ROCKLAND — An effort by the Rockland City Council to meet the concerns of Talbot Avenue residents who fear the planned opening of a re-entry house for former prisoners has led to a communitywide debate not only on acceptance of released inmates but on what constitutes a family.

The City Council gave preliminary approval on both June 24 and then again on Monday to an ordinance amendment aimed at regulating group homes such as the re-entry house.

The proposal would change the definition of both the words “family” and “lodging, rooming or boarding houses.”

Kathryn Matlack of Camden purchased 215 Talbot Ave. on June 3 under the ownership of Freedom Path LLC so that she could create a place called the Unity House to provide housing and services for up to three recently released prisoners at a time. A house manager would also live at the home.

Unity House was originally proposed to open in mid-July.

The house had previously been used as a short-term rental.

The proposal, however, caught neighbors off guard, having learned of the proposal from a real estate agent after the transaction occurred. Many of the Talbot Avenue residents turned out at two successive City Council meetings in June, demanding the councilors take action.

In response, Councilor Valli Geiger sponsored the ordinance amendment in an effort to regulate group homes. That proposal is now at the center of a controversy.

The current definition of family in the Rockland ordinance is people related by blood, marriage, civil unions, or adoption who resident together as a single unit and no more than three additional unrelated people. Alternatively, four unrelated people can constitute a family for zoning purposes.

The proposed amendment to the law would require that those people share in all household expenses including food, rent, utilities and other expenses. If not, the houses would be considered boardinghouses and require review by the Planning Board.

That proposed change has created a firestorm of its own.

Resident Amy Files said she empathizes with the neighbors’ initial reaction and the council’s desire to respond but argued that the ordinance is discriminatory and is classism.

“This could have neighbors asking the City to investigate the personal relationship of unrelated people,” she said.

Muriel Curtis, another city resident, said she has lived much of her life in communal housing arrangements. She purchased a home in Rockland last month and rents out the first floor and shares the second floor with three other people.

Curtis said it was wrong for the Council to try to regulate living arrangements.

“They want to look in our refrigerators. Then will they be looking in our bedrooms?” Curtis asked.

“In a communal home there is always somebody to ask how was your day, somebody to let the dog out if you’re sick, somebody’s birthday to celebrate. For a single woman with no family I can’t think of a better living arrangement. I would be seriously hurt if my ability to live like this was legislated out of existence,” Curtis said.

City Councilor Ed Glaser said he is not a lawyer, so he doesn’t know all of the ramifications of the proposed ordinance amendment.

“I don’t know if it will accomplish what is intended, if it has too many unintended consequences, or if is even something we wish to ‘accomplish’ in the first place,” Glaser said.

He said the council will need to schedule a workshop with its attorney to get her view on it.

“There are passionate people on both sides of this, and it will fall to the City Council to try to make a wise decision. I feel that as elected officials, we need to slow things down and let everyone have their say before we act. I view this ordinance amendment as a sort of ‘place keeper,’ to give us the time to listen to everyone and try to figure out what is best for the whole community. We can act in haste and get it wrong, or be more measured and stand a chance that we get it right,” Glaser said.

Councilor Valli Geiger agreed with Glaser.

Mayor Lisa Westkaemper and Councilors Ben Dorr and Amelia Magjik did not respond to a request made Tuesday evening for comment on the ordinance change.

Files pointed out that Rockland has a shortage of affordable housing and this ordinance will be counter to the council’s goal of trying to improve the situation.

In March, the City Council approved a zone change to allow artists to live in their work spaces at the Lincoln Street Center, the former school building located in a residential neighborhood now converted to space for artist studios.

The council also tried to amend zoning ordinances to allow smaller homes and smaller lots throughout the city, but that was met by strong opposition from residents who said it would adversely affect the character of their neighborhoods. The council backed off that plan and is contracting with a planner to work on ways to encourage housing through city zoning laws.

« Previous

Clinton’s Fourth of July Celebration yields impressive turnout

Next »

Maine State Police investigate crash that killed 2 Madison residents