I served on a local town council for six years in the early aughts and proverbially got more out of serving than the citizens received from me. It was like a master’s degree in public administration. I learned how roads are built and how tax increment financing works, sort of.

One big takeaway is the power of land use, zoning ordinances and the comprehensive plan that provides scaffolding to the laws. I realized that a municipal budget has an income side (taxes) and an expenses side (municipal services including police, fire, rescue and plowing). Generally, in towns that are stable or growing, budgets tend to grow at 1-3%.

The primary way to increase revenue to keep pace with expenses is to grow the tax base. This means development, and before you quit reading, of course this growth must be measured and balanced. It is important to have good planning professionals, and effective planning boards and town managers and elected leaders who understand each side of the municipal ledger.

As an amateur policy wonk, I was excited to read Peter Ryner’s April 12 Maine Sunday Telegram op-ed about zoning not being the silver bullet to our housing crisis (“Zoning won’t solve Maine’s housing crisis — and zoning didn’t create it”).

It is true, generally, that zoning will not fix all of Maine’s affordable housing and general housing stock needs. However, zoning and, more broadly, land use policy are at the heart of the solution. All of the issues that come with more dense zoning, such as water use, sewer, shoreland zoning restrictions, traffic and parking and public transportation, do all need thorough planning, and consideration, and generally are included in the comp plan, ordinances and the planning board process.

Allow me to address the septic/sewer issue. The op-ed claimed that large lots are necessary to prevent water source pollution. The town in which I served was considered rural, but in reality was a bedroom community for Portland. I served at a time when the old guard was serving with the newbies like me, and some of the older councilors admitted that when they implemented large lot sizes, it was a direct attempt to slow growth, even though septic system technology had advanced far enough to accommodate smaller lots.

Additionally, it was relayed to me, in a folklore kind of way, that the town “fathers” refused to extend the sewer system “back in the day” so as to deter development. Which is why there are single-family, 1-acre lots on the main drag.

Using the way back machine, the town fathers from the 1800s fought Route 9 for 25-30 years, before the state legislature finally forced it upon them, along with the expense. Some of the very streets we live on were unpopular when proposed and developed and had they not been developed, I, and perhaps you, would not be living in the place from which you are reading this.

Moving forward to almost the present day, my town was offered a bus line through the center. The first year would be paid for; after that, residents would pick up the tab. Classic move, right? Well, the town “fathers and mothers “(finally) refused the bus service. The decision was based on some vague notion of riffraff from Portland, and the fiscal note due later.

So, zoning doesn’t fix everything. But it is the basis of all the rest.

If we don’t think about the whole system, not much will change in the next 10-year cycle. My kids won’t be able to live here, retirees won’t be able to stay here, or downsize, divorced couples won’t be able to live in the same town, and at the end of it, people will continue to experience homelessness.