CAMDEN — At a vote of 3 to 2, the Camden Select Board halted a zoning amendment from appearing on the Nov. 4 ballot, killing the proposal by innkeepers Kristi and Jesse Bifulco that would have allowed them, and two other High Street inns, to seek town and state approval to serve dinner to their own guests. 

The vote followed a lengthy public hearing Aug. 12 at which 11 citizens spoke against the measure and one in favor of it. The Select Board also discussed the issue, with two members admitting that they were changing their minds based on testimony delivered during the hearing. At a July 23 meeting, board members had articulated support for letting the Camden electorate decide the issue.

In the end, board members Don White and Chairman Martin Cates voted in favor of placing the Bifulco amendment on the warrant; opposed were John French, Leonard Lookner and Jim Heard.

“This is an important issue,” said White. “Camden's business community, and that's all of you, is a very strong, imaginative and intelligent group. As the business climate changes, you have all found you can move to the plate and find ways to compete. Change is inevitable. The applicant has worked very hard. I am in favor of moving application forward.”

“I’m not going to vote in favor,” said board member Leonard Lookner. “It's not a matter of putting it before the voter. The proponent can go and get petition and put on the ballot. I am speaking against it because of what I've heard in the public hearings.”

Lookner said he would vote against it, adding that he would “strongly urge the opponents to work hard to defeat it.”

Bifulco and her husband, Jesse, are owners of the eight-room Windward House, at 6 High Street (Route 1), in Camden, just north of the public library.

She had crafted an amendment that would be included in the town’s definition of inns and would effectively allow an inn abutting High Street and within 500 feet of a zone where restaurants are already allowed the possibility of being granted a special exception “to be allowed to serve meals to overnight guests only, subject to meeting the standards of a Low Impact Use as determined by the Zoning Board of Appeals.”

The 500-foot area in question would extend north on High Street (Route 1) from the intersection of Route 52.

She had approached the Camden Planning Board last winter, requesting a language change in the ordinance. The Planning Board then directed Code Enforcement Officer Steve Wilson to assist Bifulco in crafting an amendment.

Bifulco returned to the Camden Planning Board in April with the new language. After discussion and a few more changes following a planning board discussion, she returned again in May. At its May 15 meeting, voting 2 to 2, the Planning Board was split in its opinion on whether Bifulco’s proposed amendment to the town’s zoning ordinance should be sent on for further consideration and eventual placement before a citizen vote at town meeting.

But at the next board meeting, June 3, Planning Board Chairman Lowrie Sargent reported that the town’s Zoning Board of Appeals has a policy that dictates when five members are not present to vote, and when there are tie votes, the applicant or the board can recommend the application be continued to a meeting when five members are present.

In early July, the Planning Board reversed its earlier decision and voted 4 to 1 to send the amendment to the Camden Select Board for consideration for inclusion on the November ballot.

Meanwhile, as the measure moved through the municipal process, opponents and proponents spoke at public hearings, and submitted letters to the town. The majority of seats in the Washington Street Meeting Room were again filled Aug. 12 with citizens. This time, however, the majority of those approaching the podium objected to the amendment.

They characterized the amendment as “arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable” and one that would create a slippery slope of ordinance changes that erode the integrity of the town’s zoning. They said allowing an inn in that 500-foot stretch of Camden to serve dinner would negatively affect other restaurant owners in town who are trying to make a living.

They also objected to the practice of special exceptions, spot zoning and contract zoning, saying the town’s comprehensive plan should be nexus for considering and recommending ordinance changes. The comprehensive plan is currently undergoing a revision and is expected to be ready for voters in 2016.

“Ill conceived changes turn the zoning ordinance inside and out,” said Tom Phillip. “Once voted in, there is no turning back.” 

At past meetings, supporters had said the economy has changed enough, and that the competition presented via the Internet (e.g., couch surfing, renting apartments and homes to tourists) has grown, so much so that innkeepers must get more creative in attracting guests and building a more solid business base.

They said the effect on the immediate residential neighborhood would be minimal, given that the Windward House already operates as a commercial entity, along with two other B&Bs in the 500-foot-stretch under discussion.

At the Aug. 12 meeting, Bifulco stated her case, and one supporter, Hillary Steinau, urged the Select Board to help small family businesses survive.

“Push it forward so people can vote yay or nay,” she said.

The discussion by the board members followed the public testimony, and each delivered the reasoning behind their positions. Several times, they raised the specter of Fox Hill, and their split vote last winter not to put a proposed zoning amendment on the ballot that would have allowed Fox Hill LLC the opportunity to pursue a special exception for siting an alcohol rehabilitation center at Bay View Street estate. 

Following that 3-2 vote (White and Cates for; Heard, Lookner and French opposed), citizens in town let the Select Board know of their dissastifaction that the matter did not go forward for the voters to decide. Several Select Board members said Aug. 12 that they were chastised by the town for not putting the Fox Hill measure on the ballot.

Nonetheless, it was not enough to convince them to vote differently on the Bifulco amendment.

“I came here tonight supporting it,” said board member John French. “The points raised tonight were very good points.”

He said the town is in the middle of revising its comprehensive plan, and suggested the ordinance concerning inns first be revisited.

“I'm changing my mind because I do feel some very good points raised tonight,” he said.

Board member Jim Heard said that at first, his initial reaction to the Bifulco proposal was not favorable. But, he said, he had been persuaded by young people, who advocated for running businesses that were meaningful to them. Heard said he was conflicted about the the amendment.

“I am not in favor of this and I am not going to vote for it,” he said.

Cates said: “I am in favor of this. I am in favor of the voter being able to speak. The voter is the legislative body. I don't think Fox Hill has anything to do with this. I attended all planning board hearings. Contrary to popular opinion, there were many supporters.”

He said he also received many phone calls about the Bifulco proposal, indicating support for the amendment.

“It is a travesty, shutting down the voter once again,” said Cates.

“It is our job to ensure things are ready and prepared so voters can made decisions,” said French.

 “I beg to differ,” said Cates. “The planning board did do their work, and worked through the process diligently.”

White agreed with Cates: “She [Bifulco] has worked hard that the community would not be negatively affected.,” he said. “I feel very strongly that she deserves the right to go before the voters of this town.”

“We need to slow down a moment on this,” said French. 

Related links:

Innkeeper’s proposed ordinance change slated for public hearing Aug. 12

• Innkeeper's effort to serve overnight guests dinner back before Camden Planning Board

• Camden board moves innkeeper's proposal to town leaders

• Camden Planning Board nixes innkeeper's quest to serve dinner to guests

Editorial Director Lynda Clancy can be reached at lyndaclancy@penbaypilot.com; 207-706-6657