The public hearing section of the Rockland Planning Commission meeting regarding the Center for Maine Contemporary Art relocation design began with commission member George Terrien charging those in attendance to strictly adhere to existing design codes and specifications in their comments, as these were the only concerns of the commission would and would take into consideration. Nothing else was to be discussed. That was what was said. In reality, however, what was deemed acceptable was clearly dependent upon who was speaking.

 

Kendall Merriam, a previous Rockland Poet Laureate, was first to approach the podium. He began reading his poem-as-commentary, which reflected what he had seen and heard from residents regarding the Center for Maine Contemporary Art design, and made the mistake of not censoring it for political correctness. Chairman Lausten advised Merriam that if he continued he would have to sit down. Mr. Merriam replied that he simply wanted to finish reading his poem.

 

I was next up. As I approached the podium, Chairman Lausten stated that comments should be positive. I had abandoned my comments save for those that were code/ordinance related, so when I arrived at the podium. his cautionary lingered in the air, the sense of overwhelming censorship was complete. So, I said my couple of lines regarding the length of the facade taking up more than 72 percent of the street line, and referred to ordinance regarding street frontage. And sat down.

 

Then, despite the cautionary, subsequent speakers, including Dan Bookham, proceeded to give comments that were not about the codes and standards, but rather, invoked U.S. Supreme Court decisions that "interpreted" Constitutional law, and inferring that the same should hold for true for City of Rockland ordinances and the officials who address them.

Neither he nor other speakers were cautioned or stopped. Even Frank Isganitis's brilliant to-the-point comments unexpectedly veered into the growth and importance of the arts in Savannah, Georgia. Up to that point, he was wonderfully on point, and his example was fine, but it was not in keeping with the Terrien/Lausten rulings.

 

But this just goes to show that it is nearly impossible to adhere to the strict standards ostensibly imposed by Terrien and Lausten, and the Planning Commission had better give a list of rules to the public prior to meetings, and make certain they are adhered to uniformly.

 

Given that non-standards comments were allowed, I attempted to go to the podium several times because no one else was approaching it, but, invariably, someone got up to speak, so I hastily retreated. New speakers have first rights. Their comments must be heard. It is only when there is not a lot of public comment that the decision can easily be made to allow a resident more than one comment. That is fair and just, and respect that procedure.

 

But then Lausten gave the directive that people could only comment once, (even though no one was approaching the podium). That was it for me. I left. When rules that are laid down are followed, everyone can participate. It is then a representative democratic process. That's not what happened this evening,. Once again, a heavy hand ruled.

 

Residents should be outraged, and perhaps, given their absence at meetings, it is proof that they have, as I am so often told, "Been there, done that - never again." This shouldn't be. But quasi public hearings reinforce their continued silence.

 

So, here are my thoughts about the design of the Center for Maine Contemporary Art: I think the design is antithetical to the planning the City of Rockland has enacted. If CMCA had wanted to bring attention to this move, they might well have held a competition for the architectural design, as so many other art organizations have done. But beyond that, the materials used for the CMCA should be local, and, preferably, of an historic nature. In Rockland, that means cement. If you do a Google search for cement contemporary art museum and look at images, why, there are a host of place-making designs that directly reflect a city with a history like that of Rockland, with sweeping sail-like structures, for example.

 

Dragon Cement could be brought in on the project. As it stands, a type of corrugated metal is to be used on the outside of the new building. Concrete and a partnership with Dragon seem a good way to go. The Brooklyn Museum has an oil painting study in its collection by Rackstraw Downes, entitled 'Dragon Cement, Rock Crushing Operation'. We have the real deal right here. There are design options that are contemporary and positively breath-taking. The Mori design is not one of them.

 

Ultimately, the situation is this: Heavy-handed, fluctuating rules within the City Hall chambers, a weighty segment of the community that wants CMCA installed regardless of the appropriateness of its design, censorship of the arts in the guise of political correctness, and an abhorrence of the passion that creates them. The newly-envisioned CMCA could be a highlight in Rockland. Will it be so, or, will it stand as a monument to vested political interest.