VOTING INFORMATION

ORDINANCE TO UPDATE HOUSING COMPLIANCE

This ballot item makes several changes to Chapter 1, Chapter 33 and Chapter 45 related to the Town of Eliot’s housing ordinances in order to comply with new State law and to implement goals from the 2025 Comprehensive Plan:

• Provides a formal definition of “farm”: the land, plants, animals, buildings, structures, ponds, and machinery used in the production of agricultural products. Eliot previously had no language defining farm. Eligibility requires permanent conservation land or enrollment in Current Use Tax Program: Farmland. 

• Allows for farm properties to have a second ADU (currently allowed only one), per Agriculture & Forest Resources Goal 2 from the Comprehensive Plan;

• Allows for construction or occupancy of an ADU on a lot where the owner of the lot is not a resident of a dwelling on that lot; 

• Implements requirements to State law LD 997 – allowing residential units within buildings zoned for commercial use, with restrictions to allow only one residential unit per lot, unit cannot be on the ground floor, and the building shall not contain a heavy industrial use; 

• Allows single-family to duplex conversion without extra acreage, and provides a 10%/300 sq ft building expansion for code compliance. This is in accordance with Comprehensive Plan Housing Goal 1, Policy 1, Strategy 2.

YOUR VOTE: 

YES vote means 🡪 Changes described above will go into effect. These changes support the need for more housing flexibility and more affordable housing in Maine. Some changes are required due to new state law. 

NO vote means 🡪 Town ordinances remain as they are today; however we will be out of compliance regarding State law LD 997.

Planning Board recommends approval 5-0; Select Board recommends approval 5-0

LEASED HOUSING LOT STABILIZATION 

What the proposed Eliot ordinance does and the problem it addresses

THE PROBLEM

Mobile home parks are among the last sources of unsubsidized affordable housing in Maine. The people who live in them own their homes but rent the land underneath. That one fact changes how the market works for them.

When an apartment becomes unaffordable, a tenant can move. A mobile homeowner usually cannot. Moving a home costs many thousands of dollars, and only works if an open lot exists nearby, another park will accept the home, and the home can survive the trip. Many older homes cannot be moved at all. Selling is no easier: a buyer must be approved by the park and must accept whatever lot rent the park charges new residents, so as rent climbs, the home gets harder to sell and the owner’s equity shrinks.

This is called captive tenancy. A household has tens of thousands of dollars invested in a home that cannot realistically leave, while a single owner sets the price of the ground beneath it. The ordinary protection of a competitive market — taking your business elsewhere — is not available here.

WHY IT MATTERS NOW

Lot rent at Cole Brown Estates rose from $495 in June 2021 to $800 today, about 9.9% a year against 4.1% inflation, with a further increase to $836 announced for January 1, 2027. Marshwood Imperial Estates changed hands three times between 2022 and 2025, and rent rose faster under each new owner than over the previous fifteen years. This situation impacts over 150 households in Eliot.

WHAT STATE LAW DOES — AND DOES NOT DO

Maine strengthened its manufactured housing law in 2026. A park owner must now give at least 90 days’ written notice of an increase, may raise rent no more than once per calendar year, and must inform homeowners of their right to request mediation when an increase exceeds a stated benchmark.

State law does not limit how much rent may rise. Mediation is a conversation, not a cap. A homeowner who cannot afford the new rent and cannot move the home is left without a remedy. Maine law leaves that decision to each town.

WHAT THE ORDINANCE WOULD DO

• Limit increases. One increase per 12 months, capped at the lesser of the change in the Consumer Price Index or 3%.

• Provide a safety valve. An owner who believes the cap will not yield a reasonable return may petition the Select Board for more, supported by an independent financial review the owner pays for.

• Close the workarounds. New mandatory fees, reductions in service, and rent resets when a lot turns over all count as rent increases.

• Handle capital improvements separately. Major improvements are recovered through a temporary surcharge that expires — not permanent rent, and not for routine maintenance or for work made necessary by neglect.

• Protect residents. Retaliation against residents who complain, testify, or organize is prohibited.

WHAT IT WOULD NOT DO

It does not freeze rents, set rents, or prevent a park owner from earning a reasonable return. The petition process exists for that reason: an owner who documents the need can be approved for more than the cap.

NOT A NEW OR UNTESTED IDEA

Massachusetts communities have regulated mobile home lot rents since 1977, when Peabody adopted the first such ordinance; park owners challenged it on constitutional grounds and lost. The Mass Attorney General’s Office lists more than two dozen cities and towns with local lot rent control today, and parks there are still bought, sold, improved, and privately run. In Maine, Old Orchard Beach, Searsport, Waterville, Sanford, Arundel, and Brunswick have adopted lot rent ordinances; Wells and Saco are weighing their own; and Augusta and Standish voters will decide a nearly identical measure on this same November ballot.

The complete text of the proposed ordinance is available from the Eliot Town Clerk.

Prepared by the Eliot Democratic Committee for informational purposes only

APPROPRIATION OF GRANT MATCH FUNDS FOR THE BEECH ROAD SIDEWALK PROJECT

OVERVIEW
This project will build an accessible safe pedestrian connection between Harld L. Dow highway commercial / housing area and State Road / Moses Gerrish Eliot village center. Total estimated construction cost is $3.440,000. Maine DOT will provide $2,752,000 (80% of total) and Eliot would appropriate remaining funding ($688,000 + $38,000 contingency). 

PROJECT COST & BENEFIT (source – Eliot Town Planner public hearing information)

• Improving walking/bicycling access between the Village and Eliot Commons has a long history of support in the community, including in the 2009 and 2025 Comprehensive Plans and the 2021 Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, all adopted by voters or the Select Board. The Select Board most recently expressed support for the project in February of this year.

• Recent community surveys, including in the 2025 Comprehensive Plan and 2019 Aging In Place Assessment, show strong support generally for walking and bicycling improvements.

• The path will connect many destinations and residential communities on each end. It will be physically separated from the road, designed to be comfortable for people of all ages and abilities to walk, wheel, or bike to their destinations – e.g. kids going to Eliot Elementary, seniors, people with mobility challenges, parents & caregivers with strollers, etc.

• The project’s design phase has been fully grant-funded to date, and our approach to funding construction has no impact on the property tax rate.

• The path is expected to have an average annual maintenance cost of less than $3,000 in year-of-expenditure dollars. If other funding sources, such as tax increment financing (TIF), contribute to maintenance, there will be an even lesser cost to the town as a whole. Snow removal can employ the same vehicle used for summer maintenance – no new maintenance vehicles needed. The path surface is estimated to have a life span of 15 years before needing a substantial repair or reconstruction.

• We have conducted much public engagement on the project since 2021, including walking along the road to meet with property owners, other one-on-one discussions with property owners, board and committee updates, and 3 well-attended public information sessions. The Multimodal Transportation page has more info.

• The project is past the halfway point in the design, is grant-funded up to the “shovel ready” part, and could be built by 2030 if funding is secured. DOT has expressed interest in funding 80% of construction if the Town commits local matching funds.

SAFETY IMPROVEMENT

YOUR VOTE:

YES vote means 🡪 $720,000 will be appropriated from Town’s unassigned fund balance (no tax impact), Maine DOT will provide 80% match and project will move forward. 

NO vote means 🡪 No funding will be appropriated for this project and Maine DOT will not provide 80% match. Project will not go forward to completion.  

Select Board recommends approval 3-2

The complete text of the proposed ordinance is available from the Town Clerk,

Prepared by the Eliot-South Berwick Democratic Committee for informational purposes only.

DATA CENTER MORATORIUM

OVERVIEW
This is a proposed addition to the Town of Eliot Code of Ordinances. This ordinance establishes a 180-day moratorium on the siting, permitting, construction, and operation of data centers in the Town of Eliot, with an option to extend the moratorium. It also adds a zoning definition of “data center.”

WHY A MORATORIUM IS NEEDED

There are significant concerns at state and local levels across the country about the impact of large-scale data centers on water and electrical consumption, as well as energy grid capacity and rate hikes.  There are also significant health and environmental risks due to noise pollution, heat islands, and on-site fuel storage. 

Current Town codes and regulations do not adequately address data center development. As a result, they may not prevent serious public harm or provide for effective review and regulation of proposed projects. 

There is currently no state level regulation. Other towns in Maine (Dover-Foxcroft, Scarborough, Westbrook, Sanford, Gorham, Bangor) are following the path of temporary moratorium while local zoning and planning regulations can be enacted.

PURPOSE OF THE MORATORIUM
During the moratorium, the appropriate Town boards can:
• Research the potential effects of data center development.
• Draft regulatory ordinances and zoning provisions.
• Establish safeguards to protect the health, safety, and welfare of Town residents.

YOUR VOTE:

YES vote means 🡪180-day moratorium, with opportunity to extend, goes into effective immediately upon passage.  

NO vote means 🡪 Town ordinances remain as they are today, with no language at all regarding data centers, and unknown risk for the Town to restrict or regulate any data center development. 

Planning Board recommends approval 5-0; Select Board recommends approval 5-0

RELATED ARTICLES:

https://www.route-fifty.com/artificial-intelligence/2026/08/report-finds-most-data-centers-urban-not-rural-areas/415363/

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/local-implications-data-centers-rural-communities-us/

https://www.cato.org/commentary/data-centers-are-not-problem-bad-policy

https://mainemorningstar.com/2026/09/21/the-fight-against-data-centers-is-bringing-mainers-and-americans-together/

The complete text of the proposed ordinance is available from the Town Clerk,

Prepared by the Eliot-South Berwick Democratic Committee for informational purposes only.

ELIOT’S PROPOSED SEPTIC ORDINANCE - SUBSURFACE WASTEWATER DISPOSAL 

Most of Eliot isn't on sewer. Homes and businesses here treat their wastewater underground, in the same soil that feeds the wells people drink from. This ordinance amends three chapters of the Town Code and does two things.

1.  A protected backup area for a replacement leach field

When a septic system is designed for ground where a limiting factor (seasonal groundwater, clay, or bedrock) sits within 24 inches of the surface, the plan must set aside a second area of good soil, big enough to build a replacement disposal field if the first one fails. That "reserve area" gets labeled as restricted. Nothing can be built, paved, filled, or compacted on it. Two test pits confirm the soil in each area.

Why: when a system on marginal ground fails and there is no room left on the lot to rebuild, the owner is stuck and the failure becomes a neighborhood problem.

Small and constrained lots. A lot that already exists and simply can't fit a reserve area can get a waiver, from the Planning Board for anything under site plan or subdivision review, otherwise from the Code Enforcement Officer with the plumbing inspector's written concurrence. The waiver can carry conditions: an advanced pretreatment system, water-conserving fixtures, a lower design flow, extra inspections, or a notice recorded at the Registry of Deeds so a future buyer knows there is no reserve area.

This applies when a system is designed, installed, or replaced. It does not require anyone to go carve out a reserve area on a system already in the ground.

2.  Maintenance records for large and shared systems

The ordinance defines a covered system: an engineered system (over 2,000 gallons per day, or any system requiring a licensed engineer's design), an advanced pretreatment system, or a shared system serving more than one dwelling, lot, or principal building. Owners of covered systems must:

• Record the state maintenance agreement and approved maintenance schedule at the York County Registry of Deeds, so the obligation runs with the land and binds whoever owns it next

• Keep a maintenance contract with a qualified service provider

• Send the Town proof once a year that the required inspections, pumping, sampling, and repairs were actually done

• Report a sale, a system replacement, or a change of service provider within 30 days

Systems already in service get 180 days to record their agreement and start reporting.

What's new here is the record, not the maintenance. State rules (10-144 C.M.R. Ch. 241) already require these systems to be maintained on schedule. Today those obligations are not recorded against the property or reported to anyone, so they tend to vanish when a house sells.

What this does not do

An ordinary single-family septic system, already installed, on decent soil, picks up no new obligation. There is no new town inspection program, no annual fee, and no state requirement that did not already exist.

If someone ignores it

The Code Enforcement Officer or plumbing inspector can issue a notice of violation, seek civil penalties, withhold a use permit, or suspend local permits. Each day counts as a separate offense.

Article 6, Subsurface Wastewater Disposal: Shall an ordinance amending Chapter 1 (General Provisions), Chapter 41 (Subdivisions), and Chapter 45 (Zoning), establishing a reserve area for subsurface wastewater disposal system replacement and maintenance reporting for engineered and shared subsurface disposal systems, be enacted?

The full text is available at the Town Clerk's office.

Planning Board recommends approval, 5-0.  Select Board recommends approval, 3-2.