Sprawl or wither

The first numbers of the 2000 Census were released last week, a broad overview of population trends during the last decade that will be used to reassign congressional seats among the states. There were no surprises – the big winners were the South, the losers in the North.

While the U.S. population grew 13 percent since 1990, Maine’s went up by only 3.8 percent, fifth lowest in the nation, half the rate of Vermont, one-third that of New Hampshire. At a time when economic development is tied so closely to having an available workforce, a total increase of just 47,000 people in 10 years and a disparity so great with similar neighboring states is discouraging.

Expect more discouragement as the raw census data is evaluated and published in the coming months. Unless Census Bureau estimates are terribly wrong and real-world observations completely deceptive, the April report on population movements within the states should provide proof that Maine is experiencing the same North-to-South shift. The state’s population is not growing much, but it certainly is shifting – while several northern Maine counties ended the 1990s with fewer people, many thousands fewer, than they began, some Southern Maine counties are bursting at the seams.

This bursting has made sprawl a hot issue, the subject of numerous studies and conferences and a major concern of state government. The concern over sprawl is so great that Richard Sherwood of the State Planning Office said a positive implication of the state’s slow growth rate is that it gives Maine time ”to do some orderly planning” in such matters as school construction, transportation and housing.

Sprawl is bad, but its opposite – wither – is worse. And it is hard not to wonder how much less of a problem stopping the sprawl in southern Maine would be if reversing the wither of northern Maine were the subject of as much studying, conferring and planning.

The problems facing northern Maine and the causes of its withering are well-known to its residents. To name but a few, they are the loss of traditional natural-resource jobs and their replacement, if at all, by low-wage service jobs; the lack of modern transportation; struggling schools; poor access to health care; high energy costs; the flight of young people, especially well-educated young people, to other places.

When Gov. King delivers his State of the State address later this month, it will mark the third anniversary of his ”OneMaine” initiative. The centerpiece of his 1998 speech was a promise to focus the resources of government upon reuniting this divided state, to provide opportunity for all of its people. With two years remaining in office, problems described in OneMaine – particularly when it comes to income disparity – remain largely untouched, and the result is presented as an opportunity to plan.