CAMDEN – In the midcoast, newcomers and natives have achieved population parity, and within five to 10 years, in-migrants will occupy a majority in the region, according to a recent survey.

That demographic fact is remarkable and important, Evan Richert believes, because the two groups bring often divergent values and attitudes when they try to make decisions about development, land use and transportation.

Especially telling is the difference in education between the two groups, not so much for the value of the ideas each group generates, but because of the income disparity that comes with varying degrees of education, he said.

Richert, a former director of the State Planning Office and now associate research professor of planning, development and environment at the University of Maine’s Muskie School of Public Service, spoke Thursday night at the annual meeting of the Friends of Mid-Coast Maine, a planning and anti-sprawl advocacy group.

Richert’s statistics came from a telephone survey of 521 year-round residents in 21 towns and cities that make up the U.S. Route 1 corridor from Brunswick to Prospect. The survey was conducted as part of the Department of Transportation’s Gateway 1 initiative, a push to develop a kind of comprehensive plan for the region.

In some parts of the corridor, such as in the Rockport-Camden-Lincolnville-Northport area, in-migrants already outnumber native-born Mainers by nearly 2-to-1, he said. The survey considered only coastal communities through which Route 1 runs; very different population breakdowns likely exist several miles inland.

The divergent values and attitudes “seemed to drive decisions, especially around Route 1 and land use [issues],” Richert said.

Though residents of coastal communities long have seen debates over big-box stores, land preservation and economic development often breaking along a familiar native-newcomer divide, Richert said he had never before spoken about the matter.

“It’s a bit of a risky topic because it’s very easy to fall into stereotypes,” and no stereotype is valid, he said.

About 2,000 newcomers move to the midcoast each year, and they account for about one in 10 of all in-migrants in Maine. Nearly 20 percent arrived in the last 10 years, and 44 percent have lived in the area for 20 years or more, “which means we probably ought to call them something besides ‘newcomers,'” he said.

Some 20 percent were summer residents of Maine before becoming permanent residents.

One in five in-migrants hails from Massachusetts, another 14 percent from elsewhere in New England, and 13 percent come from New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

Surprisingly, in-migrants and natives are equally likely to be 65 or older (about 25 percent) and to be retired (27 percent). But more than half of in-migrants are age 45-64, while just 38 percent of native-born midcoast residents are in this stage of life, which he said is associated with peak earning power and community involvement.

A most telling statistic, Richert said, shows the divide between the two groups on formal education: 70 percent of newcomers have college degrees, while only 30 percent of natives have attained that level.

“What formal level of educational attainment does often dictate is earning power and degree of economic opportunity, and ultimately income,” he said.

Income ends up being a key determinant in the relationship one has to land use and transportation questions, Richert suggested.

“Those with earning power and income and financial security simply have more options than those who do not have the same earning power and income and financial security,” he said.

Natives tend to view property they or their family has owned for a long time – whether farm, wood lot, downtown business or Route 1 land or business – as an asset that could be converted to cash when the time is right, Richert said.

In-migrants, he argued, have chosen to live in the midcoast in part because of the “spectacular character of this place. Their interests will naturally include protecting the reasons they came here, and that may include protecting from development the very lands or areas that longtime landowners hope one day will be able to be developed.”

So below the surface of the debate over a particular development proposal lies a clash of values, Richert said, with natives trying to protect financial potential of land, and newcomers trying to protect character of place.

On transportation, both groups worry about safety on the roads for drivers and pedestrians, but they part company when the questions go deeper. Natives are more likely to think traffic conditions have worsened, while newcomers think the loss of visual appeal of development along Route 1 is a serious problem.

“If you worry mostly about worsening traffic congestion, the impulse is to expand the capacity of the system. If you worry about the scenic aspects of the transportation corridor and the scale of the environment, the impulse is to protect the existing character of the place, which may mean opposing the expansion of the system,” Richert said.

Residents of both groups were willing to consider multitown management of development along Route 1, which he said seemed to be ahead of common notions about the inviolability of home rule.

But differences emerged on that topic as well.

Almost half of natives think local towns are well-equipped to manage growth, while less than a third of newcomers thought so.

On land use, about two-thirds of natives think they should be able to use their land as they see fit, while only 40 percent of newcomers agree. Richert said about 20 percent felt strongly about the sanctity of property rights, while another 20 percent believes government should be able to trump individual rights on matters of public safety and the environment.

Thus, a “swirling middle,” as he described it, likely will decide key land use issues on a case-by-base basis.

In-migrant profile

A statistical profile of the typical in-migrant is:

. Female (56 percent); 45-64-years-old (51 percent); has lived in Maine 10-20 years.

. Employed as professional, technician or similar white-collar job (45 percent); works for employer (39 percent), but has strong propensity for self-employment (25 percent).

. Married with at least one other adult in household (60 percent); no children under 18 living at home (72 percent).