Family camps an endangered species

So, you own a camp in the Maine woods? You may “own” the camp structures, but the large proprietors “own” the land upon which your camps were built – often by generations of loving family labor. There are about 6,000 to 7,000 leaseholders within the Unorganized Territories of Maine. The camp lots, averaging 1 to 1.5 acres in size, are the private property of the large landowners, yet the camp leaseholders are the ones who pay the property tax in their annual lease fees.

In 2005, the 24,075 nonresident owners of these seasonal structures paid most of the $17 million in property taxes in the UT. By comparison, the large landowners in 2007 paid none of this tax and less than $6 million in Tree Growth taxes on nearly 7.5 million acres of land in the UT “for which the Unorganized Territory does not receive reimbursement from the State of Maine.” (UT Annual Report 2005.) Thus, the large landowners, who own millions of acres, more than 80 percent of the land in half the state, pay minimal taxes to the Unorganized Territory.How did all this come about in Maine? First, the camp leaseholders were not given the option to buy their camp lots initially by the large landowners, paper companies and others, for reasons not yet historically documented. Over the last couple of decades, many of these companies spun off some or all of their extensive holdings to land speculators like Plum Creek Timber, Katahdin Timberlands and others who saw more value in land speculation than in timber harvesting. By restricting the supply of land on the market, basically prime water frontage below the increasing demand for such acreage, they were – and are – able to raise the value (price) of all such land in the UT.

The state is complicit in this speculation inasmuch as the few parcels of land (1,300) “freely” bought and sold at these higher prices is used to determine the higher “fair market value” for tax assessments of all properties in the UT, except, of course, those exempted for tree growth, namely, that owned by the few large landowners. Camp leases are raised accordingly based upon a percentage of these tax-assessed land values. In the last couple of decades, these camp leases have increased from $200 to $3,000 per lake frontage acre. The average $1 per acre Tree Growth Tax has not increased for the speculative, large landowners over these years.

In this old speculative ball game, strike one and two are the manipulated and controlled higher land prices of these camp lots, which automatically increase the camp “owners” taxes and lease fees. Strike three and you’re out for the Maine camp leaseholders occurs when the land speculators decide to terminate their camp leases. When the land values are sufficiently driven up to $85,000 to $100,000 and more per waterfront acre, these speculators inform the camp “owners” to buy at their price or vacate, i.e., remove your cabins. (See “Cedar Lake tenants must buy or vacate” (BDN, Sept. 12)).

“Fair market value,” “sanctity of private property,” “tax equity,” etc. under these conditions are little more than a perversion of the terms. There is no wilderness sprawl in Maine, or not yet at least. There is, however, wilderness land speculation pure and simple and the state Legislature and the governor are complicit. Just as the modest income families have been denied the use of their state’s coastal properties, they are now being driven off the inland waterways. First go the mill jobs, and then go the family camps, slowly but surely.

What is needed here is a Leaseholder Land Claims Settlement similar to the Indian Land Claims Settlement of 1980, and soon. In the meantime, the state’s Land Use Regulation Commission should not approve Plum Creek’s rezoning application in the Moosehead Lake region in order to halt these speculative land deals and the destruction of a tradition, namely family camps in the Maine woods.

Melvin Burke is a professor of economics at the University of Maine.