The manorial lords of Cape Elizabeth, the Spragues, have done it again: They’ve gotten the better of our state government and, in so doing, us.

Under their heraldic name, the Black Point Corp., one of Maine’s fiefs, Crescent Beach, happens to be partly owned by them, including the present entrance, parking lot, bath house and concession stand.

Additional Photos

The impasse in lease negotiations between the state and the company that owns part of Crescent Beach State Park could result in the company’s being allowed to run Crescent Beach for the state as a private park. 2012 File Photo/Shawn Patrick Ouellette

They have come to an impasse with the Bureau of Parks and Lands over a new lease agreement, and they may force the state to do their bidding at Crescent Beach and allow their barony to run it as a private park, as they do at Scarborough Beach.

It was but 13 years ago that the Sprague family sold Scarborough Beach to the state, which purchased the land through financing made available by the Land for Maine’s Future program. It was acclaimed by Gov. King as a great addition to Maine’s system of parks.

And yet, the state parks season pass would not admit you to Scarborough Beach. You still had to pay a private fee to the park managers, Black Point, if you wanted entry.

In a brilliant stroke of business acumen, the Sprague family cannily sold some of their valuable coastal tracts of land or leased them to the state as parkland.

As a result, they don’t owe any taxes on several thousand acres of prime Cape Elizabeth real estate, but they still collect income from the land at Crescent and Scarborough beaches, as both owners and tenants. Any feudal duke or baron would be happy with such an arrangement.

The Sprague family, as the lords of Cape Elizabeth, is less a benefactor to its loyal tenants and crofters and more protector of its own venal family interests — to the disadvantage of the community.

Stephen Small

Portland

After shooting, NRA rushes to solicit gun rights support

At 10:27 a.m. Friday, the National Rifle Association telephoned me, soliciting protection of gun rights in the light of the tragic shooting in Aurora, Colo., earlier that morning.

Less than 12 hours after the gunman opened fire in a crowded movie theater, the NRA is out there to tell me the only right to protect is guns.

Many of those who received these macabre phone calls must be appalled. I certainly am.

The Rev. Dr. James M. Young

retired United Methodist pastor

Portland

No reason for legal voters to criticize ID requirement

I cannot understand why anyone would be against voter identification laws. But I have noticed that it’s only Democrats who are voicing opposition to this.

Why is that? Maybe they don’t care if illegals or dead people are voting or how many times someone votes. It seems legal voting will only hurt the Democrats.

Anyone who collects food stamps is able to get a photo ID. They do have to apply at a local Department of Health and Human Services office. That seems to be their rallying cry: “Poor people will be disenfranchised.” Not true!

I, for one, would like to be assured that my vote counts and that it is not erased by the vote of an illegal, a dead person or somebody’s dog!

Mary Jane Newell

Oxford

Amend Constitution to limit clout of campaign donors

It’s difficult to imagine a Supreme Court opinion more perilous to democracy than the Citizens United case in which Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion that unlimited campaign contributions “do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption.”

Nor can I imagine a greater contradiction to the common values of the people of Maine. I was appalled to read that the court again acted to preserve the decision (“No second look at campaign financing,” June 26).

The people of Maine know that “the way life should be” will be sold if endless amounts of money are allowed to influence political leaders and political discourse.

Our New England values tell us unlimited money does usurp democracy. We have a history of out-of-state money influencing Maine politics. Recent examples include the 2009 same-sex marriage vote or the nearly $500,000 spent in four state Senate races in 2010. And after elections, large campaign contributions continue to influence lawmakers’ decisions.

Our democracy is not a commodity. We all deserve access to our political leadership, and that access should not be limited only to people who donate. “The way life should be” is a democracy, where lawmakers are accountable to voters, not donors or outside special interest groups.

We the people must insist on federal protections against the activities of political action committees that promise limitless contributions, and therefore limitless access, to political leadership.

We should seek an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that promises “we the people” will never be ousted by “we the fiscally superior.”

Gary Wagner

Portland

Will this big-city transfer stay in Portland awhile?

From 159 applicants, Emmanuel “Manny” Caulk was chosen to be Portland’s new superintendent of schools.

According to provided information in The Portland Press Herald, he is 40 years old. If his college education ended at 22 or so, that leaves 18 years of various positions in classroom education and school administration.

Mr. Caulk has in those 18 years been in the following school systems: Newark, Del., Baton Rouge, La., Chicago and lastly Philadelphia. That averages 3.6 years each. Why would his tenure in Portland be any longer in commitment?

This reminds me of the past Portland Police Department choice of James Craig. He arrived from Los Angeles in 2009 and left in 2011 for Cincinnati. Mr. Craig now can be seen on TV, touting his advanced education from the University of Phoenix.

What Mr. Caulk and Mr. Craig have in common seems to be the fascination of Portland search committees with finding someone from a very big city outside New England, with its perceived sophistication, to commit to and love Portland. Let’s hope it works this time.

Linda Cornish Rioux

Old Orchard Beach

Related Stories