To the editor:

When I read or hear the opinions of those opposed to the zoning amendment Article D, I am amazed to find the very legitimacy of the Rockport Chamber Music Festival's performance center project questioned.

The fact is, this project has already been approved by the town of Rockport. Ultimately, the zoning bylaw change should be considered on its own merits. Issues related to the performance center like parking, parking, parking, and the loss of a neighbor's ocean view have already been addressed.

Yes, it's true that it isn't hard to correlate the lawsuit brought against the town and the RCMF with the town's review of Main Street's zoning and proposed amendment, but it's another thing altogether to claim that the zoning change is for the benefit of the RCMF alone.

The town of Rockport decided, after a lengthy approval process, to grant the necessary permits for this project. During this approval process, Zoning Board, Planning Board and Historic District Commission meetings, as well as general public forums were held where every concern was addressed and re-addressed: construction noise and scope, concert noise and scope, loss of ocean views, and (the mother of all issues that seems to obsess every Rockporter) parking were all dealt with in a very public way. No one can claim that this project flew under the radar. Only after Rockport granted the permits, and after an abutter's demands for a multimillion buyout of their property were not met, did this same abutter, whose primary residence is not even in Rockport, decide to sue.

So what's wrong with the town of Rockport assessing the situation and deciding to consider altering the zoning of an entire district so that this loophole — a single abutter undermining the legal approval process — could not so easily be taken advantage of the next time the town grants permits? Apart from the performance center project itself, a Rockport voter might find, when viewed objectively, that the zoning change will be of long-term benefit to our town. Does the fact that it might be of immediate benefit as well negate its merit? The Planning Board has unanimously recommended this zoning amendment. I trust their judgment a whole lot more than the judgment of a few disgruntled abutters.

The truth is, the Rockport Chamber Music Festival's project is only opposed by a few neighbors anxious to keep their view of the ocean and another few people in town anxious to gain $9,000 every year in property tax revenue. To the first point, those same neighbors, unless they are willing to form a coalition to buy the Haskins building, will never be able to secure their ocean vistas.

If the abutters aren't able to buy the building itself, then the reality of keeping those ocean views looks pretty grim, as the Haskins building, with its size and location, would most likely only be desirable to a condo developer, who would no doubt seek to build out the site in much the same way as does the festival's proposal, and with a much less desirable result.

To the second point of the loss of tax revenue, I hereby propose, in the spirit of Jonathan Swift, that we, as a town, begin taxing every non-profit with the audacity to be located within the town limits. Let's start with Toad Hall Bookstore and keep going with that behemoth on Main Street, the Rockport Art Association. Just between these two organizations alone, I imagine we must lose thousands of dollars every year, thousands that could be spent in litigating the tax-exempt status of every non-profit in sight.

While I'm at it, I'd like to address the concern that I've heard in Rockport that the Rockport Chamber Music Festival is "elitist." Well, having never attended a concert there, I have no idea what really goes on behind those gilded doors. Perhaps all the attendees are exchanging stock tips during intermission (do classical music concerts even have intermission? Do rich people need to take a bathroom break?) — maybe they are giggling together behind their programs at all the poor slobs outside, too destitute to afford the cultural enrichment that a $20 ticket can purchase. Maybe, heaven forbid, classical music is actually appreciated only in correlation to one's net worth. I guess I'll never know.

The point is, as a regular Rockport citizen, I've never actually gone to a concert at the Rockport Chamber Music Festival, and yet, surprisingly enough, I don't begrudge them their contributions to our community. In fact, I am happy — maybe even overjoyed — at the prospect of having the Chamber Music Festival, our own cultural institution of the last 26 years, flourish and develop an intimate, world-class arts facility here, in our village on the edge of nowhere. And as for elitist, nothing seems more elitist to me than keeping stranglehold on your own personal ocean view (which, at least for one abutter, can be purchased for a cool $2.25 million) while denying thousands of your fellow citizens the opportunity to enhance Rockport's heritage of a small town with a big legacy of supporting the arts.

Put aside your prejudices against the project, or your unease about change of any sort in the town you love, or your fear of classical music, or your distrust of the existing town administration, or your general boredom at the prospect of reviewing zoning bylaws and amendment proposals, and give consideration to a "yes" vote on Article D on April 5 at town meeting.

Sarah Kelly

Frank Street, Rockport