By Dawn De Busk

Staff Writer

NAPLES — During the 1928 presidential election, Herbert Hoover was credited with promising, “A chicken in every pot, and two cars in every garage.”

However, attributing that statement to Hoover is an inaccurate recollection of history.

Actually, the Republican National Committee paid for the newspaper advertisements, which pledged to put a chicken in every pot and one car in the backyard.

Likewise, the Town of Naples can no longer provide two moorings for one property owner.

Such practice contradicts state law, according to Attorney Mary Costigan.

Therefore, this summer when people register their moorings with the Town of Naples, only one mooring per property owner will be allowed.

The topic, which was highlighted in a recent court case, Cynthia White versus the Town of Naples, was discussed during the Naples Board of Selectmen meeting on Monday.

“The town’s permitting process for moorings is in violation of state mooring law,” Costigan said, referring to the court case ruling.

According to Naples Code Enforcement Officer Renee Carter, “Every property owner, besides those living in a subdivision, has the right to one mooring.”

“That is all — Rick Paraschak clarified that that would be the town’s policy going forward.

“If someone comes in tomorrow and says they want to re-up their two moorings. Do we just give one?” he said.

Carter responded, “Yes.”

She explained that there is a flyer on the office window; therefore, staff will not have to explain the current procedure. She said the legality of the flyer has been approved by the Town Attorney Geoff Hole.

“The easiest way is: Everyone has one mooring. That might not be the most popular way with homeowners, but it the easiest way to abide by the law,” Costigan said.

Carter added that it is illegal for the seasonal harbor masters to okay more than one mooring for a shoreland property owner.

“With this (court) ruling we are out of compliance with state law,” Paraschak said.

“Our ordinance needs to be revised at Town Meeting,” he said.

Costigan agreed that would remedy the situation of having an ordinance that conflicts with state law.

“Your ordinance has been determined to be illegal,” she said.