Folks at the Brookings Institution do the heavy thinking.

But folks in Maine do the heavy lifting.

Brookings’ landmark report, Charting Maine’s Future, was an exercise in cognitive excellence, as it revealed what Maine should have realized for years: its unique elements, which comprise its intrinsic “sense of place,” is imperiled.

Yet after this philosophical gruntwork, implementing the report was left to Mainers, hence the Governor’s Council on Quality of Place. This abstract title belied the council’s real mission: take Brookings, and all its hard truths, and turn them into attainable, realistic goals.

They released their report last week. It seems they’ve succeeded.

Like Brookings, which told Maine truths that were self-evident, the “QoP” report also makes easy, unspectacular – yet crucial – recommendations about keeping Maine as Maine, while positioning for the future.

All in 25 pages, too. (This is the best part.) Brookings’ breadth was a drawback; it almost told us too much, and sorely needed refinement and direction. This is the QoP report’s hallmark.

Its legacy, however, is the revelation on page 21: “Make the regional councils of government…responsible for implementing this effort. Quality of place initiatives must be undertaken regionally.”

State government, study authors note, can be more hindrance than help for these efforts. So the state should “support efforts in a timely and responsive way and provide the resources and coordination to ensure success.”

From our perspective, this is brilliant. What Maine didn’t need is another report advocating a top-down economic development model, burdened by bureaucracy. Protecting and building Maine is a hometown job first.

If the state can help, either through assistance or incentive, then it should. Otherwise, let the local folks work.

What this also means, however, is taking away a well-worn safety net for communities: Augusta. If anyone hasn’t noticed by now, the Legislature isn’t the repository of Maine’s wisdom, and shouldn’t always be expected to provide solutions to development problems better resolved on a local, or regional, level.

The QoP report calls this bottom-up economic approach “asset-based development.” It calls on existing entities, like the Androscoggin Valley Council of Governments and others with similar duties, to coordinate regional economic developments, and act as buffer between the communities and the state.

There are 10 such groups, each representing different geographic areas, which could have differing definitions of quality of place. What is important in Midcoast Maine might contradict Central or Northern Maine, for example; a one-size-fits-all statewide policy defining the term, then, wouldn’t work.

Letting each region develop their opinions and goals for quality of place is wise. This initiative shouldn’t be about creating more Portlands or Camdens or Bethels or Kennebunkports; Maine already has one of each. It should be about preserving and accentuating what makes each community in Maine special, which is in danger of disappearing.

This is what Brookings revealed to Maine last year.

Now the QoP report has prescribed a sensible plan for preventing it.