BANGOR, Maine — The Bangor City Council’s infrastructure committee approved two proposals for recommendation to the full council, one for a $25,000 bridge repainting project costing the city nothing and the other costing the average Bangor resident $22 for stormwater abatement.
The latter proposal — the end result of several months’ worth of meetings, input and collaborative efforts by city staff members, officials, Bangor residents and businesspeople — involves a sliding stormwater utility fee system which will cost the average Bangor resident an extra $22 a year.
“I know $22 may not seem like much to a lot of people, but for people on a fixed income, it can be a lot,” said Bangor Councilor Ben Sprague, who cast the only dissenting vote in an 8-1 council vote May 31 to form a stormwater utility district.
Back then, Sprague voted no, citing the nonspecific and immeasurable nature of the EPA-mandated stormwater and waterway infrastructure improvements municipalities have to make, saying he wouldn’t “vote to allocate money to something so vague.”
Tuesday evening, Sprague voted with the majority as the committee agreed 5-0 to recommend the adoption of a new stormwater utility ordinance to the full council, which will vote on the matter on Oct. 22.
“Good things happen when people come together,” Sprague said. “This really is a long-term solution to an existing problem.”
While none of the councilors — Sprague, Pat Blanchette, Sue Hawes, Joe Baldacci and Charlie Longo (substituting for regular committee member Geoff Gratwick) — agreed with the EPA mandate, they all agreed a utility fee to pay for required stormwater infrastructure improvements like catch basin and storm line cleaning, drainage system repairs and construction projects is necessary and the best course of action.
“It’s a good solution to a problem that would have cost us millions of dollars down the road,” said Blanchette. “We’re doing this to save our environment and stay out of federal court.”
Assistant City Solicitor Paul Nicklas presented the utility fee proposal to the committee.
“We all have a stake in this,” said Nicklas, who said the cost to remediate stormwater infrastructure could be much higher if not dealt with early and comprehensively. “We could have ended up in a situation similar to South Portland. I think their fee averages about $3,000 per acre of impervious cover and ours is more like $475.”
To that end, residents and businesses with 3,000 square feet of impervious surface (pavement, roofs, walkways) will pay an average of $22 per year. That fee increases by $11 for every additional 1,000 square feet of impervious surface.
There is also a credit, which will be available for residents and businesses who have at least 4,000 square feet of impervious surface. The credits will be given on a percentage basis, based on the amount of remediation done.
“We’ve done everything we can to keep the amount people pay low, so the credits may not total as much as they could if the original amounts were higher,” said Nicklas.
Several business owners and professionals, including Bangor Mall General Manager James Gerety and Bangor attorney Andrew Hamilton, spoke in favor of the utility fee plan.
“We’re looking at this as a fair and equitable approach for all businesses and individuals,” said Gerrity.
“We’ve got a good system that’s about to be launched,” Hamilton said. “It’s a system to fund required changes and a system of balance.”
City Engineer Art Morgan also updated the committee on the Maine Department of Transportation’s plan to paint the Joshua Chamberlain Bridge next year.
“The $25,000 project will be paid for with state and federal funds, and will also include the broadening of one corner of Main Street and Water Street as well as the replacement of concrete curbing,” said Morgan.
The end result will leave a more narrow sidewalk at the corner which once abutted the Bangor Masonic Lodge before it burned down in the winter of 2004. It will also smooth out the corner and widen the turning radius for traffic making a right hand turn onto Water Street.
Morgan said this project is connected to a more ambitious DOT plan to rebuild the bridge, starting in March.
The DOT’s plan, which involves shutting down one lane of the bridge and closing it to traffic going from Bangor to Brewer, drew considerable criticism from councilors when Morgan first presented it last August.
Since then, there have been no major compromises or alternatives found.
“I’m not sure there’s any other proposal that will work better or affect traffic less, so what I’m trying to do now is educate the public so they know what’s coming,” Morgan said.
“In March 2013, through October of 2013, they plan to close one half of the JC bridge,” Morgan explained. “Traffic would only be allowed to move from Brewer to Bangor during that closure time.”



cut the school budget by 5 millon to cover the drainage and trash.. The council wants to fee/tax both. Boy this bunch of councilors sure can spend money
Its EZ to spend other peoples money.
Expense accounts or better yet , Tax Dollars.
Bingo !! Ka-Ghing !
At least they dont have the town of Lincoln financial doofuses involved.
Storm drains are a necessary function of a city and should be planned for in the city budget. If you think this plan will stop at the large property owners with big parking lots, think again.
Great stuff. The repainting is way overdue. This council has done so much for our city so far. All their steps are towards forward thinking. I think we all need to be thankful for all they have done so far. Their decisions are not without sense either, as they have received the best deals on work being done throughout each and every project. By acting on time sensitive matters quickly, they have moved our city forward step by step. (Audience stands and claps). I, for one and many others, thank a great council who doesn’t slow down on the things that are going to make this city great once again. Between the Arena, the Waterfront Pavilion, the business friendly attitude that brought Penn National and the people who voted for these changes, the council has understood. And they are prolific in their steadfast attitude. That… I like.
Rolling up my knickers to make way for the hip waders.
Okay you got me smiling with that one, letsbehonestforonce. Love it!
Darn I was hoping that “run off fees” had something to do with office holders being elected by a majority, not a plurality of Maine votes.
“Darn…something to do with office holders being elected by a majority, not a plurality of Maine votes.” I was hoping the same!
Remember, there is a simple way to avoid run-offs and primary elections–IRV or Ranked Voting. It worked well in the Portland mayoral race, and they had 15 candidates.
You choose WHO you want, and ONLY who you want (none of this “I can’t vote for Dill because then King would lose to Summers” stupidity…) and you RANK them according to your preference. No more “minority” candidates winning (LePage, or Baldacci the second time). And it saves money for the towns.
Maybe the way to get there is to actually start charging candidates who do not win outright a “runoff fee”?
Nah, probably illegal, but do contact your state reps about IRV, the smart way to vote.
The $22 runoff ‘fee’ sounds suspiciously like a ‘tax’.
Of course it’s a tax.
Sprague is right on. And thus another tax is born. A fee that can be continually increased year after year after year and put into another slush fund with no clear explanation of what the taxpayer is getting for it. So now we will all be charged 22 dollars / yr for rainwater running off our driveways and roofs. I highly doubt the average taxpayer would agree to this. Will everyone now be sleeping better if they know the macro invertebrate levels in the penjajawoc ditch (sorry stream) are now at “healthy” levels behind books a million? Will be people now be fishing these streams? ahhh no.
I contribute a lot more than $22/yr to this community. Do you realize what that works out to be an hour per person? It’s not worth calculating. You are paying hourly on other things however, that you might not need. You should charge your laptop battery soon…
As a Lewiston
Taxpayer, that has been paying this”fee” for several years, I support it.
Why?? Because
it make the tax exempt and non profit organizations pay their share. Think who
are some the largest Bangor property owners who don’t pay property taxes(EMMC
and all their affiliates, St Joseph’s Hospital, Acadia Hospital, Husson College,
U Maine, EMCC, Nursing homes, Churches, Government Buildings, and these are just
to name a few.
If it was an
increase in property tax rates, these organiozations would be exempt from it,
and the average Joe would be stuck paying the entire bill, but if it is a “user
fee” this is not the case, if it is written the same as Lewistons
ordinance.