Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-06-22 Penjajawoc Watershed Citizen Review Panel Minutes Penjajawoc Watershed Citizen Review Panel Tuesday, June 22, 2010 @ 12:00pm Rangeley Hall, EMCC Minutes The Penjajawoc Watershed Citizen Review Panel met at Rangeley Hall at 12:00 pm. In attendance were panel members George Elliott, Chuck Rohn, Benita Deschaine, Lucy Quimby,Valerie Carter, and Bob Quirk, consultants Liane Judd and Stephanie Cotsirilos, and staff members Jim Ring and Paul Nicklas. 1. Approval of Minutes Approval of minutes was deferred until the next meeting. 2. Utility Cost Discussion The discussion began with a review of the focus groups that had occurred the previous week. A follow-up meeting to those groups is scheduled for July 1. The first group, composed of commercial and nonprofit interests, expressed interest in Option 1 and no interest in Option 2,the property tax option. After costs were shown, businesses liked the idea of a utility, but nonprofits considered the utility a tax. There was a strong sense that Bangor had already decided what to do and a question about transparency was raised. There was a feeling in the resident groups that this is not their problem, but rather the problem belongs to businesses and nonprofits.They noted that taxes are to high, and that the City is trying to get money another way. In the end, people in all the groups tended to move themselves towards Option 3, the utility. Some moved more reluctantly than others, but the sense was that it was the least bad of the three options. Businesses and nonprofits almost immediately began talking about credits. In general, there was anger, and transparency and fairness concerns in the focus groups. The educational piece for the utility district is critical, and may take longer than expected. There is a need to make sure people understand that the problem is not going to go away. Another comment from the focus groups was about whether this should be a regional effort. Also, environmental interests tend to be dampened once costs are brought up. Timing is an issue, and one that will have to be dealt with correctly. The timeframe of potential implementation is different from the feasibility timeframe. A referendum could be bad if people do not know much about the issue. There is a difference between technical knowledge and political will. In response to a question about whether Brewer is doing anything, it was noted that Brewer has no urban impaired streams. The Council will have to make a decision on the utility district at some point. Both citizens and the Council have to be knowledgeable.The idea is to have opinion makers, respected people, supporting this process.These are known as sentinel supporters. Other suggestions including doing television spots or PSAs, or having a clean stream celebration. It was noted that many such events would be required, and that some of this might be more appropriate after a decision is made, especially if the decision is to go with a utility. It was noted that sentinel supporters should not be thrown out too quickly, and that credits are going to be a big issue. There was also some discussion of whether the fee can be passed through to renters, about governments as paying entities, and about credits. The issue of nonpayment was brought up, in that there may be a need to account for a certain incidence of nonpayment. Other communities may be a source of information about this. A sticker or other incentive could help encourage making payments, and could also help spread the message. A question was asked about how helpful residential rehabilitation is. It depends partly on how far a residence is from streams. Regarding CSOs, separation is the current goal. It was asked how much of the problem is contributed to by residences. The City now has numbers on impervious area; some impaired streams are entirely residential. An elusive issue is witnessing the problem. Flooding is not a big concern in Bangor. There are some fishing issues, in that the mouth of the Penjajawoc is a refuge for salmon. 3. Other Business Concerning the July 1. meeting, it was recommended that a memorandum be sent to the Council first.There as also some question of whether a media release would go out. The July 1 meeting will be a public meeting. S