CITY OF SACO, MAINE Administration Kevin L. Sutherland, City Administrator Saco City Hall Telephone: (207) 282-4191 300 Main Street Email: KSutherland@sacomaine.gov Saco, Maine 04072-1538 Facebook: /sacomaine Twitter: @sacomaine SACO CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MONDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2016 6:00 PM CITY HALL AUDITORIUM I. CALL TO ORDER II. PUBLIC COMMENT III. AGENDA A. Quitclaim Portion of Wharf Street P2 B. Authorize the Use of the Request for Proposal Process for P7 City Owned Property - 90 Maple Street C. Addition of Chapter 171 Single-Use Carryout Bags to P22 Saco Municipal Code of Ordinances D. Monthly Department Financials (see Administrator Update 12/8/16) IV. COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND COMMENT V. ADJOURNMENT
MEETING ITEM COMMENTARY WORKSHOP ITEM: A AGENDA ITEM: STAFF RESOURCE: COUNCIL RESOURCE: Quitclaim Portion of Wharf Street Kevin L. Sutherland, City Administrator Tim Murphy, City Attorney Councilor William Doyle BACKGROUND: Council reviewed this matter in February. Since then, the Parties have worked to get all documents prepared, but one last authorization from Council is needed, specifically authority to quitclaim a small portion of the Wharf Street right of way. As the Council will recall, Diane and David Deering propose to deed over to the City land needed to improve access to Deering Avenue. See Exhibit B. In return, the City agreed to abandon a portion of a paper street (Forskol Street) with half of the abandoned portion running to the Deerings, and the other half to a third party/abuttor. Upon completion of the land swaps, the existing Deering lot will be split into two lots with a single building on each lot improving marketability for the Deerings, and overall tax value for the City. The two Deering buildings were built many, many years ago. However, the structures are actually sited within the historic Wharf Street Right of Way, although not located in the paved/used portion of the Way. See Exhibit B. This location poses title problems for the Deerings through no fault of their own. The Parties recently determined that while the City Council previously voted to abandon the Forskol Street paper street, it had not specifically voted to transfer a limited portion of Wharf Street to the Deerings. A Council vote is required to put the final bow on this project. City staff at DPW, along with survey work from Dow Coulombe, has identified two connected portions of Wharf Street that will address this issue, one an area of 1151 square feet, plus or minus, and a second area of 3256 square feet, plus or minus. Transfer of these parcels will assure that the Deering structures are no longer located within the historic ROW. See Exhibit C. EXHIBITS: 1. Workshop Commentary For February 8, 2016 2. Exhibit C RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Council vote to quitclaim to Diane and David Deering such portion of the Wharf Street Right of Way as shown and described in Exhibit C. SUGGESTED MOTION: Be it ordered that the City quitclaim to Diane and David Deering that portion of the Wharf Street Right of Way (1151 square feet and 3256 square feet, plus or minus for each) and as identified in Ex. C for $1.00. Move to approve the order. 2
WORKSHOP ITEM: A Exhibit Item: 1 3
WORKSHOP ITEM: A Exhibit Item: 1 4
WORKSHOP ITEM: A Exhibit Item: 1 5
WORKSHOP ITEM: A Exhibit Item: 2 6
MEETING ITEM COMMENTARY AGENDA ITEM: Authorize the Use of the Request for Proposal Process for City Owned Property - 90 Maple Street COUNCIL RESOURCE: Councilor Alan Minthorn STAFF RESOURCE: Bob Hamblen, City Planner BACKGROUND: The City acquired ownership of the property at 90 Maple Street in January, 2016 due to the non-payment of property taxes. As outlined in Chapter 81 of City Code, consideration of the sale of the City-owned property has been referred to the Planning Board for evaluation and a report to the City Council. The property in this case is an existing two-family dwelling valued in tax year 2016 at $219,600. Per Chapter 81, several City departments have been asked for comments, which are attached. The Planning Board reviewed the property and held a public hearing at its meeting of Dec. 6. Given comments from staff, and procedures outlined in City Code, the Board recommends that the property be offered for sale through a sealed request for proposals process, with details to be worked out by the City Administrator and Finance Director. EXHIBIT: 1. Staff comments 2. Vision tax card 3. Location map 4. Letter from Drummond and Drummond 5. E-mail message from relative of former owner 6. Planning Board Minutes 12/6/16 SUGGESTED MOTION: Be it ordered that the City Council hereby authorizes the City Administrator to issue a Request for Proposals for the sale of real estate and real property of the city owned property located at 90 Maple Street. I move to approve the Order. 7
Exhibit Item: 1 8
Exhibit Item: 2 9
Exhibit Item: 2 10
Exhibit Item: 2 11
Exhibit Item: 3 12
Exhibit Item: 4 13
Exhibit Item: 4 14
Exhibit Item: 4 15
Exhibit Item: 4 16
Exhibit Item: 4 17
Exhibit Item: 5 18
Exhibit Item: 5 19
Exhibit Item: 6 Planning Board Minutes of 12-6-16 1. Public Hearing: a request that the Planning Board evaluate alternatives for the disposition of the property at 90 Maple Street, as outlined in Chapter 81 of City Code. Tax Map 52, Lot 46-1. Hamblen: As outlined in Chapter 81 of City Code, consideration of the sale of City-owned property is referred to the Planning Board for evaluation and a report to the City Council. The property in this case is the parcel at 90 Maple Street, a two family home on an 11,325 s.f. (0.26 acre) lot. In the R-2 zone, 5,000 s.f. per unit is the minimum lot size for a two-family dwelling, so this is a conforming lot. The City has come into ownership of the property due to failure to keep up with property taxes, and also sewer bills. The City foreclosed on the property in January, and now seeks to divest itself of the property. An e-mail from a relative of the owner, providing background and a request. Per Chapter 81, several departments have been asked for comments. Chapter 81 lays out options. The Council may decide to retain the property, or may have an interest in selling a City-owned property. Again, Chapter 81: If the Council decides to offer any Cityowned property for sale the Council shall determine the method of sale, whether by : sealed bid, sealed request for proposals, auction, by negotiation with the previous owner Or by contract with a real estate broker at predetermined prices for such real estate and real estate interests. An email from a Ms. Wolfson, who is the niece of the Tito family, gave a very sad description of a very bleak situation. Some of the details of the family were very personal. Peter: He is afraid that the personal information noted will paint a picture of dysfunction on the family. Rene asked how does the public know when a property is being disposition? Mike: it is advertised via a legal notice. Rene: what does the city do with the excess funds beyond the expenses? It would be good for the city to have a policy in place for when they have property that they are looking to dispose of, would go to an organization such as Habitat for Humanity to find out what their needs are. We would be helping the community, and those in need. Rene: I move to open the public hearing, seconded by Mike. Motion passes 4-0 No comments from the public Peter: I move to close the public hearing, seconded by Rene. Motion passes 4-0. 20
Exhibit Item: 6 Rene: I move that the Board recommend to the City Council that the property at 90 Maple Street be put up for sale via a closed Request for Proposal, seconded by Peter. Motion passes 4-0. Meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Maggie Edwards Board Secretary 21
MEETING ITEM COMMENTARY WORKSHOP ITEM: C AGENDA ITEM: STAFF RESOURCE: COUNCIL RESOURCE: Addition of Chapter 171 Single-Use Carryout Bags to Saco Municipal Code of Ordinances Bob Hamblen, City Planner Councilor Roger Gay BACKGROUND: Single-use carry-out bags are a pervasive part of our society, whether a small paper bag in which a store clerk places a single greeting card or the multiple plastic bags in which we carry home our groceries. However, these single-use bags negatively impact the environment, particularly plastic bags that proliferate near roadsides and can harm wildlife and marine life. More than a dozen states have introduced legislation seeking to ban the use of plastic bags. Currently in Maine, York, Portland, Falmouth, Freeport and South Portland have passed legislation encouraging the use of reusable bags, and imposing a fee on single-use bags. The current proposal is to add Chapter 171 Single-Use Carryout Bags to the City of Saco s general code, which would impose a fee on single-use bags in stores in Saco. The City s goal is to discourage single-use bags and to encourage the use of reusable bags. We recommend the implementation of a monetary fine system for violations of Chapter 171, should the proposal be approved and go into effect. The Council reviewed this item at the Nov. 14, 2016 workshop. First Reading was held on Nov. 21, 2016. Public hearing was held on Dec. 5, 2016. EXHIBITS: RECOMMENDATION: 1. Memorandum from City Administrator 12/8/16 2. Comments from City Council Public Hearing 12/5/16 Exhibit Items below previously provided on 12/5/16 3. Plastic Bag FAQs Exhibit Items below previously provided on 11/21/16 4. Addition to the Municipal Code of Ordinances Chapter 171 5. Single-Use Carryout Bags 6. Maine Voices op-ed: Move to Cut Plastic Bag Use 7. Articles about Plastic Staff recommends adoption of Chapter 171 as drafted. SUGGESTED MOTION: Be it Ordered that the City Council does hereby ordain and approve the Second and Final Reading of the document titled, City of Saco Code Amendment: Chapter 171 - Single-Use Carryout Bags, November 21, 2016. 22
CITY OF SACO, MAINE WORKSHOP ITEM: C Exhibit Item: 1 Administration Kevin L. Sutherland, City Administrator Saco City Hall Telephone: (207) 282-4191 300 Main Street Email: KSutherland@sacomaine.gov Saco, Maine 04072-1538 Facebook: /sacomaine Twitter: @sacomaine MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Michaud and City Council FROM: Kevin L. Sutherland, City Administrator DATE: December 8, 2016 RE: Second Workshop on Addition of Chapter 171 Single Use Carryout Bags There were a lot of good comments and suggests made to Council in regard to the Plastic Bag ordinance that is slated to be voted on December 19th. We ve collected the comments (see exhibit item 2) for your review and consideration at Monday s second workshop on this item. I d like to use the time to develop any amendments Council would like to consider. This will give staff time to prepare appropriate motions for Council to debate on at the second and final reading. 23
WORKSHOP ITEM: C Exhibit Item: 2 Notes from Dec. 5 Public Hearing, Chapter 171. Single-Use Carryout Bags Ann Saunders, 420 Boom Rd plastic bags are an insignificant part of the waste stream. Plastic bags are the greenest bags to use. Adele Saunders, 420 Boom Rd supportive of keeping plastic bags. Lynn Copeland, 526 Ferry Rd speaking on behalf of Conservation Commission, supports the proposed ban on plastic bags, and favors re-usable bags. Diane Doyle, Tiffany Lane in favor of the ban, walks along the river and picks up trash: a lot of plastic. Re-usable bags are not difficult to deal with. Yvette Meunier, Topsham our town recently voted to impose a five cent charge on each plastic bag and paper bag; the charge should include paper, not exempt it. Sarah Lakeman, Natural Resources Council of Maine the NRCM is available to assist communities with draft legislation such as this. Paper bags cost more than plastic. Paper bags are not produced in Maine. Supports the proposal as written. Hasn t heard any instance of health reports from using reusable bags. Travis Wagner, USM professor, Dept. of Environmental Science and Policy there are 248 local ordinances re: plastic bags now in the U.S. Five of the ordinances in Maine use the fee approach. If you choose to ban plastic, then charge five cents for paper. The estimate of plastic bag use is 348 per person per year. Given Saco s population, that means 6.3 million plastic bags per year. Keep the minimal fee for single use bags, and support re-usable bags. Marcia Harrington, Brunswick in Brunswick, we proposed a fee of five cents for each single use bag, whether paper or plastic. We also suggested a 4 ml plastic bag, which can be reused, at a fee of 10 cents per bag. Also used are 2.5 ml bags. We re working with the town s energy and sustainability committee, and suggest that reduce first is best approach. A recent referendum in California bans plastic bags, and requires a 10 cent fee for a paper bag. Elizabeth desimone, 210 Ferry Rd I support the ban on plastic, and a five cent charge for a paper bag. Kevin: City has received a letter from Saco Valley Land Trust which supports the plastic bag ban, and a letter from Inga Browne, Simpson Rd, which also supports the plastic bag ban. Beth Johnston, Pleasant St are dog waste bags affected? No. Are newspaper bags affected? No. Mr. Hall, Smutty Lane recently moved here from CA, saw the impacts of bans. I re-use plastic bags, and I favor the fee on paper bags. Barbara Colman -- is this just for grocery stores, or take-out restaurants, too? Answer: grocery stores. 24
WORKSHOP ITEM: C Exhibit Item: 2 Other Comments / Suggestions Received by City Administration Via email From Shelley Doak, Executive Director of the Maine Grocers & Food Producers Association on 11/18/16: You may want to refine the definition of a reusable bag to include plastic bags that are 2.25 mil thick since these are designed to be reused w/great success. In the definition, it refers to "paper" bags as single use check out bags, but then later it states that a retailer may offer paper bags for a $.5 fee. You may wish to remove the reference to a paper bag in the definition. During the First Reading of the Ordinance on 11/21/16 Councilor David Precourt: suggested an amendment to remove the fee for paper bags. Via email from Councilor Eric Cote on 12/8/16: add a section (e) to the ordinance stating "Is at least 3 mils thick if made from plastic." Consider changes to the definition of store which I think is a little vague the Town of York's definition, which covers nearly all retail establishments, with some exceptions in section 5. I am not sure if we should cover all retail establishments at this time, or just stick to the big grocery stores and make our definition clearer to just apply to the big grocery stores only Town of York s definitions: SECTION 3. DEFINITIONS Retail Establishment: Any commercial enterprise engaged in the sale of food or merchandise including but not limited to grocery and convenience stores, markets, pharmacies, restaurants, takeout food purveyors, seasonal and temporary businesses and other merchandise retailers. Nonprofit and religious organizations are not considered Retail Establishments. SECTION 4. STANDARDS Every Retail Establishment located in the Town of York shall comply with this Ordinance. A. No Single-Use Plastic Carryout Bag shall be distributed, either with or without charge, to a Customer, at any Retail Establishment located in the Town of York. SECTION 5. EXCEPTIONS A. Single use plastic bags, typically without handles, used to contain dry cleaning, newspapers, produce, meat, lobsters, fish, bulk foods, and wet items are permissible. B. Nonprofit organizations or religious institutions are exempt from the provisions of this Ordinance. Via Email from Don and Jean Horton on 12/8/16 I wish you to add our names to those who support a ban on single use plastic bags in Saco. As a long-time resident of the City, I know this ban would help advertise our City as a clean, healthy and environmentally progressive City. Moreover, as a marine biologist I am personally familiar with the damage that plastic bags have on the marine environment. As a coastal city we have an ethical obligation, as well to keep the local ecosystems healthy and safe. 25