Published in the Current
If developers have their way, a Dunkin’ Donuts will open in Cape Elizabeth, just across the high school entrance road from the Community Center.
George Valvanis, a Dunkin’ Donuts franchisee and operating partner with eight stores in Southern Maine, said a Cape Elizabeth store is on his plan, right after one at Dunstan Corner in Scarborough, one in South Portland’s Cash Corner and a third on Route 1 in Saco.
Those three are all in various stages of planning and approval, and he expects them to open within the next year. He hopes to have the Cape one open by summer 2004.
“We’re planning on putting a Dunkin’ here,” Valvanis said.
The property is now occupied by a building that used to house real estate agent Tom Tinsman’s office. “We would probably be tearing it down,” Valvanis said.
The building that replaced it would be a “colonial-type,” with “a couple thousand square feet” of space, Valvanis said.
Cape Elizabeth does not allow drive-through windows in the downtown, according to Town Manager Mike McGovern, and Valvanis said the business wouldn’t include one.
On Nov. 18, 2002, Fernando Cafua of North Andover, Mass., bought the property at 349 Ocean House Road for $288,750, according to Cape Elizabeth town records.
Valvanis said Cafua is his business partner, and owns “about 80” Dunkin’ Donuts stores in Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New York and Florida.
When the building was purchased, they planned to start the development process immediately, but corporate priorities forced a delay.
Valvanis owns a new Scarborough Dunkin’ Donuts that opened on Payne Road recently, another on Route 1 in Scarborough, one in Saco, one in Old Orchard Beach, one at Woodfords Corner in Portland and three in South Portland.
He said a Cape store may cut into the business at his Broadway store in South Portland, but he isn’t worried.
“I think it’s needed,” Valvanis said. “Obviously a lot of people like Dunkin’ Donuts.”
He said word is starting to get around Cape about the idea. “All I’ve had is positive feedback,” he said. “We’re a good neighbor,” donating to community organizations and fund-raising efforts, he said.
And Cape isn’t the last place he’ll look. “There are other properties we’re trying to purchase,” Valvanis said, though he would not give specifics. Demand is strong.
“Just about everyone drinks coffee.”
Thursday, April 10, 2003
Suit filed in deaf man’s killing
Published in the Current
The daughters of a man killed in a March 2001 encounter with Scarborough
police have filed a federal lawsuit alleging the officers, the department and the town violated their father’s civil rights and did not properly adapt their procedures to account for his disability.
The daughters’ attorney foresees a trial by year’s end, but the town’s attorney expects the suit will be dismissed by midsummer.
On Friday, attorneys will begin interviewing Scarborough Police Chief Robbie Moulton and officers Ivan Ramsdell and Robert Moore about their roles in the incident.
James Levier of Scarborough was deaf from early childhood and was 60 years old when he drove his van to the Shop ‘n Save parking lot in Scarborough March 16, 2001, to protest the sexual abuse of former students at the Baxter School for the Deaf, including himself.
He put a rifle on his shoulder and began marching back and forth in the parking lot, near his van, painted with protest slogans, and wearing a T-shirt with a slogan of protest on it.
After an hour-long standoff during which police had trouble communicating with Levier because he was deaf, he made the sign of the cross and pointed his rifle at police. Three Scarborough officers and a state trooper fired their weapons.
“It’s about as clear-cut a justification as I’ve seen for deadly force,” said Edward R. Benjamin Jr., the attorney representing the town of Scarborough and Moulton, Ramsdell and Moore. He will file a motion for summary judgment. A decision could be made by early July, he said.
The incident was complicated by the fact that Levier had filed a lawsuit earlier in the year against the Scarborough Police Department alleging civil rights violations because they did not provide an interpreter when they arrested him on an out-of-town warrant for assault.
The department’s only officer fluent in sign language was unable to participate in the armed standoff because of the lawsuit. Police were eventually able to locate another interpreter and were in the process of deciding how to safely arrange communications when Levier pointed his rifle at officers and they fired, killing Levier.
The new lawsuit, brought by Levier’s daughters Susan Vincent and Christina Cookson, alleges that police did not do enough to communicate with Levier before shooting him and did not try to use non-lethal force before using regular weapons with regular ammunition.
All the officers were cleared of any wrongdoing by the state attorney general’s office, which investigates all use of deadly force by law enforcement officers.
The suit also says that by not providing him with an interpreter, police were in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990.
Benjamin said that police are obliged to provide an interpreter, “once we’ve taken away the immediate danger.” Further, providing an interpreter for a deaf person is different from providing one for someone who speaks another language. “A deaf guy with a gun is still a guy with a gun and he has to be treated like that,” Benjamin said.
While a language interpreter could be positioned behind a car, say, with a bullhorn, a sign interpreter must be seen to communicate, Benjamin said. That’s dangerous when there is a gun involved.
The suit also alleges police used too much force too soon. “Alternatives such as police dogs, bean-bag rounds and other non-lethal use of force tactics and devices although available and feasible, were not used,” the suit says.
Benjamin said that’s disingenuous. “(Police) have the right to use deadly force when confronted with deadly force,” he said. “It was a suicide by cop case. (Levier) went out to provoke” police into shooting, he said. “Now these guys have to live the rest of their lives with that event.”
Benjamin said police officers have limited immunity from prosecution under federal law, if they “acted reasonably in the totality of the circumstances.”
Portland attorney Dan Lilley, who filed the suit on behalf of Levier’s daughters, said he is studying 30 to 40 audio and videotapes of the event, including radio transmissions from police officers and dispatchers.
He is asking the court for more time to continue his investigation, including questioning the officers involved and reviewing the records of the attorney general’s investigation.
“We have a lot more questions than we have answers,” Lilley said. One of the issues may be police confusion about the person they were dealing with. One call from dispatchers indicated to Lilley that police may have thought they were responding to an armed robber, who had taken a hostage.
“The police thought they had themselves a real criminal on their hands,” as opposed to a person conducting a public protest, Lilley said.
The suit does not request a particular amount of money, and Lilley said he has not yet determined what might be appropriate to ask for. He said he will base that decision on the results of his investigation, which is still in progress.
If the investigation wraps up by the end of June, which he expects it will, the case could go to trial before the end of the year, Lilley said. He said settling out of court was possible, but not probable.
The daughters of a man killed in a March 2001 encounter with Scarborough
police have filed a federal lawsuit alleging the officers, the department and the town violated their father’s civil rights and did not properly adapt their procedures to account for his disability.
The daughters’ attorney foresees a trial by year’s end, but the town’s attorney expects the suit will be dismissed by midsummer.
On Friday, attorneys will begin interviewing Scarborough Police Chief Robbie Moulton and officers Ivan Ramsdell and Robert Moore about their roles in the incident.
James Levier of Scarborough was deaf from early childhood and was 60 years old when he drove his van to the Shop ‘n Save parking lot in Scarborough March 16, 2001, to protest the sexual abuse of former students at the Baxter School for the Deaf, including himself.
He put a rifle on his shoulder and began marching back and forth in the parking lot, near his van, painted with protest slogans, and wearing a T-shirt with a slogan of protest on it.
After an hour-long standoff during which police had trouble communicating with Levier because he was deaf, he made the sign of the cross and pointed his rifle at police. Three Scarborough officers and a state trooper fired their weapons.
“It’s about as clear-cut a justification as I’ve seen for deadly force,” said Edward R. Benjamin Jr., the attorney representing the town of Scarborough and Moulton, Ramsdell and Moore. He will file a motion for summary judgment. A decision could be made by early July, he said.
The incident was complicated by the fact that Levier had filed a lawsuit earlier in the year against the Scarborough Police Department alleging civil rights violations because they did not provide an interpreter when they arrested him on an out-of-town warrant for assault.
The department’s only officer fluent in sign language was unable to participate in the armed standoff because of the lawsuit. Police were eventually able to locate another interpreter and were in the process of deciding how to safely arrange communications when Levier pointed his rifle at officers and they fired, killing Levier.
The new lawsuit, brought by Levier’s daughters Susan Vincent and Christina Cookson, alleges that police did not do enough to communicate with Levier before shooting him and did not try to use non-lethal force before using regular weapons with regular ammunition.
All the officers were cleared of any wrongdoing by the state attorney general’s office, which investigates all use of deadly force by law enforcement officers.
The suit also says that by not providing him with an interpreter, police were in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990.
Benjamin said that police are obliged to provide an interpreter, “once we’ve taken away the immediate danger.” Further, providing an interpreter for a deaf person is different from providing one for someone who speaks another language. “A deaf guy with a gun is still a guy with a gun and he has to be treated like that,” Benjamin said.
While a language interpreter could be positioned behind a car, say, with a bullhorn, a sign interpreter must be seen to communicate, Benjamin said. That’s dangerous when there is a gun involved.
The suit also alleges police used too much force too soon. “Alternatives such as police dogs, bean-bag rounds and other non-lethal use of force tactics and devices although available and feasible, were not used,” the suit says.
Benjamin said that’s disingenuous. “(Police) have the right to use deadly force when confronted with deadly force,” he said. “It was a suicide by cop case. (Levier) went out to provoke” police into shooting, he said. “Now these guys have to live the rest of their lives with that event.”
Benjamin said police officers have limited immunity from prosecution under federal law, if they “acted reasonably in the totality of the circumstances.”
Portland attorney Dan Lilley, who filed the suit on behalf of Levier’s daughters, said he is studying 30 to 40 audio and videotapes of the event, including radio transmissions from police officers and dispatchers.
He is asking the court for more time to continue his investigation, including questioning the officers involved and reviewing the records of the attorney general’s investigation.
“We have a lot more questions than we have answers,” Lilley said. One of the issues may be police confusion about the person they were dealing with. One call from dispatchers indicated to Lilley that police may have thought they were responding to an armed robber, who had taken a hostage.
“The police thought they had themselves a real criminal on their hands,” as opposed to a person conducting a public protest, Lilley said.
The suit does not request a particular amount of money, and Lilley said he has not yet determined what might be appropriate to ask for. He said he will base that decision on the results of his investigation, which is still in progress.
If the investigation wraps up by the end of June, which he expects it will, the case could go to trial before the end of the year, Lilley said. He said settling out of court was possible, but not probable.
Silenced Cape crowd calls for coach’s reinstatement
Published in the Current
At a Tuesday Cape School Board meeting packed with 100 people largely supporting fired basketball coach Jim Ray, board Chairman Marie Prager told the crowd that only two would be able to speak.
Among the audience were about 25 basketball coaches from throughout Southern Maine, standing in the balcony overlooking the meeting space, silent but all wearing pins reading “J Ray Must Stay.” Most other audience members also wore the pins.
Only two people, who had contacted the board ahead of time, were allowed to express their views. Grady Stevens, father of three former athletes coached by Ray, read a statement signed by 238 people in support of Ray, and also read email messages from three recent graduates.
“To say the least, his termination is bewildering,” Stevens said. “The community deserves an explanation.” His remarks were followed by thunderous applause. Prager gaveled the meeting back to order, saying “please stop, please stop.”
Tom Tinsman, also the father of three former Ray players, was the other speaker. He said he wants to see the evaluation.
“I’m hoping as a citizen in this town that we find out what is in that report,” he told the board.
Tinsman said he supports Superintendent Tom Forcella, Principal Jeff Shedd and the School Board, and wants Ray to improve his coaching.
“He has some attributes which are not conducive to good learning,” Tinsman said. “Over the years I’ve been treated with total disrespect,” he said.
“My hope is that Jim Ray can come before this board, admit his mistakes, apologize for them, accept the recommendations given to him by his boss and go on,” he said.
“Only (Ray) knows why he chose not to do those things,” Tinsman said. “We need to know where he stands.” Two people applauded Tinsman’s
Discussion cut short
When those two people had spoken, Prager said that ended the discussion for now.
“This is not something that is on our agenda,” she said. She promised that a future meeting would be scheduled where people could be heard. “It’s very important that everyone interested in this matter be heard,” she said.
“The board realizes it must review this matter in detail. Right now we are sitting here before you not having any information in this matter,” Prager said. “Everyone needs to calm down and know that the School Board will approach this matter with an open mind.”
Prager said after the meeting she did not know when a followup meeting would occur.
According to Ray’s attorney, Gerald Petruccelli, the next step is to wait for the School Board and its attorney to define the appeal’s process for fired coaches, because none appears to exist.
What people wanted to know at the meeting was what prompted Ray’s evaluation and dismissal as coach of the Cape Elizabeth boys varsity basketball team.
That’s the question Ray and supporters hope to answer as Ray begins his appeal before the Cape School Board – a process he hopes will lead to his reinstatement.
Many of the answers are cloaked in the name of “it’s a personnel matter,” and may remain that way. Some, however, believe, as one Ray supporter put it Friday night, it may not be a personnel matter so much as it is a personal one.
Friday night rally
About 100 people attended a rally Friday night in the high school cafeteria and spent two hours speaking calmly but emotionally in support of Ray. While many were involved with the basketball program, a number of speakers also knew Ray from his work in the community or as classroom teacher.
Several of the speakers thanked Principal Shedd for being the only school administrator to attend the meeting. It was Shedd’s evaluation of Ray that led to the coach’s dismissal by Superintendent Forcella. Shedd declined to answer any of the questions put to him on that topic.
Absent from the meeting were Forcella, his two sons, Dan and John, who play for Ray, long-time Cape Athletic Administrator Keith Weatherbie, and Coach Ray.
Early in the rally, a motion to file a statement with the School Board in support of Ray passed unanimously, with Booster President Tim Thompson designated to read it during Tuesday’s board meeting. When asked if he was comfortable reading the statement, Thompson replied he might not have the honor because he expected a vote for new officers later in the meeting would remove him.
Later, Thompson, who was not perceived to be a strong Ray fan, was, in fact, voted out of office. Two Ray supporters, Dave Reid and John Doherty, were elected president and vice president, respectively.
Kertes threatens to quit
Just a few weeks after coaching his team to its second consecutive girls swim championship, Kerry Kertes surprised the rally by announcing, “I’ll resign as teacher and coach” if Ray is done. “I’m very, very tired,” Kertes said, “of two or three unhappy people, a vocal minority” driving away “good people.”
Several people asked Shedd about the evaluation process and how it was conducted, a question he wouldn’t answer. Kertes addressed that directly, saying he’s never been evaluated as coach, and only for 20 minutes as teacher. “No one’s ever told me if I’m a good coach, no one’s ever told me if I’m a good teacher,” Kertes said.
Kertes said he told Shedd, “it’s a very lonely job being a coach at Cape Elizabeth. Even when you win, it’s not enough.”
Bob Brown, another well-known and respected local basketball coach, spoke at the rally. Brown, who coached the Cheverus boys to the Class A final game this year, also spoke earlier in the year at a hearing on behalf of Bonny Eagle coach TJ Hesler. (Hesler was suspended by Bonny Eagle administrators after disciplining a player for inappropriate conduct during a
game. After sitting out two games, Hesler was reinstated, but resigned at the end of the season.)
Brown earned a standing ovation with a rousing speech that had most in attendance ready to lace up the sneakers and take to the court for him. Brown said that Ray is one of the most respected coaches in the state, and his firing “is almost a joke. No one can believe it.”
At a Tuesday Cape School Board meeting packed with 100 people largely supporting fired basketball coach Jim Ray, board Chairman Marie Prager told the crowd that only two would be able to speak.
Among the audience were about 25 basketball coaches from throughout Southern Maine, standing in the balcony overlooking the meeting space, silent but all wearing pins reading “J Ray Must Stay.” Most other audience members also wore the pins.
Only two people, who had contacted the board ahead of time, were allowed to express their views. Grady Stevens, father of three former athletes coached by Ray, read a statement signed by 238 people in support of Ray, and also read email messages from three recent graduates.
“To say the least, his termination is bewildering,” Stevens said. “The community deserves an explanation.” His remarks were followed by thunderous applause. Prager gaveled the meeting back to order, saying “please stop, please stop.”
Tom Tinsman, also the father of three former Ray players, was the other speaker. He said he wants to see the evaluation.
“I’m hoping as a citizen in this town that we find out what is in that report,” he told the board.
Tinsman said he supports Superintendent Tom Forcella, Principal Jeff Shedd and the School Board, and wants Ray to improve his coaching.
“He has some attributes which are not conducive to good learning,” Tinsman said. “Over the years I’ve been treated with total disrespect,” he said.
“My hope is that Jim Ray can come before this board, admit his mistakes, apologize for them, accept the recommendations given to him by his boss and go on,” he said.
“Only (Ray) knows why he chose not to do those things,” Tinsman said. “We need to know where he stands.” Two people applauded Tinsman’s
Discussion cut short
When those two people had spoken, Prager said that ended the discussion for now.
“This is not something that is on our agenda,” she said. She promised that a future meeting would be scheduled where people could be heard. “It’s very important that everyone interested in this matter be heard,” she said.
“The board realizes it must review this matter in detail. Right now we are sitting here before you not having any information in this matter,” Prager said. “Everyone needs to calm down and know that the School Board will approach this matter with an open mind.”
Prager said after the meeting she did not know when a followup meeting would occur.
According to Ray’s attorney, Gerald Petruccelli, the next step is to wait for the School Board and its attorney to define the appeal’s process for fired coaches, because none appears to exist.
What people wanted to know at the meeting was what prompted Ray’s evaluation and dismissal as coach of the Cape Elizabeth boys varsity basketball team.
That’s the question Ray and supporters hope to answer as Ray begins his appeal before the Cape School Board – a process he hopes will lead to his reinstatement.
Many of the answers are cloaked in the name of “it’s a personnel matter,” and may remain that way. Some, however, believe, as one Ray supporter put it Friday night, it may not be a personnel matter so much as it is a personal one.
Friday night rally
About 100 people attended a rally Friday night in the high school cafeteria and spent two hours speaking calmly but emotionally in support of Ray. While many were involved with the basketball program, a number of speakers also knew Ray from his work in the community or as classroom teacher.
Several of the speakers thanked Principal Shedd for being the only school administrator to attend the meeting. It was Shedd’s evaluation of Ray that led to the coach’s dismissal by Superintendent Forcella. Shedd declined to answer any of the questions put to him on that topic.
Absent from the meeting were Forcella, his two sons, Dan and John, who play for Ray, long-time Cape Athletic Administrator Keith Weatherbie, and Coach Ray.
Early in the rally, a motion to file a statement with the School Board in support of Ray passed unanimously, with Booster President Tim Thompson designated to read it during Tuesday’s board meeting. When asked if he was comfortable reading the statement, Thompson replied he might not have the honor because he expected a vote for new officers later in the meeting would remove him.
Later, Thompson, who was not perceived to be a strong Ray fan, was, in fact, voted out of office. Two Ray supporters, Dave Reid and John Doherty, were elected president and vice president, respectively.
Kertes threatens to quit
Just a few weeks after coaching his team to its second consecutive girls swim championship, Kerry Kertes surprised the rally by announcing, “I’ll resign as teacher and coach” if Ray is done. “I’m very, very tired,” Kertes said, “of two or three unhappy people, a vocal minority” driving away “good people.”
Several people asked Shedd about the evaluation process and how it was conducted, a question he wouldn’t answer. Kertes addressed that directly, saying he’s never been evaluated as coach, and only for 20 minutes as teacher. “No one’s ever told me if I’m a good coach, no one’s ever told me if I’m a good teacher,” Kertes said.
Kertes said he told Shedd, “it’s a very lonely job being a coach at Cape Elizabeth. Even when you win, it’s not enough.”
Bob Brown, another well-known and respected local basketball coach, spoke at the rally. Brown, who coached the Cheverus boys to the Class A final game this year, also spoke earlier in the year at a hearing on behalf of Bonny Eagle coach TJ Hesler. (Hesler was suspended by Bonny Eagle administrators after disciplining a player for inappropriate conduct during a
game. After sitting out two games, Hesler was reinstated, but resigned at the end of the season.)
Brown earned a standing ovation with a rousing speech that had most in attendance ready to lace up the sneakers and take to the court for him. Brown said that Ray is one of the most respected coaches in the state, and his firing “is almost a joke. No one can believe it.”
Wednesday, April 9, 2003
Truck spills fuel in S.P.
Published in the American Journal
A tanker truck carrying 8,000 gallons of fuel flipped over early Monday morning, spilling jet fuel into the street and into storm drains leading to the Fore River and Casco Bay.
The truck overturned right outside the South Portland Central Fire Station at the corner of Broadway and Route 77, and closed the Casco Bay Bridge for hours, delaying traffic heading from Portland to South Portland.
Jon Woodard of the state Department of Environmental Protection said the truck was carrying 8,000 gallons. “All of it was released from the truck,” he said. Some was contained on the street and some went into storm drains leading to the water.
“We have collected a lot of it,” Woodard said. The DEP and Clean Harbors, a South Portland-based environmental company handling the cleanup, are using booms to contain the jet fuel that flowed into the water.
Woodard said the state Department of Marine Resources is sampling the water in the Fore River and Portland harbor to make sure no fuel escaped. He said there have been a few small sheens reported in both of those areas, but does not believe any significant amount escaped containment.
A spokesman for Clean Harbors said the amount of the spill was “sizeable.” The company said it would not have a good handle on how long the cleanup will take before the American Journal’s deadline.
It will take at least until Wednesday afternoon, according to the South Portland Police Department. A cruiser has been assigned to block the right-turn lane coming off the bridge onto Broadway through Wednesday afternoon. That will allow cleanup workers to use the road as they collect contaminated dirt from the area around the spill.
Woodard said the level of environmental damage remained to be seen. He said the plants “are not really out yet,” and may not suffer much damage, while marine animals and shellfish have different levels of sensitivity to contaminants.
A tanker truck carrying 8,000 gallons of fuel flipped over early Monday morning, spilling jet fuel into the street and into storm drains leading to the Fore River and Casco Bay.
The truck overturned right outside the South Portland Central Fire Station at the corner of Broadway and Route 77, and closed the Casco Bay Bridge for hours, delaying traffic heading from Portland to South Portland.
Jon Woodard of the state Department of Environmental Protection said the truck was carrying 8,000 gallons. “All of it was released from the truck,” he said. Some was contained on the street and some went into storm drains leading to the water.
“We have collected a lot of it,” Woodard said. The DEP and Clean Harbors, a South Portland-based environmental company handling the cleanup, are using booms to contain the jet fuel that flowed into the water.
Woodard said the state Department of Marine Resources is sampling the water in the Fore River and Portland harbor to make sure no fuel escaped. He said there have been a few small sheens reported in both of those areas, but does not believe any significant amount escaped containment.
A spokesman for Clean Harbors said the amount of the spill was “sizeable.” The company said it would not have a good handle on how long the cleanup will take before the American Journal’s deadline.
It will take at least until Wednesday afternoon, according to the South Portland Police Department. A cruiser has been assigned to block the right-turn lane coming off the bridge onto Broadway through Wednesday afternoon. That will allow cleanup workers to use the road as they collect contaminated dirt from the area around the spill.
Woodard said the level of environmental damage remained to be seen. He said the plants “are not really out yet,” and may not suffer much damage, while marine animals and shellfish have different levels of sensitivity to contaminants.
PWD not interested in lease plan
Published in the Current and the American Journal
A legislative bill that caused a big stir in Standish now appears unlikely to have any real impact on the town’s tax rolls.
Rep. Janet McLaughlin, D-Cape Elizabeth, proposed a bill that would allow water and sewer districts, including the Portland Water District, to raise ready cash under a lease-and-lease-back arrangement. Under the proposal,
district-owned buildings and equipment would be leased to a private entity, which could then take depreciation of the assets off their taxes.
Standish residents and officials were excited that the town might be a beneficiary of private control of the district’s assets, worth as much as $50 million, because they would no longer be tax exempt as they are now under PWD ownership.
Not only is the bill now tabled pending the input of the Legislature’s finance committee, but it could be revamped to excise any portions that would result in the transfer of ownership of any PWD equipment or buildings, leaving Standish’s hands empty of any new taxes.
Rep. Larry Bliss, D-South Portland, who heads the Legislature’s utilities committee, said last week that state law would require the state to pay half of the tax liability for any private property it exempts from tax. Under the proposal, the state would have granted that exemption.
A letter circulated to Standish town councilors suggested that PWD property is now worth $50 million. At Standish’s $20.48 per thousand tax rate, half of its potential property tax is $512,000, which the state would have to reimburse under the proposal.
That would be unlikely to pass in this tight budget season, Bliss said.
And the district is not interested anyway. PWD trustee chairman Howard Littlefield of Cape Elizabeth said there was nothing in the proposal the district would be likely to use.
The lease-and-lease-back arrangement was designed to provide ready cash to districts, paid by investors, who would take depreciation tax deductions on the district’s assets over time.
The tax-exempt district does not now receive any credit for depreciation. The bill would not allow the lease or sale of water rights, and transactions would be unlikely to include much real estate, because land does not depreciate.
A legislative bill that caused a big stir in Standish now appears unlikely to have any real impact on the town’s tax rolls.
Rep. Janet McLaughlin, D-Cape Elizabeth, proposed a bill that would allow water and sewer districts, including the Portland Water District, to raise ready cash under a lease-and-lease-back arrangement. Under the proposal,
district-owned buildings and equipment would be leased to a private entity, which could then take depreciation of the assets off their taxes.
Standish residents and officials were excited that the town might be a beneficiary of private control of the district’s assets, worth as much as $50 million, because they would no longer be tax exempt as they are now under PWD ownership.
Not only is the bill now tabled pending the input of the Legislature’s finance committee, but it could be revamped to excise any portions that would result in the transfer of ownership of any PWD equipment or buildings, leaving Standish’s hands empty of any new taxes.
Rep. Larry Bliss, D-South Portland, who heads the Legislature’s utilities committee, said last week that state law would require the state to pay half of the tax liability for any private property it exempts from tax. Under the proposal, the state would have granted that exemption.
A letter circulated to Standish town councilors suggested that PWD property is now worth $50 million. At Standish’s $20.48 per thousand tax rate, half of its potential property tax is $512,000, which the state would have to reimburse under the proposal.
That would be unlikely to pass in this tight budget season, Bliss said.
And the district is not interested anyway. PWD trustee chairman Howard Littlefield of Cape Elizabeth said there was nothing in the proposal the district would be likely to use.
The lease-and-lease-back arrangement was designed to provide ready cash to districts, paid by investors, who would take depreciation tax deductions on the district’s assets over time.
The tax-exempt district does not now receive any credit for depreciation. The bill would not allow the lease or sale of water rights, and transactions would be unlikely to include much real estate, because land does not depreciate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)