The latest news about Maine lakes and ponds.

Naples Looks at Wording of Bridge Referendum

April 16, 2008 - NAPLES -- On Monday, selectmen pinned down language for a May 20 referendum vote on the form of a new Bay of Naples Bridge.


They voted, 3-2, to approve referendum language outlining two main choices: preference for a replacement swing bridge that would have to be partly funded by as much as $4 million in extra local, state, federal or private business dollars; or, a project costing "up to $8 million" that would design and build a replacement fixed bridge, plus improve 1300 feet west along the Causeway, including sea walls, green space, parking and other amenities and infrastructure upgrades.


Since anything other than a fixed bridge project is in cost overrun, any "extra" available money for new swinging bridge would not realistically come from the town, selectmen asserted Monday. Attending businessmen, most of whom strongly favor the swinging bridge replacement, emphasize, however, that they could not and would not be coming up with extra millions, either.


That leaves the state and the federal government as the only viable funding sources for the more expensive swing bridge option. But the state faces a deep and broad transportation funding crisis. The originally proposed project overtopped the $11 million set aside for new drawbridge; the projected cost came to $17 million. That's when the state engineers returned to the drawing board -- and to the town. Including design and engineering money already spent, even the middle option swinging bridge, and $14 million, is currently out of reach. So, that leaves the federal government.


Proponents for a swinging bridge said the town should invite the Army Corps of Engineers to look at the current and historic Harrison to Standish waterway, and rule whether it falls under the "United States Navigable Waterway" designation. If it does, then, under the law, the federal government "would have to fund" a replacement moving bridge, they contended, to preserve a historic waterway.


Selectmen voted, as part of their motion, to invite the Corps of Engineers to look at the waterway and make a ruling, yea or nay.


Barbara Clarke reviewed, "The state's responsibility was to provide a drawbridge. To be realistic, it's not going to happen." She wanted to see a "vote in a ballot form" on a preferred bridge style -- but she didn't want the town to move forward "without all the facts." Part of those facts she and others indicated, include not only construction and bridge project costs, but also potential revenue losses to local and area businesses, and to the state in the form of sales taxes, and so on. How would you put all that in the form of a vote, though? How to word the article?


Citizen Jake Roush said Monday that the best referendum option might be to let people simply vote yes or no: do you want a swinging bridge, or not? -- without adding any qualifiers.


Roush added that he was "tired of reading in the paper" that a swinging bridge "was favored by a majority of people at a meeting. I just don't believe that most of the people in this town are really in favor of a swinging bridge."


The selectmen's determination to hold such a straw vote referendum came from their perception that Roush's feeling was sound, as well as from the MDOT's urging. It seems likely that a significant, "quiet" bloc of voters do favor a fixed structure, and the best way to find out what the majority's feelings are, is to poll them. Selectman Rick Paraschak said Monday that he had been approached by many who favored a fixed bridge, echoing a comment that selectmen Chairman Christine Powers made at last week's meeting with MDOT principles.



The Songo River Queen's Carl Talbot, who has said that the iconic paddlewheeler's summer business would be greatly injured by a fixed bridge, also felt any vote should be simple. If the town and DOT couldn't say whether or not the extra money for a swing bridge would be coming from a state's navigable waterways ruling, but then dangled the extras that the MDOT says might be included in a fixed bridge package deal, than just a simple preference would be more accurate and significant, he indicated. "Don't bribe them with the other stuff," Talbott advised.



The changing menu of options and costs presented by the state over time has been a concern. "Until we get a conceptual drawing, I don't think we can vote on anything," Tim Hamilton argued. "Maybe we should have no vote, until we can get better numbers." (Hamilton added that the proposed 14 foot-high bridge with a 5 foot high deck and superstructure could very easily be out of proportion on the Causeway. State engineers noted early in the process of designing the run up to an actual higher profile bridge would be a difficult engineering issue.)



Some kind of bridge solution is needed; the current 50-year-old structure and its operation is on its last legs. If there is a problem and the state has to put in a make due bridge at 5 feet above the water, marina owner Dan Allen warned, "we'll be stuck with it." He wanted to see a swinging bridge, for historical and cultural reasons, as well as economic.



There was again a call for an engineering expert to join the town's team, to counterbalance the expertise brought by the state. While there is no money in the budget to hire such a consultant at this time, selectmen appealed for any qualified and civic minded citizen to step forward and help provide expert information. "Nobody here is an expert on bridges," one speaker noted.



The 30 or so attending Monday were interested observers, if not expert ones, however. A group calling itself the Committee to Preserve Long Lake Commerce presented papers asking selectmen to demand more information from the state before any town vote. The state should move ahead first with developing information that the MDOT said it would gather on a cost-benefit analysis of a new swinging bridge, their letter contended.



If a new fixed bridge goes in, the nonbinding referendum question will note, the MDOT would build it starting in 2009. The money currently is available to do the project in this form. Whether the money will ever actually be available for a swinging bridge may depend on an Army Corps of Engineers designation.



This article originally appeared in the Bridgton News, April 10, 2008.


Lakes: Brandy Pond, Long Lake, Sebago Lake
Regions: Sebago


Print this story

Email this story

return to Lake News