Back to ship shape

South Portland City Council considers how to care for the aging Liberty Ship Memorial at Bug Light.

Salt water and salty air have taken their toll on the Liberty
Ship Memorial at Bug Light Park in South Portland. The
City Council on Monday discussed repairs to the outer
“hull,” which carry a price tag of around $38,000. Work
to the inside displays was dropped from a proposal due to cost.

SOUTH PORTLAND — The South Portland City Council will soon weigh anchor on the Liberty Ship Memorial, a 10-year-old steel structure located in Bug Light Park that's not exactly seaworthy, so to speak.

"There are a number of locations on the structure that are rusting out," said City Manager James Gailey at a council workshop session Monday. "It needs to be sandblasted and the entire thing should be primed and painted. … The salt air and salt spray really takes a number on metal structures like that down there, just a few feet away from the water line.”

But with repairs tagged at $37,718 – scaled back from an initial $70,000 project – and only a fraction of that available from a trust fund set up to maintain the memorial, councilors on Monday debated the merits of dipping into city reserves for the work against pushing for a capital campaign. In the end, they seemed to agree to a combination of the two, and Gailey is likely to include some funding in next year’s budget proposal.

Sponsored by the Portland Harbor Museum and dedicated in November 2001, the memorial recognizes the 30,000 men and woman of the New England Shipbuilding Corporation who churned out 266 cargo vessels of the so-called "liberty ship" design from two 60-acre yards in South Portland. The ships shuttled supplies across the Atlantic to aid Allied efforts during World War II and are widely credited with speeding defeat of the Nazis by racing American arms to the front lines.

Not long after South Portland accepted the monument, it also took on a $25,000 trust fund given by the widow of a shipyard worker to pay for long-term upkeep. However, that fund stipulates that only the interest earned on its principle can be spent.

"At this time," said Gailey, "only about $2,200 is available through this trust fund. That's a baby step and we kind of need a large step at this point."

The cost to repair the structure ­– which rang in last year at nearly $70,000 – is now expected to cost $37,718, based on the lowest qualified bid submitted in July for a scaled-back version of the project by Logan & Son Inc., of Portland. Plans include only work to the primary part of the monument, built to resemble the bow of a liberty ship. Repair to the information panels and surrounding concrete walls were cut after the 2010 bid came in higher than expected.

Gailey proposed paying for the repairs as part of next year’s capital improvements budget, using money drawn from the city's $9 million undesignated surplus. However, while councilors were unanimous in their admiration of the memorial, and what it represents, few were keen on dipping into city coffers to fund its rehabilitation.

"To me, this is a great project for a capital campaign," said Councilor Tom Blake, adding that, in his view, repair to worn educational displays on the site is more important that the mock hull built around them.

"There are ways we can raise this money," said Blake. "I think it would be good for the community to get behind something like this. If we just take money out of our undesignated fund balance, we'll have to do it again 10 years down the road. Let's build that endowment to fund those repairs in the future."

"It would be really easy to pull money out of undesignated funds, but what then?" asked Councilor Patti Smith, rhetorically. "It becomes a slippery slope."

"If we take on this project all on our own, we look like we are always there with open pockets," agreed Mayor Rosemarie De Angelis.

"It's great to be the recipient of a gift, but at the same time those gifts cost us," she said, causing Councilor Tom Coward to quip, “It’s the gift that keeps on taking.”

De Angelis urged the creation of a “Friends of the Liberty Ship Memorial” group to spearhead fundraising and oversee maintenance, adding that a similar group might be called for at the Military Service Memorial, located in Mill Creek Park, which she recently accepted on the city’s behalf.

"We have to think bigger on this, because this is not a one-time deal,” she said. “Although the Service Memorial is designed to be low maintenance, the Liberty Ship monument will need work every few years.”

But Councilor Jim Hughes took a different tact.

"When we accepted this, we didn't say, 'We'll take it but you paint it,'" he said. "We said, 'We'll take it, it's ours, thank you very much.' It would be helpful if people would volunteer to help us with this, but I don't think we have any legitimate right to tell anyone, ‘You have to paint this.’ Really, this is our responsibility. We have to do it.

"We're talking $30,000 out of mucho dollars [in the fund balance]," said Hughes. "That’s less than one-tenth of one percent of what we have in what is essentially a rainy-day fund. Well, this is a rainy day."

"I think it looks unsightly," agreed Councilor Tom Coward. "It's one of three things that is recognizably 'South Portland,' as seen from the ocean – there's Bug Light, Spring Point Ledge Light and the Liberty Ship Memorial. I think we owe it to ourselves to keep it looking nice."

Coward stumped on behalf of Blake's proposal for a capital campaign, but also backed ponying up the needed money for initial repairs, "so we don't have an eyesore down there through the next tourist season."

Because the general consensus on the council appeared to favor Coward’s two-pronged approach, Gailey said the item likely will reappear again as a budget item next spring. The work will be done at that time, he said. According to Tim Gato, assistant director of parks and public works, Logan will to honor its bid price at that time.

Landlords speak on housing rule

SOUTH PORTLAND — The South Portland City Council conducted a second workshop Monday on a proposed “disorderly house” ordinance, and this time it was the landlords’ turn to speak out.

The new rule, which could see homes and apartments posted against occupation following as few as three police visits in a 30-day period, passed an initial reading before councilors Sept. 19. Based on that unanimous vote, the ordinance is expected to also pass a final reading Oct. 2. It will then become law in South Portland 20 days later.

Although aimed at “absentee” landlords – those who do not live in their buildings, in South Portland, or, often, in Maine – it applies to unruly behavior anywhere in the city, even in single-family, owner-occupied homes.

“This ordinance applies to every single residence in this city, not just rents,” cautioned Councilor Tom Coward at Monday’s workshop session. “So, if you have a fondness for loud parties, you may find yourself being kicked out of your house. … This is the ordinance we are proposing to enact. It is very far-ranging legislation which could have very serious impacts on everybody who lives in the city.”

The so-called “disorderly house” ordinance, based on a similar law in Portland, calls for a compulsory meeting between city officials and building owners if police visit a property three times within a 30-day period. The trigger increases to four police visits if a building has between six and 10 units, and five at any larger complex.

The meeting, which would take place within five days of notice by the city, must result within one week in a written contract in which the property owner agrees to “take effective measures to resolve the disorderly house.”

Although the ordinance does not specify what constitutes resolution, or “effective measures,” it does carry a penalty of $500 to $2,000 for “each day of violation.” In addition, the city may condemn and post a building against occupancy if officials are not satisfied with the landlord’s attempts to resolve behavior deemed by the city to be “chronic unlawful or nuisance activity.”

Councilor Tom Blake has been the most vocal naysayer of Gailey’s solution. The owner of four apartment buildings and manager of a fifth, Blake has been forced to sit out council deliberations based on a presumed conflict of interest. Still, he sent a two-page letter to his peers, faulting the ordinance proposal because it “puts 100 percent of the responsibility on the property owner and does not address the problem makers.”

Since Sept. 12, when the issue first appeared on a council workshop agenda, Blake has championed a summit of sorts among landlords, city officials, police and tenants prior to enactment of any new local laws governing behavior. That idea has not gained traction with Blake’s fellow councilors, but that has not deterred him from his argument.

“My biggest concern is that the ordinance attempts to ‘cleanse the city of bad people,’ he wrote, in his letter. “If this was possible then this type of action would have been used hundreds of years ago. If we want to rid South Portland of bad behavior, then we must attack the behavior. This ordinance will only relocate it to another town, another street or another neighborhood.”

Three landlords attended Monday’s meeting, and none opposed the new ordinance on the face of it. Instead, they only questioned how it would be interpreted.

Jim Harmon asked what would constitute a police visit and trigger the ordinance, given that police could make welfare checks and other calls not necessarily prompted by a crime, or even a disturbance.

Daggett said police would “use good judgment” in tallying calls. Gailey also pointed to the appeals process built into the ordinance, noting that he would “act as judge and jury” in any dispute between Googins and landlords.

Melissa Linscott pointed out, as Blake has in previous meetings, that it can be difficult to evict a troublesome tenant.

“The laws really, really favor the tenant,” she said. “You have to follow a process and it can take a really, really long time. I just want to make sure there are protections for landlords who are trying to do the right thing – that they are not going to get penalized when they are trying to do the right thing.”

Carlton Winlsow added his hope that police would contact landlords prior to demands for resolution. Often, he said, a landlord may have no idea there is an issue, or may be able to show that the perceived problem either did not exist or has since been resolved.

The question of communication was perhaps the one sore spot in Monday’s meeting. Lisa Viola, director of housing and operating for the South Portland Housing Authority, complained that local police have refused to show her reports generated from visits to any of authority’s 641 units.

“I used to have the cooperation of the police department,” she said. “For the past 27 years, any time I had an issue I would call and they would send everything I needed. That stopped about a week ago. Lately, they don’t want to give me any reports. That’s really hard on the housing authority because I can’t kick someone out on hearsay.”

Gailey promised to broach the issue with Googins.

For his part, Blake said Gailey waited too long to involve landlords. Gailey said he sent invitations for the workshop to both the Maine Apartment Owners and Managers Association and the Southern Maine Landlords Association. Although those invites were distributed to membership lists for both groups, Blake found it unsurprising only three people showed up.

“You know when the invite was sent?” he asked, immediately after Monday’s meeting. “This morning.”

Mall calls

City considers building tower to increase cell capacity near the shopping area.

SOUTH PORTLAND — South Portland could soon enter the cell phone business.

The city is considering plans to build a 100-foot tower at the West End Fire Station off Western Avenue and rent space to as many as four companies at $2,000 per month each.

The tower is needed anyway, said Fire Chief Kevin Guimond, to facilitate the department’s new 800 MHz radios. A camera also will be mounted atop the tower to survey the area between the Jetport and the Maine Mall.

“That will be a really good tool for us,” said City Manager James Gailey. “Right now we have a camera atop the stack at National Semiconductor – now Texas Instruments – but with the steam that comes out of there, in the winter it tends to freeze up.”

Tower construction is expected to cost between $80,000 and $100,000. The tower would be placed behind the West End Station, with a 10-by-4-foot shed at the base for each cellular company.

By renting space on the tower, the city can recoup its investment “within three or four years,” according to Gailey. After that, said Gailey, revenue could be rolled into a reserve funds for fire trucks and rescue units.

“We’re going to be tapping that account pretty hard here,” said Gailey, intimating that new fire engines and a third ambulance might be needed soon, which would deplete the $600,000 account, prompting a need to replenish the account.

Guimond said he has fielded inquiries already from cell companies, while Gailey said radio frequency tests already have been made in the West End area. The tests “scored very well,” he said.

“From our understanding in talking to the cellular reps, it’s not new carriers that are needed,” said Gailey. “It’s capacity for the existing carries in the Jetport and mall area. There are just so many customers in that area in need of cell phone service.”

“Everyone’s got these smart phones now that use a ton of data,” said Guimond. “They need something in the mall area, so, somebody’s going to pop their head out of the hole and build one. So, here’s an opportunity for us.”

Gailey said if the council approves the idea at a future meeting, he expects to hire a management company to solicit cellular companies and manage the relationship with the city.

“Basically, they kick the bushes for you and get 15 percent,” said Guimond.

The issue will not be on the council’s Oct. 2 agenda, Gailey said. However, he hopes to have the project in motion by January, in order to make the 2012 budget for potential vendors.

Councilor mulls resignation

Scarborough’s Roy said a decision is likely by Oct. 5

SCARBOROUGH — Scarborough Town Council Chairwoman Judith Roy is mulling whether or not to resign as a result of her Sept. 17 summons for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol.

“I’m still processing,” she said Monday. “This has been the worst week of my life.”

Although Roy, 68, said she’s received nothing but positive calls and emails, all urging her to stay, she said she’s still uncertain what to do, and does not expect to make an announcement before the next council meeting, scheduled for Oct. 5.

“I’ve got another week,” said Roy. “Right now, I’m not sure, but I’m moving in on a decision.”

Town Manager Tom Hall said uncertainty over Roy’s status has pushed back a public hearing on Higgins Beach parking issues that was tentatively scheduled for Sept. 28. That meeting will now happen in “late October,” said Hall, adding he hopes to catch snowbirds before they leave for the season.

According to Scarborough Police Chief Robert Moulton, officers were dispatched shortly before 10 p.m. when a motorist called from the corner of Black Point and Old Neck roads to complain about Roy’s 2011 Subaru Legacy. The call, said Moulton, was for “erratic operation.”

Moulton said Officer Robert Moore, Roy, and the complainant, who had trailed the 68-year-old chairwoman, all arrived at her Second Avenue home “almost simultaneously.” There was no question, the chief said, that Roy had been behind the wheel. She was taken to the police station where she was given a Breathalyzer test and given a summons.

Moulton has declined to release Roy’s blood-alcohol content at the time of the test, or the name of the complainant in the case.

“I would rather let the D.A.’s office disclose what they want to about that situation,” said Moulton. “I have no idea as to the motivations there.”

Since news of Roy’s summons broke, online comment sections of local papers have featured speculation on whether the complainant had fingered Roy as an act of political retribution, or if the lack of an actual arrest signifies a cozy relationship with the law.

“Quite honestly, it’s been a little bit frustrating, because we keep getting comments about preferential treatment,” said Moulton.

Although a summons in lieu of an arrest is not common for OUI in Scarborough, it also is not unheard of. Since January, there have been 44 cases in which OUI was the sole charge. Of those, 39 resulted in an arrest, while five, including Roy, got a simple summons.

“We let [Roy] go on her own recognizance, which is pretty standard for individuals who are well-ingrained in the community here and where we know they are going to appear in court,” said Moulton, in a Sept. 20 interview.

At that time, the chief gave few details of the incident, referring instead to a two-sentence press release issued by the department. Since then, it has come out that Roy had a fender-bender just prior to her summons.

“I can confirm that she [Roy] came in the next morning with another party to report a very minor parking-lot accident,” Moulton said on Monday. “It was very minor, non-reportable accident with very minor damage.”

Moulton would not say if alcohol was a factor in that accident, which occurred in the town-owned parking lot on Ocean Avenue, in the Higgins Beach community.

“It was completely unrelated to our incident,” he said.

Neither Moulton nor Roy would confirm that she had spent the evening of Sept. 17 at her 50^th class reunion. However, a picture posted online at lisaquinnphotography.com shows Roy among the celebrants at the Scarborough High School class of 1961 reunion at the Higgins Beach Inn on that day.

Roy appears to have fed the rumor mill by failing to show for a Sept. 21 council meeting. On Monday, she told The Current she did not attend, and did not return initial calls from the media, on the advice of her attorney, whom she was unable to meet with until Sept. 22.

Although Roy complained on Monday that the media has “got a lot of things wrong,” she refused an invitation to correct the record, saying only that she was tired of being badgered with requests for comment.

“It’s grasping at straws – creating the news instead of reporting the news,” she said.

“I’m not going to comment on what’s factual or not,” said Roy. “I’m going to follow the legal process as advised by my attorney. I am not going to discuss any details about anything that happened at this time.”

Still, Roy was contrite, offering an apology to Scarborough voters.

“I am old enough and wise enough not to have put myself in this situation,” she said. “Certainly, I apologize to everybody, my community number one, but also my friends and family, my fellow councilors and all of the [town] employees.”

Roy is scheduled to appear in Cumberland County Unified Court Nov. 2. Moulton declined to say whether she has any previous motor vehicle offenses.

Hall said Thursday that he has received no requests for Roy to step down, either from the Town Council or her position as chairwoman.

“No one from the council has initiated or even inquired into any sort of ethics question,” said Hall.

The Code of Ethics contained in Scarborough’s Town Council policy manual deals primarily with conflicts of interest and does not delineate private actions that could elicit censure.

While Scarborough does not have a specific recall ordinance, it does have a recall process that was added to the town charter by voters last year.

The standards for recall, said Hall, are “very, very squishy.” The “bright line, with no if, ands or buts,” he said, is immediate removal from office upon conviction for any crime punishable by six months in jail.

Drunk driving, a class D crime, carries a $400 fine for a first offense, as well as mandatory suspension of driving privileges for 90 days.

However, any 25 registered voters in Scarborough can petition to have a councilor removed from office. Although the town charter requires the reason for the recall attempt to be listed on the petition, it makes no attempt to list allowable reasons to remove a person from office.

Planning Board member Kerry Corthell, a candidate for Town Council this year who was defeated last year in a three-way race with Roy and Councilor Michael Wood, was on the committee that drafted the recall provisions.

She said Monday that she has “heard of no one else” wanting to launch a recall attempt against Roy, but did briefly consider it herself, given her “no tolerance” position on OUI.

“I had conversations with friends and supporters and other people about it, most of whom said this is not nearly bad enough [to warrant removal],” said Corthell. “Do I think it rises up to something I should concentrate my energy on at this time? No. I had to come to that conclusion.”