Businesses can purchase parking lots for $1
By Natalie De La Garza
Staff Writer
CARIBOU — Two blunt questions were posed by councilor David Martin during the Monday night meeting of the Highway Safety Committee, summarizing the current debate centered around seven downtown parking lots: “Should we have municipal parking?” and “How much?”
“I don’t think we need seven parking lots, but I agree we need municipal parking,” he said.
The seven parking lots he referred to have received much conversational attention in the past couple months after city councilors placed the parking lots of the Downtown Mall, those at 7 and 37 Hatch Drive, 6 Water Street and the lot behind the American Legion out for bid in mid July. For decades, the City of Caribou has been responsible for snow removal and maintenance of the aforementioned lots.
The proposed sale elicited adamantly expressed concerns from downtown business and property owners, who cited, among other hypothetical scenarios, that an outside entity could theoretically purchase any or all of the parking lots and completely close them to businesses and the public— or charge exorbitant fees for parking.
The city didn’t receive any bid for the parking lots and councilors have offered their assurances that any such bids would have been refused — a sentiment that was echoed in Monday night’s meeting.
“I’m not in favor of selling them to anyone but the business owners,” reiterated Councilor Joan Theriault.
Going forward, the committee will recommend to the Caribou City Council that adjacent business owners be given the option of buying their respective parking lots for $1.
One audience member asked what happens if the business owners don’t want to buy their parking lots.
“Quite honestly, the only other alternative is we keep them,” said Mayor Gary Aiken, describing how the majority of parking spaces at the downtown mall are for two-hour parking and that perhaps the city should enforce the new ordinances with their new fee schedule, putting aside any generated funds specifically for the maintenance of those parking lots.
Six councilors were in attendance for the committee meeting, as well as a number business and property owners.
The fate of the parking lots has proven itself to be a multifaceted issue with layers of complexity, but Chair of the Highway Safety Committee Phil McDonough explained to audience members that the driving force behind the sale of the parking lots was fiscally related.
As the city only recently finalized a scrutinized budget for the current fiscal year, work on next year’s budget is already just a stone’s throw away — and preliminary figures suggest that the city could be looking at an even larger shortfall in state revenue sharing that it did with this year’s $380,000 loss. McDonough said that the city has been attempting to get property like tax acquired properties back on the city tax roll, but admitted that some things have surfaced in the recent parking lot discussions that the council hadn’t been fully away of.
McDonough restated that the initial parking lot sale revolve around the mindset of fiscal responsibility, “and I think if we’re not thinking outside the box, we’re not doing our jobs,” he said. “Sometimes we’re going to make mistakes, just like anyone else, and that’s why we’re here tonight.”
The proposed sale of the parking lots would have saved the city approximately $50,000 in maintenance and upkeep, but some business and property owners attending the meeting painted a devastating picture as to what privately owned downtown parking lots could look like — namely describing how the unintended consequences of the parking lot sales would be the flight of business from Caribou’s downtown to locations that were more business-friendly locations, and others asked what the incentive would be for allowing people to use their privately-owned parking lot or parking spaces after hours.
“If I own a portion of that parking lot, when I’m not there and my business isn’t open, I don’t want it open to the public because the liability exposure,” explained Troy Heald. “So then you close the parking lot — Thursdays on Sweden street, where do people go?” he added, “Sometimes, there’s unintended circumstances.”
Councilor Theriault questioned during the Monday-night meeting how many people currently attending the meeting were parked in the Aroostook County Federal Savings and Loan parking lot next door — a parking lot that does have a sign specifying that parking is for customers only.
The room had a hushed air for just a moment before folks were given the OK for their parking transgressions by the bank’s President, John Swanberg, who was in attendance.
“We’re happy to allow you to do that,” Swanberg said, and the audience chuckled in response.
While some property owners have expressed interest in purchasing the parking lots exclusively adjacent to their building, the situation gets more complicated in areas like the north and south parking lots of the downtown mall; tenants would theoretically have to find some way to divvy up ownership of the shared parking areas and determine what a business’ fair share of the parking lot maintenance cost would be — and more than likely need to establish some sort of parking association — would mean additional work and additional cost for the business owners.
Mary Lee Belanger brought up a different aspect of this multifaceted issue altogether.
“I’ve heard about people saying if they were to pay a fee they couldn’t afford it because their taxes have gone up, I’ve heard people say if they were given the property for $1 they wouldn’t want it … I think you people are so lucky,” she said to the downtown business and property owners. “I have been in business for 52 years. I have paid my dues in this town, I have helped people in this town, I have struggled to keep my doors open, but I still pay because I believe in this city. I believe in fairness, and this isn’t fair.
“I’m a small business. I pay for my parking lots — two of them,” Belanger continued. “My taxes have gone up tremendously, which I can’t afford. But I’m still going to pay. If someone gives me an opportunity to buy my parking lot for $1, don’t you think I would grab it?” she questioned. “You people are so lucky to have this for free all these years, I wish I had that opportunity, I really do.”
Kenneth Murchison, who stated at different times that he was against the parking lot sale, also talked about fairness.
“Is it fair that we pave one road and not the next, or is it fair that we turn off one street lamp but not someone else’s?” he asked. “You might say ‘no, it’s not fair’ but actually, it is fair when you consider the good to the whole community, and I think the city retaining those parking lots is good for the whole community.”
The committee recommendation to make the parking lots available to adjacent business owners for $1 is slated to be on the City Council agenda for their next meeting on Monday, Sept. 9 at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
