PRESQUE ISLE, Maine — By just 14 votes, community members rejected SAD 1’s plan to purchase a 34-acre parcel of land that borders the current school farm, located on State Street.
During last Wednesday night’s district-wide budget meeting, residents were asked, “Shall SAD 1 raise and appropriate $150,000 for the purchase of approximately 34 acres of land adjacent to the existing school farm, which sum exceeds the State’s Essential Programs and Services allocation model by $150,000?”
The article was defeated — through written ballot — 114-100.
According to Superintendent Gehrig Johnson, the district was approached recently by a local investment group with an offer to sell the L-shaped parcel of land — known as the Lois Conant parcel — for $150,000.
Prior to public comments and the vote, Johnson told residents the district was interested in purchasing the land for two reasons.
“First and foremost, we want to protect the instructional programs of the school district. We occupy and farm most of the parcel we’re talking about and have for many, many years thanks to the generosity of the investment group,” he said. “The second reason is to enable SAD 1 to maintain options for future needs of the district including the imminent future need for land. We know this district is going to be purchasing land … maybe not next year or two years from now, but we’re going to be making major purchases of land.
“We’ve got — collectively — the oldest school buildings in the state of Maine. We take good care of them and put money in them, but with several of them being over 50 years old, the district will be facing that for the next 10 years,” said Johnson. “We have a 38-acre parcel out there surrounded by this 34-acre parcel, and we feel it makes sense to combine that and have a 72-acre parcel that we’re already farming anyway to protect our programs that we have, and in the future, have the option of placing a building there. That’s not our main reason right now, but five, 10 or 15 years from now, we will be buying land, and the price of land does not go down. For those reasons it makes sense for us to buy this parcel.”
The majority of those residents who spoke disagreed.
“The school farm is an incredibly fabulous program. It offers authentic learning in an agricultural region, so I am for the farm 150 percent,” said Pamela Sweetser of Presque Isle. “My opposition to this is that it seems to me that the school farm has become more of a business venture than a teaching tool and that concerns me greatly.”
“I think the school farm is becoming more of a commercial-scale operation than an educational-scale operation,” said Jim Park of Presque Isle. “With 38 acres, I think the educational aspects could be administered and handled quite sufficiently within the present framework.”
Jim Pritchard, of Chapman, felt the proposed purchase was “not in the best interest of the communities that support SAD 1.”
“I just do not see where there’s an adequate economic benefit for the $150,000 expenditure,” he said.
Speaking as a “private citizen” of Presque Isle rather than a member of the City Council, Craig Green felt there was no reason to rush into purchasing the land.
“In my previous time on the city’s water and sewer board, we were approached by the developer of that parcel to actually fund putting in city services. Before one house lot can be sold on that land, it has to have water, sewer, electric and a paved road put through the property in order for a subdivision to fly,” he said. “That’s the reason no house lots have been sold there … ever, nor will they be any time soon because — as you can imagine — that’s many, many thousands of dollars of infrastructure that the developer would have to pay on their own. I don’t think there’s any worry in the near future that the land is going to go out of the type of usage that it now sees and I don’t think there’s any rush in us buying it today.
“As you all know, once you send anything of the sort of initial taxation — from your board or any other board that the city has – and it goes out to the public, the taxpayers have to pay that bill, and they have no choice in that whatsoever,” said Green. “I just feel that because of the difficult economic situation that we have that maybe right now is not the time to spend $150,000.”
Chapman’s Tim Scott said he didn’t feel the 34-acre parcel — combined with the existing 38 acres — would provide an adequate space for a potential new school building without significantly changing the operation of the existing school farm.
“I look at the size [of that parcel] and if we build another school, we’re going to have to shut down that school farm because we can’t put a school on that area that would be of the appropriate complex size. It would probably change the footprint of the farm dramatically,” said Scott. “I think if we look into alternative areas for another school — when we need it — we perhaps could find alternative areas. I wonder how much land the city owns up on the base and if that could be an alternative place for another school.”
Dana Allison, a former SAD 1 board member from Castle Hill, was the lone resident to speak in favor of the proposed purchase.
“Detractors cite that the parcel should be sold to developers who would build houses upon it, and by so doing, increase the tax base. Once more money comes into the town’s coffers by our property taxes, the more money the town has at its disposal. Very true, but the reality is that that parcel has been on the market for many years; no buyers,” she said. “Right now there are not enough industries here nor is there an abundance of industrialists looking to set up shop in this area to attract the in-migration of workers who would earn enough to pay mortgages on any houses which would be built upon that land.
“The voters of SAD 1 would be very wise to vote for the purchase of the lot. By so doing, it would keep the student farm program as viable, productive and valuable as it has been since the beginning in 1991,” said Allison. “The school’s farm has been an unqualified program of excellence since its inception, and I urge the voters to vote for the district to purchase this land.”
In the end, the article was rejected 114-100.
