January 9, 2026
City Council Meeting Summaries for January 5, 2026
On January 5, 2026 Bangor City Councilors met with the city's delegation to the Maine State Legislature. Government Operations and Business and Economic Development Committees also met.

Disclaimer: The views I express here are my own and should NOT be construed as speaking for the City of Bangor or the City Council of Bangor.

I hope you and everyone you love has a Happy New Year!

Special City Council Workshop

Click here to read the agenda.

This special city council workshop, held on January 5, 2026, served as a collaborative session between the Bangor City Council and state legislators to align priorities for the upcoming legislative year.


Key Participants

The meeting included members of the Bangor City Council and the following state legislators:

  • Senator Joe Baldacci (District 9): Chair of State and Local Government; serves on Health Coverage, Insurance, and Financial Services.
  • Representative Amy Roeder (District 23): Chair of the Labor Committee; sits on the State Workforce Board.
  • Representative Ambureen Rana (District 21): Member of the Appropriations Committee.
  • Representative Sean Faircloth (District 24): Member of Veterans and Legal Affairs.

Top City Priorities for 2026

The City Manager presented three tentative priorities established during a December brainstorming session:

  1. Comprehensive Homelessness Plan: Establishing a thoughtful, strategic approach to addressing homelessness, potentially using an advisory committee model.
  2. Affordable Housing: Continuing to address the high need for affordable housing options within the city.
  3. Regional Collaboration: Developing collaborative solutions and funding models for regional problems.

Homelessness and Housing Data

Public Health Director provided insights into the current state of homelessness in Bangor:

  • Estimated Numbers: Approximately 300 individuals are estimated to be experiencing homelessness in the area, including those in shelters and domestic violence programs.
  • Warming Centers: Current usage is approximately 80 to 85 people per night.
  • Data Challenges: Statistics are gathered via the HMIS database and the annual Point in Time count, though accuracy remains a challenge due to the transient nature of the population.

Legislative Updates and Bills

The delegation discussed several specific bills and budgetary concerns:

  • Rental Assistance (LD 847): A bill aimed at preventing housing discrimination based on the use of rental vouchers or public assistance.
  • Rental Registry (LD 1806): A proposal requiring businesses (LLCs/corporations) that rent housing to register with the Secretary of State to track housing stock ownership.
  • BIA Warehouse Bond: A carried-over proposal for a warehouse and freezer plant at Bangor International Airport to boost regional agriculture and shipping.
  • Mental Health Funding: Legislators noted the critical need for increased mental health infrastructure and providers to address the root causes of homelessness and substance use.
  • ICE and Law Enforcement (LD 1259 & LD 1971): Discussions regarding the relationship between local law enforcement and federal immigration enforcement.

Budgetary and Infrastructure Challenges

The council and legislators highlighted several systemic hurdles:

  • Jail Operations: The county jail faces significant costs due to the lack of “speedy trials,” leading to individuals being held for years while awaiting trial.
  • Sewer Capacity: Limited sewer capacity in certain areas, such as the mall district, is a primary barrier to new housing and commercial development.
  • General Assistance: The city remains interested in robust state reimbursement for general assistance and administrative costs.

Next Steps for Communication

Participants agreed on the need for more consistent dialogue to avoid being “reactive” to state legislation.

  • Legislative Liaison Committee: The council is discussing the formation of a specific subcommittee to track bills and coordinate with the state delegation.
  • Ongoing Meetings: There was mutual interest in holding regular check-in meetings, likely on Mondays, to maintain alignment.

Government Operations Committee

Click here to read the agenda.

The Government Operations Committee meeting took place on January 5, 2026, starting at 6:35 p.m., chaired by me. The committee addressed three primary agenda items concerning public transportation, proposals for unhoused residents, and the formation of a homelessness advisory committee.


1. Community Connector Fair Structure and Technology

The committee discussed a proposal to modernize the Community Connector bus system and adjust its fare structure.

  • Fare Increases: The proposal includes raising the base single-ride fare from $1.50 to $2.00.
  • Technology Upgrades: The city plans to replace paper tickets with electronic methods, featuring free transfers and fare capping.
  • Costs and Funding:
    • The hardware and software implementation is estimated between $130,000 and $170,000, which will be fully covered by a grant.
    • Annual licensing fees are estimated at $30,000 to $32,000.
    • Projected annual revenue is expected to increase from $500,000 to approximately $800,000.
  • Operational Challenges: Saturday service remains suspended since October 2024 due to a lack of qualified CDL drivers. Factors contributing to the driver shortage include the legalization of marijuana affecting CDL eligibility, the closure of local training programs, and increased federal testing requirements.
  • Committee Action: The committee voted to move the fare increase and technology changes to the full council for approval.

2. Transitional Safe Outdoor Space (SOS)

The Advisory Committee on Racial Equity, Inclusion, and Human Rights (ACREIHR) presented a request for a council order to establish a transitional safe outdoor space for unhoused residents.

Proposal Highlights

  • Centralized Resources: The SOS would provide a sanctioned outdoor area with access to running water, trash removal, electricity for charging phones, and basic stability measures.
  • Cost-Effectiveness: Proponents argued it would be more efficient than the current cycle of “bulldozing” encampments, which disperses individuals and scatters emergency responses.
  • Harm Reduction: The space would allow for easier monitoring of health crises, such as HIV outbreaks or drug overdoses, by keeping individuals in a community where life-saving measures like Narcan can be deployed.

Council Debate and Concerns

  • Financial Data: Some councilors expressed hesitation due to a lack of specific cost estimates for the SOS and requested a written comparison to current spending on homelessness.
  • Liability and Ownership: There were concerns about the city assuming the role of “owner” of such a site and the legal liabilities involved.
  • Drug Use: A significant point of contention was whether the city would be seen as condoning drug use by permitting it within the sanctioned space.
  • Committee Outcome: No consensus was reached to move the proposal forward at this time. I noted that while the issue is urgent, but the consensus I gathering from the committee was that more internal planning and data are required.

3. Housing and Homelessness Advisory Committee

The meeting concluded with a brief discussion on whether to form a temporary task force or a permanent standing committee to address housing and homelessness.

  • Standing Committee Argument: I advocated for a permanent standing committee to ensure ongoing consistency and carryover between council terms, noting that a 2019 task force’s progress was lost during the pandemic.
  • Postponement: The committee decided to postpone this conversation and hold it side-by-side with a workshop scheduled for the following evening.

Action Item: The committee’s discussion on the Housing and Homelessness Advisory Committee was moved to the workshop on January 6, 2026

Business and Economic Development Committee

Click here to read the agenda.


Central Kitchen Project Discussion

Staff provided a history of the commercial kitchen project, noting it began at a staff level in 2017.

Staff Presentation

  • Funding: The project has received $1.5 million in congressional spending and $500,000 from the Northern Border Commission.
  • Expenditures to Date: Approximately $500,000 has been spent on architects, $14,000 on a study by Periscope, and over $130,000 on building abatement and reviews.
  • Facility Design: The planned building is approximately 18,000 square feet, including 5,000 square feet for temperature-regulated cold storage.
  • Business Interest: Staff identified 20 companies interested in the space, with approximately half considered “very serious”.
  • Operational Planning: An operations consultant is being onboarded for $24,000 to develop financial modeling and governance structures.

Councilor Questions & Comments

  • Councilor Leonard: Inquired about the consequences of canceling or delaying the project; staff noted the potential loss of $2 million in grants and damage to the city’s credibility. Leonard expressed strong support for the project as a vital “lifeline” for the local culinary scene.
  • Councilor Mallar: * Expressed concern over the use of electric/induction appliances, arguing professional chefs prefer gas and that induction glass tops break easily.
    • Questioned why the building was 18,000 square feet when a previous report cited 13,000.
    • Raised concerns about taxpayers’ burden, noting potential operating losses of $200,000 annually for the first five years.
  • Councilor Fish: Asked about the construction budget; staff confirmed an estimate of approximately $6 million based on recent updates.
  • Councilor Faloon: Expressed “investment concern” regarding the high failure rate of businesses in the notoriously volatile food service industry.
  • Councilor Dean: Asked for success rates of similar incubator models on a national level.

Action: Councilor Mallar moved to postpone the item to the next meeting to allow staff to gather more data on bonding costs and success statistics. Vote: Passed 3-2 (Councilors Mallar, Carson, and Fish in favor; Leonard and Faloon opposed).


Annual Reports (Historic Preservation, Planning Board, Penobscot Marsh)

Staff summarized the year’s activities, including 54 total actions by the planning board and the approval of 128 units.

Action: Move the reports forward to the full Council. Vote: Passed.


Short-Term Rental (STR) Ordinance Amendment

The committee discussed an amendment to allow STRs in tiny home parks, mirroring current allowances for manufactured home parks.

  • Proposed Limit: STRs would be capped at 30% of units or five units per park, whichever is less.
  • Councilor Leonard: Expressed strong bias against STRs, stating they do not help the housing stock.
  • Councilor Fish: Supported the amendment, noting STRs bring families who invest in and visit Bangor.
  • Councilor Dean: Supported the move, particularly for accommodating visiting medical professionals.

Action: Move the amendment to the full Council. Vote: Passed 4-1 with Councilor Leonard opposed. Fish, Faloon, Carson, and Mallar supporting.


Comprehensive Plan Implementation

Staff presented a document tracking the progress of policies regarding housing affordability, economic vitality, and the environment.

You can see this report starting on page 7 of the meeting agenda by clicking here. (If you haven’t opened it already above.)

Presentation Highlights

  • Purpose and History: Staff explained that this tracking document was started in 2024 to monitor actions taken by city staff and various firms to implement the comprehensive plan.
  • Scope: The plan covers a wide array of policies, specifically highlighting housing affordability, the environment, economic vitality, and historic resources.
  • Living Document: Staff noted that they have updated the document and intend to keep it updated as they move forward.

The “Five-Year Mark” Strategy

A significant portion of the verbal presentation focused on how the city evaluates these goals over time. Staff explained that at the five-year mark, the community typically takes a “step back” to perform a formal evaluation. This process is used to determine:

  • If current policies are still relevant to the community.
  • How well the items already implemented are functioning.
  • Whether the city still wants to pursue the goals that haven’t been started yet.

Councilor Questions & Answers

The councilors asked several specific questions about the document’s content:

  • Policy Conflicts: Councilor Leonard asked if any of the numerous policies might “counteract” each other. Staff responded that they haven’t seen any opposition; instead, most policies overlap and work together toward the same bridging system.
  • Tracking Effectiveness: Leonard also inquired about the mechanism for tracking the effectiveness or quality of these implementations rather than just marking them as “done”.
  • Prioritization: Another councilor asked if the items in the document were listed in order of priority. Staff clarified that they are not prioritized; they are simply listed in the order in which they were added to the tracking list.

Other Business

  • Staff Announcement: City Manager Lear announced that Jeff LaBree has been promoted to Director of Code Enforcement, effective Monday, January 12.