Bangor City Council Meeting Summaries for January 21, 2026

Bangor City Council meeting summaries for January 21, 2026. Finance, Infrastructure, and Business and Economic Development Committee Meetings.

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.

Finance Committee

Click here to read the agenda.

1. Airport Project Management Contract

The committee approved a contract for $112,000 with Carpenter Associates to provide interim project management services for the airport.

The Need: The airport currently has a vacancy for the Manager of Infrastructure and Facilities and needs assistance to keep critical capital projects on track.
Discussion: Councilor Mallar questioned if this was a specific hire or an interim role; staff clarified it is a temporary contract for project management services only, not a permanent employment position.
Action: Bid accepted.

2. Gambling Prevention Grant

A $5,000 grant from the Adept Educational Institute was proposed to promote gambling prevention messages to parents and youth through the Maine Principles Association.

The Scope: Councilor Mallar expressed strong concerns regarding the “county-wide” nature of the grant, questioning how many hours staff would spend on Bangor-specific work versus the rest of Penobscot County. He argued that the city often provides services for the county without reimbursement and suggested “cutting it off”.
- Staff Clarification: Public Health staff explained that the funds are for materials (ad space, printing) rather than staff time, which is already covered by existing state/federal grants. She noted that public health grants are mandated to be district-wide (Penobscot and Piscataquis) and that the state—not the city—dictates these service areas.
Youth & Online Trends: Councilors also discussed the rise of online gaming and the importance of targeting the 18–25 demographic, which has seen increasing rates of problem gambling. I cited the Maine Youth Integrated Health Survey from 2025 (link) showing that 35.2% of high school students in the Penquis Health District have gambled.
Action: Application moved forward.

3. Stormwater Infrastructure (Main Street/YMCA Site)

The committee authorized $450,000 for a new stormwater trunk line near the YMCA development on Main Street.

The Opportunity: Because the YMCA is currently breaking ground for development, the city can install the pipe now at a significantly lower cost than if they had to tear up a finished site later.
Strategic Value: This is the first step in separating combined sewer overflows on the city’s west side, which is required by a consent agreement with the EPA and Maine DEP.
Bidding: To follow procurement policy, three bids were obtained through the site’s primary contractor; Sargent was the low bidder at $436,982.
Action: Resolve moved forward to Council.

4. Property Tax Relief Discussion

The discussion regarding municipal property tax relief was a significant portion of the meeting, focusing on how to support Bangor’s aging population without creating an unmanageable financial shift for other taxpayers.

Current Relief Landscape

City Manager and the City Assessor outlined existing programs available to residents:

Hardship Abatements: These are reviewed by the council for individuals unable to pay their taxes. I noted that many seniors avoid this due to the “stigma and embarrassment” of sharing their life stories in a public or semi-public forum.
Real Estate Tax Club: This allows taxpayers to pay their bills monthly rather than in two large installments, though it does not reduce the total amount owed.
State Deferral Program: This allows seniors to defer taxes until the property is sold or the owner passes away. However, only five Bangor taxpayers currently use it because the state places a lien on the home and charges a high interest rate of approximately 11%.
Property Tax Fairness Credit: A popular state-level credit claimed on income tax returns. The primary barrier is that it requires taxpayers to pay the full amount upfront before receiving a credit the following April.

The Role of the Overlay Account

The committee examined the overlay account—funds budgeted to cover potential tax abatements—as a potential funding mechanism for a new local relief program.

Budget vs. Actual: Historically, the city’s overlay has ranged from $290,000 to $474,000.
Unused Capacity: While the statutory maximum overlay could be as high as $3 million, the city uses much less.
Abatement Averages: Over the last six years, actual real estate tax abatements averaged $53,000, with a range between $16,000 and $104,000.
The Funding Opportunity: I suggested that because there is a consistent “gap” between the budgeted overlay and actual abatements used, those excess funds could be redirected to a formal relief program.

Proposed “Piggyback” and Prorated Model

I proposed a “piggyback” model similar to Portland’s, which would simplify administration and increase participation:

Verification: To qualify, a resident would simply show they received the state’s Property Tax Fairness Credit, removing the need for the city to manually verify income.
Cap and Pro-rata: To prevent a “downward spiral” of the tax base or unpredictable costs, the program would have a fixed budget. If the number of applicants exceeds the budget, the relief amount for each individual would be prorated (e.g., everyone receives 85% of the intended credit).

Next Steps: The City Manager will now research the statutory frameworks of local options and specific “pro-rata” models used in other jurisdictions like New Hampshire and Portland.

Infrastructure Committee

Click here to read the meeting agenda.

The Infrastructure Committee focused on updates regarding the city’s urban forestry initiatives, stormwater management requirements, and an overview of sidewalk snow removal operations.

Urban Forestry Management

The Forestry Manager provided updates on three primary items regarding the city’s canopy and tree maintenance:

Management Plan & Public Survey: Using IRA grant funds (link), the city is developing an urban forest management and operations plan. A public survey is being distributed to residents to gather opinions on tree care and operational efficiencies.
Tree Maintenance Rules: Residents were reminded that city trees are public assets. Pruning or attaching hardware (like bird feeders or signs) to city trees is prohibited without prior approval from the forestry division.
Red Pine Scale Response: The city is monitoring for Red Pine Scale, an invasive insect that can kill red pine trees within two years. While there is no evidence of it in Bangor yet, the city has identified 36 acres of pure red pine plantations for preventative monitoring.
Timber Harvesting: The department is seeking a contractor to implement management plans for city parks, aiming to use income-generating harvests to fund necessary expense-based management.
Staffing Challenges: The forestry division is currently operating with only two staff members, leading to a backlog in storm cleanups and routine maintenance.

Stormwater Management & Training

The Stormwater Manager discussed regulatory compliance and infrastructure projects:

Watershed Plan: The committee moved to submit a revised plan for the Penjajawoc Stream Watershed to the Maine DEP. This approval is necessary to apply for future Clean Water Act grant funding.
MS4 Permit Training: An educational session covered the city’s Clean Water Act permit, which regulates separate storm sewers. The city manages six “urban impaired” streams that require long-term restoration efforts.
Illicit Discharge: Staff highlighted the importance of finding pollution sources, noting a recent case where a historic home was mistakenly plumbed to the storm sewer for 32 years.
Infrastructure Projects: Recent and upcoming work includes flooding mitigation on Hammond Street, sidewalk drainage on Mount Hope, and geomorphic improvements to Sucker Brook.

Sidewalk Snowplow Operations

The new Public Works Director reviewed the challenges and priority systems for winter maintenance:

Priority System: Roads and sidewalks are categorized into Priority 1 and Priority 2 zones. During active storms, crews will clear Priority 1 areas multiple times before moving to Priority 2.
Operational Constraints: The city maintains approximately 70 miles of sidewalks using only four machines. Personnel shortages and the need for new hires to obtain CDL licenses also impact response times.
Public Transparency: The department is working to put priority maps on the city website so residents can identify where their streets fall in the clearing schedule.
Safety Concerns: Committee members expressed concern regarding children walking in the streets when sidewalks remain uncleared for several days following a storm.

Business & Economic Development

Click here to read the meeting agenda.

Cultural Commission Annual Report

The committee reviewed the Cultural Commission’s annual activities and future objectives.

The Commission recently completed its grant program and is drafting a proposed work plan for reviewing future applications.
- Members will address prior City Council comments regarding the grant program during their February meeting.
- Ongoing projects include identifying funding for public art and developing required five-year vision plans.
- The committee motioned to move the report to the full Council.
During the discussion of the Cultural Commission’s annual report, I asked a clarification question regarding whether this specific committee was responsible for taking an inventory of cultural assets.
- Staff confirmed that the Commission is indeed responsible for the inventory and provided the following details on its status:
  - Project Timeline: The Commission intends to take on the inventory project this year.
  - Capacity Concerns: There is some concern regarding whether the commissioners have the capacity to complete the entire inventory within a single year.
  - Potential Extension: Due to these capacity concerns, the project may be extended over a two-year period to ensure it is finished.

Proposed Land Development Code Amendments

A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to a proposal to redefine Ohio Street from a minor arterial to a major arterial street and correct the definition for State Street.

Resident and Public Opposition

The Planning Board previously recommended that this change not pass, and no members of the public spoke in support of the amendment. (You can view the January 6, 2026 Planning Board meeting regarding this matter by clicking here.)

Residents raised several objections:

Definition Mismatch: Ohio Street does not meet the legal definition of a major arterial, as it lacks 10,000 vehicles per day and has only two travel lanes rather than four.
Existing Uses: Residents argued that the 11 uses staff claimed were “not allowed” already exist on the street as legally non-conforming or previously approved uses.
Neighborhood Character: Neighbors expressed that the change would destroy the residential and rural feel of outer Ohio Street.
Traffic Concerns: Residents noted that while traffic is high near the Union Street intersection due to its use as a bypass, it has actually diminished in other areas over time.

Committee Resolution

Councilors acknowledged that the State Street change was a necessary correction but agreed that the Ohio Street proposal was problematic. There was consensus that the correct course of action was to vote the current order down at the next regular Council meeting and direct staff to prepare a new, separate order for the State Street correction only. Because the item had already been introduced at a regular Council meeting and previously been postponed to a date certain, the item could not be dispensed with in committee.

Central Kitchen Incubator Project

Staff provided an update on the proposed commercial kitchen incubator, aiming to support local food entrepreneurs.

Success Rates: Incubator programs reportedly increase business survival rates to approximately 87% over five years.
Financial Models: The project involves a $5 million bond. While some councilors expressed concern over a projected $200,000 annual operating deficit, staff clarified that the bond would be repaid through the Economic Development Enterprise Fund—supported by lease revenues and land sales—rather than property taxes.
Next Steps: The committee voted to allow staff to enter negotiations with a construction manager and conduct a fresh financial feasibility study.

CDBG and Community Development

The Community Development Officer (CDO), provided a high-level overview of the city’s housing and community health strategies, emphasizing the self-sustaining nature of their operations.

Program Funding and “Self-Sustaining” Staffing

A central point of the discussion was how the department’s funding structure allows it to operate with minimal impact on local property taxes.

Annual Funding: The city receives approximately $850,000 per year in federal CDBG funds.
Revenue Generation: The program is a “self-sustaining, revenue-generating” model. It currently brings in approximately $192,000 to $300,000 annually through loan servicing and program income.
“Staff Pays for Itself”: I noted that the department manages an “incredible” 13 plans and programs using these funds. The CDO explained that while program income has dipped since COVID, historical data from the 1990s shows that with a staff of six, the program previously generated $750,000 to $1 million.
Scalability: The CDO described program income as a “revolving door to development” and a tool that can be used as a “big hammer” for city projects depending on the staffing levels and investment the Council chooses to provide.

Strategic Initiatives and Federal Standing

Consolidated Plan: The department is currently mid-process in developing its strategy for housing, homelessness, and economic opportunity, with a major housing strategy update expected for the February 2nd meeting.
Federal Regulatory Changes: Despite recent “shakeups” and regulatory changes at the federal level, HUD has informed the city that its management of funds is consistent and no major operational impacts are expected.
Section 108 Eligibility: Because Bangor receives CDBG funds, it is eligible for the Section 108 program, which could provide up to $5 million in upfront capital—similar to a “paycheck loan”—that is repaid through future CDBG disbursements.
Civic Engagement: The department has partnered with the school department to involve high school students in the planning process; these students will present a report on their findings at the end of the academic year.

Future Housing Potential

I expressed significant interest in the “self-sustaining” model as a pilot for a potential housing bond. It was suggested that capacity building within this existing framework could reduce the amount of local tax dollars needed for major housing investments. In my view, this bond isn’t a direct hit to the taxpayer. It’s an instance where the voters co-sign for the city, allowing us to use program income to build the housing we desperately need. Debt would be repaid by program income and not property tax dollars.

(To be clear, no such bond is on the table before Council at this time.)

Executive Session Actions

Following an executive session, the committee moved forward with recommendations for a new lease agreement and a specific property matter to be placed on next week’s Council agenda.