By Dawn De Busk

Staff Writer

CASCO — Last month, Casco residents turned down what ended up being the matching funds for a Community Development Block grant. The grant had been awarded for a public bathroom facility at the Casco Community Park, the sports complex near the junction of Route 11 and Route 121. 

During Casco’s Annual Town meeting in June, citizens were concerned about how the recent revaluation would impact the property taxes. In an attempt to not be faced with bigger tax bills, residents reduced the $50,000 for the construction. At the time, nobody stepped forward to explain that matching funds of $50,000 from the Unanticipated Fund Balance were needed for the town to receive the $100,000.

The Casco Select Board, expressing reluctance and disappointment, voted to withdrawal the CBD funding application — essentially returning the $100,000 grant.

That vote took place during a meeting on June 25, about three weeks after Casco’s annual town meeting.

One Select Board member hopes the outcome will be a learning experience.

“I am frustrated in how it was presented. I am only frustrated that we are in the situation. If they [residents] realized there were matching funds needed, they would have supported the funds to continue the work that needs to be done at the facility,” Select Board member Grant Plummer said.

After all, citizens have backed improvements to the athletic fields in the past, he said. 

“The presentation was a flaw in the process. Let’s use this as an example of how to do better” at explaining warrants at town meeting, he said.

Plummer spoke prior to the board’s 5-0 vote to return the grant money.

Casco Town Manager Tony Ward brought up the subject that struck such a sour note for many during the June meeting.

“I am seeking authorization to officially decline the $100,000 funds that were awarded to the town by the county in the Community Development Block grant. The initial estimate of the project was $200,000 and as part of the application we stated we would fund the amount of the project over $100,000. The Casco Finance Committee and the select board lowered the town’s contribution to $50,000, and this amount was not approved at the town meeting,” Ward said. “The grant did require a matching portion that was part of the rating. The town did not meet that grant requirement.”

Additionally, the $100,000 was not enough money to finish the proposed project, he said.

“These are funds that are fought for by a lot of communities. Instead of sitting here in limbo, it would be in the best interest for all communities involved in that if we returned the funds,” Ward said.

A few people had misunderstood that the grant needed some percentage of funds.

“I thought it was discussed at town meeting that the $100,000 wasn’t dependent on the $50,000. I thought it was clear discussion,” Plummer said.

Community member Tuan Nguyen said he heard the same thing.

“There was discussion about that. It is super unfortunate that we give that money back,” he said.

Plummer predicted a different outcome if the correct information had been provided.

“I think people would have reconsidered the $50,000 if they knew it was the chopping block for the $100,000. So, if don’t approve the $50,000 you don’t get the $100,000 — that isn’t how it was explained,” he said.

Ward repeated that the construction project could not be completed for the grant amount.

 “I think that we just accept the fact that we shot ourselves in the foot,” Nguyen said.

Susan Witonis brought up the loss of the grant two weeks earlier. She spoke again.

“The confusion came in the way it was written in the warrant. The vote shot the whole thing down. . . It should have been discussed more. I don’t think people understood the $100,000 grant was free money,” Witonis said.

Tom Mulkern expressed his opinion.

“I am sad to give $100,000 back on a project that needs to be done. It is sad to give back $100,000 that we fought to get,” Mulkern said.

He suggested putting it on a special town meeting warrant. The town manager responded, saying that wasn’t advisable.

“From a public policy practice, that wouldn’t be the best that I would recommend. When people have spoken on something, we open it up for a second vote, we will get criticism,” Ward said. 

“The parameters of the grant are very specific. It needs matching funds. We have limited time to expend the grant,” he said.

Select board member Robert MacDonald asked, “Do we have to give it back?”

Chairman Eugene Connolly made the motion to do so.

“The town should show good faith and give it back. Other towns could probably use it. Hopefully, in the future, we can get another grant,” Connolly said.