By Dawn De Busk

Staff Writer

CASCO — Some citizens who stayed home instead of going to the Casco Annual Town Meeting on Wednesday night may regret that decision.

The evening proved to be edifying, interesting and filled with a financially conservative approach to each expense.

First off, residents had no appetite for a full-time deputy to patrol Casco. That was voted down, 20-62, with five abstentions. Rejecting the contracted law enforcement line item shaved $269,000 from the budget.

Voters passed the Animal Control Officer’s budget by only one vote. Citizens voted, 42-41-1, to support the cost of a shared ACO and a part-time position.

At the end of the night, the total amount of the approved budget was $11,998,936. That final number includes the school and county taxes. The municipal budget alone was reduced from $4,505,482 to the end-result number of $4,236,482 once the contracted deputy cost was subtracted from the proposed amount.

During Casco’s Annual Town Meeting, technical difficulties occurred. The slow-down gave town officials the opportunity to talk about the property revaluation. (See story, Page XX)

During the test-run question, “Do you like swimming,” it was discovered that the software system was not tallying the voters’ answers. Therefore, starting with Warrant Article 4, Casco residents were asked to vote verbally: Aye or nay.

Later on, town staff got the voting system up and running again, which allowed people to use the handheld clickers for the remainder of the meeting. That happened during the vote Warrant Article 9.

The meeting lasted three hours, going from 6:30 until a few minutes shy of 9:30 p.m.

Early on, it was apparent that some people were seeking ways to reduce the budget.

Trevor Tidd stood up at the microphone several times and made a motion to amend a line item, to reduce it to the previous years’ expense.

Warrant Article 7, to hire a planner on town staff for the cost of $68,000, was the first article to have a motion to be amended.

“Looking at this budget, there is a huge municipal increase. I hope the people voting today will look at this line item,” Tidd said.

His motion was to amend it to last year’s amount of $5,375 for the Planning Board and Zoning Board of appeals.

Sam Brown — who has been a regular at select board meetings — had heard how hiring a town planner could be beneficial and less costly than contracting out.

“We are at a critical time,” he said, referring to the passage of the comp plan and the technical planning assistance needed for the Comp Plan Implementation Committee and the Casco Planning Board.  

“I realize this is an expense. It is a wise, well thought-out expense,” Brown said. “Pity the poor souls who are on the planning board. It is challenging work. We should find another place to be fiscally responsible. I don’t think this an account to amend.”

Rae-Anne Nguyen directed her questions to the town manager.

“I would like to know what the $68,000 of planning service is and why it is needed now versus the previous year,” Nguyen asked.

Ward answered, “It is multi-faceted. At special town meeting, a comp plan was approved. A planner is critical person in helping with the implementation committee. Looking at applications, which are more and more complex . . .  A planner would assist in future development.”

Resident Deb Fogg stepped to the microphone.

“Thanks for the explanation why this is important. Can you give me specific examples if we don’t hire a planner, how it would negatively impact the town,” Fogg said.

“More and more complex plans are coming before the planning board. They would say right now, we are not meeting codes. Our volunteers on the implementation committee are not professional in writing zoning ordinances,” Ward said.

He added the planner would provide guidance and professional help to both volunteer committees and town staff.

The attempt to reduce the planning budget failed. The amendment was voted down.

The majority of voters succeeded in securing the funds for an on-staff planner.

Warrant Article 7 (to fund planning, planning board and zoning board of appeals) was voted on orally. Therefore, no exact numbers are available.

During the discussion on the amendment to reduce the planning budget, Ward pointed out a way that the planning department could bring in revenue.

“A goal of any planner is that permitting fees cover the cost. The ultimate goal: The planner is paid for by the people paying the fees for the applications and permits. It would be revenue,” Ward said.

Trevor Tidd did try to reduce other areas of the budget, such as General Assistance and Donations, to the previous year’s amount. Those amendments failed.