BAR HARBOR KEEPS CRUISE SHIP RULES
Bar Harbor, Tremont, and Trenton Results
Hi, everyone! As you can tell by our last article, we made two headlines and images, just in case the vote went either way and the Substack did not hold the change. Ah. Life. So, here is the proper image and proper story. We’re going to delete the last one and keep this one. Sorry for any confusion! It’s very late and tech glitches are our life.
MOUNT DESERT ISLAND—Bar Harbor’s voters did not repeal a cruise ship disembarkation plan that limits cruise ship disembarkations to 1,000 per day with fines. The vote was 1713 to 1776.
Article Four on the town’s warrant asked if voters would like to repeal the current set of rules. That repeal would have allowed the town council to put in place a new set of limitation rules.
In 2022, voters approved 1,000-a-day cruise ship disembarkation limits. After the approval, the changes were subject to a federal lawsuit, an ongoing federal appeal of the decision of that case, and then lawsuits over the enforcement.
The plan proposed by the town council if the current 1,000-daily cap was repealed would have created a 3,200 daily cap (based on lower berth capacity), and monthly caps of 55,000 in September and October, as well as 20,000 monthly caps from May through August. It also created 10 cruise-ship-free days in September and October, and the town council has said it anticipates even more cruise-ship-free days each month in the spring and summer season. That plan has been agreed to by the tendering facility as well as the cruise lines.
The town council plan involves contracts already agreed to by cruise lines and the tendering facility. The town’s planning board had recommended its passage, 4-2. The warrant committee had recommended it, 11-2.
For more information on Chapter 50 and cruise ship management, see the Cruise Ship Information page.
ARTICLE 2 – AMENDMENT OF THE HIGGINS PIT SOLAR ARRAY BOND-IMPROVEMENTS TO TOWN-OWNED PROPERTIES
Voters decided that the town could reallocate a previously approved $4.25 million bond that had been meant for the Higgins Pit Solar Array project. The vote was 2652 to 784
The original bond was approved in June 2022 by voters. It was meant to construct a solar farm on Higgins Pit. The costs were then deemed too high due to right of way issues to the site and other impacts such as connection fees, timing issues, and environmental factors.
Because the bond already was approved and taken out and must be used within the next few months, the Town Manager James Smith recommended using the money on town-owned properties in ways that are meant to meet climate goals that are similar to the project.
Voting yes meant that the town can reallocate the money toward other energy efficient “green energy” projects. Voting no rejected that measure, but marooned the funds.
The town council and warrant committee both unanimously recommended the move.
Full text of bond amendment article.
ARTICLE 3 - TRANSIENT LODGING ACCOMMODATIONS
The town voters agreed to reduce the number of transient lodging uses and definitions from 19 to seven as well as modify multiple standards that are connected to lodging uses. The vote was in favor 2,639 to 637.
The amendment is meant to simplify the town’s land use ordinance dealing with transient accommodations. It not only decreases the definitions; it also updates parking standards and requirements for the uses. Part of that simplification is a redefinition of those terms.
The amendment no longer uses terms like “bed and breakfast” but instead separates the sections into smaller and larger establishments.
It also
Modifies “nonconforming provisions to reflect new lodging uses;”
Adjusts “relevant general review standards for parking and loading requirements;”
Removes “general review standards for cabins and cottages;”
Replaces “existing lodging use references with new use references in Article XIII Design Review;”
Requires “minimum parking standards for all transient lodging accommodation uses;”
Requires “site plan approval or conditional use approval for all transient lodging accommodation uses;”
Amends “Article III to replace existing transient accommodation uses with the new lodging uses.”
The town’s warrant committee and planning board unanimously approved its adoption. Full text on the town’s Land Use Information page.
ARTICLE 5 - FILING AND APPROVALS
This article simply changed the requirement of sending all land use ordinance amendments to the Maine Department of Environmental Protection rather than just shoreland zoning related amendments. Similarly, it would no longer require amendments be sent to the Hancock County Registry of Deeds.
Voters voted in favor 2756 to 500.
It was unanimously recommended by the planning board and warrant committee.
ARTICLE 6 – FILING HARD COPIES
This amendment decreases the amount of hard copies of appeals given to the Bar Harbor Appeals Board from 12 to 10.
It was unanimously recommended by the planning board and warrant committee.
Voters voted in favor 2767 to 496.
Full text on the town’s Land Use Information page
BAR HARBOR ELECTION RESULTS ON TOWN, STATE AND GENERAL ELECTION
SOME OTHER TOWN RESULTS:
MOUNT DESERT
Number of registered voters: 2078 (does not include voter changes from 11/5/2024)
Total number of ballots cast: 1412 (General) 1408 (Referendum)
President:
Harris, Kamala (D) 1019
Oliver, Chase (L) 9
Stein, Jill (G) 23
Trump, Donald (R) 336
West, Cornel (J) 5
Other/Blank 20
United States Senate:
Cherry, Jason (I) 24
Costello, David (D) 182
King, Angus (I) 908
Kouzounas, Demi (R) 274
Other/Blank 24
Representative to Congress:
Golden, Jared (D) 1045
Theriault, Austin (R) 334
Other/Blank 33
Maine Senate District 7
Grohoski, Nicole (D) 1031
Hutchins, Sherman (R) 339
Other/Blank 42
House District 14
Friedmann, Gary (D) 981
Gray, Sandra (R) 375
Other/Blank 56
Register of Probate, Hancock County
Jordan, Velma (U) 750
Wilbur, Juliette (R) 447
Other/Blank 215
County Commissioner, District 3
DiBella, Samuel (D) 799
Paradis, Paul (R) 538
Other/Blank 75
Question 1 (PAC contributions)
Yes 1131
No 230
Blank 47
Question 2 (Research bond)
Yes 945
No 405
Blank 58
Question 3 (Historic buildings bond)
Yes 868
No 488
Blank 52
Question 4 (Trails bond)
Yes 875
No 473
Blank 60
Question 5 (State flag)
Yes 833
No 527
Blank 48
TREMONT
Tremont has released its preliminary results, which are:
President/Vice President
Harris, Kamala D.—584
Oliver, Chase—13
Stein, Jill—13
Trump, Donald J.—438
West, Cornel—5
U.S. Senator
Cherry, Jason S.—22
Costello, David Allen—89
King, Angus S., Jr.—599
Kouzounas, Demi—325
Rep. to Congress
Golden, Jared Forrest—605
Theriault, Austin—420
State Senator District 7
Grohoski, Nicole C.—616
Hutchins, Sherman—392
Rep. to the Legislature District 15
Eaton, Holly Rae—468
Joyce, Jason M.—530
Register of Probate Hancock County
Jordan, Velma Lee—482
Wilbur, Juliette—450
County Commissioner Hancock District 3
DiBella, Samuel D.—469
Paradis, Paul Albert—521
Question 1: Citizen Initiative ($5,000 limit)
Yes—781
No—223
Question 2: Bond Issue (25,000,000)
Yes—569
No—443
Question 3: Bond Issue ($10,000,000)
Yes—567
No—448
Question 4: Bond Issue ($30,000,000)
Yes—580
No—422
Question 5: State Referendum (Flag)
Yes—503
No—528
TOWN OF TRENTON
These results are via the BDN, which we have a cooperative agreement with for news sharing.
We’ll have another article tomorrow about all the races and results. We just wanted to get this one out to you tonight. We may also update this story.
We have updated this story to include Bar Harbor’s results in better jpg images, replacing the original images of the results
If you’d like to donate to help support us, you can, but no pressure! Just click here.
If you’d like to sponsor the Bar Harbor Story, you can! Learn more here.
THANKYOU CHARLIE SIDMAN.
And every Bar Harbor voter who stepped up and pushed back.
OK shameless and shameful BH Town Manager and Town Council. Is it clear NOW?
Or are you plotting more schemes to bankrupt BH?