An assessment fee, (read: additional tax), is being considered for residents of Camp Ellis to help offset the cost of combating beach erosion. The city is facing a hefty price tag to deal with this problem, but we don’t think the shoreline residents should bear this burden alone.
The Army Corps of Engineers is planning to add a 750-foot spur, perpendicular to the existing jetty at the mouth of the Saco River, in an attempt to prevent further beach erosion. The project itself will be covered by $26.9 million from the federal government, but beach maintenance won’t end with the construction. Beach renourishment, which involves sand being placed on the beach, is expected to be required every 12 years or so. If there is any money left over after construction of the spur, it will go toward the renourishment, but once that funding is spent, the city will be responsible for 50 percent of future renourishments. Per the city’s calculations, that’s going to cost about $7 million over the next 50 years.
With such a significant cost facing the city over that time, different options are being considered to pay for it, and one of them is to add a fee to the bills of all Camp Ellis area property owners. The city is proposing a “municipal development district” from Bayview Avenue to Camp Ellis and from Seaside Avenue to the ocean. Within that district, property owners would be charged extra for maintenance of the beach.
The properties closest to the beach are, without a doubt, the most vulnerable to the whims of the sea, and many saw significant damage during the 2007 Patriots Day storm, among other significant weather events. A front-row view of the ocean also comes with a heightened risk of its wrath, and those homeowners know that ”“ they already pay increased taxes for the privilege and higher insurance rates, too. It’s a privilege to live so close to one of nature’s most beautiful attributes, and the cost of oceanside property reflects that.
Homeowners, however, are not the only ones who enjoy the beach. Cities nationwide have made a point of keeping some shoreline properties public to allow anyone access to the beach, and Saco is no exception. Saco residents come from farther inland to enjoy the city’s coast, and visitors from afar regularly make trips to Camp Ellis, where they can enjoy the rocky coast and sandy beach alike. A parasailing business, personal watercraft rentals and various fishing and whale-watching charters leave from the Camp Ellis pier, while the less adventurous can stay ashore to test their toes in the icy water or just take in the view.
The beach is indeed a community-wide asset, as the beach and its associated businesses draw tourists who help support the city’s economy. With that in mind, Camp Ellis residents should not be solely responsible for renourishment of the beach.
A compromise is in order here, with taxpayers citywide ”“ residents and businesses ”“ contributing to this regular maintenance in light of the beach’s overall value to the city. Those who live on the shoreline should be putting in a little extra, just as they do in taxes, since the beach erosion directly affects their properties.
Over 50 years, $7 million is not as much as it seems, especially spread out among the entire tax base. It’s a manageable figure for a city of Saco’s size, and it’s important to remember that it’s not a big payment all at once, either. Putting this full burden on the shoreline residents alone, however, is unfair and does not recognize the beach’s importance to Saco’s wider economy ”“ and its very identity.
Ӣ Ӣ Ӣ
Today’s editorial was written by Managing Editor Kristen Schulze Muszynski on behalf of the Journal Tribune Editorial Board. Questions? Comments? Contact Kristen by calling 282-1535, ext. 322, or via email at kristenm@journaltribune.com.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
