Sometimes even the best laid plans simply don’t work out. Back in 2007, when the City of Saco was looking to expand its train platform into an enclosed train station building, it sounded like the perfect fit to have the Biddeford-Saco Chamber of Commerce located there.
The building was designed with the chamber in mind, where its members and volunteers could greet passengers coming off the train with suggestions of restaurants, shops and attractions for them to patronize. The location, near the bridge between Biddeford and Saco, and with plenty of parking, is ideal for an entity that serves both cities and created a “welcome center” feel. In return for taking on the position of greeter at the station, the chamber was to receive a reduced rental fee for its space.
The whole plan looked like a win-win, and the chamber has been there since 2009.
As with everything else, however, the devil was in the details. Now, five years later, a confluence of negative factors have led to the chamber’s decision to move out. Its lease is up Feb. 12 and the board of directors and executive director have their sights set on a new location nearby, which is soon to be announced.
Among the chamber’s complaints about its transportation center office space are:
The noisy flow of travelers and community groups gathered in the public building impedes their business and professional atmosphere; Amtrak passengers regularly ask them for assistance with the ticketing process; interpersonal challenges have arisen working with the two community groups of volunteer greeters; and the expense of meeting lease requirements such as staffing the chamber daily until 6 p.m., with the exception of two annual holidays, and clearing the snow around the building has become prohibitive.
The rent, originally negotiated at $500 per month, was widely publicized as being a deal for the chamber, but its officials now say it has become too expensive when the $28,000 per year in extra staffing and $260 per month in electricity costs are factored in.
Due to the environment and the price, it’s clear that finding a new location is the right move for the chamber, which has a responsibility to serve the interests of its dues-paying members above all else. They say it’s a business decision, and from that perspective, it certainly seems like the best move.
What is vexing about the situation, however, is that the chamber could have been retained in this location if city officials had been willing to renegotiate a number of terms to make it more affordable and hospitable. Instead, lack of communication, snarky emails and personal accusations became the order of the day when the chamber sought to have its concerns addressed.
This isn’t about pointing fingers, but the chamber’s relationship with the City of Saco has been left bruised by this experience, and that serves no one well. At this point, the chamber has decided to move and will be doing so next month, but its work with the twin cities and surrounding towns will, of course, continue.
In the long run, it seems best to have the chamber in a location that is not owned by either city so that it can move forward as an independent entity, rather than see economic development efforts bogged down by tenant/landlord issues.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
