By Wayne E. Rivet

Staff Writer

A TIF (tax increment financing) is a give-and-take proposition.

Linda LaCroix sees construction of a proposed $6 million memory care facility a “win” for Bridgton, as well as residents of the region.

However, Woodland Senior Living managing member Matthew Walters has crunched the numbers and while the Waterville-based company really likes Bridgton as the location of a 48-bed facility, a TIF is needed — at the tune of 85% of proceeds going to the developer and 15% to the town in the early years of the TIF agreement to help with construction costs. Bridgton’s share ramps up in later years of the TIF agreement.

“This is a win-win situation for Bridgton. It serves our primary priorities to be mindful of tax burdens while providing the opportunity for private development of essential services so important to residents. This assisted living facility is critical to all of us as an extraordinary opportunity to have a best-in-class facility local to residents; one that builds Maine Care into the business model and thus is inclusive to all,” wrote LaCroix, the town’s Community Development Director, to the Bridgton Selectboard prior to Tuesday’s Zoom meeting. “TIFs are beneficial to the town not only as a mechanism to enable critical projects and development, but especially in this case as a path to bringing important good-paying full-time jobs to 30 people, people who will engage in our community businesses, pay taxes for those who live here and indeed attract new residents from elsewhere. These jobs are critical, and the facility itself adds a tremendous health care asset complimenting existing services provided by the hospital.”

LaCroix noted voter support for the project when they overwhelmingly approved a change in the zoning district on North High Street to enable development of the memory care facility.

“The TIF is essential to this happening,” LaCroix added. “These monies will provide important funding for future wastewater, streetscape and other infrastructure projects benefitting the town in addition to the critical primary healthcare service. Rather than increase the tax burden, this TIF as with others leads to greatly enhanced infrastructure assets that do not add to the tax bill. We all win. For these reasons, I urge the board to approve this framework.”

Early discussions between the board and Walters centered mainly on finding a middle ground regarding what tax mix was reasonable for each side.

Walters did provide selectmen with a spreadsheet of a TIF Woodland Senior Living reached with the town of Rockport, showing what money stayed with the developer and when, and what money went to the town, early on and later in the agreement.

Selectman Paul Tworog chartered what the numbers would look like in Bridgton under the 85-15 model — which Walters says Woodlands needs to make the project happen. Tworog developed the model based on the estimated worth of the project at $6 million and the current mill rate. His conclusion: 

“It seems to be a reasonable place in my mind to end up,” he said. “This is a very high value project; $6 million valuation, big project for Bridgton; creates 30 jobs; service that is certainly good for town. We need be careful with our focus. 15% — $13,455 taxes — this project generates a significant number. There is only 55 individual properties in Bridgton that pay that amount or more in taxes; even at a reduction, the project is still paying what town receives from Paris Farmers Union; Howell Labs at $19,000. Contributions remain significant the first 10 years at 15%.” 

Tworog added that another piece officials should keep in mind is that the TIF works to shield property value from the state formula as it pertains to distribution of aid. If there is no TIF, the town collects full tax assessed value, but Bridgton would lose $53,000 in state aid because its overall property value is higher.

TIF allows a municipality to “shelter” new value resulting from certain development projects from the computation of its state subsidies and county taxes. The sheltering allows the municipality to retain all or a portion of those newtax revenues that would otherwise be passed on to the county and state. The designation freezesthe value of taxable property within the district with respect to the state and county for the term of the TIF district.

Selectwoman Carmen Lone felt the 85-15% model is “reasonable.”

“It is an important business to bring to Bridgton, providing jobs, good industry and benefit people utilizing services,” Lone said.

Officials wondered what would happen if the facility were to be sold during the TIF agreement?

Town Manager Bob Peabody said typically, the TIF “flows to the new owner” but he would recommend that legal counsel review the matter. That issue recently surfaced with the Magic Lantern, which was developed with a TIF agreement, being on the for-sale block.

Peabody admitted the TIF concept is not always easy for folks to grasp. Like LaCroix, he pointed out that by “sheltering” the addition of $6 million to the town’s property valuation number via the TIF, the town would not see reduction in general purpose aid to education or an increase in county tax.

Bridgton currently has two “active” TIFs, and money from those agreements has been used to pare down existing bonds (wastewater project) or could be used to address other infrastructure improvements — ultimately, not asking taxpayers to ante up.

Some question whether it is fair to cut one business a significant tax break, and not others. 

North High Street resident Mary P. Shorey questioned the idea of granting a TIF to Woodland Senior Living in a letter to the board.

“I was concerned that the proposed TIF agreement for Woodlands Senior Living could be a hardship for the town businesses and property owners. Other businesses and property owners will have to absorb the tax burden that will not be shared by this new business. Due to the virus restrictions, many businesses and households are struggling financially. A 100% or 85% agreement over 10 or 15 years seems wrong under the circumstances,” Shorey wrote. “This winter, some residents told me that they were likely to vote for the assisted living ordinance change because this new business would share the local tax burden. Instead, Bridgton taxpayers will pay more. Since this business seems to be able to expand in these difficult times, the business seems better off and capable of finding other ways to improve its financial situation. Also, the selectmen need to consider what costs this new facility will add to the town budget because of accessing town services.”

Board Chairman Lee Eastman likes the idea of bringing memory care services to the area, but has a hard time giving up 85% over a 10-year period to a for-profit company.

“I struggle with it,” he said. “If I’m a business owner, how do I feel?”

Tworog sees the possible $6 million project as a “huge” plus for the town, and reiterated that even with the town receiving 15% of tax dollars in the first 10 years of the agreement, it is “still a very significant tax contribution.”

When Eastman wondered if the town was opening a Pandora’s box that others might also come seeking a TIF, Tworog countered that it might be a good problem for Bridgton to have if companies are looking to make that sizable investment here, especially if those companies bring “desirable services” such as Woodland Senior Living is proposing.

Peabody, noted that there is a limit to the number of TIFs a municipality can have, but Bridgton is “nowhere close to it.”

Selectboard approved the proposal by a 4-1 vote, Eastman against. Ultimately, voters will need to approve the agreement. The timeline would be:

• Absentee ballots available, Feb. 28-March 1

• Public hearing on referendum questions, March 9

• Special town meeting, election, March 30. Estimated cost for special election, $2,500, which would be paid by the developer.

Before moving onto other agenda items, Selectman Bear Zaidman wondered if Woodland Senior Living might in fact shelve the project based on comments Walters made in a Dec. 9 e-mail to LaCroix and Peabody.

Walters wrote, ““Once again, not the reception we expected last night..Our bottom line is 85% for, at minimum, the first 10 years. After the first 10-year period, the split is much less important. We could do 50% or 25%...it matters much less after year 20…Given the continued push back from the selectboard thus far, and even if they eventually agree to the reasonably proposed TIF allocation (which appears far from a sure thing), it creates a great deal of uncertainty and a lack of confidence that the people of Bridgton would ultimately support the concept at the special town meeting.”

LaCroix admitted Walters was both “frustrated” and “disappointed” following the early December Zoom conference with the selectboard. However, the company remains commited to the project.

“I have been all for this. It would be a great addition to town,” Zaidman said. “But, it is up to the selectboard to go through all information, parties and finances, pushing it down the road, yeah beating it up. It’s a big step for the town of Bridgton. If we present this package to voters, we want to assure them that they have numbers, and not just slide something through. That letter put sour grapes in my mouth.”

LaCroix responded, “Be clear, they didn’t understand this kind of deliberation process. In other towns, they work with town managers; it’s not the way we operate here. I wouldn’t take it to heart. I’ve had conversations with him (Walters) that this board is very thorough; he accepted it. They very much want to be here. I have every confidence they very much want to do this; they love the site; it is appropriate for the region.”

Eastman feels Woodlands is “asking for a lot out of the gate.”

“I hope it doesn’t cloud what’s being offered — a chance to have services here,” LaCroix said. “Their institutions are highly rated.”

Ultimately, voters will decide.