Officials Currently Will Work to Refine — Not Repeal — Voter-Backed Environmental Rules
Feb 25, 2026
The Bar Harbor Story is generously sponsored by Acadia Psychiatry.
SOUTHWEST HARBOR—The citizen’s petition that was overwhelmingly approved by voters in November and that created an amendment to the town’s land use ordinance that will likely be tweaked but not repealed, the Southwest Harbor Select Board indicated, February 25.
The ordinance calls for testing of soil contaminants for any property within a half-mile of anywhere the state has deemed “an uncontrolled site” prior to any land use that requires permitting.
Southwest Harbor voters passed the soil standard changes 554-187, November 4, 2025.
“With the will of the people this passed overwhelmingly,” Town Manager Karen Reddersen said. “Once passed, the town has received a significant number of questions related to scope and geographic impact, defined points of measurement, testing standards, remediation authority and enforcement. There has also been discussion regarding DEP review requirements of the amended LUO and number of uncontrolled sites as identified by the DEP within Southwest Harbor.”
The ordinance requires soil testing within .5 miles of an uncontrolled site.
The state defines that as a location where hazardous substances “were handled or otherwise came to be located, if it is concluded by the commissioner that the site poses a threat or hazard to the health, safety or welfare of any person or to the natural environment and that action under this chapter is necessary to abate, clean up or mitigate that threat or hazard.”
It usually includes all the contiguous land that’s owned by the same person, company, or group.
According to the state, “The Uncontrolled Hazardous Substance Sites Program (“USP”) was created to abate the threats to human health and the environment posed by abandoned hazardous substance contaminated sites. The USP is the state equivalent to US Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA) Federal Superfund Program.”
Within Southwest Harbor, the only site considered “uncontrolled” and not remediated by the state is the Worcester Associates landfill property, which is in between Long Pond and the Marshall Brook Road and began in the 1930s with an open burning dump that was used by the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) and then the town. It has polluted ground water in the area.
However, the town’s code enforcement officer and others have worried that because it just says “uncontrolled,” it applies to all three sites in town—including those remediated—, therefore limiting where development can occur without testing.
“After talk to our uncontrolled sites group, the three sites in Southwest Harbor. Fox Property, Stanley Boat Yard, and Worcester Landfill, are all still considered uncontrolled sites,” Maine DEP senior hydrologist Matthew Burke wrote in a December 2025 email.
Testing, Code Enforcement Officer Jarrod Kushla, can cost between $10,000-$20,000. In a letter to the town, Ben Worcester said the minimum cost is $5,000-$8,000.
Kushla wrote in a February 17 memo, “While the intent of the provision is understandable and protective of public health, several portions of the language are vague, administratively difficult to implement, and potentially unenforceable as currently written. Additionally, there are currently two additional sites listed by DEP as ‘uncontrolled sites’ that fall within the town and would therefore trigger this provision. As a result, the scope and practical impact of this ordinance is broader than may have originally been anticipated, further underscoring the need for clarification and refinement to ensure consistent and defensible enforcement.”
However, at least one of the key writers of the amendment does not agree.
“The only site impacted by the LUO amendment is owned by the proponent of removing that amendment,” Jim Vallette wrote in an email to the town.
Vallette has been one of several residents who were opposed to the recently approved Trundy Farm subdivision because of its location by an uncontrolled site.
Worcester said that the ordinance came up because of the Trundy Farm subdivision, which he brought before the planning board for its approval. He requested a repeal of the ordinance so, he said, the town could “properly identify what does the town need.”
“The reason that I asked for repeal in my letter was because I knew that coming up with revisions to what was there was going to take time, and it was going to be imposed on a lot of people that, frankly… I would say the majority of lots that are in there are going to come up without contamination,” Worcester said.
“It doesn’t seem that anyone is concerned for a $10,000 fee for anyone building a house,” Tom Benson, a local land surveyor said from the audience. “I think you guys need to think about that.”
The ordinance, Benson said, will devalue land across Southwest Harbor and it’s unreasonable for people.
“I guess my concern is that, number one, the half-mile radius assumes that everything within that half-mile is contaminated. And with no real knowledge that, frankly, they are or they aren’t. No real knowledge as to who is the contaminator,” Worcester said.
He said that reworking the ordinance and doing a proper job will take time. The voters would have to approve any changes in June or November, the typical election times.
“But in that span of time, there’s a lot of people, as Tom just mentioned, that are going to, if they’re going to do something, even a rather small project could be spending significant sums,” Worcester said.
“With regard to Worcester Associates and the landfill, this discussion is all assuming that Worcester Associates and the landfill have done nothing to come up with a plan for that site to be remediated,” Worcester said. “And that just isn’t true. You may not know of it, but Worcester Associates is planning to extend a waterline from Long Pond Road to Marshall Brook Road.”
They are planning to extend an eight-inch, 2,000-feet waterline for Marshall Brook Road residents if they wish to tie in and use it. That project, he said, they’ve been working on for several years.
“That’s a considerable sum for a company that hasn’t done business in forty years,” he added.
“I wanted to remind the board that they did find PFAS six feet below the surface, right in the middle of the property, and the planning board chose to ignore that, but PFAS doesn’t come out of nowhere, and I believe that land has been fallow for probably longer than there’s been PFAS, so where did it come from?” Vallette said. “It came from the groundwater, most likely, the groundwater, which Mr. Worcester placed under a negative easement, meaning that groundwater underneath the subdivision is polluted, or he wouldn’t put a negative easement on it.”
Vallette said that the ordinance came from concerns about pollutants.
“It wasn’t about subdivision specifically; it was about the insanity of building this subdivision right next to a leachate ditch,” Vallette said. “It’s never been tested, even in the testing that the planning board did. They never bothered to go next to the boundary where this water line is supposed to go across the ditch, the leachate ditch, which . . . A leachate ditch is designed to carry pollution.”
“The proponent of repealing the citizens’ initiative owns the property at its heart: an uncontrolled landfill that has been or is in ongoing violation of state and federal environmental laws, according to EPA and DEP. The proponent has failed to remediate the site since it was closed in 1995, thirty years ago. And it is vastly larger than the Tremont landfill, which has impacted a wide area. It is premature and negligent for the town to not even ask these questions before it considers dropping the language that was approved by 75% of our voters. Yet that is what is being contemplated for the next select board meeting,” Vallette wrote.
Kushla listed his concerns and explained that he wanted to modify the amendment so that it could be easily enforced.
“I’m more worried about the verbiage in there,” Kushla said.
Some of those issues, Kushla said, are that there is no defined point of measurement for the half-mile radius and “all known substances” (part of the ordinance language) “is vague and difficult to administer.”
The state monitors several substances, he said. That would be something to put into the ordinance and also have a place for people to refer to for state guidelines.
“Also in the ordinance, it’s just says any land use. So if anybody wants to put a shed on their property, they need to do soil testing,” Kushla said.
“All of our ordinances, I’d consider a work in progress,” select board member Natasha Johnson said.
She wants to honor the people who came out and voted this in place. She appreciated the list that Kusla gave as well.
“I feel the pain of all the landowners who would like to build their homes; they’d like to sell their homes; they’d like to make plans for themselves between now and November,” select board member Dan Norwood said. “I mean, it’s a long time to wait for them not being able to work on their houses with a huge additional cost.”
Reddersen suggested working with the Musson Group, a planning and consulting firm, and create a work team to better define the changes in a way to make it more enforceable. The goal would be to have those changes ready for the November ballot, but with hopes for it to potentially be ready for June.
ASSESSORS’ CONTRACT AND OTHER BUSINESS
Reddersen presented a new contract for assessor services with Matthew L. Caldwell who has provided the town’s assessor for many years. The board discussed some details of the contract. Board members agreed to approve the contract with some clarification on the terms.
The board also appointed Noah Burby as the town’s liaison to the Pemetic School Board, with the term running from February 2026 to July 2026. The school board has already approved the appointment.
Reddersen gave the board a quote from the town’s contracted fire inspection company, Eastern Fire, to repair the malfunctioning sprinkler system in the town office building. The board discussed the significant cost but agreed it was necessary to address the long-deferred maintenance and bring the system back into compliance.
The town was awarded Maine’s Coastal Community Grant/Shore and Harbor Planning Grant. The review committee has conditionally approved full funding in the amount of $50,000 for the town’s “Harbor Management Plan Update.”
LINKS TO LEARN MORE
Subdivision Near Worcester Landfill Approved After Retesting and Public Concerns.
Voters Approve Southwest Harbor Soil Testing Initiative; Local Ordinances Pass Across MDI
HELP SUPPORT THE BAR HARBOR STORY
When we started The Bar Harbor Story, we didn’t know if anyone would read it. But you showed up. You shared. You sent tips. Now—over 400,000 views every month later—it’s clear: people here care about their community and each other.
We’ve kept everything free because news should never be out of reach, but every one of our stories takes time to write, and your support keeps The Bar Harbor Story going.
If you value our work, please consider a paid subscription, a founding membership, or a sponsorship.
It truly helps us cover one more meeting, tell one more story, shine one more light.
Even $5 a month makes a difference. Click here to become a one-time supporter now.
Thank you so much for being here.
Founding member information can be found here.
Have questions about sponsorships? Just send Shaun an email at sfarrar86@gmail.com, he’d love to hear from you.
Discover more from Bar Harbor Story
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.