Staff Writer

  Police may have more leverage against disruptive neighbors if the Biddeford City Council adopts an ordinance to crack down on nuisance behavior.

The Biddeford Policy Committee on Monday unanimously endorsed a disorderly housing ordinance modeled after a similar policy in Portland.

The ordinance was developed over the past six months by a committee comprised of landlords, city staff, members of the Southern Maine Landlord Association and Trish McAllister, who prosecutes neighborhood issues for Portland.

Community Development Coordinator Linda Hardacker said it is needed to address nuisance behaviors that disrupt neighborhoods across the city and drive away good tenants.

If adopted by the Council, the ordinance would allow police to designate a building a disorderly house if they respond to it a specified number of times in a six-month period. The number of calls ranges from three to five depending on the size of the building. The ordinance excludes police calls related to domestic violence.

Disturbance calls covered under the ordinance include, but aren’t limited to, loud music, boisterous parties, fights and public intoxication.

A building that has been visited by police two or more times within a 30-day period would receive a notice of a hot spot designation. Hardacker said this will allow landlords to know when there are problems at their buildings.

Hardacker  said the ordinance will increase communication between landlords and police and provide landlords assistance to address problem tenants. Although the ordinance includes civil penalties for violations if property owners refuse to address problems, she said the intent is to work with landlords, not punish them.

McAllister said Portland’s ordinance has allowed police to work effectively with property owners to address nuisance problems that disturbed neighborhoods. She said city officials now meet regularly with the owner of a building that was “an incredible stress” on the surrounding neighborhood for many years. At one point, police responded to the building 25 times per month.

“Without a disorderly housing ordinance, all the city would have been able to do was continue to go to the building,” she said.

McAllister said calls for police service to the building went down more than 80 percent after the landlord began working with the city. The city waived more than $27,000 in fines and civil penalties because of his cooperation, she said. City officials work with landlords to evict problem tenants, implement tenant screening processes and address a variety of other issues, she said.

Portland has designated 14 buildings as disorderly houses since the city council adopted ordinance changes in April, McAllister said. She said every landlord contacted by police has agreed to work to fix problems.

“I’m blown away by the level of cooperation from the landlords. We try to work with them as much as we can,” she said. “I truly believe there’s been a change in the mindset of landlords in Portland because of the enforcement of this ordinance.”

Jeanne Jackson, a landlord who owns property on Sullivan Street in Biddeford, urged the committee to support the ordinance to hold landlords accountable for what happens on their property.

“You have a room full of landlords who are suffering because of landlords who are not taking care of their buildings,” she said.

Several tenants described what it is like to live in neighborhoods where police are called frequently to deal with loud music, fights and debris dumped on sidewalks. They said they worry about retaliation from neighbors who have figured out they are calling police.

Bill Powers, a resident and landlord, said he fully supports the ordinance to help address problems that make it difficult to retain good tenants. He said his car has been keyed and his fence kicked over because he calls police.

“I watch good tenants with jobs who pay taxes leaving every day,” he said. “If this makes one of my next door neighbors write a lease and do a background check (on tenants), it would be worth it.”

Nicole Wolfe said it is frustrating and scary to live in her neighborhood. She said her car also has been keyed by neighbors after she called police.

“You call, you call, you call and nothing happens,” she said.

Wolfe said it is not unreasonable to ask landlords to take responsibility for what happens on their property.

“When you rent to a tenant they are an extension of you. I have the right to live in a quality building,” she said. “At what point is enough enough? It’s not about punishing landlords, it’s about helping them find quality tenants and getting the bad ones out.”

Michele Trahan of Old Orchard Beach, a local landlord for 40 years, was the only person to speak against the ordinance during the meeting. She said landlords should not be penalized for their tenants’ actions.

“They should be allowed to do what they do inside that house,” she said. “I feel (the ordinance) is an infringement on my rights doing business in this town. I don’t feel I need a group of people telling me I’m going to be fined for someone’s behavior in a unit I don’t have any rights to because it’s leased to them.”

Police Chief Roger Beaupre said the ordinance is needed to allow police to better address issues that detract from quality of life and potentially endanger officers.

“Seeing the complaint log every day, I can certainly sympathize with those who are having issues with their neighbors,” he said. “Something needs to be done because, for the most part, all the police do is chase their tails as they run from one noise complaint to the next.”

Beaupre said the city needs to build a coalition of people who are not afraid to report problems in their neighborhoods. He has dedicated one officer to the collection of statistical data based on calls for service and to work closely with landlords and business owners.

“It would be nice for him to have this ordinance to use,” he said.

City councilor and committee member David Bourque said he fears the city will lose good landlords because of the burden placed on them, though he supports the ordinance. He said he is also concerned that landlords will be asked to provide lists of tenants to police if their building is designated as disorderly. Hardacker said that information will be kept private and used only by police as they work with the landlord to address problems.

Bob Mills, committee chairman and City Council president, said he has long supported implementing this type of ordinance.

“This is an ordinance I think we should have passed many years ago,” he said. 

Also on Monday the Policy Committee held its final public hearing on the future of the Coastal Area Committee and recommended the City Council adopt several changes.

The Coastal Area Committee, formed by city ordinance in 1998, includes seven members from five coastal neighborhoods. The committee includes residents of Biddeford Pool, Fortunes Rocks, Granite Point, Hills Beach and outer Biddeford Pool.

The committee reviews all building permits and planning board requests for the coastal area before recommending whether proposals should be approved or denied.  The City Council on June 7 tabled a motion to disband the committee to allow the Policy Committee time to review the issue and make a recommendation.

The issue of the Coastal Area Committee first came to light in May when the City Council considered an order from the Policy Committee to add a $200 application fee plus the cost of postage for mailings to abutters of proposed projects.

The Policy Committee held public hearings in June, July and August on whether  to keep the committee.  Supporters say the Coastal Area Committee provides a valuable service to the community, while others maintain it is unnecessary and has outlived its usefulness.

After listening to comments from three residents, Policy Committee members voted unanimously to forward the Coastal Area Committee’s recommendation for three ordinance changes to the City Council. 

The Coastal Area Committee recommended the city change the deadline to submit proposals to the committee; require applicants to submit required documentation and encourage – not require – them to appear before the committee; and to provide training workshops for new committee members on new laws or ordinances.

The City Council has the final say on the future of the Coastal Area Committee.

Edward Dougherty of Biddeford Pool Improvement Association and Biddeford Pool Land Trust said the Coastal Area Committee causes tension and anxiety for some coastal residents. He said the committee should focus on facilitating communication and leave enforcement issues to the Codes Department.

Dougherty said a group of people from the trust and association recommend the Policy Committee consider instituting term limits and a requirement all members be trained on zoning issues. He also suggested Coastal Area Committee meetings be held as informal roundtable discussions instead of the more formal hearings.

Dougherty said he has “great respect” for Coastal Area Committee members, “but with all due respect, they need to sharpen their focus to the original intent of facilitating communication.”

Former City Councilor Ron Peaker, who was on the council when the committee was formed, suggested it be reduced to three members who deal solely with shoreland zoning issues. He said he thinks the requirement coastal area projects go before the committee is discriminatory because that requirement does not apply to all city residents.

In other business, Policy Committee members indicated they would like to move forward with discussions on an ordinance that would give local contractors preference when bidding on city projects.

Mills said he brought up the possibility of developing an ordinance in response to a recent City Council vote to award a RiverWalk project bid to an out-of-town contractor. A Biddeford contractor’s bid was about $10,000 higher than the winning bid.

“I think it’s very important we find a way to put dollars back into local businesses,” Bourque said.

Committee member Richard Rhames said he also is interested in pursuing the ordinance because when bids are given to non-local companies, “most of the time that money leaves and doesn’t come back.”

Mills said the committee will further discuss a local contractor preference ordinance at its September meeting.

Staff Writer Gillian Graham can be reached at 282-4337, ext. 213.