Ellsworth City Council approves land-swap plan and up to $1.5 million for road to proposed Wardwell courthouse site

The City Council on a motion approved authorizing the city manager to pursue a land-swap for 17.9 acres of the Wardwell property and to negotiate easements and a contract with the State of Maine to build a road to a proposed courthouse, with city-issued bonds or bond anticipation notes not to exceed $1,500,000.

Charlie, city staff and presenter to the council, opened the discussion by describing the choice facing the council: move forward with the Wardwell alternative, take no action (allow the state to build on Surrey Road), or pursue a moratorium. "This is our fifth kind of formal conversation on the alternative, Ellsworth Courthouse, proposal and location," Charlie said, describing due diligence on surveys, geotechnical and environmental work and a time-sensitive bond-council deadline for the state.

The nut graf: Councilors and residents debated trade-offs between up-front city cost and long-term economic and planning benefits. Supporters said the Wardwell option would anchor development in Ellsworth’s urban core; critics said the council should not commit city funds for a private development and raised concerns about wetlands, Card Brook watershed impacts, traffic and tax effects.

Council discussion and motion: The motion approved by the council instructs the city manager to facilitate a land-swap with the state for a 17.9-acre Wardwell parcel in exchange for the state’s 17.9-acre parcel on Surrey Road; to negotiate easements with adjacent landowners (Adams and Merrill) for road access; and to enter a contract with the State of Maine Judicial Branch defining standards, timelines and the city’s obligation to bond for road construction not to exceed $1,500,000. The motion also directs the manager to pursue state, federal and other funding opportunities, consider zoning and land-use changes to spur development and provide quarterly funding reports until the project closes. The motion takes effect immediately.

Public hearing and major community concerns: The council held a public hearing focused on the single agenda item. Taxpayer Robert Grant told the council, "There's no there's no price tag for the for the taxpayers of Ellsworth. There's no price tag." Several speakers asked whether Hancock County or the state should assume more of the cost; others urged conservation protections for Card Brook and questioned whether Surrey Road might later prove unsuitable. Resident Lisa LaRue said the Wardwell site "provides larger acreage for the placement of their buildings, drainage, stormwater, and expansion," and argued the state should share more of the cost. Mary Blackstone raised environmental questions about Card Brook and noted the brook is listed as impaired for stormwater and impervious-surface impacts.

Costs, timeline and funding detail discussed in the public record: Council and staff repeatedly cited an estimated maximum city liability of $1,500,000 for the road if no outside funding is secured. Staff gave line-item examples referenced during the hearing (for illustration provided to the council): an 8-inch water main with hydrants estimated at about $167 per linear foot (roughly $200,400 in an example), sewer at about $130 per linear foot (about $156,000 in an example), and road construction including stormwater roughly $585 per linear foot (about $702,000 in an example). Easement costs were described as potentially in the $100,000–$200,000 range. Charlie said the road construction likely would not begin before 2026 and that a full build-out of major pieces could be nearer 2027, subject to final agreements, permits and funding.

Environmental and planning controls: Staff said surveys and geotechnical work show a courthouse "definitely can be built" at the Wardwell site subject to DEP (Maine Department of Environmental Protection) permitting. The presentation noted potential vernal pools and associated 250-foot setbacks; design work aimed to keep road disturbance under thresholds that would allow permitting within current DEP rules, but speakers cautioned that DEP rule changes and future wetland or stream protections could affect feasibility and cost.

County and traffic issues: Several public speakers urged Hancock County and other municipalities that use the courthouse to help with cost, and speakers who live near Surrey Road said property values, traffic and turning-lane/sidewalk needs would create city expenses if the state-built Surrey Road option proceeded. Council members said they will continue outreach to the county and state for funding and noted a separate, state-partnered High Street corridor planning process could provide design and funding opportunities for related intersection or traffic improvements.

Vote and next steps: The council voted to approve the motion (voice vote; no roll-call count recorded in the minutes). The motion requires the city manager to facilitate the land-swap, negotiate and execute easements, enter the contract with the State Judicial Branch with a city bonding cap of $1,500,000 for the road, pursue external funding, consider zoning changes, and report quarterly on funding status until project close-out.

The council’s action sets a course but leaves key contingencies in place: state bond-council timelines, DEP permitting and the ability to secure state, federal or private funding to reduce the city’s share of costs. The council and staff said they will provide quarterly updates to the public and continue outreach to the county and state partners.