Lewiston Planning Board sends FY2026 capital plan to council, urges cuts attempt and highlights priorities

The Lewiston Planning Board voted unanimously to forward the FY2026 Lewiston Capital Improvement Program to the City Council, asking council to aim to bring the plan closer to the city's 80% funding target and highlighting several projects the board favors preserving or considers candidates for reduction.

The planning board, chaired by Shanna Cox, made the recommendation after a public hearing in which no members of the public spoke and after more than an hour of discussion about which LCIP line items the board would recommend the council preserve or consider cutting. The board also asked staff to prepare a list of the board's preserves and cuts to accompany the recommendation.

Why it matters: The LCIP recommendation is advisory but matters because the council will make final funding and sequencing decisions. Planning board members told staff they wanted to flag items the council should prioritize and to encourage close attention to the plan's overall cost relative to the 80% guideline.

Board members repeatedly named the same priorities: a municipal vehicle wash facility and implementation of the Riverfront Island master plan. Several members also urged the council to consider delaying purchases of new public-works and emergency-vehicle units until the wash facility is operational. At the same time, members identified recurring candidates for reduction, including Franklin Pasture tennis courts, a security fence at the Franklin Pasture athletic complex, Central Avenue rehabilitation, parking-garage sign upgrades and citywide wayfinding signs.

"I would like to make a motion to accept the capital improvement budget as presented and make a recommendation to the city council for it unchanged," Chair Shanna Cox said before the board amended the language to include the recommendations discussed at the meeting.

Michael Marcotte, who opposed an earlier bland-motion approach, said the planning board has a distinct role beyond a simple "sanity check": "The planning board has a viewpoint. What's really going to help this community grow," he said, urging the board to provide specific guidance to the council, including a suggestion the council attempt to move the package closer to the 80% target.

Board members asked staff to capture the items on which there was clear agreement. Staff said they would prepare a memo listing: - Items strongly supported for preservation: Public Works vehicle wash facility; Riverfront Island implementation; (several members also flagged water-system items such as meter replacement and sewer rehab) - Items repeatedly suggested for reduction: Franklin Pasture tennis courts; Franklin Pasture athletic-complex security fence; Central Avenue rehabilitation; parking-garage signage; citywide wayfinding signs; educational space for growing enrollments (page references were given in the LCIP document and captured in the board's notes) - A recommendation that the council attempt to bring the LCIP cost closer to the 80% benchmark and a note of appreciation for the department heads' engagement in preparing the request.

After the board agreed on the language, the chair moved, pursuant to Article 7, Section 4(e) of the Zoning and Land Use Codes, that the board send a favorable recommendation of the FY2026 LCIP to the council with the staff-prepared list of preserves and potential cuts. The motion was seconded and, by roll call, passed unanimously.

The board asked staff to request feedback from the City Council after council considers the LCIP. Staff said council would discuss the LCIP in a workshop on the 18th and that the planning board's recommendation would be on the council's agenda for consideration and public hearing.

The planning board also asked staff to include, where practical, page references and a short history of prior LCIP appearances for line items (for example, when a project had repeatedly been listed) so future reviewers and the council can see past treatment and prioritization.

The board closed the public hearing and adjourned at the end of the meeting.

What's next: The LCIP and the planning board's recommendation move to city council workshops and hearings; the board requested an explicit response from council after council action on the LCIP.