Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Lodging Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wells board cites Eno decision in lodging-fee workshop, appoints subcommittee to calculate proposed fee
Summary
Boarders reviewed Eno v. Bar Harbor as a legal template for defensible lodging fees, debated whether to pick a number now or ‘do the math first,’ and the chair appointed a subcommittee (Kathy and Jim) with staff to produce cost calculations before the January budget meeting.
During a Dec. 3 workshop, Wells selectmen centered debate on how the town should set or justify new lodging and short-term rental fees.
Leah (Speaker 7) reviewed the 2020 Eno v. Town of Bar Harbor decision, telling the board the case provides a "road map" for what costs a municipality may include in a fee: direct costs (staff time processing applications) and indirect costs (inspections, enforcement, public information). She said the Bar Harbor example was persuasive because the town backed up its fee with detailed calculations.
Board members split on approach. Some urged picking a practical fee now to meet budget timelines and reduce further delay; others insisted staff and the budget or lodging committees produce granular, defensible calculations first. Speaker 1 warned against indefinite delay, saying the board must make decisions; Speaker 11 and lodging representatives pushed for staff-driven arithmetic before finalizing a number.
To move the work forward, the chair appointed a two-member subcommittee—Kathy (Speaker 4) and Jim (Speaker 6)—to "figure out the number and present it," with staff (Speaker 2) agreeing to generate internal cost numbers tied to the Eno methodology. Staff committed to collect data on wages, vehicle time, inspections, and calls attributable to lodging and return with calculations in time for the January budget cycle. No final fee was adopted at the meeting.
