By SAM PECOR, Special to the Gazette
A January 13 City Council workshop meeting included an in-depth presentation by Philip Saucier of Bernstein Shur on TIFs (tax increment financing) and CEAs (credit enhancement agreements).
These terms get thrown around like they’re the same thing. They’re not. They’re separate tools, each with a purpose and each capable of being used well or badly.
In my day-to-day life, I might go from using my computer to using a table saw. Both are tools. Both can do real damage if you use them carelessly. The solution isn’t to ban computers because identity theft exists, or to ban table saws because they can take a finger.
The solution is guardrails: good practices, good rules, and an understanding of the risks.
CEAs work the same way. A CEA isn’t automatically “a giveaway.” It’s a contract that can be written with real conditions. It can be as simple as reimbursing a percentage of new tax revenue, or it can be designed to pay only when specific outcomes are delivered. That distinction matters because Biddeford’s biggest redevelopment controversies haven’t been about the existence of a tool. They’ve been about leverage.
My interest in municipal governance was spurred by the MERC redevelopment process, a slow, meandering saga that’s now closing in on a decade since the first site concepts were drafted.
When you read the agreements closely, what jumps out isn’t just time. It’s how little enforceable leverage the city retained to shape a defining downtown project. Ironically, one of the most criticized mechanisms in these deals is also one of the best ways to demand results: a well-structured CEA.
If the city wants outcomes like housing units, specific mixes of development, public infrastructure commitments, and timelines that actually mean something, CEAs can be written to require them. Tie reimbursements to milestones. Build in performance metrics. Use phased triggers and claw backs when promised deliverables don’t show up.
That’s not anti-development. That’s basic accountability.
So, while I understand the instinct to be skeptical of CEAs, especially given how some have been structured in the past, I’d caution the City Council against rejecting a tool that can provide serious negotiating leverage.
The problem isn’t CEAs. The problem is CEAs written with no teeth. CEAs are a tool. Like a table saw, they deserve respect. Used well, they build something real.
Used carelessly, people get hurt.
___________
Sam Pecor is a Biddeford resident and a member of the Biddeford Gazette’s advisory board. The views expressed are those of the author. The Gazette welcomes guest columns and letters to the editor from our readers.
For more information, please contact us
Never miss another update! Subscribe for free today!
THE BIDDEFORD GAZETTE 