OPINION | Gazette repeated ‘false narratives,’ further eroding public discourse about UNE

Editor:

The Biddeford Gazette’s May 17 article, “UNE describes their relationship with Biddeford as ‘broken,’” makes several factual errors and perpetuates false narratives about the proposed research pier.

First, it states that the pier will be “jutting toward the center of the river.” The pier will not extend anywhere near the center of the Saco River. The farthest extent of the pier will sit over 200 feet from the federal anchorage, and approximately 400 feet from the federal navigation channel, posing no risk to maritime operations along the Saco River.

Once completed, the proposed pier will extend into the river a similar distance as the existing seasonal pier, which will be removed once the new pier is completed.

The article also implies that UNE moved through the regulatory permitting process unusually fast due to some kind of preferential treatment, even invoking the term “backroom deals.” This is false, and there is no evidence to support it.

The Army Corps of Engineers and Maine Department of Environmental Protection applications were submitted in June 2024. The Army Corps permit was not issued until April 2025, nine months later, after multiple meetings, site reviews, and at least two supplemental application packages.

The Maine DEP permit was publicly noticed in the Portland Press Herald and involved extensive back-and-forth correspondence with UNE’s engineers before approval. The Biddeford Planning Board process included a sketch plan review, two site walks, and three board hearings between May and August 2025, and drew an extraordinary volume of public comment, more than our planning staff had ever seen on a single project.

The Saco River Corridor Commission also heard substantial public input at its hearing. None of this resembles “clear sailing.” It reflects a rigorous, fully public process that UNE navigated by being well-prepared and responsive to every regulatory request.

Finally, the article suggests that the former mayor and city manager acted improperly in removing the harbormaster from the pier’s review process. What the article does not report is that this decision was made on the advice of the city’s own attorney, who counseled city leadership to take that action. The omission of this critical fact leaves readers with a distorted picture of what actually occurred.

Perpetuating false narratives that have been actively circulated by the project’s opponents does not serve the Gazette’s readers or the residents of Biddeford.

Perpetuating false narratives that have been actively circulated by the project’s opponents does not serve the Gazette’s readers or the residents of Biddeford.

Misinformation, regardless of its source, erodes public trust and makes constructive dialogue harder. The university remains committed to transparency, and we continue to urge the mayor and city council to work collaboratively with the university to advance our shared interests for the benefit of this community.

Sarah Delage | University of New England

_____

The Biddeford Gazette welcomes Letters to the Editor from our readers | SUBMIT A LETTER

_____

STAY CONNECTED | SUBSCRIBE FOR FREE TODAY