Ryan Paige grew up in Biddeford, and he has now taken the worst part of his life and turned it into a resource that has helped hundreds of people achieve sobriety all across Maine.
Paige, 43, has been sober and drug-free since 2019. Flash forward six years, and he is now running a statewide non-profit organization dedicated to helping others achieve sobriety.
“I would not be able to do this if I hadn’t gone through all the pain and my own poor decision making,” he said. “My own past, including incarcerations and all sorts of other stuff, has allowed me to build a reserve of empathy for others who are struggling.”
As part of his own recovery process, Paige started an informal support network to help those who want to pursue recovery.
Ryan Paige talks about the recovery network that he built from the ground up (Seaver photo)
At first, it was just him and his cell phone, interacting with people he met on the street. People he knew. People his friends knew.
Over time, the calls increased . . . dramatically.
“It was just word of mouth,” he said during a recent interview. “I was just staying busy, focusing on helping others, which is a big part of the recovery process.”
Before he knew it, Paige was helping people by driving them to recovery facilities between Kittery and Caribou.
“In the beginning, I was getting maybe 20 calls a month from people seeking help in their own recovery journey,” he said. “Before too long, that turned into a hundred calls a month.”
Today, Paige’s non-profit organization fields between 800 and 1,000 calls per month.
The AccessDirect Recovery Network partners with several other non-profit service providers across the state, including Opportunity Alliance, Spurwink and the Seeds of Hope Neighborhood Resource Center. Paige said.
“Our phones are open 24 hours a day, seven days a week,” he said.
“I would not be able to do this if I hadn’t gone through all the pain and my own poor decision making,”
— Ryan Paige
Paige said he would not be able to do what he is now doing without the help of his wife, Cynthia.
“She’s the business part of it,” he explained. “She does all the office stuff and so much more.”
Ryan and Cynthia were able to transform AccessDirect into a stand-alone non-profit organization. From there, Cynthia was able to apply for grant money to help keep the network running.
“I was doing everything out of my own pocket,” Ryan explained.” The expenses can add up quickly.”
Just two months ago, AccessDirect was able to secure a $500,000 grant from the Maine Recovery Council, the agency that was charged with dispersing Maine’s share of the federal opiate settlement funds provided by several pharmaceutical companies.
Ryan and Cynthia are using that money to add staff for their inbound call center, which is based in Biddeford. They are now also able to reimburse mileage expenses for their volunteer drivers.
AccessDirect has worked closely with the Biddeford Police Department and the city of Biddeford.
Paige says he has been asked to help train police officers about dealing with addicts and those struggling to achieve sobriety.
He also credits former Mayor Alan Casavant and current Mayor Marty Grohman for helping his organization grow and provide services.
In fact, Paige says City Council President Liam LaFountain was proactive in reaching out to learn how the city could support the recovery network.
Paige feels a strong connection to his hometown of Biddeford, which is why his organization is headquartered in the city.
“This is where I grew up,” he said. “These are the same streets where I was using.”
“None of this would be possible if I hadn’t lived through the darkest time of my life,” Paige said. “I was sick, desperate and hopeless. Today, I can leverage that part of my life to help others who are struggling.
According to a press release, both the Maine House of Representatives and Senate voted unanimously last week to approve a housing bill that was introduced by Speaker Ryan Fecteau (D-Biddeford).
The bill, LD 1829, is intended to make it easier to build new housing units by amending zoning requirements and providing clarity for municipalities, developers and others.
“Too often, the creation of new housing units is hampered by onerous and overly complex rules that make it too expensive, or too frustrating, for homeowners to build,” Fecteau said. “This law will cut red tape, remove government roadblocks, and empower everyday Maine people to build housing for their own families and neighbors.”
According to Fecteau, LD 1829 will reduce minimum lot sizes to no more than 5,000 square feet in designated growth areas and remove owner occupancy requirements for accessory dwelling units (ADUs) to unlock financing for construction.
Fecteau said LD 1829 will “streamline municipal review for smaller housing developments; create a one-story height bonus for qualified affordable housing and require training for municipal planning board members within 180 days of their appointment.
“This is a significant step toward addressing Maine’s housing shortage.”
__ Sen. Rick Bennett (R-Oxford)
“Building any type of housing in Maine is extremely difficult and expensive. These costs and our home shortage are not isolated to one town or region. It is structural, systemic, and statewide,” said Laura Mitchell, executive director of the Maine Affordable Housing Coalition.
“LD 1829 sets us on a better path,” Mitchell added. “Maine communities will always be able to shape their futures, but with the understanding that solving our shared housing challenge requires consistency and commitment at all levels of government.”
“This a significant step toward addressing Maine’s housing shortage,” said State Sen. Rick Bennett (R-Oxford).
Bennett said the legislation “respects local communities and strengthens individual property rights.”
“This law cuts through outdated and overly restrictive regulations that have limited the ability of Mainers to make reasonable use of their own land,” Bennett added.
“I’m proud to have supported this bipartisan legislation that will help more Maine people secure housing they can afford.”
The bill will now go to Gov. Janet Mills for her signature and final approval.
Randy Seaver is the editor and founder of the Biddeford Gazette. He may be contacted by email: randy@randyseaver.com
NEVER MISS ANOTHER UPDATE!Subscribe for free today!
I view this past week in Augusta as transitional. Committees, including my own, finished their work on bills and the bulk of the activity began moving from the committee room to the floors of each chamber.
The week began on a stressful note personally. I went to the Memorial Day ceremony at Waterhouse Field, but had to leave before it began due to a family health matter (not to worry – everyone is okay now). This same issue kept me from being able to attend session on Tuesday, making it the first session day I have missed this term.
My absence Tuesday from roll call votes is excused due to the compelling personal reasons for my absence. Still, I hate missing any vote. Fortunately, it does not appear that my vote alone would have swung the outcome on any measures on Tuesday.
State Rep. Marc Malon (D-Biddeford)
Among the measures I would have supported on Tuesday (and look forward to supporting on enactment) are two bills for active transportation and trails along defunct rail corridors.
As the Maine Sunday Telegram noted in their lead editorial today, these measures are modeled off the economic success of the Eastern Trail which runs through our community. While I am supportive of expanding rail transit where it is viable, I have not seen compelling evidence that these corridors would be viable anytime soon, and this is an excellent use for them. I am proud to support the Transportation Committee’s bipartisan work on this issue.
Though I missed session on Tuesday, things stabilized enough for me to be able to remotely attend and participate in the last full meeting of the Housing and Economic Development Committee later that day. We worked and voted on three bills dealing with very important issues.
After long, occasionally challenging conversations regarding two bills to amend the Growth Management Act, I joined a majority of the committee in supporting a compromise version of LD 1940, which makes badly needed updates to the Act to enable smarter growth principles and development where it makes sense. The compromise incorporates feedback from municipalities and their planners and gives them options rather than mandating one pathway from the state.
There was also merit to LD 1751, which proposed more modest changes and would still be a step forward, but while I wanted to support both I believe LD 1940 is the better policy and that is what I decided to throw my full support behind. These measures took us deep into the weeds of policymaking over development and how Maine can align its goals on housing, economic development, and our environment. While it was charged at times, I believe we landed in a very good place.
“Overall, the Housing and Economic Development Committee was very productive this session, and it benefited from the thoughtfulness of all of its members (from both parties).”
— Marc Malon
I also was proud to cast my vote in favor of LD 1829, sponsored by Speaker Ryan Fecteau, which makes needed updates to zoning requirements and makes the laws clearer for folks interested in creating more housing.
The Speaker worked hard with Rep. Amanda Collamore (R-Pittsfield) on a compromise which makes sense for all Maine communities while respecting their differences. The vote was unanimous, which is significant given the history of bills dealing with zoning. Building more housing remains imperative, and this bill will help.
Overall, the Housing and Economic Development Committee was very productive this session, and it benefited from the thoughtfulness of all of its members (from both parties). Perhaps it was due to the subject matter and the fact that we kept the culture wars out of the committee room, but even members whom I have sharp disagreements with on other subjects engaged in good faith discussions over the bills we worked. Not everything was unanimous of course, but we never disagreed on the underlying facts behind the policies we debated. When facts matter, good process is possible we can accomplish a great deal.
I was able to return to Augusta on Wednesday and Thursday, which were spent in the House Chamber. We voted on a number of items. These included:
– Very close votes on a measure, LD 301, to clarify the Public Utilities Commission’s authority to engage in performance-based ratemaking. Like many bills from the Energy Utilities and Technology Committee (EUT) this bill is highly technical and dense. It takes a lot of studying to understand! But these bills are very important as they deal with the vital and sensitive issues of how to best regulate utilities, protect consumers, and meet state economic development and climate goals. I believed LD 301 made sense and voted in favor.
* We voted 108-33 (making it bipartisan) to support funding for the University of Maine System, whose importance needs no explanation.
* We opposed a wholly unnecessary measure out of my other committee, Veterans and Legal Affairs (VLA), which proposed a constitutional amendment stating that only citizens can vote in our elections. We opposed this for a very good reason: it is already the case that only citizens can vote in our elections. Statute makes it crystal clear that only citizens can vote in all Maine elections, including municipal (and town ordinances cannot change that as state law supersedes them). This bill was brought forward to perpetuate a myth and spread disinformation. It failed, as it should have.
* Bills from the Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Committee (IFW) don’t normally garner a ton of attention, but three did on Thursday. On a mostly party-line vote, we approved a budget initiative from the Department to support their programs, which bolster sportsmen and our outdoor economy. This measure was strongly backed by the Sportsmen’s Alliance of Maine (SAM).
It remains unclear why there was opposition, but the few arguments I heard against it were not compelling to me.
A bipartisan majority of us rejected a bill which would allow youth hunters to hunt on Sundays. For those unaware, Sunday hunting has long been a touchy issue. It is not currently allowed, and that is not simply due to old-fashioned “blue laws.” To make a long story short, most hunting in Maine is conducted on privately-owned land as allowed by the landowner. Multiple surveys and studies have shown that both landowners and hunters alike enjoy (reasonably, in my view) having one day each week where there is a reprieve and precautions are not needed for folks enjoying the land for non-hunting purposes. If Sunday hunting were to be allowed, more landowners would post their land and prevent hunting. This would be a blow to our hunting traditions. This is why I opposed the measure.
I also voted against a measure to establish a Constitutional Right to hunt and fish in Maine. For one, I do not think it is at all necessary. Mainers enjoy broad hunting and fishing rights (as they should!) and they are not at risk. This measure is also broad and vague, which creates confusion that will surely lead to litigation. We don’t need that. It also could open the door to Sunday hunting.
I was in the minority voting in opposition, but it is unclear whether or not this measure will move forward because a constitutional amendment needs to receive a two-thirds vote on enactment and it did not receive that on Thursday (though it was close). I support our hunting and fishing traditions, and am likely to oppose any restrictions on what is currently allowed. But this measure went too far and was poorly drafted.
I also would like to note that one of my bills, LD 641 which bolsters the Housing Problem Solving Program at MaineHousing in support of homelessness diversion efforts, was unanimously enacted by the House and now goes to the Special Appropriations Table, where all bills with fiscal notes go. I am working on ways to secure the funding for this vital program which prevents people from becoming unhoused in the first place.
These next few weeks will be busy as we move through the remainder of our work. We will have some late nights and will tackle some very important and sometimes-controversial issues. I’ll keep you posted as we go.
In the meantime, let’s remember to take good care of each other, respect our neighbors, and support our community.
State Rep. Marc Malon is currently serving his second term representing a portion of Biddeford in the Maine House of Representatives. He is also the party affairs director for the Maine Democratic Party. He may be contacted at: Marc.Malon@legislature.maine.gov
The views and opinions presented here are solely those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Biddeford Gazette or its publisher.
Never miss another update! from the Biddeford Gazette! Subscribe for free today!
Editor’s note:The following is a response that Biddeford City Council President Liam LaFountain sent to a resident who expressed concerns about this year’s municipal budget.
By Liam LaFountain
Thank you for taking the time to write and for your thoughtful engagement with this year’s city budget. Your questions about affordability, sustainability, and fiscal discipline are essential. I appreciate the opportunity to respond and provide additional context on this year’s proposed budget.
Your recognition of the value that organizations like Heart of Biddeford, McArthur Library, and our food security and cultural institutions bring to the city is deeply appreciated. These organizations stretch every dollar and are actively engaged in fundraising and collaboration. They are not resting on municipal support alone.
For example, Heart of Biddeford, to which the Budget Committee awarded $110,000 this year (a 10% increase from last year), operates on a total budget of $270,500—meaning the City’s share is approximately 41%. In return, they run 16 community events (many spanning multiple days or weeks), manage the Art of Biddeford initiative, conduct business training, and support downtown vibrancy year-round.
Biddeford City Councilor Liam LaFountain
McArthur Library, a private nonprofit that functions as Biddeford’s public library, requested $1.25 million, and the Budget Committee awarded $1 million (a 33% increase from last year). That represents 48% of its $2.081 million annual budget. With 4,825 active cardholders and 6,500 in-person visits each month from Biddeford residents, it remains one of our city’s most widely used public services.
While the library holds a $6 million endowment, it’s my understanding that they are only able to draw down 4–5% annually per the terms of Robert McArthur’s will, and those funds are restricted in their use. I recognize the City’s contribution is substantial, but so is the library’s role in our city’s physical and social infrastructure.
Particularly in times of economic strain, the library’s value as one of the few free and welcoming places to access books, the internet, programming, and essential public services becomes even more critical. Every time I reflect on its role and its municipal funding, I am reminded of both childhood memories of the library and a quote from President Franklin D. Roosevelt: “I have an unshaken conviction that democracy can never be undermined if we maintain our library resources and a national intelligence capable of utilizing them.” With reduced federal and state support for libraries, Biddeford is fortunate to have one so deeply rooted in public service. Without the McArthur Library, Biddeford would need to build, staff, and maintain a municipal library from the ground up—a much more expensive alternative.
On the question of duplication and collaboration in food services, I believe the three food-related nonprofits supported by the City provide distinct, highly targeted services and collaborate extensively:
In-A-Pinch Non-Food Pantry: The Budget Committee awarded $4,500 (18% of their total budget). 100% of funding goes to supplies and services, and there is no paid staff.
Bon Appétit Community Meal Program: the Budget Committee awarded $24,000 (40% of their budget); volunteer-run, serving 26,000 hot meals in 2024—about 92 cents per meal for the City’s contribution.
Youth Full Maine: the Budget Committee awarded $10,000 (3% of their budget), supporting food distributions at Rotary Park and downtown, and direct deliveries to school pantries and teen programs. They served over 600 Biddeford residents last year—about $16 per person served in City funds.
Altogether, the Budget Committee awarded $38,500 to these these three organization and their food security efforts this year. I wish we did not have to allocate a single dollar to these programs. But the alternative—letting people go hungry—is not one I can support.
Biddeford Community Gardens, which the Budget Committee awarded $17,871 (28% of their budget), served over 500 residents in 2024. They operate in city parks and Housing Authority properties, charge no fees (but require a work service component for beneficiaries), and provide Bon Appétit Community Meal Program and Youth Full Maine with fresh produce (another key example of their collaborations). They also collaborate with over a dozen organizations across Biddeford and help maintain and beautify portions of Biddeford parks and public spaces.
Regarding holiday lighting, the Budget Committee awarded $5,000, not $20,000. These funds allow Heart of Biddeford and La Kermesse to install battery-powered lights in areas without electric access, helping create a welcoming winter atmosphere throughout the downtown without drawing on City staff time.
On local history and cultural preservation, the Budget Committee awarded:
$7,875 to the Biddeford Cultural and Heritage Center (29% of their budget), which maintains archives and offers year-round programming.
$7,500 to the Biddeford Historical Society (33% of their budget), which maintains our area’s oldest meetinghouse (7 Meetinghouse Road) and several historic cemeteries.
$2,625 to the Biddeford Mills Museum (6% of their budget). The museum is entirely volunteer-run and has no paid staff. In 2024, the Museum logged 1,213 volunteer hours, welcomed 525 museum visitors, led 438 standard tours, 16 special tours, and provided guided educational tours to 418 students about Biddeford’s industrial history.
The Budget Committee awarded $18,000 in total to preserve and promote Biddeford’s history through these three organizations—about 78 cents per resident.
In summary: The Budget Committee received $1,974,957 in funding requests from social service and nonprofit partners and awarded$1,376,486.50—about 69.7% of what was requested. Some requests were partially funded, and others not funded at all.
These awards make up 2.9% of the City’s $47,821,494 municipal appropriation. In contrast, the largest cost drivers of the municipal budget and use of tax dollars remain Public Safety ($14,773,566) and Public Works ( $6,051,410)—with $20,824,976 budgeted this year across Police, Fire, EMS, Public Works, sanitation, and city infrastructure. The largest portion of those costs is for salaries and wages for the essential staff who protect public safety, plow and maintain roads, pick up trash, and keep the city’s systems functioning year-round.
On the education side, while the overall budget increased by 5.84%, 4.18% of that growth comes from the School Department. The City’s portion rose 1.44%, and County expenses increased 0.22%. Education costs are rising due to higher wages for teachers and support staff, increased needs for student services, and a sharp reduction in state funding.
With 60% of students economically disadvantaged and 21% qualifying for special education, the state covers just 37% of Biddeford’s total school budget—leaving 63% to local taxpayers. At the same time, Biddeford educates students at a cost of $15,273 per pupil, below the state average of $17,028 and significantly less than South Portland ($19,592) and Saco ($17,347).
That efficiency also means we are investing less per student than many of our peers—not necessarily a point of pride, but a reflection of the financial constraints the School Committee and City Council must navigate. While local taxpayers may experience some relief from lower education spending per student compared to the state average and our peers, the consequences are borne by our students and educators through reduced resources and increased strain. These students are not only learners today—they are the future leaders, workers, and contributors to the strength of this city tomorrow.
Through more than 10 public meetings, several other councilors and I proposed dozens of amendments to the budget to improve efficiency and reduce the tax commitment.
I’d be remiss if I did not also mention that over the past nine weeks, through more than 10 public meetings, several other councilors and I proposed dozens of amendments to the budget to improve efficiency and reduce the tax commitment. Some succeeded—such as reducing expenses for conferences and training, dues and memberships, user licenses, advertising, and cutting a transfer that subsidized the mooring program. Others, like adjusting development-related fees, were partially successful.
Efforts to raise dispatch service fees charged to other municipalities did not gain traction. I also advocated for increased funding for municipal building maintenance and capital investments—a line item that decreased this year despite growing need—but that, too, was not adopted. Unfortunately, the consequence of underfunding this area is often deferred maintenance that becomes more expensive to address later and can disrupt basic services if not resolved in time.
These were difficult calls. None of us entered this process expecting it to be easy. But every amendment offered reflected an attempt to balance long-term responsibility with today’s fiscal realities.
I understand the concern that the continued growth of the city budget is not sustainable for many Biddeford residents. That is why I believe it is critical that both City government and the organizations we support continue to ask tough questions, pursue efficiencies, and seek out alternative funding sources. This year’s process included many of those conversations.
While the final outcome is not perfect, it reflects real attempts to prioritize essential services while holding the line where we could. The choices ahead will continue to be difficult, and the pressure to do more with less is real. But I believe that preserving affordability and maintaining the services that support our city’s well-being are not mutually exclusive goals—both are part of what it means to meet these fiscal challenges head-on.
In closing, thank you again for raising these questions and for participating in this process. Thoughtful public input like yours plays a meaningful role in shaping how our city is governed and funded. I hope the information I’ve shared helps clarify how and why certain allocations were made, even if not everyone agrees with every outcome. I don’t agree with every allocation in this budget either.
I apologize for the length of this reply—it is difficult to capture two months of Budget Committee work, and the many hours of staff time that went into crafting this document. This year’s budget, like everyone I’ve been part of, is imperfect, but it reflects an earnest effort to balance what we value with what we can realistically sustain.
Thank you again for writing. Please reach out at any time.
__________________
NOTE: If you would like to submit a column to the Biddeford Gazette, please contact us
Never miss another update! Subscribe for free today!
During a sometimes terse and heated meeting, Biddeford Mayor Marty Grohman defended the way the city has acted during the review of a controversial pier that the University of New England wants to construct on the Saco River.
The nearly hour-long meeting was held at the request of John Schafer, the former chair of the Biddeford Harbor Commission and a Hills Beach resident who has been outspoken about the need for transparency during the review process.
City Attorney Harry Center also took part in the late Monday morning meeting in Grohman’s second-floor office at City Hall.
Center stressed that the meeting was strictly informal and not part of the review process. “The mayor has simply set aside some time to listen to the concerns of a constituent,” he said.
Hills Beach resident and former chair of Biddeford’s Harbor Commission John Schafer points to a diagram that shows inadequate depth where UNE is hoping to build a 177-foot pier to dock its research vessel near the mouth of the Saco River (Seaver photo)
No one from the university was at the meeting, and other media outlets declined invitations to attend, according to Schafer.
Schafer’s concerns center on three essential points: the impact and necessary removal of at least seven private moorings on the river if the project is approved; concerns about the water depth where the university wants to construct its pier; and the process that has been used to review the university’s proposal.
The permitting process for the proposed pier is complex and multi-layered, requiring the review and approval by several state, federal and local agencies.
Earlier this year, UNE cleared two major hurdles in the review process, winning approval from both the Saco River Corridor Commission and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
But a very critical part of the review process is expected to begin in just a few weeks when the Biddeford Planning Board begins its formal review of the proposal.
“I don’t have any say over what the Planning Board does or doesn’t do,” Grohman said during Monday’s meeting. “I simply appoint members, and those appointments are then confirmed by the council. I think we have a really good planning board, and I have full confidence in them.”
But Schafer said he is concerned about the lack of public input during the review process and how the city has approached the project thus far. He also criticized the university for its “lack of transparency” and for “bullying those who raise questions and concerns” about the proposed pier.
“I think [UNE’s] application is both incomplete and full of misinformation,” Schafer told the mayor. “Don’t you think it’s a bit presumptuous for a private entity to dictate how the city will review its application; to show no regard for those who have private moorings in that area just so they can construct a vanity pier?”
When contacted by the Biddeford Gazette, a university spokesperson declined an opportunity to address Schafer’s remarks.
“Since this was not an open meeting and a representative from UNE was not present, it would not be appropriate to comment on the conversation that took place,” wrote Sarah Delage in an email response. “UNE will continue to follow the public regulatory process, and we look forward to presenting our application to the Planning Board.”
Schafer said he and “a growing coalition of residents” have no problem with the university building a pier to dock its 60-foot research vessel. Instead, he says, all the concerns boil down to the exact location of the pier and the dismissal of public concerns about the project.
Survey says?
Schafer roundly criticized Grohman for allowing former City Manager James Bennett to “silence” the city’s harbormaster and assistant harbormaster last year, preventing them from participating in the city’s review of the proposal simply because they voiced concerns about the pier’s location.
But Grohman shot back and said Bennett was simply trying to avoid the appearance of bias. He also reminded Schafer that the harbormaster’s role – as outlined in city ordinances – is strictly an “advisory position,” a change that was first proposed by Schafer himself last year when he was chair of the harbor commission.
Schafer said a growing number of residents have serious concerns about a review process that seems to have a pre-ordained outcome, pointing to the results and comments found in a recent public survey about the project.
Nearly 40 percent of respondents indicated that they had a “very low” level of confidence in the city’s handling of the review process, while roughly 30 percent of respondents indicated that they had “moderately low” confidence in the city’s handling of the matter.
The online survey was conducted over several days in late April on a Facebook page called “UNE Pier Review,” a group that Schafer has helped organize.
The survey asked respondents a wide range of questions about the proposed pier and the review process thus far. The survey allowed respondents to maintain their anonymity.
The multi-question survey included feedback from 156 respondents, showing an overwhelming lack of public confidence on the issues of transparency and the mayor’s handling of the issue.
Nearly 40 percent of respondents indicated that they had “very low” level of confidence in the city’s handling of the review process. And roughly 30 percent of respondents indicated that they had “moderately low” confidence in the city’s handling of the matter.
City Attorney Harry Center (left) and Mayor Marty Grohman listen as John Schafer details his concerns about UNE’s proposal
Fewer than 10 percent of respondents indicated that they had “very high” confidence in the process, while slightly less than 20 percent of respondents indicated that they are not sure.
Many respondents added comments saying the city has been “too secretive” while other questioned the motives of city officials, speculating that some members of the city seem to have a “cozy relationship” with the university.
Grohman described the survey as “interesting,” but also said it was not a professional survey conducted by a polling firm.
“An anonymous survey is not something that a public permitting process could use, as it does not include an opportunity for all parties involved to publicly comment,” Grohman wrote in a text message to the Gazette after the meeting.
Schafer told the mayor that several mooring owners have already written to regulatory authorities stating quite plainly that they have “no intentions of moving their moorings where UNE wants to build their pier.”
Schafer also said that UNE has threatened the city with litigation if its desired location for the pier is not approved, referencing a letter sent to the city by Ron Schneider, the university’s lead attorney, several months before the university had submitted its application for review.
Grohman described Schafer as a good friend, and said he was happy to hear the concerns that were raised.
In a moment of levity during the meeting, Grohman pointed out that the mayor does not vote on or control the regulatory review process. “I don’t have the authority to change what sodas are sold in the vending machines downstairs,” Grohman laughed.
After the meeting Schafer said he very much appreciated the opportunity to share his concerns with the mayor. “Nothing in the meeting surprised me,” he said. “It’s about what I expected.”
Never miss another update! Subscribe for free today!
Blackout Percussion earns first place while Blizzard Winds secures second place.
By KAREN GARNETT
Biddeford’s Marching Arts program is closing out a remarkable season with top honors at the New England Scholastic Band Association (NESBA) Winter Percussion Finals. BlackOut Percussion earned first place, while Blizzard Winds secured a strong third-place finish, solidifying Biddeford’s standing as a powerhouse in the region.
Biddeford’s Marching Arts program was revived in 2019 after a decade-long hiatus and now bolsters 57 students from Biddeford High School and Biddeford Middle School. The program not only consists of BlackOut Percussion and Blizzard Winds but also BlackOut Percussion-B, a middle school concert-style percussion ensemble that represents the district’s commitment to cultivating musical excellence from an early age.
Biddeford’s Marching Arts Program, which consists of BlackOut Percussion (in white), BlackOut Percussion B (in black), and Blizzard Winds (in red). BlackOut Percussion earned first place, while Blizzard Winds secured a strong second-place finish, solidifying Biddeford’s standing as a powerhouse in the region. {Photo by Maureen Grandmaison Photography)
“We are so proud of what these students have accomplished this season,” said Michael Murphy, Biddeford High School Band Teacher and Marching Arts Director. “They’ve dedicated countless hours to rehearsals, shown tremendous growth as musicians and performers, and supported each other every step of the way. It’s incredibly rewarding to see their hard work recognized at such a high level.”
“We are so proud of what these students have accomplished this season.”
— Michael Murphy, BHS Band Teacher and Marching Arts director
Both BlackOut Percussion and Blizzard Winds have consistently placed first throughout the season in competitions on the NESBA and Maine Band Directors Association (MBDA) circuits. Their talent recently earned regional acclaim at the Dartmouth High School Winter Guard International (WGI) Regional Championships, with BlackOut Percussion placing first in percussion and Blizzard Winds taking second in the winds category. This season marks BlackOut Percussion’s second appearance on the national stage and Blizzard Winds’ first-ever performance at a Regional Championship, making their achievements even more remarkable.
For those who haven’t had the chance to experience these talented performers in action, the ensembles will cap off their season with a Friends and Family Finale Performance on Sunday, April 13, 2025, at 1:00 p.m. in the Biddeford High School Steve White Gym.
The community is invited to come celebrate these student musicians and their incredible accomplishments.
Karen Garnett is the communications director for the Biddeford-Saco school system. She can be reached atkgarnett@biddefordschools.me
Never miss another update! Subscribe for free today!
The last time I wrote to you, I spoke about the importance of MaineCare, our state’s version of the Medicaid program. MaineCare provides health care to low-income families and children, people with disabilities and pregnant women, and is overwhelmingly supported by Maine people.
I also wrote about how Maine faces the same challenge as many red and blue states – the cost of health care is rising and state budgets are having a hard time keeping up.
This fiscal year, which runs until the end of June 2025, we face a $117 million gap in MaineCare. If unaddressed, providers already facing financial challenges would be put in an even more difficult situation. In some dire cases, providers could be forced to shut their doors – and when those doors shut, they shut for all of us.
State Sen. Henry Ingwersen (D-York)
In the last month, members of the Legislature’s budget committee worked hard to reach a bipartisan agreement on a supplemental budget that would fix this gap and get funding out the door quickly.
I was very pleased when, in early February, they reached a deal and voted unanimously to recommend passage of the supplemental budget to the full legislature. However, my Republican colleagues suddenly walked back on the deal and began insisting that to earn their support, we would need to make cuts to MaineCare and housing assistance.
While I disagree with these cuts, these are large policy conversations that can certainly be had as the Legislature moves to construct a biennial budget – which covers the next two fiscal years – in the coming weeks. Right now, Maine people are counting on us to keep MaineCare afloat and to do it quickly.
A unique aspect of Maine law requires a two-thirds vote in the Maine House and Senate to approve emergency funding, which means strong, bipartisan support. Without this two-thirds vote needed to get this funding out the door, the Department of Health and Human Services will begin cutting back funds owed to hospitals, nursing homes, and home and community-based services as early as March.
We have continued to hold votes, and Republicans continue to oppose the plan they had previously agreed to. The more votes we take, the less I understand why there is opposition.
–State Sen. Henry Ingwersen
We have continued to hold votes, and Republicans continue to oppose the plan they had previously agreed to. The more votes we take, the less I understand why there is opposition. Our most rural communities rely heavily on keeping MaineCare functional – 45 percent of folks in Washington County; 40 percent in Aroostook County and an average of 37 percent across Oxford, Franklin, Somerset and Piscataquis counties are enrolled in MaineCare.
Many of us in the Legislature are here to make sure that our rural areas are not left behind.
In addition to the people covered by MaineCare in these areas, the small health care providers that strengthen our small towns are at most risk of harm. The Maine Primary Care Association recently told the Press Herald, “Health centers operate in small, rural towns in each county, and are also present and essential in Maine’s bigger cities; like many other health care providers, they are not designed to weather endless instability in payments.”
As I’ve learned in my time on the Legislature’s Health and Human Services Committee, Maine already has many “care deserts” across our state, forcing folks to travel long distances to get the services they need. I am deeply worried that not approving this funding means the problem would only get worse.
Every day in Augusta, as I chair the Health and Human Services Committee, I hear more stories of folks struggling with access to health care. Folks like Vickie, from Norway, who shared how her insurance did not cover services she felt would have made a real difference in her mental health care.
We need to be moving forward on health care access, not backward. I stand ready to support critical funding for MaineCare, and I hope my colleagues will join me to find a path forward for Maine people.
The people of my district and the rest of Maine are not the least bit interested in the political games taking place here in Augusta. They want to make sure that they continue to get the quality health care they deserve for their families. They deserve no less from us.
As always, if you have any questions about the information here or if you would like to reach out with a comment, question or concern, you can reach out to me any time. If you want to stay up-to-date on what we’re working on in Augusta, please sign up for my email newsletter at mainesenate.org or visit my Facebook page at facebook.com/IngwersenForMaine.
Henry Ingwersen represents District 32 in the Maine Senate, which includes Biddeford and the surrounding communities of Arundel, Dayton, Hollis and Lyman. He can be reached at Henry.Ingwersen@legislature.maine.gov or 207-287-1515
Editor’s note: The views expressed here are those of the author. If you would like to contribute an opinion column, please contact us at biddefordgazette@gmail.com This column was also published in the Biddeford-Saco Courier
Never miss another update! Subscribe for free today!
This week at the Statehouse was front-loaded and compact. Many of my colleagues traveled on the biannual Maine Development Foundation tour across the state, learning about economic development particularly in Penobscot and Aroostook Counties from Wednesday through Friday. I’ve always wanted to attend, but it’s difficult to manage with family obligations. One of these days I will.
On Monday, the Veterans and Legal Affairs Committee met, adopted committee rules, held one public hearing and voted on two lines relevant to our work in the Governor’s supplemental budget. One of those lines appropriated money to the Secretary of State’s office to offset costs associated with the 2024 election which were higher than anticipated.
State Rep. Marc Malon
Funding our election systems is critical, and I voted to support this one-time appropriation. The other line was requested by the Secretary of State to cover their Maine IT costs, which were billed to them at a higher amount than expected. I was in the minority in voting Yes on this, but agreed with my colleagues that the Appropriations Committee should ask tough questions of the Department of Administrative and Financial Services for why they hiked their IT bill (to the tune of $19k).
Tuesday, we had a relatively uneventful session where we referred many bills to committees. I also announced to colleagues that the Franco American Caucus was going to begin its work and that folks should think of individuals in their communities who might deserve nominations for the Franco American Hall of Fame.
After Session, the Housing and Economic Development Committee met and listened to the report from HR&A Advisors on how to address the state’s 84,000-unit shortfall. The report was comprehensive and gave us significant food for thought. NewsCenter produced an excellent story on their presentation and published the full report here: https://www.newscentermaine.com/…/97-847e89d5-dd04-4678…
The speech, like any of these addresses, contained plenty to like and dislike. That’s normal. It’s a tough budget this year,
After committee, I attended a lecture at the Holocaust and Human Rights Center of Maine commemorating the 50th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz and Birkenau. The lecture, partly organized by my colleague Rep. Sam Zager, offered us a sobering look at how Hitler was able to quickly consolidate power and destroy German democracy, a necessary condition for him to further pursue his plans, including the planned extermination of Jews. There are serious lessons to learn from this history which I hope we will take to heart.
Following this presentation, we returned to the State House for Governor Mills’s State of the State Address. The speech, like any of these addresses, contained plenty to like and dislike. That’s normal. It’s a tough budget this year, and the Appropriations Committee will carefully review her budget proposals to see how they can be improved.
I liked that she stood strong in her commitment to funding MaineCare, which covers a significant percentage of Mainers, as well as 55% of the costs of public education, revenue sharing, and free school lunches. I did not like the stance she took against adopting red flag gun laws which would strengthen public safety. No one agrees 100 percent of the time. When I liked what she said, I stood and clapped. When I didn’t, I politely remained in my seat.
What was not helpful, however, is that one of my legislative colleagues recruited protesters to the State House to shout at and heckle the Governor, her family, and legislators from both parties. One of the hecklers I recognized as a former political candidate who believes the horrific Sandy Hook shootings were a hoax. People have the right to protest, and the right to be as rude to us as they want. That’s fine! But we have the right to not be persuaded by such antics, and I wasn’t.
Finally, I would be remiss if I did not note the impact that certain federal actions have on Maine. I would love for my posts to stay focused on state policy, but some actions are so impactful that I can’t avoid mentioning them.
The chaos and confusion caused by the federal OMB memo on Tuesday blocking the funding of all grants and federal funding to programs that Mainers rely on was unacceptable. Though the memo was rescinded after significant outcry, it put people’s livelihoods in question. These programs included LIHEAP, Meals on Wheels, and numerous initiatives at the University of Maine. That is no way to govern.
Just yesterday the Trump administration announced significant tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China. I am not a free trade fundamentalist, but these tariffs are ill-conceived and very harmful to Maine consumers. Canada is our largest trading partner and a trade war with them hurts Maine workers too.
Overall, these tariffs will raise prices on energy, heating, food, housing, and cars. This is not what we need, and I will add my voice to the chorus demanding that Trump walk this back.
State Rep. Marc Malon is a Democrat representing a portion of Biddeford in the Maine Legislature. He may be contacted at:Marc.Malon@legislature.maine.gov
The views and opinions presented here are solely those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Biddeford Gazette or its publisher.
The Gazette is always happy to consider reader-submitted commentary for the Community Voices section of the Biddeford Gazette. For more information, please email: biddefordgazette@gmail.com.
Never miss another update! Subscribe to the Biddeford Gazette for free today!
THE BIDDEFORD GAZETTE 