Candidate Charles Sidman Responds to Chamber Questionnaire

As part of our goal to be a conduit that connects businesses, community, and government through effective communication, we asked each of the Bar Harbor Town Council candidates several questions. We have published Candidate Charles Sidman's responses below. A posting with all candidate responses can be found at www.visitbarharbor.com/blog/chamber-blog-5694/post/town-council-candidates-respond-to-chamber-questionnaire-all-candidates-42752.

A couple of notes before you start reading:

• Candidates were limited to 200 words per response. To be fair to every candidate, if someone did go over the limit, their response was cut off at the 200th word and a note added at the end of their response with the amount of words they exceeded the response by.
• The questionnaire should NOT be viewed as an endorsement of any candidate. The Bar Harbor Chamber of Commerce does not currently provide endorsements for candidates of any race. The information provided below should be viewed as an opportunity for candidates to let you know where they stand on several topics affecting our community as you head to the polls this June.
• VOTE - The Annual Town Meeting for Bar Harbor will be held on Tuesday, June 2nd and the June Ballot election will be held on Tuesday, June 9th. Mark your calendars and make a plan to vote.

Thank you for reading,

Your Bar Harbor Chamber of Commerce Team
 

Charles Sidman
 

Section 1: General Vision

Question: Briefly describe your professional background and any previous service to the Town of Bar Harbor. What are the two to three primary pillars of your campaign platform?

Candidate Answer:

Professionally I am a long-time and accomplished scientist and business person (operating as well as investing), both of which are based on reality and practicality rather than wishes and fantasies. In Bar Harbor civic affairs, I have served on the Warrant Committee, led and defended several successful Citizen Initiatives (to compensate for Council inaction or resistance), advocated and fought for uniform rule of law and fairness (to protect everyone), and attended (and written about) more committee and Council meetings than many members. My pillars of public service are 1. Success and win:win for the general interdependent community rather than win:lose for one constituency over another, 2. Consistency, commitment and persistence until practical results are achieved, instead of endless words, wishes and kicking of hard choices down the road, and 3. Mutual respect and collaboration even through differences.

Question: How can the town better balance the needs of seasonal tourism with its year--round residents?

Candidate Answer:

With respect, this question poses a false equivalence and dichotomy. Year-round residents democratically decide (i.e. vote on) the community’s direction, with seasonal tourism being effectively a stakeholder but not a shareholder. Nevertheless, tourism is one of the major drivers of our economy and well-being, and a major occupation for many. It is not therefore an us-versus-them situation, but an overall balancing by year-round residents according to their senses of their own priorities and benefits. We should also bear in mind that while year-round residents are the primary deciders here, they do not own Acadia National Park (the nation does), even though we benefit especially by being privileged to live here and enjoy it. We are therefore effectively stewards as well as managers. Recent votes and legal actions may be regretted by some as divisive, but have been necessary due to multiple perspectives and the balancing of different legitimate obligations and priorities not being simple to untangle. This is the unavoidable reality of a diverse democracy, but I feel that we are getting through it successfully.

Question: What is your approach to the town budget? Where do you see opportunities for cost-saving, and where is further investment non-negotiable?

Candidate Answer:

First and foremost, we must spend within our means, which we have not been doing for many years now. Lots of shiny wants and wishes have been approved, without the long-term finances (other than constantly rising taxes) to support them. Since additional revenue streams are demonstrably difficult to identify or practically to obtain, I feel it necessary and unavoidable that we pare back total town expenses to a level in line with historical prices and inflation (which correspond directly with residents’ and businesses’ pocketbooks and resources.) Otherwise we will become a town of and for the wealthy only, and a business-benefitting theme park for tourists. Bringing expenses back in line with resources inevitably entails painful reductions in staff, equipment and programs, with all future allocations prioritized within the funding realistically identified and available. New investments can always be considered, but only within the context of the overall budget, with anything new being balanced by a reduction elsewhere, for the overall best result to the town while maintaining fiscal sustainability for and responsibility to everyone.

Section 2: Tourism Management

Question: How can the town better ensure infrastructure (parking, traffic, waste, etc.) remains functional for both visitors and locals?

Candidate Answer:

Commonly available infrastructure should be supported by those who actually use it (think toll roads, parking facilities, etc.) Of these, waste handling and disposal may be the most straightforward to allocate and charge for appropriately as we have multiple successful examples, so as to cease being an equal burden on the entire community. Parking similarly should be charged to those who use it, with possibly enlarged fee station zones and/or pay-for-use parking lot(s) or garage(s) as additional options. Priority discounts for locals make sense. Traffic patterns may be the most difficult to optimize, requiring constant tinkering and experimentation.

Question: What opportunity do you see for tourism management that would enhance both the resident and visitor experience with Bar Harbor?

Candidate Answer:

No easy answer here, as one person’s problem (ex. overcrowding) is another’s opportunity (potential customers!) An overall sense of and respect for this tradeoff, and commitment to an optimum balance for the greatest number (determined democratically) is probably the best we can do.

Question: The lodging moratorium was put into place in November 2024. The current extension of the moratorium is set to expire on July 27th and will be one of the first issues the new council we be expected to address. What facts do you see as driving the need to repeal or extend the moratorium? If you do support extending, what work do you believe needs to be completed before you would vote to repeal the moratorium or let the moratorium expire?

Candidate Answer:

This moratorium has not been our finest hour, and illustrates much of what I consider amateurish dysfunction by our town government. IMHO, the moratorium was enacted as a political hand-waving response to the emotions and concerns of one segment of the community, and as the only available route seen able to stop a particular project. It had little in the way of specific goals or criteria, and abused the property rights of those engaged in professional development and housing in similar fashion to the much more restrictive temporary lodging rules also enacted recently, that even more regretfully impaired the economic security of a different segment of the community (the many less wealthy, elderly or retired residents who rely on rental income to enable their continued existence in an ever-more expensive town.) In neither case was the full picture or the totality of effects (or lack thereof) well considered. In order to continue the moratorium, I would need to see well-defined and attainable goals, considered in the contexts of rule of law and a balance of benefits for all.