By Ward Peck

Editor

    When it comes to Cape Elizabeth’s Fort Williams,
questions about what to do with the 90-acre former military
installation and how to fund it have been a near constant struggle for
the town since it paid $200,000 for the property in 1964. After a
10-year struggle, the town resolved the former question– create a park–
but the latter question vexes public officials and citizens to this day.

    Home to one of Maine’s most visible and well-know
landmarks, Portland Head Light, the park draws tourists and townspeople
alike for a wide variety of uses and activities, yet years of frugal
stewardship of the park’s structures, battlements, horticulture and
facilities have created a laundry list of improvements that outstrip
the public’s ability and willingness to pay.

    As recently as November of last year, citizens of
Cape Elizabeth reaffirmed their commitment to shouldering the
responsibility for park maintenance and improvements by rejecting a
scheme to install parking meters. Yet it remains to be seen to what
extent the town’s property taxpayers are willing to see their taxes
increase to that end.

    Today, oversight and financing of park operations
are divided among three groups of citizens. The Fort Williams Advisory
Commission (FWAC), a town council appointed board, is charged with
overseeing the day-to-day operations of the park as well as formulating
park policies and maintenance and improvement priorities. A relatively
new group, the Fort Williams Charitable Foundation (FWCF) was formed in
2001 to raise private funds, including donations and grants, for the
park’s operation, maintenance and capital improvements. The Cape
Elizabeth Town Council has the ultimate authority over the park and is
responsible for budgeting public funds and enacting policies related to
the park.

    The current budget, adopted in May of 2006 provided
$123,000 for park maintenance and operation, with roughly $90,000 of
that sum dedicated to paying park personnel. The Town also maintains a
capital improvement fund, which ccurrently has a balance of roughly
$68,000. That fund is the vehicle by which some contributions to the
FWCF are spent, according to Town Manager Michael McGovern, but the
bulk of the capital fund revenues come from fees for park rentals,
coin-operated revenue and other revenue generated by the park.

    According to FWCF President Joel Russ, the
foundation currently has $75,000 in assets, of which $50,000 is
reserved to establish the foundation’s endowment. The FWCF currently
maintains a policy of designating 50 percent of its contributions to
help fund the endowment and 50 percent to be contributed to the Capital
Improvement Fund.

    According to Ellen Nadeau, of the FWAC, the capital
needs of the park are substantial and well outstrip the current funding
sources. Among those needs are: repairing or replacing the concrete
bleachers (also known as the amphitheater), repairing stone walls,
exploring the installation of permanent bathroom facilities, improving
or securing several of the artillery batteries, making the site of the
Goddard Mansion safe, whether by razing the existing structure or
maintaining it as a ruin, and reconfiguring the main entrance.

    Other less daunting improvements include new
historical signage, lighting the flagpole, cleaning up the pond and
improving the park’s horticulture and arboriculture.

    Members of the council, the FWAC and FWCF recently
met to explore ways to harmonize their activities and explore ways to
fund the park’s needs. Russ told the group that the foundation was
looking to professionalize and expand its fundraising activities, which
up to this point has largely focused on appeals to town citizens.
McGovern cited the recent defeat of the parking meter referendum as
evidence that taxpayers are willing to increase the park’s operational
budget, although Councilor Anne Swift-Kayatta warned she believed the
vote did not represent such mandate and would resist any significant
increase in the budget that results in a tax increase.

    One suggestion put forward by Council Chair Paul
McKenney to establish a composite body to steer a renewed push for park
improvements ran into resistance from members of the FWAC, who
interpreted the suggestion as duplicating their charge.

    Councilor Jim Rowe, who headed the workshop, said at
the outset that that concrete remedies for the park’s challenges were
not expected, rather, the meeting was intended to establish a dialog to
move a renewed emphasis on the park forward. The meeting yielded lively
discussions on the park and how it is used– whether it’s historical
significance and role as a tourist attraction should be emphasized or
whether its character as a rough and informal space for passive
recreation should be maintained. But by the end of the nearly two-hour
workshop, Rowe’s prediction that nothing would be resolved seemed to
hold up.