
Presque Isle City Manager Jim Bennett, one of two finalists for the job of town manager in Brunswick, answered a number of tough questions from Brunswick residents, ranging from his departure as Lewiston’s city administrator to his dealings with Casella Waste Systems.
Speaking at a public Q&A session Thursday at Town Hall, Bennett likened his departure in Lewiston to coaching a sports team that comes under new management.
“They made a decision that they wanted a different coach, and exercised their right … and bought me out,” said Bennett, who was the first to broach the subject as he introduced himself.
According to the Sun Journal, Lewiston’s city council in 2009 voted to buyout the remainder of Bennett’s $100,000-a-year contract, after a tumultus year in which he clashed over the authority of that council.
“I wasn’t fired,” Bennett said, responding to questions over his employment history by Brunswick resident Richard Fisco, who drew parallels to the departure of former Brunswick Town Manager Gary Brown earlier this year.
Bennett said, as a town administrator who had to lay people off, “when you make changes, you inevitably make enemies.”
Bennett said that “other than the current manager, every manager has left under duress” in Lewiston, and that his philosophy as an administra- tor changed as a result of that experience.
“It’s not about getting the community to select a right answer, it’s about how I get them to accomplish what they want to accomplish,” Bennett said.
The manager echoed that statement when asked how he would handle the dispute over a massive passenger train shed to be built in the West Brunswick neighborhood, noting that his role would be as “a facilitator.”
“At the end of the day, my job is to implement what the council wants me to do,” Bennett said.
Town Councilor Jane Millett wanted Bennett to speak on his dealings with Casella Waste Systems while in managerial positions in Westbrook and Lewiston, specifically as it related to testimony submitted to the Maine Board of Environmental Protection by former Freeport Town Manager/Regional Waste Systems Chairman Dale Olmstead in early 2001.
Olmstead had testified that the city of Westbrook opted not to continue its relationship with the quasimunicipal Regional Waste Systems, and instead entered into an agreement with Casella, which built a transfer station in Westbrook. Olmstead also testified that there had been inaccurate statements made to the environmental board by Westbrook officials regarding Westbrook’s dealings with RWS.
Several years later, Casella had been in talks to manage a landfill in Lewiston at a time when Bennett was city administrator. According to a 2007 article in the Sun Journal, the deal would have lowered property taxes in Lewiston, but was rejected unanimously by the Lewiston City Council, in part, over fears of what the facility would do to the town’s image.
On Thursday, Bennett said he has dealt with Casella the same way he would with any other waste management company.
“I’ve been involved with a lot of trash stuff,” Bennett said. “No business is more cutthroat than trash.”
Bennett also admitted that the Lewiston landfill negotiations “was a pretty major mistake, the way we handled it” before that council rejected the deal.
Bennett said he was proudest to have worked to improve the images of communities he managed, such as Westbrook, Lewiston and Old Orchard Beach.
He noted that he helped Old Orchard Beach through a difficult period with its finances, and that he helped Westbrook after the decline of a mill there.
In Presque Isle, Bennett said that “we accomplished everything the council asked us to do.”
He said he wanted to make the move to Brunswick, in part, because his wife was a native of the town and their daughter is attending Bowdoin College.
“Brunswick is a great community. I know it well,” Bennett said.
jswinconeck@timesrecord.com
The Times Record Sustaining Sponsor
We believe a community must be informed to thrive. bowdoin.edu
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less