Planning board chair resigns amid dispute after council approves land-use ordinance

The Caribou Planning Board on Tuesday acknowledged a letter of resignation from its chair and spent the meeting debating whether to press the City Council to rescind a recently approved ordinance that planning-board members say bypassed the board’s process.

The resignation was read into the record; board members called the departure “unfortunate” and said the chair is “no longer with us.” Planning board members said they had identified a candidate to fill the chair position but that the prospect withdrew after witnessing how the council handled a recent meeting.

The dispute centers on three ordinances the council approved at its last meeting, identified at the planning-board meeting as ordinances 1, 2 and 3. Board members said the three measure relate to anti-blight, anti-nuisance and cannabis land-use rules. Several planning-board members said ordinance 3, the cannabis-related measure, was approved by the council even though the board expected an amendment to remove a requirement for the personal identification of a complainant.

One planning-board member described the council’s action as a “debacle” that discouraged a prospective appointee from serving. Another member said the board had worked through detailed review and multiple workshops and that the council’s action was an “insult to the planning board.”

A council liaison at the meeting said they had voted against ordinance 3 and planned to ask the council at its next meeting to rescind its vote, calling the council action, in their words, a violation of state and local standards and the city charter.

Board members debated whether to send a message to the council by threatening mass resignations; several members urged against that course, saying losing the remaining quorum would stall ongoing work such as the comprehensive plan, zoning changes and grant-related projects. Members repeatedly emphasized the time and technical work required by planning-board duties and urged staying to complete projects despite frustration.

The board did not take a formal vote on the matter of asking the council to rescind its action. Members said the board’s attorney had given detailed advice that the planning board believed supported their position, but several members expressed doubt that communications to the council would change the outcome.

The meeting record shows the planning board remains committed to continuing its work — including a comp-plan update and other projects — but members signaled continued friction with the council over the scope of planning-board authority.

The discussion included repeated affirmations from planning-board members that the board is volunteer, technically demanding work, and that the board’s recommendations are intended to guide the council’s decisions.

The planning board listed the resignation in its packet and discussed outreach to recruit new members; no formal appointment was made at the meeting.