A Small City With a Crowded Ballot
Sanford, Maine, has spent much of 2026 arguing with itself about its future, and on Tuesday, November 3, that argument goes to the ballot box. The city has wrestled all year with proposals for an AI data center and a biosolids-processing plant, with unsafe conditions at the old International Woolen Mill and along Heritage Crossing, and with the everyday pressure of rising household costs. Now voters will find three contested races and more candidates than the city has seen in recent memory: four people running for mayor, seven vying for two city council seats, and three seeking two spots on the school committee. Of the fourteen candidates in total, only two are incumbents, which means this is not an election about fine-tuning the current leadership. It is an election about who gets to decide what Sanford becomes next.
That sense of a turning point is visible in the numbers alone. In many recent cycles, local races in a city of Sanford’s size have drawn a handful of familiar names and a predictable result. This year, the ballot is crowded because the issues are large, and because residents who spent months attending forums, signing petitions, and protesting on Main Street have decided that showing up to meetings is no longer enough. A plan to build a data center in South Sanford earlier this year sparked significant debate, multiple question-and-answer forums, and protests on Main Street. A moratorium followed. A biosolids proposal stirred its own opposition. And the deteriorating mill, long a source of concern, became an emergency in October. Each of those stories pulled new people into civic life, and several of them are now on the ballot themselves.
For a community story, the important question is not only who wins, but what the winners will actually be able to do about the problems that motivated voters in the first place. A mayor, a council, and a school committee do not set national policy on artificial intelligence, energy prices, or housing markets. They do decide local ordinances, land use, public safety priorities, and school budgets, and those decisions determine whether a data center can be built, where a processing plant can operate, how a dangerous building is handled, and what families pay in property taxes. That is why a local election in a small Maine city can feel so consequential to the people who live there: the decisions are close enough to touch.
The Mayor’s Race: Succeeding Becky Brink
Sanford’s current mayor, Becky Brink, is not seeking a third term, so the mayor’s office, like DC’s, is an open seat. Four candidates are hoping to succeed her: Deputy Mayor Maura Herlihy, City Councilor Pete Tranchemontagne, newcomer Daniel White, and Matthew Dupuis, who previously challenged Brink in 2024. All but one of the mayoral hopefuls — Dupuis, the one who ran before — are political newcomers in the sense that they have not previously sought this office, and the field mixes experience inside City Hall with fresh voices from outside it. Herlihy brings the deputy mayor’s vantage point; Tranchemontagne brings council experience; White and Dupuis bring the perspective of residents who have watched local government from the other side of the podium.
The candidates introduced or reintroduced themselves during the Sanford-Springvale Chamber of Commerce’s Candidates Night on October 1, and outlined their positions on the issues shaping the election, including whether they support or oppose allowing a data center in Sanford. Their answers revealed differences in approach, even where they agreed that residents should have a voice. Tranchemontagne said voters in Sanford should decide whether a data center should be allowed in the community, arguing that the question should go to the ballot box directly rather than being settled by officials alone. Dupuis said the prospect raises many unanswered environmental questions, that he does not think a data center should be in Sanford, and that people should have the right to vote on it. White expressed skepticism about a data center operating in Sanford, pointing to the complexity and changing nature of the technology. Herlihy, noting the moratorium and the fact that no actual proposal is currently before anyone, urged people to take a breath while the city learns more.
Herlihy’s fuller answer is worth setting out, because it captures the tension at the heart of the data center debate. She sits on the city’s industrial task force, which is discussing and learning more about data centers, and she said the city should be business-friendly while recognising that a data center would not solve a long-term municipal problem. It would provide temporary construction jobs, some longer-term jobs, and tax relief, she said, but it could also have a significantly negative impact on environmental resources and increase consumer utility costs. That balancing act — jobs and tax relief on one side, water, power, and environmental risk on the other — is the same calculation facing towns across America as data centers search for sites, and Sanford’s voters are being asked to choose leaders who will make it on their behalf, with incomplete information and real stakes.
The Data Center Moratorium: A Pause, Not an Answer
The city currently has a moratorium on new data-center proposals while officials gather information and public input to shape future policies. A moratorium is often misunderstood as a decision, but it is better understood as a pause: a period in which the city stops accepting new proposals so that it can write rules before the next proposal arrives, rather than improvising rules while a developer is already at the table. In Sanford’s case, that pause grew out of citizen action — reporting on the candidates’ own answers notes that the moratorium itself grew from a citizen petition with more than 1,100 signatures — and the council passed two separate moratoriums, one for data centers and one for biosolids processing. Each opens a window to shape new ordinances, up to and including a potential ban, and each depends on residents staying engaged while the window is open.
What happens during a moratorium matters as much as the moratorium itself. Officials are gathering information about how data centers use water and electricity, what they pay in taxes, what jobs they actually create over time, and what protections a host community can reasonably demand. They are also gathering public input, because a policy written without residents is likely to be distrusted by residents, whatever its technical merits. The next mayor and council will inherit that process, and their job will be to turn a pause into a policy: to decide whether Sanford welcomes data centers under strict conditions, restricts them to particular areas, or bars them altogether. That decision will not be made in a single vote on November 3, but the people elected on November 3 will be the ones who make it, and that is why the moratorium, though temporary, dominates the campaign.
The state context adds another layer. Maine lawmakers advanced a first-in-the-nation statewide moratorium on new data center construction in April, before the governor vetoed the bill and instead created a council to study data centers’ effects. Sanford’s local moratorium therefore sits inside a statewide debate that has not been settled, and the city’s eventual ordinance will be written against a backdrop of state study, neighbouring towns taking their own pauses, and a national conversation about the power and water demands of artificial intelligence. For Sanford residents, the practical question is simpler than the policy debate: will a data center raise their electricity bills, strain their water supply, or change the character of their neighbourhood, and will the tax revenue and jobs be worth it? No candidate can answer that question with certainty today, which is why voters are choosing judgment as much as policy.
The Biosolids Plant and the Air and Water Question
Alongside the data center, Sanford has spent the year wrestling with a proposal for a biosolids-processing plant, and the two debates share a common thread: residents asking what new industry means for the air they breathe and the water they drink. Biosolids are the treated byproducts of wastewater treatment, and a processing plant raises questions about odour, truck traffic, runoff, and long-term environmental safety that are difficult to answer in the abstract and easy to worry about in a neighbourhood. The council’s separate moratorium on biosolids processing, like its data center moratorium, buys time to study those questions and to hear from residents before a proposal becomes a plant.
The biosolids debate also shows how local environmental groups have shaped this election. Council candidate Alexander Clary, who works for Catholic Charities of Maine and has experience in global humanitarian efforts, noted his involvement with the Sanford Clean Air and Water Coalition, his support for the city’s moratorium on data centers, and his opposition to the proposed biosolids facility. His candidacy is a reminder that the groups formed around these issues are not only protesting; they are also running for office, and the council elected in November will include voices that were organised in opposition to these proposals. Whether that makes the council more cautious about new industry or simply more informed about its risks will depend on how the new members work together, but the pipeline from petition to candidacy is itself a story about how local democracy responds when residents feel unheard.
The Mill and Heritage Crossing: A Dangerous Building in the Middle of Town
If the data center and biosolids debates are about Sanford’s future, the International Woolen Mill is about its past refusing to stay in the past. The old mill, a deteriorating building in the downtown mill yard near Heritage Crossing, has been the subject of documented safety concerns for years. In recent months, volunteers have banded together to clean local parks and trails and rid them of litter and discarded needles, and candidates have discussed public safety concerns in the mill yard, on nature trails, and downtown at night. The city recently closed a majority portion of Heritage Crossing, which runs along the abandoned and deteriorated mill, because the area is deemed unsafe and a place where trespassing, squatting, littering, and other inappropriate behaviours are taking place.
The situation sharpened in October. On October 8, City Manager Steven Buck issued a Declaration of Emergency and ordered the temporary closure of a portion of Heritage Crossing, including affected sidewalks, due to ongoing public safety concerns at the mill complex. Concrete barriers were placed to restrict access, and purple paint markings and No Trespassing signs were posted around the property; under Maine law, purple paint is a legally recognised notice that access is prohibited without authorisation. On October 13, the council voted at a special meeting to extend the declaration and continue the closure until public safety hazards have been sufficiently addressed. That same day, police conducted a coordinated enforcement operation at the mill, finding six people inside, arresting three and issuing summonses to three others, and describing the building as extremely hazardous.
The candidates have responded to the mill in ways that reveal their broader approaches to public safety. Herlihy described the mill as concerning but still salvageable, spoke of recent efforts to move unhoused individuals out of the building, and said she would continue working on affordable housing and on the state’s restrictions on how law enforcement can charge unhoused individuals committing certain crimes — restrictions she called frustrating to police officers. Tranchemontagne said the mill and its surroundings are not safe, put public safety first, and said he would like to see centres providing round-the-clock care and treatment services for residents struggling with substance use. Dupuis expressed hope for a new health services facility under construction near the York County Jail in Alfred, saying it might free up space for people to get help. There is no magic solution here, as Herlihy herself put it, but the next mayor and council will have to find a lasting one: the city has secured federal environmental funding for demolition and remediation at the mill’s Boiler House, with demolition anticipated in spring 2027, while the larger complex remains a costly, complicated problem with no funded plan to fix it in full.
For residents, the mill is not an abstraction. It affects whether they feel safe walking downtown at night, whether businesses near the mill yard lose customers, whether first responders are put at risk entering an unstable building, and whether a historic piece of Sanford’s industrial heritage can be saved, demolished, or redeveloped. A closed road is a daily inconvenience; an unsafe building is a daily worry. The election will not demolish the mill or rebuild it, but it will choose the people who decide how much the city spends on securing it, how hard it presses the property’s owner, and how it balances compassion for unhoused residents with safety for everyone else. That balance is the hardest part of the mill story, and it will still be there on November 4.
Seven for Two Council Seats
Two three-year seats are open on the Sanford City Council this fall, and with Deputy Mayor Herlihy running for mayor, at least one newcomer is guaranteed to win. Incumbent Councilor Jonathan Martell is seeking reelection and faces six first-time candidates: Alexander Clary, Meagan Crawford, Shawn Goodwin, Bryce Lambert, Victoria Pariyar, and Michael Perry. The field is a cross-section of the city: Clary from humanitarian work, Crawford a local business owner with a hospitality background, Goodwin a local sports coach focused on expanding manufacturing, Lambert an owner of two local businesses who volunteers with the Sanford Mainers, Pariyar a downtown business owner and former Peace Corps volunteer, Perry a long-serving public servant in corrections and community organisations, and Martell a supplier quality engineer and legislative officer for the Sanford-Springvale Fish and Game Club.
Their pitches, as shared at the Candidates Night, show how local issues translate into campaign themes. Goodwin argued that focusing on manufacturing and strong industry could create good-paying jobs so people can afford to live in the community, and that a stronger industrial base could absorb some of the tax burden. Lambert emphasised small businesses as a huge part of Sanford’s success and a reason people want to live there. Pariyar said she hopes to serve as a liaison between residents and city departments and to make thoughtful decisions about ordinances and their impacts. Perry said his years in public service taught him to listen and work with people even when they disagree, and that he is running because Sanford is his home. Martell said his time as a councilor helped him understand Sanford’s people and their unique challenges, and that he is heavily invested in wanting the city to continue to be a great place to live by making choices that are best for Sanford long-term. Crawford said running her own business helped her connect with residents and fall in love with the city, and that she wants to help address concerns she hears from parents, business owners, and neighbours. Together, these are not national talking points; they are the language of a city trying to keep its people, its businesses, and its tax base in balance.
Schools: Three for Two Committee Seats
Two three-year terms are also on the ballot for the Sanford School Committee. Vice Chair Paula Cote is seeking reelection, while Chair Amy Sevigny is not. Cote faces two first-time candidates: Brianna Gironda and Lisa Pritchett. Gironda, a Sanford Middle School PTA member and strategic operations manager in the insurance industry, said she is running to give back to a district that has supported her family, and that public education is one of the best investments a community can make. Pritchett, a retired educator, coach, and former school board member in another district, said running was not originally in her plan but now feels right, and that she wants children to be happy in school — a goal she treats not as a given but as something to work at deliberately. Cote, a teacher who has taught locally at Sanford High School and St. Thomas School, said her two passions are family and education, and that teaching is, in her superintendent’s phrase, the noblest profession.
The school race matters beyond the classroom because schools are where many of Sanford’s other debates converge. A district’s budget is shaped by the same property tax base that the council debates; its buildings and grounds are affected by the same public safety concerns that surround the mill; and its families feel the same cost pressures — gas, heating oil, groceries, and taxes — that dominate the mayoral and council races. A school committee that listens to parents, supports teachers, and plans carefully for enrolment and facilities can steady a community through a period of change. One that is divided or disengaged can amplify it. With only one incumbent in the race and two newcomers, the committee elected in November will bring fresh energy and, inevitably, a learning curve, and voters are choosing which mix of experience and new perspective they trust with their children’s education.
The Cost of Living Underneath It All
Underneath the headline debates about data centers, biosolids, and the mill runs a quieter pressure that every candidate has heard about on doorsteps: residents feeling the strain of rising costs for gas and heating oil, groceries, and property taxes. In Maine, heating oil is not a minor budget line; for many households it is the difference between a comfortable winter and a difficult one, and when it rises alongside grocery prices and a property tax bill, the squeeze is felt across the whole household budget. Local government cannot set the price of oil or food, but it can influence the property tax rate, the fees residents pay, and the services they receive in return — and how policies can change profit and loss for households is a question that lands differently when the household in question is choosing between heating a home and filling a shopping cart.
That is why the council and mayoral races, for all their focus on large projects, keep returning to jobs and taxes. A new industry that brings good-paying work can ease the squeeze; a project that raises utility costs or demands new infrastructure can worsen it. A school budget that grows faster than the tax base can strain homeowners; a budget that shrinks too far can strain classrooms. Candidates who talk about manufacturing, small business, and tax relief are not changing the subject from data centers and the mill; they are connecting those subjects to the monthly bills that voters actually pay. The voter who cares most about heating oil may still vote on the data center, because the data center’s effect on utility costs is part of the same household calculation.
A Newcomer Election, and Where to Vote
One of the most striking features of this election is how many of its candidates are new to politics. Of the fourteen candidates across the three races, only two are incumbents, and all but one mayoral hopeful are political newcomers in the sense described above. That newcomer wave is both a strength and a risk. New candidates bring energy, new networks, and a willingness to question how things have always been done. They also face a steep learning curve in offices that require knowledge of budgets, ordinances, state law, and the long history of projects like the mill. Voters are therefore weighing not only positions but capacity: who can learn quickly, who can work with colleagues they disagree with, and who can turn a campaign promise into a council vote.
The Candidates Nights on October 1 and 8, sponsored by the Sanford-Springvale Chamber of Commerce, gave voters a chance to make that judgment in person and on recordings, with mayoral and council candidates on the first night and school board and state legislative candidates on the second. Those forums, and the local newspaper’s questionnaire answers from candidates, are the closest most voters will get to a job interview with their future officials, and they matter more in a newcomer election than in one dominated by incumbents with records to examine. A voter who watched a forum heard not only what a candidate thinks about a data center, but how they listen, how they handle disagreement, and whether they acknowledge what they do not yet know. In a city choosing so many new leaders at once, those qualities may matter as much as any single policy answer.
Polls in Sanford will be open on November 3 in Sanford High School’s gymnasium at 100 Alumni Boulevard, from 7 in the morning until 8 in the evening. Voters who need an absentee ballot or have questions about registration can contact the City Clerk’s office, and recordings of the Candidates Nights remain available for anyone still deciding. When the results come in, the city will not have settled its debates in a single night. The moratoriums will still be in place, the mill will still need a long-term plan, and the school committee will still face a budget. What will have changed is who sits at the table where those decisions are made — and in a year when Sanford has argued so intensely about its future, that change of personnel may be the most consequential decision of all. The new mayor, the new councilors, and the new school committee members will inherit the same problems, but they will inherit them with a fresh mandate, and the residents who elected them will be watching, closely, to see what they do with it.
Sources
USN reviewed reporting from multiple outlets for this story. Read more from Seacoastonline, Sanford Springvale News and City of Sanford.