ST. STEPHEN, New Brunswick — Look at a map.
Cianbro Corp. President and CEO Peter Vigue said that’s all that is required to understand how vital construction of a proposed 220-mile east-west highway across northern Maine would be to the state’s long-term economic viability.
Vigue was the keynote speaker Thursday at a forum on the topic that attracted a standing-room-only crowd of more than 100 to a parish hall at St. Patrick’s Church in this New Brunswick community. Also speaking in support of the concept were current Maine Department of Transportation Commissioner David Bernhardt and his predecessor in that job, David Cole.
Bernhardt said DOT’s mission includes supporting economic opportunity by strategically targeting transportation investments that will help grow Maine’s economy. He termed the east-west highway project “a gateway to opportunity.”
Bernhardt said Gov. Paul LePage is a big supporter of the project and is expected to quickly sign new legislation approved by lawmakers this week appropriating $300,000 from a DOT reserve account to fund what Bernhardt termed Thursday an “investment-grade study needed to see if there is someone in the private sector willing to invest in this project.” Bernhardt said the study is expected to be completed before the end of this year.
“We have public-private partnership legislation in place,” he said, “but private investors will have to step up.”
Should the corridor be built, investors will repay the $300,000 in state funding spent to undertake the study. Private-sector investments in the project would be recouped through toll collection.
As a teenager working for Cianbro, Vigue helped to build portions of Interstate 95. For many years now he has been the point man and an active cheerleader for the east-west highway initiative. He said Thursday that, with an improving economy, he’s convinced the task of finding private-sector venture capital to bankroll the $2 billion undertaking is becoming more and more doable.
Vigue said those fiscal stars were nearly aligned in 2006 but that negotiations were suspended when the economy took a nosedive in 2008. “We’re now reigniting those relationships,” he said.
Vigue said a look at a map shows that Maine is within a one-day’s drive of 40 percent of the population of North America. He also noted that Atlantic ports in New England and Atlantic Canada are ideally suited to accommodate the next generation of cargo container ships, some of which are being designed to handle as many as 20,000 containers. Given congestion in West Coast ports such as Long Beach, Calif., Vigue sees the big ships coming through the Suez Canal for unloading at Atlantic ports built to accommodate ships that are as long as 1,000 feet and require ports that are at least 70 feet deep.
“I believe that Atlantic Canada will see a very significant transshipment facility being located in Nova Scotia in the next 10 years,” he said. “That’s already being planned.”
Such a facility will need links to rail and truck transportation that will deliver products to highly populated areas in America’s “rust belt” and the Midwest and to major Canadian cities such as Montreal and Toronto.
“Maine is not at the end of the road, but in the middle of the road,” Vigue said. “This is a very significant opportunity to attract investment to this region.”
Not everyone who came to St. Stephen for Thursday’s forum thinks the corridor is a good idea. Marching in front of the church hall with signs protesting the project were Sidney Mitchell and Peter Brenc, both from Dover-Foxcroft.
Brenc is concerned about the ecological damage such a project would entail and does not agree with characterizations that the route is sited in little more than “the hollow middle of Maine.” He’s also concerned that a public-private partnership would allow the use of eminent domain procedures, which allow governmental entities to acquire private property for public works projects, even if owners don’t want to sell.
“This route runs through some deeply rural areas,” Mitchell said. “This is a through corridor that connects New Brunswick and Quebec. It has nothing to do with Maine.”
“This route runs through some deeply rural areas,” Mitchell said. “This
is a through corridor that connects New Brunswick and Quebec. It has
nothing to do with Maine.”
You’re exactly correct Mitchell. Just like I-95 has nothing to do with Maine.
To bad they put that wretched interstate right in your way, huh?
It looks like she is one of these enviro freaks who are angry their park got struck down. Now she and this other buffoon she is with are worried about the damage to the environment this road . Are they kidding me this road has support from just about most folks in Maine. These East-West Highway proposals several of them which have been studied to death since the 1950’s need to start being built. We need to grow our infrastructure to not only to compete for good paying jobs, but to also have 1st rate roads and bridges to travel on. People want to not to have to drive over pot holes every 50 ft. because of the neglect Democrats have had on our infrastructure due to them putting Welfare over everything else.
Eminent domain is a serious issue that needs to be addressed right now, not when the surveying is done and finished. But what’s more concerning is the constant ‘if’ and ‘proposed’ question’s.
If Vigue and Cianbro are so sure that this road is gonna’ be built, and that they’re gonna be the one’s building it, then by all means put up a $300,000.– PERFORMANCE BOND to insure that it’s actually built. Nothing keeps investor’s more motivated, and honest, than seeing their money at risk if their principal starts to put it at risk for not performing. The same can be said for this supposed ‘trans-shipment center’. The rail issue is already set since the MMA railline’s capacity are already leased out by Irving right now at 70%. That’s a matter of public record since the MMA lines were purchased under a State bond. But the real issue’s are gonna be the toll’s and maintenance, and I can see this one coming already in terms of NAFTA (do we all get that ‘warm and fuzzy feeling’ right about now ?) and waiver’s. Same for the fuel issue. You can be dammed sure that no Canadian truck is gonna fuel up here in Maine, even if it means that they have to put 600 gallon Arctic fuel tanks on every rig that takes this cargo run to keep from paying Maine fuel and road tax’s. So what winds up happening ? We pay for the road construction, we pay for the road maintenance, we pay for the road service’s (including emergency services in the remote area’s) and we wind up paying for the inevitable clean-up when these same truck’s have accident’s and spill their load’s all over Maine’s road’s. So someone please SHOW ME just where and when Maine benefit’s from this road ’cause I’m pretty sure that I’m not the only one waiting for the Greater Augusta Dog and Pony Show to begin.
You are SO totally wrong on all counts that to try to set you straight would be futile.
Indulge us all Sir, We have the time.
I’ll take a whack at your issues. For one thing, it would not be legal for the study to be privately funded, as if the decision is made to make it a publically funded toll road, than the project would go out for bid. What construction company would pay up front for a study if in the end they may not be the contractor? Also, if Cainbro or any other contractor paid for the study, you would than be fuming that the findings were fixed…
Roads have nothing to do with NAFTA, so put that political soap box away. And as far as the fuel issue, I would suspect the carriers would love filling up in Maine, considering the difference in diesel between Canada and the US (ah… we are cheaper…). In Nova Scotia, there is a stretch of road that is a toll road that cut through a pass and it’s well worth the $4 to use it instead of the old two lane road. Truck tolls I think run about $10 – $12 for the run. This road is basically though a conduit between Atlantic Canada and the rest of Canada. Some “Downeast” folks might take advantage of it to I-95, and those in Western Maine may do the same to get to Central Maine, but the majority of the traffic will have Canadian plates.
Let’s talk trade. Each truck would be required to be bonded from the port of entry to the port of export. US CBP w0uld have to designate Coburn Gore a commercial port (currently only Jackman, Houlton, and Calais are border commercial ports), so trucks could enter via there. This could also increase the number of Canadian trucks crossing there instead of ports to the West, who end up traveling along Route 2, if they are heading to Maine destinations. My hopes are that the western part of the road has a spur that goes west into NH, VT, and finally into Northern NY. Most truckers from Ontario cross at Massena, NY, sort of beeline it across these states into Maine to get to Atlantic Canada.
no bidding..see the references and links above to Maines Statute which allows this as a sole source negotiated deal with the state kicking in up to 50%..no fair wage provisions, no provisions on default,no public hearings.
Good points all. I agree that the highway or a spur needs to go past Rumford and Bethel and into NH, VT and NY. Checking gas buddy diesel in Maine is $1.00-1.25 a gallon cheaper depending on exchange. I think most all of them will buy fuel here at each end.
Thanks, Mr. Kiernan; I agree. When are we actually going to get some actual information about the highway?
Isin’t that the big question that we are all waiting for ? When is the information gonna be released ? Who’s going to compile it ? And who is going to verify it’s accuracy ? This whole $ 300,000.– cluster is now, apparently, stuck in neutral, and is in fact gathering active opposition by any number of folks in Calais. And still, no where to be seen, is the rail component being heard from.
Wherever trucking is, rail is never far behind since both mode’s depend on volume to be economical and efficient. But the current rail system, above Brownsville, is the old MMA line’s now under a State Bond purchase / lease, currently with 70% + of it’s traffic’s volume capacity leased out to Irving, by their public statement no less. So who really win’s, rail or road ? Given the current plan, even the modest one proposed by Vigue, as accurate, is anyone prepared to believe that once the Right of Way for the road is obtained that a similar Right of Way won’t be coming down the road (sorry, timing is not my strong suit) running parallel with it for a rail line, in effect creating a road/rail corridor right thru Central Maine to Calais ? And to add a little added food for thought, once the rail line is in, does anyone really think that Irving isin’t going to use the rail line, with Cianbro building it, for it’s mining at Bald Mountain ? Raw ore needs to be processed in quantity to be economical. That means it needs to be moved to the smelter’s in bulk since Maine doesn’t have any industrial smelter’s, unless that ‘little fact’ has somehow escaped Irving’s notice. One only has to look at Sudbury in Ontario to see the aftereffects of smelting. Don’t look down the road folk’s. You need to be looking at who’s drawing the map your using going down that road.
Mike & Other Bloggers Here
Turns out we are not going to get any information at all..none of it is publicly available and there will be no public hearings..all this purusant to a highway privatization law snuck under the radar my Damon of Hancock that wen tpast the committee andstraight to the floor in a special procedure allowed for “emergencies”. It was enacted April 2010 reference is Title 23 Section 4251 and it is a diapointing complete abandonment of the public interest.
I think we need to start a citizens action to repeal that bill so we an have a proper public discussion on the privatization of Maine’s highways.
Mr. Vigue sure does care a lot about the State of Maine! All of this traveling around and presenting power points makes me think he might gain a “little” by this road. We already have Route 9 in Downeast, Maine. The new proposed highway is less than 10 miles north of the existing highway and surprisingly it also goes East – West. Put a major highway through the middle of thousands and
thousands of acres of woods and maybe we can put Maine guides to work in
the toll booths. All of the lodges, sporting goods stores, variety
stores, and restaurant workers along the other roads can put a safety
vest on and dig there own grave for a year or two and then go collect
unemployment. Short term jobs with a lot to lose.
How is this going to be short term jobs. This road is already in place all they are going to do is upgrade and widen it to Interstate/Maine Turnpike standards to handle the speeds and traffic this road will handle. This road will create hundreds of good paying construction jobs, it will also when finally built accelerate economic growth in the other two-thirds of Maine. The Liberals and National Park supporters need to get a grip with reality their park they have been dying for is DOA and is not happening. It has major opposition from just about every Sportsmen’s group, business community , town and city north of Augusta, and the Legislature, Governor and 3 out of 4 of Maine’s congressional leaders oppose it . The Liberals in Augusta want Infrastructure well they need to start stepping up to the plate putting their money where their mouth is and supporting some of these ideas because their is going to be no borrowing for awhile for any of their ideas.
I am also against any type of park and FYI I am a registered Republican
Right on Blinky. Roads, who needs ’em? Nobody. What are they good for? Absolutely nothing. Shut em down, lay everybody off. Go back to coastal trade and transportation. The Romans had good luck with roads; but then they were from away. Xenophobic Luddites and social cro-magnon’s for truth justice and the American way. Way to go! I can see clearly now.
You want to continue to live in the dark ages go that is your choice but it is not most Mainers feelings. Most working Mainers we want to move the state further in a positive manner away from the Socialist agenda that Democrats and Rino’s want to take the state in. This road is going in because the DOT and Gov. LePage has the final say on it and they support it being built. They are just waiting to see what the study says if their are any changes recommended to the route and the costs so Cianbro can bring in the private sector to pay for the road to being built.
Cab Calloway would be proud of you. Your numero uno in talkin “ragtime” on this string. And thats no mean feat.
Please do not associate the LePage name with this project. Any project he will be associated with is sure to fail. He will open his mouth and screw up everything. He is a loser
darkcat you are not getting the details here.no fair wage requirements and cianbro would get to set all conditions and hire all ..this is 50+years….so it applies to all the operation and maintenance jobs as well..
Route 9 is two lanes, twisty, and hilly with a 55 mph max speed limit. The new road will be 4-lanes, pass when you want at 75 mph. Plus, being divided, the likelihood of head-on crashes drops to next to none. How many have died in crashes like that on route 9?
Yes exactly..no question..no more collisions with Moose..high speed all the way through..but no exits and a travel cost end to end of $100-$200. Don’t really see that including any existing local users of route 2 or route 9.
Also, what no one seems to get is that we are literally transferring ownersgip of route 2 and route 9 to a non competitively bid sole source to own and operate and collect all the tolls from for 50 years. We are facilitating that by cutting the red tape ( environnmental laws, eminent domain etc, etc.) and allowing variations from what would normally apply to public contracts..eg fair wages, inclusion of minority contractors etc..
Actually this is the most expensive form of infrastructure development because private entities have a higher costs of capital than public entities and must also make a profit that public pricing for road access does not have to account for. This higher cost is paid for entirely by the users. That is the big bugaboo of private public partnerships.short trip users have to pay a huge toll ( there is no per mile rate ..its a flat rate gate to gate so $25 to $75 per gate for this road) no choice. The private operator can raise tolls whenever and however much it needs to to meet the contractually specified profit level..it guarantees the operator a given rate of return.
Protection of the public interests is only as good as the statute and ours (apparently slipped under the radar in 2010 and wrotten by Cianbro and other contrcator interests) doesn’t do much to guarantee the public interest but does a lot to make opportunities for the private operator as flexible and generous as needed. The other part where the public interest can be protected is in the agreement itself but our statute doesn’t require any public hearings..only notice to the legislature.
The information you’re looking at on the DOT website is 13 years old and you are conveniently looking at only 1 option that was mentioned…upgrading the existing roads. This is where you are getting the two exit idea. Part of upgrading the existing roads included at-grade intersections. It would be a 4-lane divided highway, but not controlled access. The study also mentioned an entirely new controlled access highway, but the cost was prohibitive. Since that is what is being proposed now a more comprehensive study of just that option is needed. A completely new highway will have interchanges at appropriate locations, and route 9 and route 2 will still be there for those that want to take the scenic route. Yes, the toll for a large truck to travel the entire 200+ miles will run about $150. This is in-line with other northeast toll roads. Car toll would probably be about 12 bucks. Proportionate amounts for shorter trips. You said users will pay the entire cost. That is the concept of a toll road…paid for by those who use it. If you choose not to use it you’re not paying a dime. Concerning the private-public statute I would imagine it is similar to most others. Not to sound harsh but please improve either your spelling or your typing (whichever is lacking). It would make your posts much easier to read.
(apologies for typos..my hands have a bit of neuropathy..I do try to go back and edit)
I am glad you took the time to actually read the studies at DOT’s website..we should all begin with the same facts, with the truth, even if we end up with different opinions.
The closest in those studies to what is apparently being proposed was “option D”.. a four lane toll road which utlized the actual road way of 2 and 9 for most of the length widening it out from the existig right of way.That roadway was founn not to be feasible and to also divert too much traffic away from existing businesses.
Sound planning of toll roads requires that a local route be left in tact and I would hope that would be the case but it is not what has been put forward. This has been about using the existing right of way for routes 2 and 9 for the entire length and one of the concerns raised by the DOT and by the consultant was the impact on existing settlements along the route. I believe it was a quote from Vigue that the road would have only 2 exits.
Under the law on privatization, written by Cianbro, DOT, Maine Contractors Association and other contractor associations, and implemented with no public input to protect the public interests,there is no public input or access to the proposal until it is approved and Vigue has not been very forthcoming with the affected public or made any commitments at all in the public interest so you and I are only piecing together our assumptions from a few statements here and there in the press.
Mostly ,Vigue, who is a wonderful head of Cianbro, but not an economist or transportaion planner, has just offered false promises of prosperity and economic growth from the road way and few details about the road way itself, no promises to the existing users or route 2 and 9 and the homes and businesses along these routes.
Pete Vigue for Governor. :)
HEAR HEAR!
I was rather harsh on Mr. Vigue a few months’ back for his seeking financial assistance for this project from our “state of chaos” headquartered in Augusta. I feel you both may be correct Mr. Vigue has moved forward by seeking out alternatives without Augusta’s virtual reality bankroll. If these are his normal characteristics he would make a fine Governor that would grow Maine jobs and industry across the entire state.
Infrastucture is a government responsibility and the government has been given power to create rds.Mr Vigue is way out of line soliciting the government to build a road that HE thinks it is nescesary. Writeing legislation to meet his whims is nothing more than crony capitalism.
The normal and constitutional correct method of building a rd is for the government to determine a need to facilitate commerce and the citesens of Maine based on facts gathered from Maine residents and transportation data and then seek out resources to finance and build the rd within feasibility guidelines of a cost benefit analysis.
The construction then should go out for bid.
This, I have a Construction Buisness , lets get the government to sign on to my project so that I can make more money is Crony Capitalism at its worst.
We dont need another Crony Governor!
Please provide the reference to road building in the Constitution. Indiana, Colorado, Virginia, and Texas are places I know to have private toll roads. There may be other states as well. We just don’t have the tax resources to do this right now. This will likely get more common in the future.
We dont have the Tax Resources because it has been hyjacked by a group of Tax Protestors who want to defund America and privatise it!
Its called the Republican Party.
I believe Chicago (Obamaville) has privatized some of their roads , and former Liberal Gov. Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania looked into privatizing some of their interstates to grow the DOT budget. It is being looked at by alot of folks because their is no more money to give from taxpayers. This is your new form of stimulus and job growth through infrastructure from having private donors pay for these roads.
Your just angry that LePage and DOT are looking for new ways to pay for infrastructure. If Democrats and Baldo or King were behind this you and the rest of the Liberals would be jumping up and down telling us how revolutionary this idea is that we need to support it. If Liberals aren’t behind it or it isn’t Welfare Expansion all of you Liberals are against it what hypocrisy.
I agree if Vigue was Governor Maine would be alot farther ahead than we are now and you would be seeing the Maine Economy thriving. Peter Vigue is one of the very few people with the leadership and vision that Maine needs to move foward and prosper.
This buisness about paying for a study was already in the law. The one who solicits is required to submit a study ,
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/23/title23sec4251.html
The new legislation waiving this is an example of how Vigue is cutting a Sweatheart Deal on the Tax Payers Dime.
I see no mention of having to produce a study in the document you linked. I did notice that DOT retains the right to require some of the tolls be shared with them. Vigue has nothing to do with the $300,000. A consulting firm will be hired by bid by the state to do the study. If the road is built, the company created to operate it will have to reimburse the state for the $300,000. If we get a 4-lane expressway across the state with no up front investment I’d say we’re getting a heck of a deal. For the forseeable future this project will not be able to be done with tax dollars.
Replying to hssportsnut
F. If the proposed transportation facility is to be supported by tolls or other user fees, the private entity must provide a traffic and revenue study prepared by an expert acceptable to the department and national bond rating agencies. The private entity must also provide a finance plan consistent with the traffic and revenue study that identifies the proposal costs, revenues by source, financing, major assumptions, internal rate of return on private investments and whether any government funds are assumed to deliver a cost-feasible project and that provides a total cash flow analysis beginning with implementation of the project and extending for the term of the agreement. [2009, c. 648, Pt. A, §1 (NEW
Once a corporation decides to apply they will provide those details. These items are not part of the study contracted by the state. The state study will propose where to build the road and other higher level details. The finer details you cited can’t be measured until it’s decided exactly what is proposed.
Build it and they will come. Get it done Peter you are a mover and go getter.
“Build it and they will come.” That’s what they said about the sperm bank.
The shorter story for Cianbro is hurrah for me and my fatter pocketbook.
Vigue said connecting Atlantic Canada and Downeast Maine with the Canadian and American interstate highway systems is vital to Maine’s long-term economic survival.
Correction: it is vital to Cianbro’s long term future and Vigue’s wallet.
Here are some quotes form a 2010 PPH piece about how Maine should use the stimulus funds. As a planner I agree with the core point which is that infrastructure doesn’t create economic development ..to be effective in promoting economic growth it must be carefully partnered with enhancing access to the most promising existing assets to the places people already want to go and be to the placeslocal businesses are alreday established and could grow more with better connections.
If we began with the question “where in Maine would enhanced access make a real difference to economic development?” would it be this road?
“Maine’s transportation infrastructure is critical to the economy; but with few exceptions, like the Penobscot Narrows Bridge, it is not a unique asset that will itself drive long-term growth.
People don’t use roads and bridges for their own sake; they use them to access people and places, businesses and customers, views and experiences. If we want to secure Maine’s long-term economic viability, we must invest in the destinations to which people come, not just the roads on which they travel.”
http://www.pressherald.com/archive/maines-way-forward_2009-01-02.html
Maine’s Way Forwad Catherine Reilly & Richard Barringer
“We have public-private partnership legislation in place,” he said, “but private investors will have to step up.”
You better believe that they do!
The Public Pays for it, The private company collects the Tolls!
Privatise Profits, Socialise losses!
It’s the Republican Dream!
Who is this highway going to help the Canadian’s and Irving. He will put a bigstop on either end then the Canadian’s will not have to stop all the way across, and our dollar will pay for it. Bet they love that. LOL
Canada has already buit a 400 mile interstate from St Stephen to Halifax it now our turn to live up to an agreement Maine made to New Brunswick 40 some years ago! They have done what they promised for us we need to do likewise!
This was very interesting.
First it turns out there is in fact existing public private jont venture legislation as Mr. Vigue maintains and it appears to have been enacted in 2009.(Highways 4251).
Now that I see the statute, I am having a hard time reconciling how this has been handled with the statute which says, for example, that the private entity is supposed to fund the feasibility study and submit that as a required part of developing their proposal. So I don’t get why DOT is paying for it when the statute says the proposer has to do that???
The statute lays out a very orderly rationale process ( no public review) for submission of a proposal, public announcement of its receipt ( no competitive bids) in a public bulletin but its very hard to reconcile with the secrcy and lack of information on exactly what is being prosed or whether a formal proposal exists.
The statute says that the public share may not be more than 50% and it limits where those funds comefrom. That is very different from what has been reffereed to and discussedpublicly. This could be up to $1billion in state funding..presumably through TIFIA bonds. Have I heard wrng or have we not been tld this is 100% private financing?
Also what Vigue is saying here (” we have the legislation now all we need is the private investor” doesn’t square with his earlier representations that the feasibility study was imperative because there was an investor in the wings.
I think it is time we all addressed all these questions to the transportation Commissioner who turned up with Vigue at this St Stephen’s event. It is clearly as much the DOT Comissioners pet project as Vigue’s
And what is this deal with out DOT Comisisoner visiting folks in New Brunswick before he has met with “we the people”?
And if David Cole ends up with this $300,000 contract..well..what do you all think of that????
The support of building East-West Highways in Maine goes way back to the 1950’s it is still supported by Mainers especially those North of Augusta, Lewiston. Only Liberals and Nutty Environmentalists only care about continuing to find ways of destroying Maine’s Economy and the Way of Living for Working Mainers. The fact is this road is almost ready to break ground and their is nothing Liberals and Enviros can do about it. All Maine DOT’s David Bernhardt and LePage has to do is declare emergency economic need for this road by Maine Law and you will see shovels and construction crews going to work. It is time for these folks to find some new line of work because the Maine people think their acts are getting old and annoying.
We dont need to finance a shortcut for the Canadians through my dooryard!
There ain’t NO economy here to declare Emergency.
You cant declare an emergency need for another country!
Wrong. Maine DOT and any Governor can use a Maine law put in by the Legislature that was signed decades ago that gives them power to use a emergency economic clause to have infrastructure built to help grow the economy and jobs. It is people’s veto proof nothing Liberals can do about it either . You folks can try but the courts have already ruled on it as well that they have the power to do so. So you might as well grind your teeth together, punch the wall with your fist because this East-West Highway is coming soon for those who want to save time on the their travels. Even King and the Bald headed one paid for studies because they spoke for the need of this road.
If there has been support for the E-W highway since “…way back to the 1950’s”, why hasn’t it been built? Could it be that a majority of “Maine-iacs” are opposed to the idea when, if ever, they get any “particulars” about the highway? Or could it be that the previous studies of the highway haven’t shown that the benefits are worth the costs?
I think you mean majority of Democrats don’t want this highway. It is going to be built now that this study has been passed . As I stated Liberals are powerless because all Maine DOT and LePage have to do is declare the emergency economic clause for infrastructure in Maine law and this road goes in. Liberals can’t people’s veto either it because its in an emergency law that was designed for DOT to help construct highways to benefit Maine’s economy.
Actually what I meant was a majority of “Maine-iacs”, regardless of political persuasion.
Have to admit that I’m not familiar with the “emergency economic clause for infrastructure”, but I doubt that the DOT and Governor LePage can approve the E-W highway over the wishes of the state legislature or a majority of Maine voters. Like so much else regarding this “pig in a poke”, it remains to be seen. I don’t see how this proposal can be called an “economic emergency”, but who would have thought that corporations would be called “persons”.
Perhaps at some point we’ll get some specifics about the proposal and we can then have an informed debate about whether we want it or not.
It appears as though you are right, Cianbro is getting a sweetheart deal on this Study!
It appears as though It was their obligation.
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/23/title23sec4251.html
DLBRT..thanks for checking that out and do you agree as well that what Vigue has said publicly doesn’t jibe with this statute?
So you recall anything about the public debate or testimomy when this bill was passed in 2010?
It seems to have been designed and tailor made to create the stautory authroity for this proposal before there was any public mention of the proposal. I had hoped that we did not yet have statirtoy authority so that we could have a fuller discussion of issues and implications . For example our statute does not address fair wages or apportion responsbility n the event of default or provide adequately for any public scrutiny at all.or require any comparative bids . It allows a negotiated sole source process.It is all strictly between the DOT Commissioner & the Legislature. Is that how you read it too??
Intersting to note that a 2006 study by UMaine for DOT, which cincluded a chaper on public private partnerships specifically advised against highway ifrsatructure and stressed multi modal projects.
Also at the DOT site at the history page on the Esat West Highway, interestingto note Angus King, like the DOT was not keen on further purusing an East West toll road.
And this vivtory lap with our DOT Comissioner and David Cole in tow in Canada????
I thnk we should all push to close up some of these loop holes.in the statute and put the spot light on the DOT Comissioner.
The way that I see it, (May be wrong) is that the solicitor, { Vigue } has to provide a study if it is a toll rd.
The way that I understand this is that it is a Closed Deal with the DOT but has to meet the quidelines of which,
L. The proposal and transportation facility are in the best interest of the public. [2009, c. 648, Pt. A, §1 (NEW).]
And then it goes to legislation.
Not much in there for facilatating public opinion.!!!!!
I was just reading testimony before U.S. Senator Snowe ( & other Senate Finance Committee members) in 2008 that makes this clearer and warns that this is actually the most expensive way to access capital not a “freebie” as everyone seems to think. According to expert witnesses this is actually a significantly more costly way to finance..the public users pay the difference in those higher costs. Also Mainers’ don’t seem to grasp that this means actually turning over complete ownership and opertaion of 2 now public roads, routes 2 and 9, to private ownership for a period of 50 years.. The only protection of public interests comes via the statute ( and ours, written by Cianbro & other contractor interests, seems has a few gaps in that Department) and through the contract agreement.
There was no public notice no public hearing and the public doesn’t understand the meaning of the law or its very sigificant public interests consequences.
All of the testimony before Snowe (& other U.S. Senate finance committee members) acknolwdeged that the dramatcally higher cost of private financing under public private partnerships was ultimately transferrred to the public via dramatically higher and often intolerable tolls
Olympia Snowe has nothing to do with Maine state legislation. You lost a lot of credibility with this post.
I would hope , and presumed , our US reps would share some of what they learn and know back home….my point was that Snowe had been briefed by experts on all these hazards of privatization
I really respect and admire your diligence and research in this Dlbrt. It is important that we are all delaing with facts first and form our opinions from that.
I just re read the statute..all applications under it are exempt from FOIA ( freedom of Information) until such time as the Dot deems it to meet the requirements of DOT and the legsilation. Then , you are right, it goes to the legsilature for approval with no stops along the way for public input on design, location and number of exists, fair wages, preservation of access for existing towns and destinations, maximum profits, maximum tolls..nothing.
I have just writtenn to Nancy Fisher (nancy.a.fisher@maine.gov to aks what cianbro’s status is exactly under the statute and whether there is any existing application under connsideration by DOT under the statute. I also asked how the $300,000 squares with the requirement that an applicant pay all proposal costs.
This place for continuing discussion amongst ourselves will no doubt be closed very soon but I will look for everyone the next time a BDN or PPH article at all realted to the highway is published. Meanwhile we can address questions to Nancy Fisher and do our reserach and share all that on line wherever we can.
Your work on this is heartening and inspiring.
Just wanted to point out that this statute was passed in 2009 so Baldacci was still governor. In the end I think this will be truly bi-partisan with support and dissent from both sides. Hopefully a majority in support. We are trying to operate on nearly the same roads we had 40 years ago and have one of the lowest interstate mileages in the country. It’s time to move forward.
“If you build it, they will come”
So why aren’t the Canadians paying for their highway? Got an idea here, though, perhaps we could trade California for the maritime provinces…..
If it’s so great for Canadians, why aren’t they paying for it?
If you can get for nothing – why not?
Will the distance markers and speed limits be in metric?
en francais, mais oui .
Toujours gaie. archie!!!
How about fixing Maine’s existing infrastructure first and then worry about building a transMAINE highway/pipeline when and if it might be beneficial to Maine. Until then Route 9 running from Baileyville to Brewer’s I-95 is already a 2 lane super highway that runs east to west 100 some miles through the middle of undeveloped no mans land. USE THAT! hell connect it to the end of I-395, toss in 20 or 30 toll booths and ill never drive on it again!
Route 9 is a superhighway? LOL.
Why divide this state in half and ruin the country side just so the canadians can drive from Quebec to new brunswick. We already have Rt 9 from New brunswick to Bangor then down I-95 to 201 into quebec. The taxpayers can`t afford any part of this project including the study.
It will mostly benefit them so let them pay for the study
And why would this benefit the small towns it ruins. It will only take the ambionce away.Just Look what it did to Aurora when RT.9 by-passed the town just to make it straighter
Did you read any of the articles the money gets paid back when this road is built which eventually its going to happen. This road is needed to help spur job growth in the other Maine (North of Augusta). Liberals are upset that their stupid park has been defeated so they are going to find every avenue to stop jobs from being created. The Liberals should accept LePage on his offer to take join Welfare Bums on a bus out of here.
Your are stuck with an incurable bilious rant of self – destructive Libodemoclaustrobia. If the highway is built I hope they cut between your house and the out house.
Aurora was just a drop in the speed limit that annoyed the 99% of drivers who were passing through.
Yes, town by passes and diversion of traffic which supports existing businesses were two issues raised in previous studies of this route and which have not yet been addressed by Mr. Vigue.
He has made no promises or reassurances to the people and businesses alog route 2 and 9 about preserving a local road for their use, or about safeguarding their towns and the livliehood which support these settlements. In fact he has kept the details of the planned road, whose design will be driven by maximum profit not by maximum public benefit, a secret offering the public only false promises of economic growth and prosperity.
One of the “justifications ” for this pork barrel project is that shipping to deep water Atlantic ports that can handle 1000 ft freighters is going to increase, and we need to give the Nova Scotia ports an advantage over Maine ports by building this corridor. You can bet Maine citizens will pay for this road one way or another. Why don’t we look at projects that serve our transportation needs first. Access from Eastport to 9/95, access from 9 to Montreal: the roads are there, they need work.
That is true wisdom tarheel and what experts in transportation planning would say..roads don’t create economic growth unless they are designed to support natural opportunities for gowth which this road isn’t.
This route would not be any transportation planners best pick for where infrastructure would benefit Maine. Having contractors decide where public highways should be built makes no sense at all.
Another “justification” as written: “Vigue said a look at a map shows that Maine is within a one-day’s drive of 40 percent of the population of North America…” I believe that, sure, as long as I’m driving a lear jet. If only the people who write this stuff would read it. Has the BDN laid off all of their copy editors?
Great idea on paper, but we all know this will be a toll highway, that will without a doubt put more costs on people downeast nothing like paying a toll to go to Bangor. Put your mud tires on and take the studmill road
This will be like the Southern Maine portion of the Interstate and Maine Turnpike it will have tolls so they can be used to maintain this road and pay for patrols etc.. Maine needs upgraded roads and infrastructure. We shouldn’t have to drive through pot holes every 50 ft and damage our vehicles because of the Democrats not caring about our roads and bridges supporting Welfare instead. Maine should have 1st rate roads and bridges.
…and, the Canadians should have them built across Maine by Mainers.
If you want to go to Bangor for free you will still be able to go 50-55 down route 9. Your choice. I will take the faster, and safer new road.
$300,000 to do what??? A study to see if we can get another road—–why do we not fix the ones that we already have, that would a step in the right direction. A “TOLL ROAD” is any road in Maine! The fuel tax, taxes on the repairs of our trucks, cars, etc. and what do they do with it? If the Canadians want to go from point A to B, there already is a road there.
It is just like making a cut for the Panama Canal across Maine. A four-lane super highway strictly to benefit Canadians.
There is no doubt what company is already earmarked to construct it – Cianbro.
This “dream” has been bouncing and drifting about for decades. Supporters – the dreamers – foresee untold wealth and economic opportunities by having this speedway destroy thousands of acres of rural Maine. Hundreds will lose their homes and farms. It is even worse than Urban Renewal.
The ultimate goal is to provide a super highway for Canadians. A shorter loop between eastern and western Canada. Much better than having to navigate Maine’s rural highways. That’s all. Maine loses. The Quebecois want a short link with the Eastern Canadian Provinces and Vice versa.
Direct, concise and exactly on point. You put it out there and cut thru the crap to keep it simple. The only thing missing is the supposedly final leg of I-95 being run from Houlton up to either Madawaska or Van Buren like it was originally proposed. But that’s a whole different story !
Paving that short jaunt between the I-95 terminus at Houlton and Madawaska is long forgotten. That is, except for The County potato and vegetable shippers and long haulers from the south.
Besides, it’s too parochial for politicians’, especially those who love to bask in the international spotlight. Saying you’re creating Maine’s own Autobahn adds a more sophisticated clink in conversation, when cocktail glasses are raised.
I-95 spurred a neighborly rush by businesses to share a side of the road bed, which left many Maine communities with barely any traffic.
I can’t possibly imagine what part of “privately funded” is not understood by the majority of people posting here.
Some of us here in Piscataquis County will have a web site called “FRIENDS OF THE PISCATAQUIS VALLEY.” It will include a discussion group dedicated to the East-West issue. (Probably won’t be up and running for a few weeks, we got to do our taxes first!) Look for it! Remember, this could turn out to be much more than a highway. It is characterized by Vigue as a “Utility Corridor”.
Some Canadian websites have suggested that it might be a good route for what they term the “Alberta to St. John Pipeline.”……We will be willing to fight this.