BANGOR, Maine — When Maine voters hit the polls on Tuesday, Nov. 6, they will be deciding whether the state should borrow a total of nearly $76 million — with about $19 million in interest — toward infrastructure, higher education and conservation projects.
The bond questions on this year’s ballot are:
Question 2: “Do you favor an $11,300,000 bond issue to provide funds for capital to build a diagnostic facility for the University of Maine System; for capital improvements and equipment, including machine tool technology, for the Maine Community College System; and for capital improvements and equipment at the Maine Maritime Academy?”
Question 3: “Do you favor a $5,000,000 bond issue to purchase land and conservation easements statewide from willing sellers for public land and water access, conservation, wildlife or fish habitat and outdoor recreation, including hunting and fishing and deer wintering areas, and to preserve working farmland and working waterfronts to be matched by at least $5,000,000 in private and public contributions?”
Question 4: “Do you favor a $51,500,000 bond issue for improvements to highways and bridges, local roads, airports and port facilities, as well as for funds for rail access, transit buses and the LifeFlight Foundation, which will make the state eligible for at least $105,600,000 in federal and other matching funds?”
Question 5: “Do you favor a $7,925,000 bond issue to be expended over two years for revolving loan funds for drinking water systems and for wastewater treatment facilities, which will make the state eligible to secure $39,625,000 in federal grants?”
Mainers have a history of backing bond initiatives — voting “yes” on 31 of the 33 bond questions on ballots since 2001, according to results compiled by the Maine State Law and Legislative Reference Library.
The most recent rejected bond initiative was voted down narrowly by voters in November 2005. It would have secured $9 million for building renovations at University of Maine System campuses. Prior to that, Mainers lopsidedly turned down a $25 million 2002 bond to build a new correctional facility in Machias and make improvements at Maine Correctional Center in South Windham.
However, this year Maine Gov. Paul LePage has tried to tighten the state’s fiscal belt, citing the need to rein in spending and borrowing.
Early this summer, LePage said he wouldn’t allow the four bond packages on the Nov. 6 ballot to be sold, even if approved by voters, until the state’s “spending problem is under control.” Also included in that decision was about $40 million in bonds that already had been approved by voters but not sold at market.
“I’m not going to speculate on something that the voters haven’t voted on,” the governor’s spokeswoman Adrienne Bennett said Thursday. “But I’ll tell you [the governor’s] stance hasn’t changed.”
“We are trying to balance a budget,” Bennett said, adding that it’s not uncommon for governors to hold back voter-approved bonds and that LePage would continue to show “fiscal restraint until the state’s financial situation improves. We cannot absorb additional debt at this time.”
Supporters of the bond initiatives say they would fund badly needed repairs to roads and bridges, create and protect jobs, better equip colleges and universities and more.
Question 4 has the highest price tag of the four bond initiatives and has brought about some of the most vocal support. Most of the money — $41 million of the $51.5 million — would go toward the repair and reconstruction of highways and bridges deemed vital to business and public safety. The remainder would go to port facilities, transit buses, rail services and airports. The bond funding also is expected to make the state eligible for an addition $72 million in federal funding.
On Oct. 31, city officials from Bangor and Hampden, as well as the Port of Searsport and representatives of the transportation industry, threw their support behind the transportation bond during a press conference.
Susan Lessard, Hampden town manager and member of the Maine Board of Environmental Protection, said that while her community doesn’t support debt, these expenses can’t be put off any longer.
“This bond issue is not a luxury — it’s a necessity,” Lessard said. “If we are serious about the idea of attracting and maintaining business in Maine, whether those businesses are service or manufacturing or industrial, we need to improve the infrastructure.”
Question 2 would bring $7.8 million to the University of Maine System for an animal and plant diagnostic facility at the University of Maine. The facility also would support research in the identification and monitoring of pests and invasive species in the state.
“The University of Maine has an important role in protecting jobs, safeguarding the food supply, and protecting Maine citizens from potentially threatening diseases,” said John Rebar, executive director for the UMaine Cooperative Extension.
UMaine diagnostic facilities provide unique services to business owners, farmers, state government and others, but the university’s laboratories and equipment are outdated, Rebar said.
Officials at the diagnostic lab also have said they are concerned about biosecurity. The lab currently is located near the center of the University of Maine campus. The funding would help build a new 18,000-foot facility with improved biosecurity, laboratories, an attached greenhouse, animal autopsy lab and more.
The Maine Community College System would receive $3 million for infrastructure improvements and equipment that would allow it to expand programs that are high in demand as enrollment continues to grow, the system has said. The remaining $500,000 would go to Maine Maritime Academy for equipment and to expand infrastructure capital improvements to meet its own growing enrollment numbers.
Question 3 would authorize the state to issue up to $5 million to fund the Land for Maine’s Future program, which in the past 25 years has expanded its focus from public access-based land conservation to farm and working waterfront preservation.
Supporters say Maine’s natural resources yield tangible economic benefits and that the program protects Maine’s value as a place to live, work the land, hunt, fish and enjoy nature.
“The program has bolstered the natural resource industries that are the backbone of Maine’s economy and improved our quality of life,” Lands for Maine’s Future says on its website.
A February 2012 study by The Trust for Public Land stated that “every dollar invested in land conservation through LMF returned $11 in natural goods and services to the Maine economy.”
The Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine, which endorses the bond, lauded the part of the bond that designates funding to conserve deer habitat and help restore healthy deer numbers, which could bring more hunters and wildlife watchers to the state.
Question 5 would authorize nearly $8 million for drinking water and wastewater treatment programs. A total of $3.6 million would go into the state’s safe drinking water revolving loan fund, which is administered to eligible public water systems by the Maine Bond Bank and Department of Health and Human Services. The remainder would go into an existing state loan fund that helps municipalities construct and upgrade wastewater treatment facilities.
Passage of Question 5 would yield a 5-to-1 return in federal dollars on Maine’s expenditure to replenish the Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund, which was established in 1997 as a financing tool to minimize the impact on ratepayers of public water system capital projects, and a similar Clean Water Revolving Loan Fund created in 1987 for wastewater treatment.
Maine’s State Treasurer Bruce Poliquin has released a statement in advance of the election in an attempt to clarify exactly what voters are approving when they vote “yes” on a bond.
In the statement, Poliquin writes that voter approval of all four bond questions would allow the state treasurer to borrow nearly $76 million by selling general obligation bonds to investors. Like any loan, the bonds would accrue interest over their 10-year life, which Poliquin estimated at $19 million.
Furthermore, there is another $41 million of borrowing authorized by past Legislatures and approved by voters that has not yet been borrowed, Poliquin said.
“The annual interest and principal payments to the bondholders will be funded primarily by personal and corporate income and sales taxes paid by Maine citizens, businesses and visitors,” Poliquin wrote.
The treasurer’s statement will be posted at polling places on Election Day.
Poliquin did not return a message requesting an interview on Thursday, but in a recent blog post on the state’s website he decried spending that has driven the country deeper into debt.
“Ten short years ago little was discussed about our accumulating public debt,” Poliquin wrote. “The media wasn’t interested in government’s addiction to spending money it doesn’t have. Many years of this financial recklessness by career politicians has caught up with America.”
“Here in Maine, we’re getting it right and leading by example,” Poliquin continued. “We understand that living within our means, paying off debt, reducing taxes, simplifying business regulations, and pushing down energy and health insurance costs will attract business investment and jobs.”



Whats the point of voting on it? LePage will vetoe it anyway, citing it is going to cost us more or some such thing.
Time for impeachment.
For what? he has that power ..duh
You must vote anyway/ I agree with you But All people must vote. Bonds are ined in states to get what they need Don’t be untimidated/
Burdening our children with crushing debt is selfish and irresponsible.
If you pay yourself, right now, the entire cost for a major infrastructure asset, one that will be used by your children and grandchildren, they get a free ride. So tell me, how is that fair to you?
Maine does not just issue bonds without paying – they are regularly paid off, and often paid ahead of time.
Maine issues and repays bonds much like riders get on/off a Ferris wheel. The wheel stops and bonds get on, while others are paid off and retired.
We are not abdicating our responsibility if we sensibly finance using bonds. I speak of Maine, not Uncle Sam. That is a different issue.
If you believe that Maine has been spending responsibly then you haven’t been paying attention.
I said that bond financing for a long term infrastructure is sometimes smart.
You said the rest. Vote “No” if you want to. It is a free country, and it is your right.
..and has become the American way. I’m with you.
VOTE NO ON ALL BOND ISSUES!!!! The credit card is maxed out.
Governments (and larger coporations) don’t operate on credit cards.
Really……16t in debt..how ya paying for that!
You missed his point. Bond financing isn’t exactly the same as running up the ol’ credit card.
I’m no finance guy, but I know that sometimes the debt is less expensive of the alternatives. That is why corporations issue bonds, from time to time.
Money has a time value. Depreciation (loss of value) is a real cost. Sometimes this means that bonds make sense.
Reading these posts would make one think that Maine just issues bonds, piles up debt, and never pays it down. The truth is that Maine pays them off regularly, and often, ahead of schedule.
Meanwhile the state has current bills that are due to Maine hospitals and medical providers, some over 5 years old, that haven’t been paid. Only the drones running government and those who benefit from their irresponsible spending could think the solution is to borrow more money.
No argument that they should pay those.
Remember, though, that letting infrastructure deteriorate is another form of deficit spending. And the track record for paying bonds is good. Reading most of these posts, one would get the impression that we never pay any of them down, and it isn’t true.
However, Buddy, bonding is still borrowing on the future credit of the State..there’s no denying that, and if unnecessary funding is borrowed the net result is to drive up future tax rates that must be paid in order to service the [increased] debtload.
Right, let our infrastructure
go to pieces and wait until interest rates get higher to decide to fix those
things.Certainly looks like perhaps you don’t use roads or bridges. Lucky you!
Unfortunately, most Of Maine needs these things, even the ‘job creators
If we can afford the interest AND the principal then why not pay as we go and pay only the principal? Road maintenance is not a one time expense like buying a house. Time to put on the big boy pants and quit borrowing from the future. Vote NO on all bonds.
There are many things we ‘think’ we need, as is evident by the millions of people who have borrowed themselves into bankruptcy. Feel free to donate your personal funds as you see fit.
Maybe vote yes for highway/bridge, maybe drinking water. But, NO, for the U of M, they have always got their hand out for something, they need to scale down, get rid of some of that infastructure, get rid of the chancellor’s office, that alone, would give them the money they need. However the biggest and loudest NO NO NO is question 3, this is an inside deal, someone is just waiting to unload these, and let the poor Mainers pay for it, let the owners pay taxes to the State, and if they do not want too, donate the land.
No Water/Waste Treatment!! MANY people in Maine have decent wells and a perfectly good septic tank! Personally I don’t want my town to require me to hook up and pay for public water and sewage! I pay enough in property taxes as it is! I’m just fortunate that right now I live far enough away from town to avoid this nonsense!
Many? Data please. Maine has a good record the last couple of decased improving it’s ground and surface water let’s keep it up.
they can’t make you hook up to the town….
the treatment plant delivers clean drinking water and handles the waste. You may have a well ( hope you test your water often) but I don’t. I want water that I can trust.
A lot of folks don’t understand that voting for a bond issue, is voting for our tax money to get spent.
LOL…you seriously think your tax money would not be spent in the absence of bonds?
what alternative universe are you people living in?
Ah, yeah, just vote NO for everything, we don’t need any of it. Why would we want to increase any debt. It’s better for no one to have any chance for a job. Just shut the state down… Borrow money, heck NO.. Oh, the next time you might want a car, house, or any other high cost item, save for it. Put the loan institutions out of business!
You know there was a time in this country when the general public was not so eager to lick the boot heels of the bankers….sad to see you’ve fallen victim to the bankster’s outright lies and illusions
Point of the comment is, Money needs to travel around to help everyone. Not borrowing, does not move money. When money doesn’t move neither does the economy…
Then why don’t we all just max out our credit cards, apply for more credit cards, max’em out, apply for more, ect? Borrowing money for necessities is acceptable, but to be responsible old debt must paid before creating new debt.
When money doesn’t move, neither does the economy.
My thesis today is about being economically dead.
You know that I was a single man for twenty years — between the ages of 34 and 54. I have always been a very moderate man. Call it being lazy if you will. A medical person might now explain that I had a thyroid deficiency which can yank the rug of ambition from beneath your feet. I was always tired, I had no wife and no children so there was no need for me to work. You might know many people who wouldn’t work if they didn’t have to. For many, many years I didn’t earn enough money to pay an income tax. I was content to let my house fall down around me. I dressed in rags and was happy. I can remember one winter my income was the $100 Alvin Hawkins paid me for some hackmatack trees he wanted for his dock. You can see that if every man in the United States
had lived and thought like I did, we would have been invaded and conquered by Peru a long time ago. I didn’t work, and therefore I couldn’t spend. I was completely worthless as far as Maine’s economic community was concerned. For all practical purposes Adam Smith or John Nash would have pronounced me economically dead.
Are you hanging in here with me?
On the other hand, — you heard about the people who died but weren’t found until three years later. Their social security checks were deposited directly into
their checking account and the power and utility companies had prevailed upon
these people to eliminate the bother of check writing and let them tap directly
into the account on the other end. So for three years after these people died,
the money went into the checking account and for the same three years all their
bills were automatically paid by their checking account. You, of course, see
where I’m going with this. For three years after these people stopped breathing, they continued to be vital, contributing members of their economic community.
There in a somewhat abbreviated form, you have the economic history of two households: The humble Farmer, who was living but economically dead, and the family that was dead but economically living.
If you were Open For Business which one would you want in your town?
When money doesn’t move, neither does the economy.
The humble Farmer
Well said… And, if anyone doesn’t agree, Keep buying from China!
You were lazy and you’re neighbor had no friends. What’s the point?
If we don’t borrow the money then the taxpayers who have to pay it back will keep the money and spend it much more wisely than the government drones could ever hope to.
You’re exactly right…money in circulation is what defines our economy. However, you don’t have to borrow to keep the economy in decent shape. The mere fact that we have two political parties, one of which always advocates for increases in social welfare program spending is enough to help support the economy.
Investors buy the bonds and Munis are always a good buy.
LOL….man are you gonna get creamed!
Ben and the boys at Goldy are gonna roll right over yah…
The only way a banker pulls it over on you would be if you do not read the contract. / paperwork
When you buy a house (it is stupid to borrow money for a car even though many people do it) you are buying it once and will retire the debt and have a valuable asset. The state comes back begging for new bonds EVERY year. Meanwhile they own Maine hospital and medical providers hundreds of millions in unpaid bills. Only a graduate of Maine public schools could call that a balanced budget.
You have a valuable asset, even while you are paying for it, and even if you refinanced it.
You might be better off, in some cases, to never pay it off. If you pay it off, you might incur costs that are even larger from depletion of your own savings, loss of value, loss of tax deduction, and lack of liquidity.
It isn’t as simple as “if I never have any debt to service, that is ideal” and “if I have debt to service, that is terrible.” It depends on the situation.
It might not always be stupid to borrow money to buy a car, either. What if you borrowed at 1%? Is that stupid?
Doesn’t matter whether you borrow at 1% or 15%. If, in 5 years, you owe more on the car than the car’s worth you’re ‘upside down’. Not a good position to be in. Likewise, that’s the position many homebuyers found themselves in when the bottom dropped out of the real estate market in 2008.
Can we do it line by line I favor some but not all
yes, the bonds are separate items, Questions 2, 3, 4 and 5.
You don’t borrow more money when trying to get out of debt…THAT makes sense only in the bizarro world of a liberal. Problems? Just throw more money at them according to the failed ideology of the Leftists, Liberals and Dems. Nothing about cutting spending, just spend, spend, SPEND! Good thing we’ll have Angus King in DC to fight against….oh, right. He’ll spend like a drunken sailor like he did when governor. Nevermind.
Please don’t compare Angus King to drunken sailors. It’s insulting to drunken sailors!
Vote Yes on all bonds!
Stick it to Lepage!
That would be sticking it to all Maine taxpayers.
That’s what the dems are all about
Ha Ha! When your rich like Myth it doesn’t matter. :]
No.
Didn’t they just increase tolls for this very reason? Am I missing something? We pay taxes to pay for infrastructure, and education, or at least that is what we are told. Yet we have failing schools, and crumbling roads, so then we are told that we only need to borrow some more money, or be taxed a little more to pay for our failing schools and crumbling roads. At what point have we taxed enough and borrowed enough money in order to have a healthy school system and infrastructure, because from the looks of it, it will never happen. No matter how much they borrow, no matter how much they tax, and no matter how much they raise tolls, our schools and infrastructure will continue to be neglected as the money will continue to be wasted elsewhere.
They either need to work with what they have got or be quiet.
And you’re satisfied with what you have?
Part of the problem is that the money, borrowed or otherwise, isn’t spent wisely. I’ve harped about this too many times to count but just in the last few years we’ve spent ~$200,000,000 on just 4 new schools. Hampden takes top prize with $60,000,000. They “want our children to be proud of their school”, as though a child’s pride in school makes a difference in the quality of their education. Then we have the road bonds. These are sponsored by a group called MBTA (Maine Better Transportation Association) which was created by construction companies solely to promote continued road construction via bonds and local taxes. This organization is relentless in it’s pursuit of public monies. That is it’s reason to exist! UMaine seems as though it is a likely recipient but, again, they are back at the trough every year! Ditto for land conservation. Then we have the job creation bonds such as the one put forth during the last election cycle. Almost everyone is in favor of creating jobs but the trouble is, nobody does their homework on where the money goes. At least one potential recipient of this bond money has been in business for over a decade, has always been funded by the public, and STILL doesn’t have a viable product. Oh, I almost forgot the constant pressure to build new “public safety” campus’s. All of this is fueled by the claim, accurate, that these funds are matched by federal largess. The trouble is, they make it sound as though this money is free but it isn’t. We pay federal taxes too so this money is coming out of your wallet.
Currently the joke is that Maine voters never saw a bond they didn’t like. That would seem to be true. The problem is that these bonds are not really vetted publicly. We, citizens of Maine, mean well but we never get the details such as the workings of the MBTA and other bond sponsors. It’s time to put a halt to bond issues and revamp how the process is done. There needs to be a requirement that bonds are vetted and then published for all to review. Simple headlines with anti/pro opinion from one person just doesn’t cut it. So until then, I urge voters to vote NO on all new bonds.
How much bond money do we owe now, that would help me decide.
NO on everything! Only a fool or a Democrat would try to spend their way out of debt!
NO,NO,NO freaking NO!!!!!!!!!
A bond question is like an election in that it decides who will get the money — do the rich get more to hoard, or is tax or borrowed money used for education, healthcare and infrastructure.
The American patriots who keep their homes in the Cayman Islands and their money in Swiss banks could care less about your public education, healthcare and infrastructure. And unless they want to give something back to you in this country, whose tax structure has enabled them to grow increasingly richer, why should they?
Because the media is owned by the rich, many rural people have been conditioned to believe that giving money back to themselves and their communities in the form of education, healthcare and infrastructure is bad and giving money to the rich to stash in Switzerland is good.
Until I started reading this blog a couple of years ago I really didn’t believe that so many people who eagerly vote against themselves could live in Maine.
The humble Farmer
Dems and republicans have off shore accounts..so?
I vote we throw out all Maine officials and start over with honest ones, that would mean selecting someone with an income below $50K.
Ya..maybe we should put minimum wage workers in there…ya no! I do not want to be led by one that has not already gotten ahead..
Ya like we need more people like king getting ahead on the taxpayers back. or the electric ratepayers backs.. LOL!!! Please stand in line.
You’re thinking LeBuffoon’s daughter, right?? :-)
The liberals will vote yes and the conservsatives no. For the liberals the amount of money is not what the balance is in the checking account, it is the number of unwritten checks in the check book. Got a $2 balance and no money but I got 6 blank checks, I can write one for $50. I like that.
The state needs to repay the bonds that we have outstanding already before we borrow more and more. I believe the road and bridge bond is the only one we really need, now. The others can wait until we reduce our payback…….
Pass a responsible budget that doesn’t require bonds. Vote NO on all bonds.
We pay bonds off constantly. Maine’s record on paying bonds off is good. They are often paid off early.
I’m not voting Yes on them all, but I can’t stand this constant “always vote NO” mantra.
Vote on the individual merits. Use your heads.
And I don’t see any advantage to voting to increase the size of the budget gaps that all too frequently leave the legislative appropriations committee scrambling to plug the holes in the dike with insufficient revenue sources(assuming that tax rates don’t get raised to cover on someone’s whim).
Vote no on debt.
I have a company that would benifit greatly from these bonds. I’m in it for over 1.3 millon, over 1/2 millon will be pure profit. Thanks for voting yes.. LOL!!! I need the money.
Easiest questions I answered: No, No No and No
Even when we vote “Yes,” we’re told our keeper will not permit the bonds to be sold. In other words – your vote doesn’t mean anything in Maine.
The Bonds are urgently need to get the state moving again. I’ll be voting “Yes” and let the US Supreme Court decide whether Paul Le Page has the power to stifle the people’s vote.
Vote NO on all bond issues is a great suggestion. Money is borrowed, and the taxpayers have to pay it back–Maine can not afford it!
They got my vote and it is NO on all bonds.
Yes on bonds. They are for the good of all.