Maine
Rooks: School construction in Maine needs a major overhaul
Before leaving for Norway last week, Gov. Janet Mills announced a new commission to study the state’s school construction program and report to the Legislature by next April, to which one might respond, “It’s about time.”
The state’s existing construction model simply isn’t working, and has left towns and cities, and Maine’s regional school districts, with crumbling and outdated buildings and no clear path to replacing or renovating them.
Mills noted that in her first six years, there’s been $580 million committed, which sounds impressive until one realizes a single new high school often costs $100 million.
With dozens if not hundreds of inadequate buildings, replacing a handful won’t accomplish much, and the backlog of applications keeps growing.
The new commission, chaired by King Administration Labor Commissioner Valerie Landry, has a tall task, and should start with two major flaws in how school projects are financed.
The first is a peculiar compromise by which the state reimburses the local districts that actually borrow the money. Rather than a separate capital construction budget, funding is carved out from the mammoth General Purpose Aid account that goes mostly for operating expenses.
Construction is constrained by a debt ceiling – rarely increased – that limits new projects to debt retired from previous awards. Maine ends up being generous with operating support and stingy for capital spending.
The second flaw was introduced through adoption of the Essential Programs and Services (EPS) system in the late 1990s.
Previously, construction costs were shared between the state and the local district on a sliding scale. Towns and cities with robust tax bases, as in Cumberland County, would pay more, while those in Aroostook and Washington were mostly state-funded – but all districts paid something.
Under the EPS calculations the state pays 100% for almost every project, meaning it can fund even fewer projects than when local districts contributed.
Now, a few lucky districts effectively win the lottery, while everyone else is left out in the cold.
The infrastructure crisis has become so severe that some districts have tried to do without state funding and asked property taxpayers to pick up the entire tab. Even in Cumberland County, the results have been dismal.
While some local bonds have been approved, most have been turned down – not necessarily because voters don’t support schools but because they rightly see this as a state responsibility.
It makes little sense for Maine to provide 55% of all approved school spending but make construction projects wait a decade or longer. Students will have started school and graduated by then.
What can be done? There are other models.
When voters turned down several state prison bond issues during the McKernan administration, lawmakers created the Maine Governmental Facilities Authority, operating “off budget” and apart from General and Highway Fund bonds more familiar to voters.
Later expanded to courthouses, the authority has replaced or renovated nearly the entire state correctional system, and has built impressive judicial centers in several counties.
That’s all well and good, but most parents and taxpayers would place a higher priority on schools. That’s not the way things are working.
A School Facilities Authority may not be the answer, in part because we have an existing system, however flawed – but mostly because the authority has no real accountability to taxpayers and citizens.
One possibility: a robust General Fund bond that voters could approve to jumpstart the process, along with a real capital budget for the first time in decades.
There are other matters for the Landry commission to take up. Current rules require a perhaps excessive amount of acreage, eliminating sites close to urban and village centers and creating sprawl.
Kids can’t walk to school, and schools are increasingly remote from the communities that support them.
Finally, no amount of tinkering with construction funding can ignore Maine’s hopelessly decentralized school districts, well over 200 for fewer than 200,000 students – less than 1,000 per district.
A Baldacci administration initiative to consolidate failed because it ignored the proven formula for success: the Sinclair Act, passed in 1957 during the administration of Gov. Ed Muskie.
Implemented during the 1960s, Sinclair created 68 regional districts with generous support for mergers, and provided the first adequate rural high schools in Maine. The 2007 consolidation plan, by contrast, penalized districts for not merging while provided no state plan to do so.
The next administration could dust off Sinclair and see what will work in a high-tech era where public schools face unprecedented challenges.
Mainers have shown time and again they value public education and are willing to pay. Now the state must make sure they’re getting their money’s worth.
Douglas Rooks has been a Maine editor, columnist and reporter for 40 years. He is the author of four books, most recently a biography of U.S. Chief Justice Melville Fuller, and welcomes comment at drooks@tds.net.
Maine
Planned Parenthood says requests for birth control spiked in Maine after Trump election
Planned Parenthood of Northern New England says requests for long-acting reversible contraceptives have nearly doubled at its clinics since the Nov. 5 election that resulted in Republicans gaining control of U.S. Congress and the White House.
In the week after the election, Planned Parenthood of Northern New England received 215 appointment requests for long-acting contraceptives, including birth control implants and intrauterine devices, at its clinics in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont, almost twice as much as its normal weekly bookings of 111. In Maine, bookings went from an average of 26 weekly appointments to 48 in the week after the election.
While President-elect Donald Trump has said he would not support a national abortion plan, reproductive rights advocates have doubted that he would refuse to sign such a bill.
Advocates have also raised concerns that the Trump administration will restrict access to reproductive health services and could try to use a 19th century law – the Comstock Act – to forbid shipping mifepristone, the abortion pill, across state lines – a claim Trump denied during the campaign.
Abortion rights advocates also warned that a Trump administration could also make it more difficult to access contraceptives.
Almost all Republican politicians are anti-abortion, and starting in January Republicans will control all levers of the federal government, with the presidency, both houses of Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority.
Nicole Clegg, CEO of Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, said in a statement that “our patients are worried.”
“They are concerned that they may not be able to access the care they need or make the best choices for their health,” Clegg said. “Election outcomes shouldn’t have this type of impact on people’s lives. People shouldn’t wake up one morning and find that getting the method of birth control they want or need is now out of their hands. These are personal decisions and shouldn’t be subject to political whims.”
The Supreme Court in 2022 reversed Roe v. Wade, leaving decisions about whether abortion is legal up to the states. While Maine passed laws increasing access to abortion, 21 states either banned abortion outright or placed strict restrictions on abortion care.
The first Trump administration, which ran from 2017-2020, instituted a gag order on what abortion clinics could say about abortion care to their patients, resulting in a cut in federal funding to Planned Parenthood.
In addition to the interest in long-acting contraceptives, the number of vasectomy consultations, 26 in the first two weeks of November, had already surpassed Planned Parenthood of Northern New England’s monthly average of 23.
Also, Planned Parenthood has experienced an increase in patients reaching out about the potential for reduced access to gender-affirming care during the Trump administration, although there was no data released about an increase in these concerns.
This story will be updated.
Maine
Key takeaways from Maine’s new climate action plan
The Maine Climate Council is scheduled to release the state’s new climate action plan on Thursday, delivering an ambitious blueprint for how policymakers can accelerate the state’s transition to a clean energy economy and prepare for the impacts of climate change.
The plan, approved by the council at its October meeting, builds on the state’s original 2020 plan, Maine Won’t Wait. But the updated version focuses more than its predecessor on adaptations to the changing climate, building and industrial energy efficiency, and ensuring that all Mainers benefit from the climate actions outlined in the plan.
The plan doesn’t include many specific cost estimates, but notes that the cost of doing nothing would be much higher. It cites the $90 million in public infrastructure damage caused by last winter’s back-to-back storms, the kind of extreme weather events projected to become more frequent and ferocious due to climate change.
The report identifies potential sources of funding to implement its recommendations, including the state budget, federal grants from the Inflation Reduction Act, private investment in clean energy projects, green bonds to finance climate-related projects and even implementation of a carbon pricing mechanism.
The plan now heads to Gov. Janet Mills, who appointed the first Maine Climate Council and will be on hand Thursday for the report’s release, and the Legislature, which is likely to consider some of these proposals in the upcoming legislative session.
Here are the major takeaways of Maine Won’t Wait 2.0.
• Maine’s ambitious emission reduction goals are reaffirmed.
The updated plan lays out how the state can help prevent the Earth from overheating by sticking to its original greenhouse gas goals: cut carbon emissions by 45% from 1990 levels by 2030 and by 80% by 2050, and achieve carbon neutrality by 2045.
• The plan prioritizes the rapid expansion of renewable energy sources, such as solar, wind, and hydropower, with an aim to reduce the state’s reliance on burning fossil fuels that create heat-trapping greenhouse gases.
It also maintains the state’s previous goal to generate 80% electricity from renewable sources by 2030. Maine is at 55% now.
• Maine will continue to promote the widespread adoption of electric vehicles, including cars, trucks and buses, to reduce transportation-related emissions. But the shift to electrified transportation would occur at a slower pace than laid out in the first climate action plan.
The state’s new goal calls for 150,000 light-duty EVs and 3,000 heavy-duty EVs on the roads by 2030. The 2020 plan called for 219,000 light-duty and 5,000 heavy-duty EVs, but the state has fallen short of those goals. Maine currently has 17,492 electric vehicles.
To reduce “range anxiety” – the concern that there is not enough charging capacity to support longe trips – the plan calls for creating 700 publicly funded fast-charging EV ports by 2028. Maine now has 273.
• The new plan emphasizes efficiency measures in buildings and industries to cut energy consumption. It encourages clean heating and cooling methods, such as a heat pump system, and adoption of new building codes and efficiency standards.
New goals include reducing commercial building energy demand by 10% by 2030, improving industrial process efficiency by 1% a year by 2030 and weatherizing 35,000 homes by 2030. Maine has weatherized 11,472 to date.
• While calling for measures to slow climate change, the plan also emphasizes the need to prepare for the inevitable impacts, including sea-level rise, extreme weather events, and coastal erosion, and the need to protect critical infrastructure, natural resources and communities.
It includes strategies to protect Maine’s coastal communities and the working waterfront from sea-level rise and storm surges, such as elevating infrastructure, restoring coastal ecosystems, the use of incentives and fast-track permits, and new flood control measures.
• The plan promotes carbon sequestration as part of the solution by recognizing the key role of Maine forests, wetlands and eel grass beds in trapping carbon and keeping the greenhouse gas out of the atmosphere. It promotes the purchase, protection and restoration of such carbon sinks.
• Equity and social justice will be factored into the state’s responses to climate change. The plan emphasizes the importance of ensuring that the benefits of climate action are shared across all communities in Maine and addresses the disproportionate impact of climate change on marginalized communities.
The plan includes a number of goals to achieve by 2030, including 40,000 heat pumps installed in low-income households, 10,000 low- to middle-income homes weatherized and the creation of 1,500 energy-efficient affordable housing units. It also calls for EV rebates, rooftop solar installations or community solar projects and resilience grants to be directed to less affluent households and communities.
• The plan identifies opportunities to create green jobs to spark economic growth through investments in clean energy, energy efficiency and climate resilience.
It sets a new goal to create 30,000 clean energy jobs by 2030. Maine has 15,557 now.
• More forests, wetlands and working farms would be protected from development to offset the state’s carbon emissions, provide wildlife habitat and clean water, and help the tourism and natural resource industries. Maine has struggled to fund land acquisition at the rate sought by the council.
The plan maintains the 2020 goal to conserve 30% of Maine lands by 2030. A little more than 22.2% of lands in Maine are protected now. Maine now conserves about 50,000 acres a year, but would need to protect 250,000 more acres a year if it hopes to hit that goal.
Maine
Report says children's mental health, education and labor force growth will impact Maine's economy
In it’s annual report released Wednesday, the Maine Economic Growth Council identified children’s mental health, education and labor force growth as several challenge areas facing Maine’s economy. The council said high housing and energy costs are also concerns.
The annual Measures of Growth report identifies where the Maine economy is improving and where there is still more work to do compared to other states across the country.
Yellow Light Breen, President of the Maine Development Foundation, a public-private organization focused on improving Maine’s economy, said the drop in elementary and middle school students test scores are most concerning to him.
“If we really want to have well educated 20-year-olds, 30-year-olds and 40-year-olds in the Maine of the future, we have to do right by them in preschool and in early elementary,” Breen said.
According to the report, the state is doing well in the areas of internet connectivity, improved roadways and limited increases in greenhouse gas emissions and forestland removal.
-
Business1 week ago
Column: OpenAI just scored a huge victory in a copyright case … or did it?
-
Health1 week ago
Bird flu leaves teen in critical condition after country's first reported case
-
Business5 days ago
Column: Molly White's message for journalists going freelance — be ready for the pitfalls
-
World1 week ago
Sarah Palin, NY Times Have Explored Settlement, as Judge Sets Defamation Retrial
-
Politics4 days ago
Trump taps FCC member Brendan Carr to lead agency: 'Warrior for Free Speech'
-
Science2 days ago
Trump nominates Dr. Oz to head Medicare and Medicaid and help take on 'illness industrial complex'
-
Technology3 days ago
Inside Elon Musk’s messy breakup with OpenAI
-
Lifestyle4 days ago
Some in the U.S. farm industry are alarmed by Trump's embrace of RFK Jr. and tariffs