The ballot description of Question 5 is so long that it cannot be printed in its entirety here. The $17 million bond covers needed environmental and agricultural improvements with a small grant tossed in to help downtowns. Individually, each of the 10 proposals are worth supporting, so voters should be asked to overlook the clumsy way they were assembled by the Legislature and vote yes on this package.

Question 5 is a reminder that it is often more cost-effective to prevent pollution rather than try to clean it up later. Too late to think about that now, however, because Maine’s aging and substandard water-treatment plants, its leaking landfills, mountains of tires and sites contaminated with hazardous waste already exist, making the money requested in this bond a small down payment against pollution statewide.

The money, if history is a guide, will be well-spent. Voters have approved bond issues year after year to allow the state, mostly through the Department of Environmental Protection, to reimburse communities for landfill closure and repair, to upgrade water-treatment systems and to finally get rid of those tire piles, which are now chipped and used for filler for highway beds, among other uses. It is unexciting but necessary work that has become a permanent part of Maine’s bonding process and is likely to remain so for the long-term. The fact that the water-treatment money would be matched with $30 million in federal dollars is an added incentive.

In this year’s proposal, $3.7 million of the money would go toward agriculture – helping to build environmentally safe places to store large amounts of manure, euphemistically called nutrient management facilities, and to build dependable farm water sources. The Potato Marketing Improvement Fund would receive $1 million of the bond money. Agriculture does not have the presence it once did in Maine but it remains a vital part of its economy and culture. Helping farmers stay in business or expand their businesses while being environmentally responsible

The bond adds $300,000 to the Municipal Investment Trust Fund, although it is hard to see the connection between it and the environment and agriculture. The fund was begun in 1993 under the Department of Economic and Community Development but, like other state programs, has remained empty for years. Legislators, unwilling to do the responsible thing and either pay for the program through the general fund or kill it, tucked it into a bond question expected to pass. So much for leadership.

Question 5, however, provides necessary funding for needed long-term projects that should relieve Maine of larger costs in the future. These are ideal projects for bonding and the federal match doesn’t hurt, either. Voters should say yes to Question 5.