The bond problem before Maine is simple enough, yet becomes complicated if not solved this fiscal year. That means a vote of the Legislature is needed before November, an event that could be helped by a meeting of the Appropri-ations Committee soon.

The problem comes from three sources:

. To keep the work on the Waldo-Hancock Bridge moving, the state, with the approval of Democratic and Republican lawmakers, used $10 million in transportation bond money scheduled for use at projects around the state starting this fiscal year, which began July 1. That money leverages a federal match of $4 for every state dollar, meaning it is worth a total of $50 million in transportation projects.

. A similar shift, also with bipartisan support, occurred when the Eastern Pulp mills in Lincoln and Brewer needed immediate cash to be cleaned and secured. That money, about $1.2 million in state funds, came from an environmental bond scheduled to clean up 16 projects around the state and will cost local taxpayers considerably if they are not funded.

. The popular Land for Maine’s Future fund is empty. It has operated since 1987, has been enthusiastically supported by Maine voters and also uses matching money to expand the value of its purchases. Gov. Baldacci has proposed adding $30 million to its coffers, a significant reduction of what he first wanted.

Pretty basic stuff. Maine government has made promises for funding, its lawmakers for good reason have needed to use bond money for critical projects and now, as Maine does every year, needs to renew bonds and keep these jobs moving and to start new ones. To do that, Gov. Baldacci wants to call a special session this summer to approve a bond package; Republicans are resisting. As for LMF, the question has not been whether to fund this program but at what level. The answer should be that its board should have enough funding to enter into major land deals for a least several years giving the board enough flexibility to plan.

Legislative Republicans, generally, do not want to support the matter. House Leader Joe Bruno recently said, “I would not be able to guarantee enough votes for a bond package from the replies I’m getting in our survey.” Support of two-thirds both the House and Senate is required to send a bond question to voters. If a legislative vote is taken this summer, the question can go on the fall ballot; if they wait until January, the question would not be decided until June at the earliest.

Last spring, when the question of using bond money to pay for mill environmental expenses arose, local Republican lawmakers were in favor of shifting the money. GOP Sen. Ed Youngblood of Brewer said he thought voters would support the shift. “It’s wonderful if everything can be planned, but everything doesn’t work out that way,” he said. “I think voters understand we cannot plan everything that happens.”

GOP Sen. Tom Sawyer of Bangor was less happy with the idea, but he also accepted the need to invest in the mills. “If we failed to take all available resources to protect those two assets and something happened [environmentally], we could be remorseful.”

They were right at the time and now their party needs to complete its obligation by restoring the funds taken from the approved projects. The way to do that is for both parties to support the proposed bonds this summer.