BOND ALTERNATIVES

Rejection of the bonds to pay for drinking water and wastewater projects, which are important to the health, safety and economic wellbeing of Maine residents, as well as a highway bond, highlights the problem of financing necessary, on-going work with bond money, that must be approved by lawmakers and voters. Several lawmakers have said they will propose including these expenditures in the state budget in the next Legislature. It is an overdue discussion.

In the meantime, many communities must wait at least another year for drinking-water and water-pollution improvements. This could lead to problems like polluted rivers during storms and curtailed shellfish harvesting. It may also mean that companies look elsewhere to build or expand because they favor towns with adequate water and sewer capacity.

LD 1001 proposed a $17.5 million bond, with the largest share – $6.6 million – going to the Department of Environmental Protection’s wastewater facility construction loan and grant programs, to be matched by $13 million from the federal government. Without the money, improvements to the Machias wastewater collection and treatment system will be delayed. Recent declines in the water quality in the Machias River below the plant led to the closure of clam flats in the area, putting at least 80 clammers out of work. The flats aren’t likely to be re-opened until the wastewater project is complete.

The bond proposal also included nearly $3 million, to be matched with $2 million in federal funds, for the DEP to secure and clean up uncontrolled hazardous substance sites, the state’s version of Superfund sites. The DEP fund for this purpose is now out of money, so if new sites contaminated by hazardous substances are found, the department could just put up a fence and cross their fingers, said the department’s Deputy Commissioner Deb Garrett.

LD 1001 also included $3.5 million for grants and loans to construct and upgrade public drinking water systems, money necessary to secure $17.5 million in federal funds. Without that money, the Bureau of Health is in jeopardy of having to lay off 17 employees who assist communities with drinking water programs, which could lead the state to lose its authority from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to license such projects. The state has two years to get the federal money, so a larger bond issue next year would put the program back on track.

Communities, however, shouldn’t be taken on a biennial roller coaster ride wondering whether they will be get state and federal funding for necessary drinking water and sewer improvements.

Lawmakers tend not to look favorably on fees or taxes and are likely to be hesitant to cut other programs to fund environmental work, but it is clear that the state needs to find a better way to pay for water projects and toxic cleanups.