Many Roads Lead to the Budget

As the Legislature’s appropriators continue to work on the supplemental budget, committees are establishing their funding priorities.  So far, lawmakers have supported state funding for 55% of pre-K to grade 12 education costs, additional funding for county jail operations, and resources to retrofit school buses with critical safety features.  Additionally, Tanya Emery joins podcast co-hosts Rebecca Lambert and Amanda Campbell to discuss a wide range of legislative issues, including updates on mandatory reporter provisions, new protections for certain public officials, and emerging questions regarding the authority of municipalities to regulate clean energy developments.  

Transcript

 Welcome everyone to Potholes & Politics, Local Maine Issues from A to Z. I'm your co-host Rebecca Lambert, and with me as always is my amazing colleague, Amanda Campbell. 

Good morning, Rebecca. Thanks everybody for listening. 

If you missed our previous episode, we welcomed our colleague, Tanya Emery, to talk about the bills that she's been working on. It was a treat for us and for our listeners to have the whole team weighing in, and as luck would have it, she's available to join us this week too. Oh, happy days. 

Woo woo. 

If you haven't listened to the previous episode yet, please consider checking it out and while you're there, also consider liking and subscribing to our podcast. As we've mentioned, doing that is a great way to ensure you never miss one of these updates.

Also don't forget another great resource, our legislative bulletin, which is published every Friday during the legislative session. And it's also a great place to get weekly information on what's happening at the State House.

So, let's just jump right in. HHS held a work session on LD 2105, which was An Act to Update the Mandated Reporting Laws. The bill was sponsored by Representative Meyer from Eliot, and at the work session she proposed an amendment that was crafted with help from a stakeholder group led by the policy folks at the Maine Children's Alliance.

The amendment addressed one important point that our testimony identified, which was the proposed, very broad inclusion of people who would be considered a mandated reporter. Now, instead of repealing the list of specific professionals, the amendment streamlines the list with some deletions and some consolidations.

This helps identify the people who, in addition to being required to file a report of suspected neglect or abuse, it identifies who would also be required to attend DHHS training every two years. 

I spoke to the representative from the Maine Children's Alliance to ask specifically about code enforcement officers as mandated reporters. She reported that CEO filings come in very infrequently, and CEOs were not in the top 10% of filers who were contacted as part of the amendment process. This is important because in the recent discussions about CEO training that Tanya has reported about both here on the podcast and in the bulletin. Our team is hoping that this connection will ensure that CEOs are getting the training that fits their requirements and those of the DHHS.  

And keeping on the topic of keeping children safe, Tanya has an update on a transportation bill. 

The Transportation Committee is considering LD 2159, which would require all school buses in Maine to be equipped with crossing arms and require drivers to activate them when picking up or dropping off students. The proposal follows recent bus-related tragedies and aims to improve student safety.

The committee amended the bill, so failure to activate the arm would be treated as a traffic infraction rather than a criminal offense, ensuring liability stays with the driver rather than the school district. The proposal also sparked debate about requiring anti pinch door sensors on older buses with concerns raised about the cost and effectiveness of retrofitting existing buses.

The committee appears strongly supportive of the crossing arm requirement, though details are still being worked out. Notably, the Governor's supplemental budget proposal does include $5.9 million in one-time funding for safety enhancements to approximately 2,300 school buses. 

Speaking of the supplemental budget, the Appropriations and Financial Affairs Committee have been busy holding joint public hearings with different committees depending on what part of the budget is being heard.

We talked in the last episode about a few different areas of municipal interest, but one in particular that I talked about was the joint hearing with the Education and Cultural Affairs Committee. Just to recap real quick, staff testified on three parts of the budget as it relates to educational matters; supporting the funding of 55% of the cost of education, funding to retrofit the school buses that Tanya just talked about, and neither for nor against minimum teacher salaries. 

After the joint public hearings are held, the committee of jurisdiction, in this case, the Education and Cultural Affairs Committee, held two work sessions, one on February 25th, and then again on February 26th for the budget documents in their purview.

During those work sessions, the initiative that would fund the retrofitting school buses was voted on unanimously to a recommendation to the AFA committee. The funding for 55% of the cost of education and minimum teacher salaries were also voted on as a recommendation to include, but both were not unanimous.

On Friday last week, the AFA committee met and voted to include in the budget the funding for 55% of education as calculated by the EPS formula. The other two measures still have not been taken up by AFA. 

And Rebecca, isn't there a committee bill coming out based on the EPS formula study that MEPRI did? 

Yes, that committee bill was sent to the Revisors office and has been printed as LD 2226 and we will link to that bill in the show notes and I would encourage listeners to check it out and feel free to reach out with any questions.

We'll also link to the full MERPI report which can be found on their website. The public hearing for LD 2226 was held Monday, March 9th and it lasted for almost four hours. A lot of testimony was received in support, but there were a few people who testified in opposition, particularly against the changes to the special education pieces.

MMA testified neither for nor against this initiative since there are clear winners and losers associated with it. A work session has not been scheduled yet for this bill. 

Amanda, have any of the segments of the budget you're watching been taken up yet? 

Actually, yes. I have two quick budget updates to share.

One is from the taxation committee who voted unanimously to include the expanded veterans exemption initiative in the budget. And the second, from Criminal Justice who voted 11-1 to include a request for additional jail funding in their report back to a FA. The committee referenced LD 852, which is currently on the appropriations table and would appropriate an additional $4 million in both fiscal year 26 and 27. The committee admitted this action is a bandaid, but a necessary one. And AFA has not reviewed either initiative yet. 

Rebecca, what else is in the works for you recently? 

In the Judiciary Committee on March 4th, they held a work session for LD 2121 An Act to Enhance the Safety of Judicial and Elected Officials, Constitutional Officers, and the State Auditor by Allowing Certain Personal Information to be Removed from Designated Public Records. And that was sponsored by Representative Faircloth of Bangor. 

As originally drafted, the bill proposed to make confidential information that includes residential addresses for a specific set of individuals. An amendment was offered prior to the work session that would transform the bill into a resolve, directing the Secretary of State to convene a working group of stakeholders to study methods for enhancing the safety of judicial officers and elected officials.

There were a list of nine groups identified to participate in the working group, including a member representing MMA. The amendment would also establish a two-year pilot project administered by the Secretary of State's office that would provide each state judge or justice and state legislators who apply to participate in the pilot project, with a subscription service that would remove officials’ personally identifying information from internet websites and databases. The Secretary of State would also be required to submit a report with the working group's findings and recommendations by February 1st, 2027, and they're also authorized to report out legislation in 2027 based on the outcome of the report.

In response to the amendment, the Maine Press Association sent a letter to the committee requesting a seat on the working Group. Committee members didn't seem to object to that, but it raised the question of why there were no legislators tasked with sitting on the working group to answer that question, the bill sponsor indicated that it was his intent to not use legislative resources to accomplish this work.

The Secretary of State's office spoke at the work session to share information they found when they were looking into a preliminary fiscal note for this bill. According to their calculations, the pilot project would cost approximately $60,000 per year, so $120,000 for the two year pilot project, and this was based on the total number of legislators and judicial officers who would qualify for the program.

If you break that down, it would've cost approximately $200 per subscription per person, but doesn't take into account any bulk purchasing benefits. And it would also need to go through the state's RFP process. The bill was voted out of committee with an ought to pass as amended majority report, and the amendment includes a member of the press and two legislators, one from the house and one from the Senate, and they must be of differing parties.

So that's all I had on that bill. Amanda, I understand that you saw some success this week. 

Yes, I did and I'm thrilled to report that the attempt to divert funds from the real estate transfer tax to fund emergency housing shelter was amended in the housing committee last week and takes the counties out of it altogether.

Two ought to pass as amended reports for LD 2124 were recorded - both taking funds from the existing waterfall that is already in statute for the disbursement of the real estate transfer tax funds. One would reduce the housing production fund from a 30% allocation to 28%, and the other report recommended taking 2% from the general fund allocation, which is currently 20%.

What I think was most notable about the work session, other than the outcome, is the point that was made about this bill pitting the shelters against the counties, putting both groups of people who are providing services for their communities in a really difficult spot. Those members voting for the minority general fund report felt strongly that the state should be more adequately funding emergency shelters, but not take funding away from other housing programs.

I'm gonna say personally what was most frustrating about this bill was some committee members’ stance that since there are increased transfer tax revenues, it's okay to take those extra dollars away from the county portion of the transfer tax. It's a classic rising tides lift all boats moment. And this bill, as it was originally drafted, would have allowed the shelter boats to rise while leaving the county boats on an even keel.

So either amended report now raises the county boats as well, and by default will benefit the taxpayers due to the county's increased revenues, which is yay for them. 

Tanya, did you have an update from Criminal Justice? 

I do, and that's great news on the shelter funding. We also had a minor success in LD 2223, which is a proposal in front of the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee aimed at speeding up fire sprinkler system plan reviews for development projects. This bill would allow municipalities with trained personnel to partner with the Office of State Fire Marshal to conduct sprinkler plan reviews locally through a memorandum of understanding. Supporters say that this would expand capacity and bring local expertise into the review process and reduce project delays. The bill would also include funding for two additional state inspector positions, which the state fire marshal said could cut their review times down from about six weeks to two, further addressing some of the perceived bottlenecks that have been leading to the housing crisis.

And speaking of bottlenecks in permitting, a bill we talked about last time, LD 2174 would've preempted local control as it applies to clean energy development projects. The bill had a four-hour public hearing and about a four minute work session. An Act to Increase Predictability in the Permitting of Renewable Energy Development was unanimously voted out, ought not to pass.

Last Friday's Bulletin warned municipal officials to not necessarily take it as a win because it's likely a bill like this will rear its ugly head again next session. 

I'm glad that was voted out ought not to pass, but it sounds like we'll be seeing that one again in the future. 

I think that is a pretty safe bet.

Yes. And so the last thing that I wanted to mention was an amended bill that was dropped on us just recently. It has a public hearing on Wednesday of this week, which is LD 713. This was a concept draft that the taxation committee carried over from the first session. It's been essentially amended into a bill that would not allow AI data centers to qualify for the business equipment tax exemption program. We've polled the LPC, we're still waiting on some final results of that poll so that I can draft testimony, but I think it's a safe bet to say that, LPC members and most municipal officials agree that erosion of the tax base is a primary driver behind increases in taxation. So, definitely, we'll have an update on this during our next episode, but, last-minute bills, this the standard operating procedure this time of year. So. But, I think this bill has some intersection with a bill that Tanya listened to in a work session last week. And so, I'm wondering your thoughts about how those two bills might intersect. 

Great question, Amanda. Yes, LD 307 is in front of the Energy Utilities and Technology Committee. And originally it was a concept draft, but when the amendment dropped, and there have been several subsequent amendments, it was to both create a council that would look into how data centers are sited and what the impacts are on both natural resources and the energy grid, and so, some important, sort of long-term considerations. Then the bill was amended, by a second sponsor’s amendment, and that was to create a moratorium on data centers. There have been a number of different dates thrown around and there's actually another amendment that was offered as a minority report, when the bill was finally voted out.

That included a provision that those data centers that were eventually able to be sited would not be able to access state financial resources. So, there is a lot of discussion and dissention about data centers in general in Maine right now, but there certainly seems to be a strong sense that if they are going to come to, and they should not be coming and utilizing state financial incentives.

The LD 713 that the taxation committee will be hearing also excludes data centers from the state Dirigo business program. Also directs the Department of Economic and Community Development to study potential financial incentives that could apply to AI data centers at some point in the future.

So, seems like these two bills may act in tandem, but hard to say what the final, what the final result will be. 

Definitely something that we will keep listeners posted on as they develop either in the end of this session or in next session. 

This is gonna do it for this episode of Potholes and Politics and remember to keep an eye out for the legislative bulletin coming this Friday where you can get weekly information on the bills moving through the legislature.

As always, feel free to reach out to any one of us on the team with any questions that you might have. 

Thanks so much everybody for listening. We really hope you found that this information was helpful. 

Thanks for listening. 

Have a great day. 

Take care everybody.

LD 2226 An Act to Amend the Essential Programs and Services School Funding Formula

MEPRI EPS Funding Study Report

MMA’s Legislative Bulletin