As one of the most rural states in the country, the state of Maine is well known for its so-called “heritage industries” that rely on outdoor occupations, such as farming, fishing and logging.
Those industries have long driven Maine’s economy but they also present a few — somewhat hidden – challenges.
Overall, the bulk of those working in Maine’s “heritage” industries are men, and those physically-demanding jobs often come attached with significant mental health strains.
Workers in Maine’s “heritage industries” face lack of mental health resources. (Associated Press Photo)
“We know from years of statistical data that men are far less likely to reach out for mental health assistance than women,” explains State Sen. Henry Ingwersen (D-Biddeford). “And that is having an impact on our economy and our overall quality of living.”
Ingwersen is the senate chair of the Legislature’s Health and Human Services Committee. He is also a member of the Joint Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry Committee.
Those two roles intersect when it comes to addressing the health needs of those who work in one of Maine’s often rigorous and demanding heritage industries.
“Simply put, there are not a lot of mental health resources for people employed in small farming and fishing operations,” Ingwersen said. “Furthermore, men are often reluctant to ask for help.”
According to the U.S. Center for Disease Control (CDC), the suicide rate among males in 2023 was approximately four times higher than the rate among females.
Men make up roughly 50 percent of the population but nearly 80 percent of suicides.
To address this issue, Ingwersen plans to submit new legislation when the Legislature reconvenes in January.
State Sen. Henry Ingwersen (D-Biddeford)
That legislation will focus on creating a subcommittee to examine and address the lack of mental health resources in Maine’s heritage industries.
The bill — “Resolve, to Establish a Working Group to Prioritize Mental Health and Wellness Resources Within Maine’s Heritage Industries,” — was approved for introduction by a majority of the Legislative Council in a November 20 meeting.
“As senate chair of the Health and Human Services Committee and a member of the Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry Committee, I’ve had a front row seat to the ways health intersects with our heritage industries,” Ingwersen said. “We all know that farming, fishing and logging are physically demanding industries. But there is less awareness of the significant mental strain on these workers, which leads to burnout, stress — or worse.
“It is critical that we take care of the people who power our economy, help us put food on tables and provide the material to build our homes.”
As proposed, the bill would create a working group to convene and work on policy recommendations to address the mental health needs of Maine’s workers in heritage industries.
Earlier this year, Ingwersen attended and spoke at Maine’s first-ever Land and Sea Farmer Wellness Forum, which was rooted in the work of The University of Maine Cooperative Extension.
The Extension recently conducted a survey, revealing that 61 percent of respondents from agriculture, aquaculture and wild-harvest fisheries identified the need for increased public education to raise awareness and reduce stigma around mental health.
Survey data showed that suicide rates remain higher for agriculture, fishing and forestry occupation groups. Many farmers and fishermen have no employer-provided health insurance.
“These industries are critical to Maine’s economy and yet we are facing some serious vulnerabilities that – as a cumulative effect – could disrupt the flow of the food we eat and the materials we use to build our homes,” Ingwersen said.
______________
Randy Seaver is the editor and founder of the Biddeford Gazette. He may be reached by email: randy@randyseaver.com
c.) 2025 All Rights Reserved
Never miss another update! Subscribe for free today!
There are many resources available for those struggling with food insecurity
By STATE SEN. HENRY INGWERSENSpecial to the Gazette
This week, I hope that the residents of Senate District 32 — whether in Dayton, Biddeford or Arundel, Hollis and Lyman, — can celebrate the holiday with their families, friends and neighbors. This time of year, our community always seems to pull closer together, and the past month has been no exception.
As we experienced the uncertainty of funding for SNAP (food stamps) for the nearly 1,500 families in our area that depend on it, businesses, groups, individuals and organizations rose to the occasion. Some of you donated items, money or time. Some of you shared flyers and posts on social media. Some of you checked in on a friend or a neighbor and found help for them. I am grateful for all of you and your efforts.
(Photo Courtesy Youth Full Maine)
Although folks ultimately received their full SNAP benefits, hunger remains present in our community. Among the many food assistance resources available, I want to spread the word about the new Maine Food Access Map from the Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry.
The Ending Hunger Corps collaborated with food security organizations throughout the state to collect and compile data on a wide range of resources, which you can view online here. Because the map is new, I still encourage folks to contact the organization to confirm details such as hours of operation and services. I hope you explore the map, whether you are looking for help or you are looking to help.
In addition to the Maine Food Access Map, Youth Full Maine has put together a more local list of food resources for residents of Biddeford, Saco and Dayton. You can view the chart online here. I would like to highlight that, thanks to Youth Full Maine and our School Departments, every school in the district has an emergency food pantry. They offer take-home ingredients and meals, which may be helpful over the holiday break.
Looking a little beyond Thanksgiving, from 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. on Thursday, Dec. 4, Youth Full Maine will host a free food distribution in the parking lot of Biddeford Ice Arena (14 Pomerleau St.). It will be a drive-thru event with dry goods and fresh produce, featuring Santa. Mark your calendars and share the event.
As a reminder, for the entire month of November, the Maine Federation of Farmers Markets continues to provide Maine Harvest Bucks to SNAP participants at farmers’ markets. When you show your EBT card at a participating farmers’ market, including the nearby Kennebunk Farmers Market, you will receive $15 in Maine Harvest Bucks to spend on fresh produce. You can do this every time you visit the market in November. (Please be sure to check the hours ahead of time.)
Even before the SNAP crisis, I was proud to work on a bill that allocates ongoing funding to the Maine Harvest Bucks program. Although the full amount did not make it into the state’s budget, my proposal has been carried over to the next legislative session. That means I can try again.
Last month, I also successfully made the case for why the Legislature should, next session, consider a new bill to ensure we can continue to fund this critical program from private or state sources – even if federal match dollars disappear or dry up. After the Legislature resumes its work in January, I will be sure to share more information on this bill, including how and when to testify on it.
Being a grandfather, I am looking forward to time with my family this week. I hope you will, too. If the resources in this column do not provide the help you or someone you know is looking for, you can always call 211 or contact me at Henry.Ingwersen@legislature.maine.gov. You can also call the Senate Majority Office at (207) 287-1515.
___________
Henry Ingwersen is serving his second term as the state senator representing District 32, which includes Biddeford, Arundel, Dayton, Hollis and Lyman.
Do you know anyone currently suffering from polio?
My guess is you probably don’t. But polio has existed throughout recorded human history, and the worst outbreak in the United States killed more than 3,000 people in 1952. It left countless others with lifelong health consequences.
Photo credit: South Dakota Department of Health
Finally, after years of research, Dr. Jonas Salk was able to develop the first effective polio vaccine. By 1961, only 161 cases in the U.S. remained. Salk was committed to ensuring that the vaccine was available to all, famously saying, “There is no patent. Could you patent the sun?”
Life-saving vaccines have helped to all but eradicate some of the most dangerous diseases that affect humans. Now this progress, and the decades-long progress made against diseases like polio, measles and mumps is in serious peril due to recent actions from the federal government.
Unfortunately, alongside the successful track record of vaccines, the anti-vaccine industry has sprouted up and flourished in recent years as a result of misinformation shared widely online. The unscientific views of anti-vaccine advocates gained an even stronger foothold due to the significant social disruption of the pandemic and the corrosive effect of social media. What was once an overwhelming bipartisan and nonpartisan societal agreement that vaccines are a good thing has sadly become polarized.
Alongside the successful track record of vaccines, the anti-vaccine industry has sprouted up and flourished in recent years as a result of misinformation shared widely online.
And the groups that push these beliefs are profiting from their lies. In 2023, the Informed Consent Action Network, an anti-vaccine group run by Del Bigtree, who is an ally of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., reported $23 million in revenue. Kennedy’s own organization, Children’s Health Defense, has also raked in millions through the years. They push lies blaming vaccines for autism and various other maladies, use it to sell products and propaganda, and get rich off vulnerable people getting sick.
This is why it is so distressing to witness Kennedy’s actions to gut the federal CDC and to stack vaccine advisory boards with anti-science skeptics, which will make it more difficult to effectively investigate rare but real cases of vaccine injury, and stifle necessary research and development. Right now, the federal CDC is attempting to restrict access to the COVID-19 vaccine for folks 65 and older and for younger people who have preexisting medical conditions, in contradiction to the fact-based guidance of experienced medical professionals.
So, what are we doing about it in Maine? Thankfully, we have strong vaccine protections in place. Certain vaccines are mandatory for children to attend Maine schools, with exemptions only allowed for medical reasons. This helps preserve the herd immunity necessary to prevent the spread of life-threatening diseases. The weakening of standards in other parts of the country like Florida is still alarming. But that gives us more reasons to do everything we can to protect ourselves and our communities.
Rep. Marc Malon says Maine is leading the way in ensuring public access for vaccinations
For the 2025-2026 COVID-19 vaccine, the Mills Administration has issued a standing order to ensure that every Mainer who wants a vaccine can get one. The standing order essentially serves as a prescription for all Maine people, and it will allow them to get the shot at local pharmacies, clinics and health care offices.
It also requires state-regulated health insurance carriers, including those with MaineCare, to provide full coverage of the cost of the vaccine. The shot is recommended for all children from ages six months to 23 months, all individuals ages 18 and older, and children two to 18 years old based on risk factors – check with your children’s medical provider. If you want a vaccine, you should be able to receive your COVID-19 booster at your local pharmacy. I encourage folks to do so. I did it this week.
Vaccine opponents like to paint the decision to vaccinate as purely a personal choice. The problem is that these personal decisions can impact other families and broader communities. The miracle of vaccination is a miracle of community, and when communities need action, our history shows us that we take it because we care about not only our families, but those around us.
So, let’s band together once again, roll up our sleeves, literally, and not take for granted the hard work, sacrifices and medical advancements that have actually made America healthier for decades.
______
Rep. Marc Malon is serving his second term in the Maine House, representing a portion of Biddeford. He serves as a member of the Veterans and Legal Affairs Committee and the Housing and Economic Development Committee. He can be reached via email at marc.malon@legislature.maine.gov.
Never miss another update! Subscribe for free today!
Mainers will see two big questions on the ballot this year: one about election procedures, and one about a potential red flag law.
Maine citizens can put proposed legislation directly before voters through a process called a citizen initiative. For a citizen initiative petition to be approved by the Secretary of State’s Office, petitioners must collect the signatures of registered Maine voters equal to at least 10 percent of the votes cast in the previous gubernatorial election, which in this case was at least 67,682. The petition then goes to the Legislature, which can choose to enact the bill as written or send it to a statewide referendum.
Photos by Stephanie McFeeters.
On Nov. 4, Maine voters will decide on two referendum questions brought by coalitions of citizens through this process: one that would change voter ID and absentee voting rules and one that would create a process by which family members could petition the courts to temporarily remove weapons from an individual at risk of harm to themselves or others.
As in-person absentee voting begins this week, here’s what you need to know:
QUESTION ONE
Question 1: “An Act to Require an Individual to Present Photographic Identification for the Purpose of Voting”
Do you want to change Maine election laws to eliminate two days of absentee voting, prohibit requests for absentee ballots by phone or family members, end ongoing absentee voter status for seniors and people with disabilities, ban prepaid postage on absentee ballot return envelopes, limit the number of drop boxes, require voters to show certain photo ID before voting, and make other changes to our elections?
This referendum question was brought forward by a coalition that calls itself Voter ID for ME. The proposed legislation would make a number of changes to the way votes are cast in Maine.
It would require all voters to present photo identification in order to vote in-person or absentee, and would allow voters from the same municipality to challenge the validity of another person’s ballot for alleged failure to comply with the ID law or for a non-matching signature on an absentee ballot envelope. Exceptions would only be granted if someone had religious objections to being photographed.
Valid forms of photo ID would be limited to a Maine driver’s license, non-driver identification card, or interim identification card; a U.S. passport or passport card; or a military or veteran identification card. Voters would not be able use a student ID, Tribal ID or Maine Department of Corrections-issued ID.
The legislation would also make significant changes to absentee voting procedures. In addition to requiring photo ID from those requesting an absentee ballot, election officials would also have to issue an “identification envelope” with all absentee ballots for voters to fill out with information, including their political party affiliation and ID.
If passed, Maine’s current laws that allow an immediate family member to request an absentee ballot on behalf of a voter and make it possible for a voter to request an absentee ballot by telephone would be repealed.
Instead, voters would be required to request an absentee ballot electronically or in person themselves, though they could still designate someone else to return a ballot on their behalf. The proposed changes would also eliminate two days of absentee voting.
Maine’s current ongoing absentee voter enrollment program, in which a senior or person with disabilities can register once to vote absentee and is automatically sent an absentee ballot each election thereafter, would be repealed. Voters, regardless of age or ability, would have to request an absentee ballot for each election.
The proposed law would also limit each municipality to one drop box, designate one municipal office at which election officials could accept absentee ballots, prohibit election officials from including prepaid return postage with an absentee ballot and would bar the Secretary of State’s Office from charging a fee for non-driver identification cards, which are currently sold for $5 each.
The Legislature’s nonpartisan Office of Fiscal and Program Review estimated that the free non-driver ID cards would decrease the state’s highway fund by about $29,000 annually. The Secretary of State’s office, according to OFPR, estimated the voter ID requirement would cost the state more than $1.3 million the first fiscal year and about $156,000 every following year.
The law would go into effect on January 1, 2026.
Supporters
The Maine-based conservative political action committee The Dinner Tableis behind the citizen initiative. Alex Titcomb, who co-founded the group with state representative Laurel Libby (R-Auburn), said the proposed law emerged out of “election integrity issues.”
He emphasized that Question 1 is meant to be “future-looking,” and said he believes it will increase the “security and transparency of the election process.”
It’s also about fairness, he said, explaining that every municipality and every voter should start on a level playing field. That means every town should get one drop box, regardless of size, he said, and that people who want to cast absentee ballots should have to make that request themselves.
“I can’t go in on election day and go in line and ask, ‘Hey can I have my ballot and my wife’s ballot and go take care of it?’” But Titcomb said he can request both his and his wife’s absentee ballots, which he did last year and finds unfair to people who aren’t voting absentee.
Same goes for requesting an absentee ballot by phone.
“Every person should request their own ballot, and there should be a paper trail,” Titcomb said.
He called the opposition’s campaign “fear-mongering.”
“Every person should request their own ballot, and there should be a paper trail,”
— Alex Titcomb
“Maine people are smart people and they’re independent people,” Titcomb said. “Every person that wants to cast a ballot will figure out how to cast a ballot.”
David Farmer, the campaign manager for Save Absentee Voting, said Question 1 is a “clear attack on absentee voting in Maine.” While the campaign spearheaded by Titcomb is called Voter ID for ME, the majority of the proposed legislation has to do with absentee voting, Farmer said.
Among his coalition’s concerns are the “new and onerous restrictions” on election officials and the reduction of local control.
“This is a voter suppression measure. It’s meant to reduce the number of people who participate,” Farmer said.
Absentee voting has been around in some form for more than a hundred years, he added, and has proven to be safe and secure. Question 1, if passed, would put up “new hurdles,” particularly for seniors, people with disabilities and people in rural areas who Farmer said “disproportionately use the absentee voting system.”
He added that he encourages all voters to read the full proposed legislation before heading to the ballot box.
“This is a voter suppression measure. It’s meant to reduce the number of people who participate”.
– David Farmer
“They’re putting in new restrictions to how people access absentee voting and they’ve used language that’s unclear in its intent and purpose,” he said.
Members of the Save Absentee Voting coalition include the ACLU of Maine, Disability Rights Maine and the Maine Immigrants’ Rights Coalition, among several others. The Maine Democratic Party also opposes the proposal.
_______
QUESTION 2
Question 2: “An Act to Protect Maine Communities by Enacting the Extreme Risk Protection Order Act”
Do you want to allow courts to temporarily prohibit a person from having dangerous weapons if law enforcement, family, or household members show that the person poses a significant danger of causing physical injury to themselves or others?
If voters approve this question, it would enact an Extreme Risk Protection Order Act, which would create a process by which family members or law enforcement could petition the courts to temporarily remove weapons from an individual at risk of harm to themselves or others and temporarily prohibit them from possessing or purchasing firearms.
Extreme risk protection orders are already in Maine statute, currently as a one-of-a-kind yellow flag law, which went into effect in 2020. Under the current version of the law, only law enforcement officers have the ability to submit a court petition to temporarily take away a person’s weapons.
Under the yellow flag law, a law enforcement officer must first bring a person into protective custody, which is different from arresting someone, and obtain a behavioral health practitioner’s assessment that a person may hurt themselves or others. Only then can they bring a weapons restriction order (also called an extreme risk protection order) to a judge or justice for final approval.
Following the mass shootings in Lewiston in 2023, state lawmakers passed a bill that, among other changes, gave law enforcement officers the ability to obtain a warrant to take someone into protective custody.
There are two key differences between the proposed red flag law and the current yellow flag law: one is that family or household members, in addition to law enforcement, could file a petition requesting the court issue an extreme risk protection order; the second is that a red flag order would not require a behavioral health assessment.
If passed, the proposed legislation would add the red flag law to Maine statute without repealing the yellow flag law, meaning Maine would have two different methods of temporarily confiscating weapons from people deemed to be a danger.
If the red flag law passes, the Administrative Office of the Courts, via OFPR, estimated a one-time cost of $76,000 to the Maine Judicial Branch for “significant system programming updates” and temporary staffing to implement it.
The administrative office estimated that the red flag law would require an additional annual appropriation of approximately $1.1 million to establish six new positions “to handle the increased workload expected to be generated.” OFPR also noted state and local law enforcement agencies may see increased costs for the collection and storage of firearms.
The law would go into effect 30 days after the governor makes a public proclamation of the result, which must be within 10 days of the election. The governor has no veto power on legislation enacted via a citizen initiative.
Supporters
Jack Sorensen, the spokesperson for the Safe Schools, Safe Communities initiative that submitted the petition for Question 2, said red flag laws have been “proven effective at saving lives, disarming people who threaten mass shootings, including school shootings, and reducing suicide.”
Sorensen called the current yellow flag law, which went into effect in 2020, an “experiment” negotiated by the governor, lawmakers and gun rights lobbyists.
“The experiment failed in Lewiston, horrifically and tragically, despite the fact that the gunman’s family knew he was dangerous and repeatedly warned law enforcement,” he said.
Giving family and household members, who may be the first to notice concerning behavior, the ability to directly petition the court “adds a tool to the toolbox,” he said, noting that families may not want to get law enforcement involved immediately out of fear that it could escalate a situation.
In response to opponents’ argument that a red flag law diminishes a person’s right to due process, Sorensen pointed out that subjects of a red flag order still get their day in court: Once a petition is filed, the court must schedule a hearing within 14 days to determine if there is a preponderance of evidence that the person poses a significant risk before approving the order.
Family or law enforcement can also petition for an emergency extreme risk protection order, which does not require that the subject be given prior notice before an order is approved. A hearing is still required within 14 days of when the order was issued.
Supporters of the proposed red flag law include the Maine Gun Safety Coalition (the sponsor organization behind Safe Schools, Safe Communities), many of the state’s professional medical organizations and the Maine Education Association.
Opponents
Opponents of Question 2 said that the proposed red flag law is not only unnecessary, given what they called the yellow flag law’s success, but infringes on due process and personal liberty.
As of late September, Maine law enforcement agencies had completed nearly 1,100 yellow flag orders since the law went into effect in 2020. David Trahan, executive director of the Maine Sportsman’s Alliance, said this is evidence that the yellow flag law is working. Law enforcement cited threats of suicide in three-quarters of all orders, which Trahan said weakens supporters’ argument that a red flag law would help reduce suicides.
“Our law is working. There’s no way they can spin that any other way,” he said.
Some supporters of a red flag law, like Sorensen, said that Maine shouldn’t have a law that conflates mental illness with violence. A person could be violent without an underlying mental illness, and mental illness does not necessarily predispose someone to commit a violent act, which is part of why supporters want to do away with the behavioral health assessment requirement.
But Trahan sees it differently. To him and other opponents, getting rid of the assessment — and giving people who are not law enforcement officials the power to directly petition the court to remove someone’s weapons — suggests the aim of the red flag law is “eliminating due process in the law.”
“This is a slippery slope,” he said. “Because if you can do it for a person’s Second Amendment, you can do it for a person’s First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Fifth, 14th, you name it.”
Trahan said there are already other ways to take away weapons from a person who poses a threat of violence, like protection from abuse orders or arresting someone on criminal threatening charges.
Other opponents of the red flag law include the Maine State Police — with Lt. Michael Johnston writing in testimony earlier this year that the agency worries it could increase the likelihood of a violent encounter — and Gov. Janet Mills. The Democrat was part of the bipartisan group who helped draft the yellow flag law in 2019.
In an op-ed published in the Portland Press Herald, Mills said a red flag law would “create a new, separate and confusing process that will undermine the effectiveness of the law and endanger public safety along with it,” adding that based on her experience, “if there is a potentially dangerous situation, I want the police involved as soon as possible.”
Update (Oct. 6): This article has been updated to reflect the fact that the National Alliance on Mental Illness Maine is no longer listed among the organizations endorsing Question 2 on the Safe Schools, Safe Communities website.
This story was originally published by The Maine Monitor, a nonprofit and nonpartisan news organization. To get regular coverage from The Monitor, sign up for a free Monitor newsletter here.
____________
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Emily Bader is a health care and general assignment reporter for The Maine Monitor where she covers substance use, mental health and access to care.
She is particularly interested in exploring how these issues affect Mainers’ everyday lives, how communities are seeking solutions and in serving as a watchdog on decision-makers.
Prior to joining The Monitor, Emily was a reporter for three years at local Maine papers. She has earned recognition from the New England Newspaper & Press Association, Maine Public Health Association, National Newspaper Association Foundation and Maine Press Association. She is a member of Investigative Editors & Reporters and the Association of Health Care Journalists.
Early last spring, while still cleaning up the wreckage of devastating winter storms, southern Maine towns began drafting new rules governing how they’d rebuild or develop on stretches of land that were widely inundated months before.
The process coincided with the adoption of new federal flood maps and is required by the Federal Emergency Management Agency for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program.
After years of back-and-forth between FEMA and local officials, the agency finalized its first flood map updates for Cumberland and York counties in decades.
Flooding in Wells in January 2024. Photo by Gregory Rec of the Portland Press Herald.
The maps’ finalization last summer meant local officials had to update their floodplain ordinances to FEMA standards or risk their residents losing out on federal flood insurance — often a requirement for homeowners with government-backed mortgages who live in FEMA flood zones.
While municipalities could simply adopt boilerplate language that the Maine Floodplain Management Program provides towns based on their local flood threat (i.e. coastal or riverine), towns also had the opportunity to fine-tune or strengthen their floodplain rules further.
One way to do that is by requiring heightened standards if new developments or significant renovations occur inside regulated flood zones.
Municipalities, for example, could require that the lowest floor of a new development be built higher than the one foot above flood level that FEMA recommends, giving future homes more protection from sea level rise, which FEMA flood maps don’t account for.
That’s the path that Scarborough’s town council took last year. Their updated floodplain ordinances require anyone building a new development or making repairs worth more than 50 percent of a building’s value to raise the lowest floor two feet above flood level.
Brian Longstaff, Scarborough’s zoning administrator, said that he was a little hesitant about the proposal at first when considering the challenges it could pose to homeowners who were already in compliance with the FEMA minimum.
“It was a little bit of a big bite, I thought, but in the end, it makes sense,” Longstaff told The Maine Monitor, adding that the town is conducting a vulnerability assessment and its projections for future sea level rise show local flood risks growing down the line.
“I’m looking at the vulnerability assessment, the picture of risk maps… and there are some areas of Scarborough [where] the projections are pretty scary,” Longstaff said.
Down the coast in Wells, town officials took a different approach. They kept the one-foot minimum elevation requirement in flood zones but expanded the criteria that triggers it.
Whereas Scarborough requires repairs or remodels that are worth more than 50 percent of a building’s value and completed within one year to be elevated to its two-foot minimum, Wells tracks the cumulative value of such projects — adding up project costs over a multi-year period to determine when an elevation change is required.
That’s an effective way to close a common loophole used to get around similar ordinances according to Sue Baker, coordinator of the Maine Floodplain Management Program. (The Wells code enforcement director and town planner could not be reached for comment by publication.)
“There are some people that will just piecemeal their projects so that they stagger them out over a number of years, so that they don’t ever trigger the substantial improvement rule,” Baker said. “What I think is bad about that is now you’re putting thousands and thousands of dollars into a building, but you haven’t changed the risk.”
Scarborough considered similar language during the town’s ordinance development, but ultimately town officials didn’t adopt it, according to Longstaff. As a certified floodplain manager, he said he carefully evaluates projects in flood
zones and can typically reach an understanding with the applicant about flood risks and how to mitigate them, though calculating cumulative improvements is “’a great idea to do over a reasonable period.”
The deadly floods that devastated Central Texas last month provide a stark example of what happens when flood zone development regulations are absent or unenforced. Camp Mystic, the summer camp where 27 campers and counselors died, was built in a high-risk flood zone.
In rural Texas, there are few regulatory powers afforded to county governments over flood zones and many communities exist outside of the jurisdiction of municipal ordinances, according to the Texas Tribune. In Maine, meanwhile, unorganized communities are overseen by the state Land Use Planning Commission, and county hazard mitigation initiatives are widespread.
Outside of southern Maine, Baker said the state is developing updated flood maps for multiple watersheds and pursuing new initiatives through the recently formed State Resilience Office and Office of Community Affairs.
But with the vulnerabilities exposed in last year’s storms and climate change’s intensification of sea level rise and heavy precipitation events, it only makes sense to elevate and move back from flood-ravaged areas whenever possible, according to Baker.
“I heard a good quote once upon a time,” Baker said. “‘There’s going to be retreat. The question is whether… it’s going to be managed or unmanaged.’”
__________
About The Reporter: Emmett Gartner is an environmental reporter for The Maine Monitor. Having grown up on the Chesapeake Bay, Emmett has long been interested in stories of adaptation and accountability.
He joined the Maine Monitor newsroom in 2023 as a Roy W. Howard fellow and now explores how environmental policy aligns with Mainers’ lived experiences and where climate change complicates the status quo.
Previously, he reported for a daily newspaper in Maryland and spent separate summer stints working as a trail maintenance worker in Nevada, a wildland firefighter in Oregon and an environmental educator on Maryland’s Eastern Shore.
Editor’s note: This story was originally published by The Maine Monitor, a nonprofit and nonpartisan news organization. To get regular coverage from The Monitor, sign up for a free Monitor newsletter here.
According to a press release, both the Maine House of Representatives and Senate voted unanimously last week to approve a housing bill that was introduced by Speaker Ryan Fecteau (D-Biddeford).
The bill, LD 1829, is intended to make it easier to build new housing units by amending zoning requirements and providing clarity for municipalities, developers and others.
“Too often, the creation of new housing units is hampered by onerous and overly complex rules that make it too expensive, or too frustrating, for homeowners to build,” Fecteau said. “This law will cut red tape, remove government roadblocks, and empower everyday Maine people to build housing for their own families and neighbors.”
According to Fecteau, LD 1829 will reduce minimum lot sizes to no more than 5,000 square feet in designated growth areas and remove owner occupancy requirements for accessory dwelling units (ADUs) to unlock financing for construction.
Fecteau said LD 1829 will “streamline municipal review for smaller housing developments; create a one-story height bonus for qualified affordable housing and require training for municipal planning board members within 180 days of their appointment.
“This is a significant step toward addressing Maine’s housing shortage.”
__ Sen. Rick Bennett (R-Oxford)
“Building any type of housing in Maine is extremely difficult and expensive. These costs and our home shortage are not isolated to one town or region. It is structural, systemic, and statewide,” said Laura Mitchell, executive director of the Maine Affordable Housing Coalition.
“LD 1829 sets us on a better path,” Mitchell added. “Maine communities will always be able to shape their futures, but with the understanding that solving our shared housing challenge requires consistency and commitment at all levels of government.”
“This a significant step toward addressing Maine’s housing shortage,” said State Sen. Rick Bennett (R-Oxford).
Bennett said the legislation “respects local communities and strengthens individual property rights.”
“This law cuts through outdated and overly restrictive regulations that have limited the ability of Mainers to make reasonable use of their own land,” Bennett added.
“I’m proud to have supported this bipartisan legislation that will help more Maine people secure housing they can afford.”
The bill will now go to Gov. Janet Mills for her signature and final approval.
Randy Seaver is the editor and founder of the Biddeford Gazette. He may be contacted by email: randy@randyseaver.com
NEVER MISS ANOTHER UPDATE!Subscribe for free today!
I view this past week in Augusta as transitional. Committees, including my own, finished their work on bills and the bulk of the activity began moving from the committee room to the floors of each chamber.
The week began on a stressful note personally. I went to the Memorial Day ceremony at Waterhouse Field, but had to leave before it began due to a family health matter (not to worry – everyone is okay now). This same issue kept me from being able to attend session on Tuesday, making it the first session day I have missed this term.
My absence Tuesday from roll call votes is excused due to the compelling personal reasons for my absence. Still, I hate missing any vote. Fortunately, it does not appear that my vote alone would have swung the outcome on any measures on Tuesday.
State Rep. Marc Malon (D-Biddeford)
Among the measures I would have supported on Tuesday (and look forward to supporting on enactment) are two bills for active transportation and trails along defunct rail corridors.
As the Maine Sunday Telegram noted in their lead editorial today, these measures are modeled off the economic success of the Eastern Trail which runs through our community. While I am supportive of expanding rail transit where it is viable, I have not seen compelling evidence that these corridors would be viable anytime soon, and this is an excellent use for them. I am proud to support the Transportation Committee’s bipartisan work on this issue.
Though I missed session on Tuesday, things stabilized enough for me to be able to remotely attend and participate in the last full meeting of the Housing and Economic Development Committee later that day. We worked and voted on three bills dealing with very important issues.
After long, occasionally challenging conversations regarding two bills to amend the Growth Management Act, I joined a majority of the committee in supporting a compromise version of LD 1940, which makes badly needed updates to the Act to enable smarter growth principles and development where it makes sense. The compromise incorporates feedback from municipalities and their planners and gives them options rather than mandating one pathway from the state.
There was also merit to LD 1751, which proposed more modest changes and would still be a step forward, but while I wanted to support both I believe LD 1940 is the better policy and that is what I decided to throw my full support behind. These measures took us deep into the weeds of policymaking over development and how Maine can align its goals on housing, economic development, and our environment. While it was charged at times, I believe we landed in a very good place.
“Overall, the Housing and Economic Development Committee was very productive this session, and it benefited from the thoughtfulness of all of its members (from both parties).”
— Marc Malon
I also was proud to cast my vote in favor of LD 1829, sponsored by Speaker Ryan Fecteau, which makes needed updates to zoning requirements and makes the laws clearer for folks interested in creating more housing.
The Speaker worked hard with Rep. Amanda Collamore (R-Pittsfield) on a compromise which makes sense for all Maine communities while respecting their differences. The vote was unanimous, which is significant given the history of bills dealing with zoning. Building more housing remains imperative, and this bill will help.
Overall, the Housing and Economic Development Committee was very productive this session, and it benefited from the thoughtfulness of all of its members (from both parties). Perhaps it was due to the subject matter and the fact that we kept the culture wars out of the committee room, but even members whom I have sharp disagreements with on other subjects engaged in good faith discussions over the bills we worked. Not everything was unanimous of course, but we never disagreed on the underlying facts behind the policies we debated. When facts matter, good process is possible we can accomplish a great deal.
I was able to return to Augusta on Wednesday and Thursday, which were spent in the House Chamber. We voted on a number of items. These included:
– Very close votes on a measure, LD 301, to clarify the Public Utilities Commission’s authority to engage in performance-based ratemaking. Like many bills from the Energy Utilities and Technology Committee (EUT) this bill is highly technical and dense. It takes a lot of studying to understand! But these bills are very important as they deal with the vital and sensitive issues of how to best regulate utilities, protect consumers, and meet state economic development and climate goals. I believed LD 301 made sense and voted in favor.
* We voted 108-33 (making it bipartisan) to support funding for the University of Maine System, whose importance needs no explanation.
* We opposed a wholly unnecessary measure out of my other committee, Veterans and Legal Affairs (VLA), which proposed a constitutional amendment stating that only citizens can vote in our elections. We opposed this for a very good reason: it is already the case that only citizens can vote in our elections. Statute makes it crystal clear that only citizens can vote in all Maine elections, including municipal (and town ordinances cannot change that as state law supersedes them). This bill was brought forward to perpetuate a myth and spread disinformation. It failed, as it should have.
* Bills from the Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Committee (IFW) don’t normally garner a ton of attention, but three did on Thursday. On a mostly party-line vote, we approved a budget initiative from the Department to support their programs, which bolster sportsmen and our outdoor economy. This measure was strongly backed by the Sportsmen’s Alliance of Maine (SAM).
It remains unclear why there was opposition, but the few arguments I heard against it were not compelling to me.
A bipartisan majority of us rejected a bill which would allow youth hunters to hunt on Sundays. For those unaware, Sunday hunting has long been a touchy issue. It is not currently allowed, and that is not simply due to old-fashioned “blue laws.” To make a long story short, most hunting in Maine is conducted on privately-owned land as allowed by the landowner. Multiple surveys and studies have shown that both landowners and hunters alike enjoy (reasonably, in my view) having one day each week where there is a reprieve and precautions are not needed for folks enjoying the land for non-hunting purposes. If Sunday hunting were to be allowed, more landowners would post their land and prevent hunting. This would be a blow to our hunting traditions. This is why I opposed the measure.
I also voted against a measure to establish a Constitutional Right to hunt and fish in Maine. For one, I do not think it is at all necessary. Mainers enjoy broad hunting and fishing rights (as they should!) and they are not at risk. This measure is also broad and vague, which creates confusion that will surely lead to litigation. We don’t need that. It also could open the door to Sunday hunting.
I was in the minority voting in opposition, but it is unclear whether or not this measure will move forward because a constitutional amendment needs to receive a two-thirds vote on enactment and it did not receive that on Thursday (though it was close). I support our hunting and fishing traditions, and am likely to oppose any restrictions on what is currently allowed. But this measure went too far and was poorly drafted.
I also would like to note that one of my bills, LD 641 which bolsters the Housing Problem Solving Program at MaineHousing in support of homelessness diversion efforts, was unanimously enacted by the House and now goes to the Special Appropriations Table, where all bills with fiscal notes go. I am working on ways to secure the funding for this vital program which prevents people from becoming unhoused in the first place.
These next few weeks will be busy as we move through the remainder of our work. We will have some late nights and will tackle some very important and sometimes-controversial issues. I’ll keep you posted as we go.
In the meantime, let’s remember to take good care of each other, respect our neighbors, and support our community.
State Rep. Marc Malon is currently serving his second term representing a portion of Biddeford in the Maine House of Representatives. He is also the party affairs director for the Maine Democratic Party. He may be contacted at: Marc.Malon@legislature.maine.gov
The views and opinions presented here are solely those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Biddeford Gazette or its publisher.
Never miss another update! from the Biddeford Gazette! Subscribe for free today!
Maine House Speaker Ryan Fecteau of Biddeford is gaining some national attention after the United States Supreme Court ruled yesterday in favor of Republican lawmaker Laurel Libby who said he violated her Constitutional rights.
The case began in February after Libby (R-Auburn) posted a photo of a transgender athlete from Greely High School who won the girls’ pole vault competition. Libby’s post included a photo of the student and first-name identification in quotation marks and set off a heated debate across the state, divided mostly along partisan lines.
Fecteau, a Democrat, is the first openly gay person to serve as House speaker and has long been a champion of LGBTQ+ rights.
Fecteau censured Libby for her behavior, criticizing her post and subsequent comments identifying the student. The censure prevented Libby from speaking or voting on the House floor.
Maine Speaker Ryan Fecteau of Biddeford
The Democratically-controlled House of Representatives found that Libby’s post violated its code of ethics by putting the student at risk.
Fecteau said he would lift the censure if Libby simply apologized for the post.
Libby ultimately filed an “emergency appeal” with the nation’s highest court. She previously sued Fecteau and the House clerk in lower courts.
Many Republicans across Maine celebrated the Supreme Court’s 7-2 decision to restore Libby’s voting rights as the first session of Maine’s Legislature begins to wind down.
Fecteau was unavailable for comment on Wednesday morning, but did issue a statement to the Gazette.
“Representative Libby’s ability to vote on the floor of the House has been restored until the current appeal process runs its course,” Fecteau said in his statement. “The Clerk of the House, whom the injunction is against, has already complied with this court ruling. We look forward to continuing with the important work Maine people expect of us.”
But not all Democrats were disappointed by the high court’s decision. Former Democratic lawmaker Cynthia Dill, an attorney from Cape Elizabeth, took to social media Tuesday evening and proclaimed that the Court’s decision was a validation of girls’ rights.
And former Republican lawmaker Joyce Maker from Calais expressed disappointment about the Court’s decision on her Facebook page.
In Maine and across the nation, polling shows that many people –– regardless of political affiliation — are uncomfortable with the issue of transgender participation in high school sports.
“This is a victory not just for my constituents, but for the Constitution itself,” Libby told WMTW-TV. “The Supreme Court has affirmed what should never have been in question — that no state legislature has the power to silence an elected official simply for speaking truthfully about issues that matter.”
Libby said she is still not allowed to speak on the House floor. “We do have a bit of a long road, still,” Libby told WMTW.
Never miss another update! Subscribe for free today!
The last time I wrote to you, I spoke about the importance of MaineCare, our state’s version of the Medicaid program. MaineCare provides health care to low-income families and children, people with disabilities and pregnant women, and is overwhelmingly supported by Maine people.
I also wrote about how Maine faces the same challenge as many red and blue states – the cost of health care is rising and state budgets are having a hard time keeping up.
This fiscal year, which runs until the end of June 2025, we face a $117 million gap in MaineCare. If unaddressed, providers already facing financial challenges would be put in an even more difficult situation. In some dire cases, providers could be forced to shut their doors – and when those doors shut, they shut for all of us.
State Sen. Henry Ingwersen (D-York)
In the last month, members of the Legislature’s budget committee worked hard to reach a bipartisan agreement on a supplemental budget that would fix this gap and get funding out the door quickly.
I was very pleased when, in early February, they reached a deal and voted unanimously to recommend passage of the supplemental budget to the full legislature. However, my Republican colleagues suddenly walked back on the deal and began insisting that to earn their support, we would need to make cuts to MaineCare and housing assistance.
While I disagree with these cuts, these are large policy conversations that can certainly be had as the Legislature moves to construct a biennial budget – which covers the next two fiscal years – in the coming weeks. Right now, Maine people are counting on us to keep MaineCare afloat and to do it quickly.
A unique aspect of Maine law requires a two-thirds vote in the Maine House and Senate to approve emergency funding, which means strong, bipartisan support. Without this two-thirds vote needed to get this funding out the door, the Department of Health and Human Services will begin cutting back funds owed to hospitals, nursing homes, and home and community-based services as early as March.
We have continued to hold votes, and Republicans continue to oppose the plan they had previously agreed to. The more votes we take, the less I understand why there is opposition.
–State Sen. Henry Ingwersen
We have continued to hold votes, and Republicans continue to oppose the plan they had previously agreed to. The more votes we take, the less I understand why there is opposition. Our most rural communities rely heavily on keeping MaineCare functional – 45 percent of folks in Washington County; 40 percent in Aroostook County and an average of 37 percent across Oxford, Franklin, Somerset and Piscataquis counties are enrolled in MaineCare.
Many of us in the Legislature are here to make sure that our rural areas are not left behind.
In addition to the people covered by MaineCare in these areas, the small health care providers that strengthen our small towns are at most risk of harm. The Maine Primary Care Association recently told the Press Herald, “Health centers operate in small, rural towns in each county, and are also present and essential in Maine’s bigger cities; like many other health care providers, they are not designed to weather endless instability in payments.”
As I’ve learned in my time on the Legislature’s Health and Human Services Committee, Maine already has many “care deserts” across our state, forcing folks to travel long distances to get the services they need. I am deeply worried that not approving this funding means the problem would only get worse.
Every day in Augusta, as I chair the Health and Human Services Committee, I hear more stories of folks struggling with access to health care. Folks like Vickie, from Norway, who shared how her insurance did not cover services she felt would have made a real difference in her mental health care.
We need to be moving forward on health care access, not backward. I stand ready to support critical funding for MaineCare, and I hope my colleagues will join me to find a path forward for Maine people.
The people of my district and the rest of Maine are not the least bit interested in the political games taking place here in Augusta. They want to make sure that they continue to get the quality health care they deserve for their families. They deserve no less from us.
As always, if you have any questions about the information here or if you would like to reach out with a comment, question or concern, you can reach out to me any time. If you want to stay up-to-date on what we’re working on in Augusta, please sign up for my email newsletter at mainesenate.org or visit my Facebook page at facebook.com/IngwersenForMaine.
Henry Ingwersen represents District 32 in the Maine Senate, which includes Biddeford and the surrounding communities of Arundel, Dayton, Hollis and Lyman. He can be reached at Henry.Ingwersen@legislature.maine.gov or 207-287-1515
Editor’s note: The views expressed here are those of the author. If you would like to contribute an opinion column, please contact us at biddefordgazette@gmail.com This column was also published in the Biddeford-Saco Courier
Never miss another update! Subscribe for free today!
This week at the Statehouse was front-loaded and compact. Many of my colleagues traveled on the biannual Maine Development Foundation tour across the state, learning about economic development particularly in Penobscot and Aroostook Counties from Wednesday through Friday. I’ve always wanted to attend, but it’s difficult to manage with family obligations. One of these days I will.
On Monday, the Veterans and Legal Affairs Committee met, adopted committee rules, held one public hearing and voted on two lines relevant to our work in the Governor’s supplemental budget. One of those lines appropriated money to the Secretary of State’s office to offset costs associated with the 2024 election which were higher than anticipated.
State Rep. Marc Malon
Funding our election systems is critical, and I voted to support this one-time appropriation. The other line was requested by the Secretary of State to cover their Maine IT costs, which were billed to them at a higher amount than expected. I was in the minority in voting Yes on this, but agreed with my colleagues that the Appropriations Committee should ask tough questions of the Department of Administrative and Financial Services for why they hiked their IT bill (to the tune of $19k).
Tuesday, we had a relatively uneventful session where we referred many bills to committees. I also announced to colleagues that the Franco American Caucus was going to begin its work and that folks should think of individuals in their communities who might deserve nominations for the Franco American Hall of Fame.
After Session, the Housing and Economic Development Committee met and listened to the report from HR&A Advisors on how to address the state’s 84,000-unit shortfall. The report was comprehensive and gave us significant food for thought. NewsCenter produced an excellent story on their presentation and published the full report here: https://www.newscentermaine.com/…/97-847e89d5-dd04-4678…
The speech, like any of these addresses, contained plenty to like and dislike. That’s normal. It’s a tough budget this year,
After committee, I attended a lecture at the Holocaust and Human Rights Center of Maine commemorating the 50th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz and Birkenau. The lecture, partly organized by my colleague Rep. Sam Zager, offered us a sobering look at how Hitler was able to quickly consolidate power and destroy German democracy, a necessary condition for him to further pursue his plans, including the planned extermination of Jews. There are serious lessons to learn from this history which I hope we will take to heart.
Following this presentation, we returned to the State House for Governor Mills’s State of the State Address. The speech, like any of these addresses, contained plenty to like and dislike. That’s normal. It’s a tough budget this year, and the Appropriations Committee will carefully review her budget proposals to see how they can be improved.
I liked that she stood strong in her commitment to funding MaineCare, which covers a significant percentage of Mainers, as well as 55% of the costs of public education, revenue sharing, and free school lunches. I did not like the stance she took against adopting red flag gun laws which would strengthen public safety. No one agrees 100 percent of the time. When I liked what she said, I stood and clapped. When I didn’t, I politely remained in my seat.
What was not helpful, however, is that one of my legislative colleagues recruited protesters to the State House to shout at and heckle the Governor, her family, and legislators from both parties. One of the hecklers I recognized as a former political candidate who believes the horrific Sandy Hook shootings were a hoax. People have the right to protest, and the right to be as rude to us as they want. That’s fine! But we have the right to not be persuaded by such antics, and I wasn’t.
Finally, I would be remiss if I did not note the impact that certain federal actions have on Maine. I would love for my posts to stay focused on state policy, but some actions are so impactful that I can’t avoid mentioning them.
The chaos and confusion caused by the federal OMB memo on Tuesday blocking the funding of all grants and federal funding to programs that Mainers rely on was unacceptable. Though the memo was rescinded after significant outcry, it put people’s livelihoods in question. These programs included LIHEAP, Meals on Wheels, and numerous initiatives at the University of Maine. That is no way to govern.
Just yesterday the Trump administration announced significant tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China. I am not a free trade fundamentalist, but these tariffs are ill-conceived and very harmful to Maine consumers. Canada is our largest trading partner and a trade war with them hurts Maine workers too.
Overall, these tariffs will raise prices on energy, heating, food, housing, and cars. This is not what we need, and I will add my voice to the chorus demanding that Trump walk this back.
State Rep. Marc Malon is a Democrat representing a portion of Biddeford in the Maine Legislature. He may be contacted at:Marc.Malon@legislature.maine.gov
The views and opinions presented here are solely those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Biddeford Gazette or its publisher.
The Gazette is always happy to consider reader-submitted commentary for the Community Voices section of the Biddeford Gazette. For more information, please email: biddefordgazette@gmail.com.
Never miss another update! Subscribe to the Biddeford Gazette for free today!
As Maine lawmakers gear up for what is expected to be a grueling session, there are two topics that both Democrats and Republicans agree should be a top priority.
The 132nd Legislature will consider several bills aimed at tackling the state’s housing crisis while also addressing a projected $450 million budget shortfall and a new budget proposal that represents a 10 percent increase in state spending.
When it comes to issues of housing, Biddeford’s delegation is well poised and ready to tackle the complex issues of homelessness, the need for affordable rental units, protections for mobile home residents and the rather stagnant supply of workforce housing options, which includes starter homes for Maine’s families.
“There is a lot for us to do on these issues,” said State Rep. Traci Gere (D-Biddeford) “We’re just getting started, but I am optimistic that folks on both sides of the aisle are ready to roll up their sleeves.”
Gere was just elected to her third term. She represents coastal Biddeford and Kennebunkport, and was just appointed as the House Chair for the Joint Standing Committee on Housing and Economic Development.
Rep. Marc Malon (D-Biddeford) has also been appointed to serve on that same committee.
Though Gere’s coastal district is rich in land and real estate values, it is also home to an aging population – seniors who are wondering how they can remain in homes they have owned for generations while struggling to keep pace with rising property taxes.
“Our housing problems also adversely impact people who already have stable housing
— Rep. Traci Gere
“There are so many facets that fit under the umbrella of housing issues,” Gere said, pointing out that roughly eight percent of Maine homeowners occupy manufactured housing.
Gere is hoping the Legislature will be able to help cities and towns across the state in revising zoning standards and cutting bureaucratic red tape.
“Our housing problems also adversely impact people who already have stable housing,” Gere said, pointing out that both businesses and consumers are impacted when front-line workers cannot afford to live in the same community where they work.
Speaker Ryan Fecteau of Biddeford is very familiar with housing issues. In addition to his legislative service, Fecteau is employed as a senior officer of policy and planning for Avesta Housing, a non-profit affordable housing developer that operates throughout New England.
Like Gere, Fecteau believes the state can help municipalities by cutting some of the red tape that often slows housing development.
“There are more than 200 towns in Maine that don’t have any zoning regulations or designated growth areas for new housing,” Fecteau said. “That’s almost half of all municipalities.”
Fecteau said the Legislature can find an appropriate balance in working with communities without overstepping on the bounds of local, home rule.
State Rep. Traci Gere (Photo: Maine House)
“There is an appropriate role the state can play in these local discussions,” Fecteau said. “We can bring resources to the table and help our municipal partners without stepping on their toes.”
The looming budget battle
A few days ago, Gov. Janet Mills (D) submitted her proposal for the state’s next biennial budget.
Mills $11 billion budget request represents a roughly 10 percent increase over the current budget.
To support her proposed spending increases, Mills has suggested increasing taxes on a wide range of products and services, including a 50 percent increase on cigarette taxes and more modest increases on things such as streaming services, cannabis and ambulance fees.
Local lawmakers say they are still treading through the massive budget documents that were released less than two weeks ago, but say declining federal revenues that were available to states during the Covid pandemic are no longer available.
State Rep. Wayne Parry (R-Arundel) is back in Augusta for a third consecutive term. He previously served in the Maine House for four terms before taking a two-year hiatus because of Maine’s term limit laws.
Parry will once again serve on the Legislature’s Transportation Committee. When asked about the budget, Parry said he is not feeling very optimistic.
While a majority of Democrats, including Fecteau, say the state needs to increase revenues, Parry say he favors a spending freeze.
‘I know a lot of Republicans are going into this with a mantra of cut, cut and cut, I prefer that we do our best to freeze spending at its current level,” Parry said. “Lots of people talk about the federal monies we received during Covid. Well, I have news, the pandemic is over.
“It just becomes a never-ending cycle of spend, spend, spend.”
Although a new state program designed to help seniors stay in their homes fell flat on its face last year because of huge demand and flaws in its implementation, Parry says there are still many opportunities to help seniors deal with crippling property tax increases.
“I find it really frustrating,” Parry said. “We’re not taking care of our seniors and veterans. The focus is all about people who have lived in Maine for about five minutes.
“I support programs to help people out and lend a hand, but how can we keep inviting people who need financial assistance into our state when we can’t properly take care of the people who already live here?’
When asked about the budget shortfall and looming increase, Fecteau and Gere say that many of the newer programs the Legislature passed have wide and strong support among voters.
“When you look at some of the things we accomplished – as our commitment to fund 55 percent of local school budgets to help local property taxpayers, or the universal free me program for all students, I don’t think there would be much support for cutting those programs,” Fecteau said.
“But the cost for those programs does not stay flat. We have to consider inflationary impacts and shrinking federal funds.”
Parry criticized Mills for not recognizing the importance of Maine’s transportation needs, saying 100 percent of all revenue from the state’s vehicle sales tax should be used to support a vital part of Maine’s infrastructure.
State Rep. Wayne Parry (Courtesy photo)
Currently, Parry says, only about 40 percent of vehicle sales tax revenues are being used for transportation.
“It’s really frustrating,” Parry said. “Our transportation infrastructure, including bridges, highways and roads is essential for everything from day-to-day commerce to tourism.”
“It feels like we don’t have our priorities straight.” he added.
Editor’s Note: This is a corrected version of the story. In a previous version, we misquoted State Rep. Wayne Parry in reference to gasoline taxes, which should have read vehicle sales tax. We apologize for the error.
Never miss another update! Enter your email and subscribe for free today!
With the 132nd Legislature now officially underway and facing a state budget shortfall, members of Biddeford’s legislative delegation are preparing for what is expected to be a battle of spending priorities.
Members of Biddeford’s delegation are all Democrats, the party that holds a solid majority in both the House and Senate; as well as the Blaine House where Gov. Janet Mills is now serving the final two years of her second term in office.
Last week, Mills presented lawmakers with a proposed two-year budget that is roughly 10 percent higher than the current $10.5 billion budget.
Mills has also cautioned lawmakers that the state will need to be especially prudent with its spending because of a potential $450 million deficit.
State Sen. Henry Ingwersen (D-Arundel) represents Biddeford in the 35-member state senate. During a telephone interview on Sunday, Ingwersen said he is still going through the details of Mills’ proposed budget, which was released on Friday.
State Sen. Henry Ingwersen
“I haven’t yet gone through all the fine print, but there is no question that we have our work cut out for us,” Ingwersen said.
Adding to his workload, Ingwersen has also been named as senate chair of the Health & Human Services Committee, which has the biggest impact on the state budget in terms of spending, especially for the growing MaineCare program.
The MaineCare program provides free and low-cost health insurance to residents who meet certain income guidelines.
“Maine people have clearly shown support for the expansion of MaineCare, but we also have a tighter budget and facing increasing demand for services,” Ingwersen said. “It’s going to be a challenge for all of us.”
State Rep. Marc Malon (D-Biddeford) agreed with Ingwersen about the daunting budget process.
“We have to be willing to examine everything, but it’s also important to note that some of our past spending increases have provided Maine people with really good outcomes,” Malon said, pointing to the state’s relatively new commitment to provide 55 percent of local education costs in the General-Purpose Aid (GPA) for education budget.
State Rep. Marc Malon
Like Ingwersen, Malon is also beginning his second, two-year term in the Legislature. Malon will again serve on the Legal and Veterans Affairs Committee and was appointed this year to serve on the Housing Committee.
“Despite some of the challenges we’re facing, I firmly believe that we will be able to deliver a balanced budget without tapping into a ‘rainy day’ fund,” Malon said. “It’s going to be a balancing act, but it will not be impossible.”
Malon said he has submitted nine bills for consideration, including one that will likely breeze through the legislative approval process.
Malon is the primary sponsor of a bill that would allow the cities of Biddeford and Saco to rename the bridge at the bottom of York Hill in honor of the late Gen. Wallace Nutting, a Saco native who became Biddeford’s mayor after an extraordinary military career.
“It’s going to be a balancing act, but it will not be impossible.”
Rep. Marc Malon
That bill, LD 79, has already been referred to the Joint Transportation Committee and is being co-sponsored by every member of the Biddeford-Saco delegation, including Ingwersen; Sen. Donna Bailey of Saco; Reps. Marshall Archer and Lynn Copeland of Saco and Reps. Ryan Fecteau and Traci Gere of Biddeford.
Malon has also submitted bills intended to improve state review of proposed housing projects, new regulations related to medical cannabis sales and a bill that could place some limits on local real estate taxes by assessing only a parcel’s land value.
Although the budget will consume much of the conversation, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle say housing issues will be a top priority for the Legislature.
“Housing really affects so many other things,” Malon said. “Businesses need workers, but those workers need homes in proximity to their workplace. We need affordable housing, but we also need to increase our supply of modest starter homes that allow young families the opportunity to start building equity.”
To address the housing crisis, Malon says state and local leaders will need to look at and reconsider certain zoning restrictions and find ways to cut red tape for builders and developers.
“It’s not going to be an easy two years,’ Malon said. “But it’s not going to be the end of the world either. Maine has faced tough budgets before. We will get through this, keep our commitments to Maine people by working together and being creative.”
Never miss another story! Sign up for a free subscription today!
THE BIDDEFORD GAZETTE 