logo
‘Not good public policy': Bill would roll back some provisions of 2021 transmission line referendum

‘Not good public policy': Bill would roll back some provisions of 2021 transmission line referendum

Yahoo12-03-2025

Maine needs to expand its transmission system in the coming years to meet the needs of increased electrification, while ensuring there is enough clean, affordable energy, said Caroline Colan, the legislative liaison for the Governor's Energy Office. (Photo by)
Rep. Chris Kessler voted for the 2021 referendum question that created the requirement for the Maine Legislature to approve any new high-impact transmission lines.
'This referendum was intended to give the public a greater voice in the development of major transmission lines,' Kessler said of the ballot question that drew passionate grassroots support and overcame over $60 million in opposition spending fueled mostly by international energy companies.
Since casting that vote, the Democrat from South Portland said he has had a change of heart and no longer believes it is good public policy, as he told the Legislature's Energy, Utilities and Technology Committee Tuesday afternoon.
That rethinking led Kessler to introduce LD 810 to streamline the approval process without repealing the entire policy born out of the people's vote. The proposal seeks to clarify that when the Legislature asks for a new line to be developed, that line should not need to come back to the Legislature for approval after the review process performed by the Public Utilities Commission.
In 2021, Maine voters approved a ballot question that increased legislative oversight on new transmission lines. The question was largely seen as a vehicle to stop the controversial 145-mile transmission line through western Maine known as the New England Clean Energy Connect.
Despite the political and legal hurdles, the Central Maine Power corridor project is expected to be completed later this year, Maine Public reported.
Rep. Sophie Warren (D-Scarborough) asked Kessler and others who supported the bill to address the fact that the proposal would scale back a policy that was supported by nearly 60% of Maine voters.
'This is not a comfortable position for me to be in,' Kessler said in his testimony, but the policy has created unintended consequences.
'It may be an unpopular position to have but I think it's not good public policy,' he added.
While Kessler argued the Legislature lacks the technical expertise to sign off on the details of a transmission line, representatives from the Office of Public Advocate, Maine State Chamber of Commerce and multiple environmental organizations agreed the duplicative process can deter developers, drive up costs for ratepayers and stand in the way of meeting climate goals. Several of the groups voiced support for removing the legislative approval requirement entirely.
Public Advocate Heather Sanborn said a second round of approval for projects requested by the Legislature is not necessary.
'Such a requirement will have the direct effect of costing ratepayers additional money by introducing additional risk and delay that must be priced into the modeled costs of the project from the beginning,' she added.
Maine needs to expand its transmission system in the coming years to meet the needs of increased electrification, while ensuring there is enough clean, affordable energy, said Caroline Colan, the legislative liaison for the Governor's Energy Office.
Colan testified neither for nor against the legislation, but she echoed what others said about it adding financial risk and driving up developer bids, which ultimately fall on Maine ratepayers.
The Maine Public Utilities Commission is responsible for conducting a thorough review process for petitions from developers to construct new transmission lines capable of 69 kilovolts or more, as required by state law. The petition needs to include information about why the line is needed, why it should be built along that particular route and how it will affect public health, safety, as well as the scenery and environment, among other considerations.
The commission holds a public hearing as part of the petition process and is tasked with determining whether the new line is needed.
Because of the 2021 referendum, in addition to that process, the Legislature must give its approval of the project. However, Kessler pointed out what he sees as a flaw in the referendum language, which does not specify when in the process legislative approval should occur.
Opposing the change, Tanya Blanchard, founder of Preserve Rural Maine, argued that if the Legislature is knowledgeable enough to propose a transmission line, it should be able to approve one. Blanchard founded the group in the summer of 2023 in response to a proposed transmission line through more than 40 rural communities.
She fears that bypassing the legislative review could not only weaken public trust, but also lead to projects being approved without fully considering the effects on local people, wildlife and natural beauty.
The intention is not to stop transmission lines, but 'get them right the first time,' Blanchard said. Legislature approval can provide that assurance, she added.
Kessler's bill was one of four that the committee heard Tuesday related to transmission lines in the state.
LD 596 sponsored by Sen. Mark Lawrence (D-York) would provide a vehicle for the Legislature to consider the construction and operation of a transmission line to connect renewable energy resources in northern Maine with the regional electric grid.
While it does not give preemptive approval, the bill serves as a placeholder in case the Public Utilities Commission moves forward with soliciting new bids for the renewable energy project and transmission line in northern Maine. The Legislature passed a law in 2021 calling for this project, but would still need to sign off.
The commission selected bids for a wind farm and transmission line in early 2023, but those contracts were later terminated due to delays and other changes that increased the costs of the projects.
Sen. Scott Cyrway (R-Kennebec) introduced LD 197 to direct the Governor's Energy Office to study the state's future electric transmission infrastructure needs with a report on the findings to be submitted by September 2026.
Colan testified neither for nor against the bill, but said the office is already working on a 'thoughtful, comprehensive, forward-looking strategy to address the full range of long-term transmission-level needs expected in Maine.'
The bill from Sen. Joseph Martin (R-Oxford), LD 469, would require that 50% of electricity carried on any new lines originating in Canada would need to be consumed in Maine. It would also require a variety of reports and efforts to reduce costs amid increased electricity consumption.
While the committee raised a number of technical questions about the bill, Martin said the intention is to control the supply and demand to benefit Maine ratepayers.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Noem Says Padilla's Approach Wasn't Appropriate
Noem Says Padilla's Approach Wasn't Appropriate

Yahoo

time14 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Noem Says Padilla's Approach Wasn't Appropriate

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem talks about US Senator Alex Padilla, a Democrat from California, being forcibly removed from her press conference. "I think everybody in America would agree that that wasn't appropriate, that if you wanted to have a civil discussion, especially as a leader, a public official, that you would reach out and try to have a conversation," she told reporters. Padilla says he was not arrested and was only trying to ask a question.

Rep. Mannion defends house floor outburst as act of patriotism: ‘I have to stop the rise of authoritarian government'
Rep. Mannion defends house floor outburst as act of patriotism: ‘I have to stop the rise of authoritarian government'

Yahoo

time32 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Rep. Mannion defends house floor outburst as act of patriotism: ‘I have to stop the rise of authoritarian government'

WASHINGTON, D.C. (WSYR-TV) — Congressman John Mannion is defending his vulgar outburst towards a fellow congressman on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives as an act of patriotism. Over a televised feed of the House vote, shouting can be heard in a distant part of the room. It's Representative Mannion saying, in part: 'get over there and get some f**king balls. Tell them. Tell them. You know who I am.' The comments were directed at Republican Congressman Mike Lawler, also of New York. Mannion's office said the congressman was already fired up about Senator Alex Padilla being removed from a press briefing hosted by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. The tension continued into a Democrat-hosted press conference outside the house floor, which then spilled onto the house floor when the argument began the congressman began. Lawler posted a response, also profane, to his campaign's social media: 'John Mannion was entirely unhinged and unprofessional. That was a shameful display that exposed his complete lack of temperament. No wonder numerous staffers have previously alleged a toxic work environment. He should go seek help for anger management — and f**k off.' Mannion's office responded to NewsChannel 9's request for comment. Statement from Representative John Mannion: I'm a kid from Tipp Hill that's fighting for my hometown and my country. I'm giving everything I have to stop the rise of authoritarian government and the destruction of American democracy. If making some noise on the house floor and calling out Trump enablers draws attention to what's happening to our country right before our eyes – good. Today it's roughing up and handcuffing a United States Senator and a politicized military patrolling the streets of American cities. It's the willing abandonment of the rule of law and a gross fealty to a want-to-be dictator who is tearing the country apart. None of this is normal or okay. I'm always going to stand up and speak out and fight for the people of this country. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

'Afraid' for court: Trump DOJ sues NY over immigration enforcement in state courthouses
'Afraid' for court: Trump DOJ sues NY over immigration enforcement in state courthouses

USA Today

time41 minutes ago

  • USA Today

'Afraid' for court: Trump DOJ sues NY over immigration enforcement in state courthouses

'Afraid' for court: Trump DOJ sues NY over immigration enforcement in state courthouses Show Caption Hide Caption Three Democratic governors testify in House hearing over immigration New York Governor Kathy Hochul, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, and Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, testify on Capitol Hill over immigration policies. NEW YORK − The Trump administration on June 12 sued New York state for its law restricting federal immigration enforcement inside state courthouses. The lawsuit challenges a New York state law that blocks immigration officials from arresting people at or near New York courthouses. The complaint, filed in federal court in Albany, New York, alleges the law frustrates federal immigration enforcement at a venue - state courthouses - where authorities can safely make arrests. U.S. Justice Department lawyers said New York's law and policies restricting cooperation with federal immigration officers violated the Constitution's Supremacy Clause, which gives federal law precedence over state law. The lawsuit filed in federal court in Albany comes after the administration has increased immigration enforcement at workplaces and while people appeared for immigration court hearings. People have protested against the federal actions in cities across the country. Attorney General Pam Bondi blamed so-called 'sanctuary city policies' for violence seen in California. Sanctuary policies generally refers to those limiting local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement. The Justice Department has also sued four New Jersey cities for their laws. New York state had similar policies preventing agents from apprehending migrants, Bondi said in a statement. 'This latest lawsuit in a series of sanctuary city litigation underscores the Department of Justice's commitment to keeping Americans safe and aggressively enforcing the law,' she said. Justice Department lawyers challenged the 2020 state law preventing federal officials from arresting people for civil immigration violations at state courthouses without a signed judicial warrant. New York's 2020 law doesn't apply to federal courthouses or immigration court, according to the legislation's author, state Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal, a Manhattan Democrat who called the lawsuit 'baseless and frivolous." The Justice Department said in a news release that enforcement at courthouses reduces risk of people fleeing or dangerous situations, especially since there is enhanced screening inside court buildings. 'Ongoing assault' on rule of law in NY, state officials say State officials said federal agents entering local courthouses make communities unsafe by preventing people from accessing the judicial system. The law ensures New Yorkers can pursue justice without fear, Geoff Burgan, a spokesperson for state Attorney General Letitia James, said in a statement. 'Due process means nothing if people are too afraid to appear in court,' he said. James would defend the law and 'all of New York's laws, just as she will continue to defend the rights and dignity of all who call New York home,' Burgan said. Hoylman-Sigal, who authored the law, said the lawsuit was part of the administration's 'ongoing assault on the rule of law in New York.' To avoid conflicting with federal law or federal immigration authority, the law doesn't apply to federal courts or immigration courts, he said in a statement. Meanwhile, it allows U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to arrest people in local courthouses when they have 'actual, valid judicial warrants.' 'At a time when masked ICE officials are roaming the state and lawlessly detaining New Yorkers without any due process, the law preserves access to justice and participation in the judicial process,' he said. 'Sensitive' areas targets of immigration enforcement A contentious issue has been federal agents targeting people in 'sensitive" areas. Prior Department of Homeland Security guidelines banned enforcement in areas such as schools, places of worship and hospitals. When President Donald Trump took office in January, DHS overturned the longstanding policy to give agents discretion on such actions. The administration enacted another policy permitting enforcement at or near courthouses. Justice Department lawyers also challenged two New York executive orders restricting civil immigration arrests at state facilities, and a separate policy preventing state employees from sharing information to federal officers related to civil immigration enforcement. 'Through these enactments, New York obstructs federal law enforcement and facilitates the evasion of federal law by dangerous criminals, notwithstanding federal agents' statutory mandate to detain and remove illegal aliens,' the complaint said. The same day as the lawsuit, Gov. Kathy Hochul was one of three Democratic governors testifying before Congress about "sanctuary" policies and immigration enforcement. Hochul said her state has cooperated with ICE since she's taken office. "But we have to draw a line somewhere,' Hochul said. 'New York cannot deputize our state officers to enforce civil immigration violations, such as overstaying a visa.' The administration's attack on the 2020 law would turn courthouses 'into traps,' Donna Liberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement. It would further force immigrant communities into the shadows. An initial conference date for the lawsuit was scheduled for Sept. 10, court records showed. Contributing: Bart Jansen, USA TODAY Eduardo Cuevas is based in New York City. Reach him by email at emcuevas1@ or on Signal at emcuevas.01.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store