Latest news with #EmmaDavis
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Maine lawmakers pass $1.6 billion ‘messaging bill' to reverse cuts to state pension system
Passersby honk at Winnie Malia (right) and other state employees chanting along State Street in Augusta on Sept. 26, 2023. (Photo by Emma Davis/ Maine Morning Star) Maine Legislators said they hope to send a message about the importance of public service with the passage of a bill that would undo previous cuts to the state pension system — to the tune of more than $1.6 billion. In 2011, the Legislature and former Gov. Paul LePage made changes to the state pension system that capped cost of living adjustments at 3% and restricted that increase so that it would only apply to the first $20,000 (which has now increased to $24,000) of pension income. At the time, those cuts helped the state lower the top marginal individual income tax rate from 8.5% to 7.15%. The House voted 81-66 on Wednesday following the Senate's 22-12 vote on Tuesday in favor of legislation (LD 900) that would undo some of those changes and tie the Public Employees Retirement System to the Consumer Price Index in an effort to help retirement accounts keep pace with inflation. Speaking from the chamber floor Tuesday, Sen. Mike Tipping (D-Penobscot) noted the bill has a fiscal note of more than $1.6 billion due to the state pension system not having enough assets to cover the future cost of those changes. 'I have every confidence that my colleagues on the Appropriations and Financial Affairs Committee will find that money,' Tipping joked, 'but regardless of how it works out, this is an important reminder of how much we've taken from retirees to pay for tax breaks for the wealthy.' However, critics said passing a bill with such a price tag would be irresponsible. 'We must legislate responsibly, balancing our obligations to retirees with a broader need for Maine's working families, businesses and public services,' Rep. Mike Soboleski (R-Phillips) said during the House debate, adding that if funded the bill would likely divert resources from education, health care, and other priorities. Rep. Amy Roeder (D-Bangor) said although the bill is likely going to die on the appropriations table, where legislation not included in the budget vies for remaining funds at the end of session, she won't stop fighting for pensions. 'Every year we fail to restore these pensions, we are complicit in perpetuating the injustice,' she said. Bill sponsor Sen. Joe Baldacci (D-Bangor) said over the last 15 years 'employees of the state have been shortchanged significantly,' noting the thousands of retired teachers and public workers impacted by the current structure. His hope is that over successive legislatures, this issue becomes a priority. Before advancing to either the governor's desk or the appropriations table, the bill will go back to both chambers for final enactment votes. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Immigration enforcement hearing highlights lack of protocol for local, federal collaboration
Rep. Deqa Dhalac (D-South Portland) presents legislation to the Judiciary Committee on May 19 that would restrict the scope of immigration-related work of individual law enforcement officers and state employees. (Emma Davis/ Maine Morning Star) As some communities in Maine have clashed, with varying outcomes, over local police contracting with federal immigration authorities, legislators are pushing for new state laws that would make those decisions universal. On Monday, dozens of people packed the Maine Legislature's Judiciary Committee room, spilling into two overflow rooms, to testify largely in support of two bills proposed by Democrats that would restrict local authorities from carrying out federal immigration enforcement. For the most part, testimony for and against plans in Augusta mirrored the arguments that have been voiced in board meetings in a coastal community in Southern Maine. In April, the Wells Police Department became the first local agency in Maine to contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement under what's called the 287(g) program, which has divided the community. After the 287(g) program was discontinued in 2012 due to the discovery of discriminatory practices such as racial profiling, President Donald Trump revived it to bolster ICE's capacity by deputizing local police officers to detain immigrants, an authority otherwise generally reserved to federal authorities. Wells community divided over ICE agreement with local police Participation is growing across the country. As of Monday, ICE had signed 588 agreements with agencies in 40 states. Six states have laws or policies that prohibit participation, according to ICE. Wells remains the only local agency in the program in Maine. Monmouth Winthrop Police Department, a combination of departments that serve central Maine communities, applied for the program but withdrew its application after community pushback. While immigration is a federal matter by law, work on the local level is key. An estimated 70% of ICE arrests nationwide over the past decade have been handoffs from state or local authorities. The effect of both bills, LD 1259 and LD 1971, would be to prohibit state and local law enforcement agencies from carrying out the work of federal immigration authorities. LD 1259 would do so by explicitly prohibiting contracts with such authorities, while LD 1971 would place restrictions on enforcement activities absent such formal agreements, which is the case for the majority of police departments in Maine that currently have local discretion regarding when to involve federal officials. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX A fine point was placed on that subjectivity when Sen. Rachel Talbot Ross (D-Cumberland) questioned Kennebec County Sheriff Ken Mason, who testified against both bills on behalf of the Maine Sheriffs Association's Legislative Policy Committee, about general police protocols for when to involve federal agents, in light of a routine traffic stop in Waldo County leading to two immigration detentions. 'At what point in that dichotomy of events is the decision made to contact Border Patrol and why?' Talbot Ross asked. Mason responded, 'I have to rely on my deputies and the supervisors that are working the road that day to make a judgment call on if they believe they need to call somebody.' The text of LD 1259 is succinct. Sponsored by Rep. Ambureen Rana (D-Bangor), the legislation would prohibit state or local law enforcement agencies or officers from entering into contracts with federal immigration enforcement authorities. LD 1971, sponsored by Rep. Deqa Dhalac (D-South Portland), would restrict the scope of immigration-related work of individual law enforcement officers and state employees regardless of federal contracts. Specifically, LD 1971 would prohibit state and local law enforcement agencies from 'stopping, investigating, interrogating, arresting or detaining' a person for immigration enforcement purposes. This would include in response to a hold request, immigration detainer or administrative warrant issued by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. It would also prevent law enforcement from holding someone solely for immigration enforcement purposes for longer than 48 hours and establish clear protocols during custody, including requiring law enforcement to inform incarcerated people of their rights before an interview by an immigration authority. Home rule is wonderful until it comes to our constitutional rights, which our federal authorities are violating right now. – Ambureen Rana The bill specifies that it would not prohibit a law enforcement agency from arresting, detaining or performing other law enforcement duties due to reasons not solely based on the person's immigration status. Other than law enforcement, LD 1971 would prohibit state employees from inquiring into immigration status unless the inquiry is required by law or necessary to provide the service sought by the resident. Proponents say that allowing local police to carry out federal immigration enforcement would erode public trust and safety. Lisa Parisio, policy director at the Immigrant Legal Advocacy Project, Maine's only state-wide immigration legal services organization, said ILAP's clients have already reported that they've decided to not call the police when they wanted to out of fear for their own safety and that they are scared to continue serving as a witness in court. Some of their clients have also reported that they're not pursuing higher education out of fear of immigration enforcement, which Parisio described as a loss to Maine's future economy. Many who testified focused on cost. Proponents said the bills would protect local tax dollars from being strained to carry out federal responsibilities. Under 287(g) agreements, ICE is responsible for the cost of training and information technology infrastructure, however the local law enforcement agency bears all other costs, including personnel expenses such as salary and overtime, benefits and lawsuits, according to the general memorandum of understanding. Rep. Elizabeth Caruso (R-Caratunk) said she appreciated this local control argument but asked Rana, in that spirit, why not leave the decision of whether to contract with federal immigration authorities up to local communities? 'I believe that we shouldn't be tying the hands of our local law enforcement by allowing the federal government to pressure them into these agreements,' Rana responded. 'Home rule is wonderful until it comes to our constitutional rights, which our federal authorities are violating right now.' Many proponents also highlighted this latter point, that they do not want local police to be implicated with a federal agency that has been accused of disregarding due process. Immigration detention increase reveals expanded federal operations in Maine Auburn Police Chief Jason Moen, who testified against both bills on behalf of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, said he reviewed information about the 287(g) program and decided against his department participating. However, he does not think the blanket ban on such agreements in Rana's bill is the right approach, nor the restrictions on cooperating with federal authorities for immigration matters in the other bill. 'It disrupts long standing partnerships among local, state and federal agencies and will prevent local law enforcement from exercising discretion in critical situations,' Moen said. Moen and Mason from the Maine Sheriffs Association were the only two people to testify against the bills on Monday. Other groups submitted testimony in opposition, including the Maine County Commissioners Association to LD 1259. The association's legislative policy committee co-chairs, Stephen Gordon and Jean-Marie Caterina, wrote that the legislation could put at risk federal funding that county jails receive to detain people accused of violating federal law. 'These funds help defray county jail operating costs, which is good for local property taxpayers who are asked to fund the great bulk of the cost of operating county jails,' they wrote. As Maine has seen an uptick in immigration detentions, some immigrants rights advocates have raised concern about the financial incentives prisons and jails have to assist with the Trump administration's goal of expanding space for immigration detention. The Democratic proposals come after Republicans presented a conflicting bill last month that would prevent local agencies from adopting any policies that restrict them from assisting in the enforcement of federal immigration law. None of these bills have received committee votes yet and there is only a month left until lawmakers are expected to conclude their work for the first year of Maine's two-year Legislative session. Rana told Maine Morning Star that the intention is for the Legislature to make its decisions on the topic this year. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Legislators suggest task force tackle challenge of property tax reform
The Legislature's Taxation Committee hears public feedback on bill proposals in Augusta. (Emma Davis/ Maine Morning Star) With bipartisan agreement that Maine's property tax burden is too high, legislators are pushing for some tweaks to tax credits this year, however they're holding off on substantial reform until a task force can study the issue. Among its work on 18 bills on Thursday, the Taxation Committee removed the policy changes from a bipartisan plan from legislative leadership to provide property tax relief. Instead, the committee members unanimously agreed the bill should be exclusively focused on the creation of a task force that would report back legislative recommendations starting next year. 'The truth of the matter is with 2,000 bills that we're working in five months,' said co-chair Sen. Nicole Grohowski (D-Hancock), 'I actually think taking a break and being able to focus on one thing for a period of time is the way we can get the best outcome for Maine people.' The Maine Legislature is approaching its expected final month of work for the first year of the two-year session and is overall considering dozens of bills that aim to reform property taxes. Some have received favorable votes from the Taxation Committee including on Thursday a plan to expand the Property Tax Fairness Credit. The committee also earlier advanced a proposal to increase the state's tax exemption for homeowners and another to expand property tax relief for veterans and their survivors, with the latter passing both the Maine House of Representatives and Senate this week. The committee's recommendations largely fell in line with the positions of Gov. Janet Mills' administration, including committee members unanimously opposing on Thursday attempts to reinstate previously repealed programs related to property taxes. 'We did take the time and really work the task force,' Rep. Shelley Rudnicki (R-Fairfield) said, referring to the several hours the committee spent Thursday morning hashing out the details of its composition and deadlines. 'I think it makes sense right now to go that way rather than try to piecemeal things.' A bipartisan bill, LD 1770 sponsored by Senate President Mattie Daughtry (D-Brunswick) and co-sponsored by House Speaker Ryan Fecteau (D-Biddeford) and Senate Minority Leader Trey Stewart (R-Aroostook), among others, initially sought to both increase the property tax fairness credit and establish a Real Estate Property Tax Relief Task Force. The committee unanimously decided to advance an amended version of the bill that only included the latter, which now sets LD 1770 on a likely path to passage. The Mills administration had some concerns about the policy changes in LD 1770 given the tight budget year but was fully supportive of the task force component. Stating that they'd like to wait for the recommendations from this task force for major reform, the committee unanimously rejected most of the other property tax bills it considered on Thursday. These included LDs 432, 1304, 1464, 1537, 1591, 1610, 1729 and 1798. 'We are taking all of this, all of this information, seriously,' said Rep. Tracy Quint (R-Hodgdon), 'and that is why we are sending it over to the task force, because they can take the appropriate amount of time to see which bills can be properly worked and implemented.' Other lawmakers withdrew their own bills, including Rep. Steven Foster (R-Dexter) who withdrew LD 614, which sought to modify certain property tax assessment methods. 'I believe a long term answer to this problem requires much more than occasional increases to the Homestead exemption, tax credits, or other temporary fixes,' Foster said. 'I think the task force and its work this bill would establish may provide that answer.' Daughtry had outlined that the task force would be required to be geographically diverse and composed of legislators, economists, tax experts, real estate professionals and representatives of low-income and older residents. The committee added additional specifications, including that those representing low-income and older residents be people with that lived experience and that one member must represent municipalities with fewer than 10,000 residents and different forms of government — i.e. both cities and towns. While the committee had wanted the task force to complete its work within the current 132nd Legislature, it ultimately compromised, given concerns about staff workload in light of changes on the federal level raised by Michael Allen, associate commissioner for Tax Policy in the Department of Administrative and Financial Services. With the Republican majority in U.S. Congress pushing for a budget plan with new tax breaks, cuts to Medicaid and other programs, Maine state government will likely have to return to readjust state spending and operations once the details are finalized, Allen said. 'That means we're looking at conformity sometime in the middle of the summer of a very complicated bill, which is going to probably require this committee to come in to evaluate any proposal by the governor,' Allen said. 'It may take two or three weeks just to figure out what exactly Congress did and its impact on state revenue.' Therefore, the committee agreed to have the task force issue an interim report in January 2026, but also have the ability to continue its work until December 2026, when a final report would be due. Rep. Gregory Lewis Swallow (R-Houlton) was alone in offering a different take on the task force. He thinks limiting it to only studying property taxes is too narrow. 'Everything is synergistic on this issue,' Swallow said. 'When you deal with one tax, you're dealing with another tax.' The state has incrementally expanded the Property Tax Fairness Credit, the latest of which occurred last year. The credit allows taxpayers to receive back a portion of their property tax or rent paid during the tax year, with the value calculated by the degree to which the 'base benefit' exceeds 4% four of a person's annual income. In the 2023 tax year, the state essentially returned just under $80 million to taxpayers through the credit and after the latest expansion the state has returned about $115 million to taxpayers in 2024, though that number may change as returns come in. Allen said 33,463 taxpayers have benefitted from the expansion, with an average tax cut of $678, including 7,672 people who would have earlier been ineligible. Another adjustment could be coming. The committee unanimously voted to advance LD 715, sponsored by Rep. Nina Azella Milliken (D-Blue Hill), which would allow for people over the age of 65 with an annual income of $36,000 or less to receive a credit equal to the amount by which the 'base benefit' exceeds 3% of their annual income, a decrease from the current 4%. Former state Rep. Ron Russell introduced this plan last session, and while his bill passed both chambers, it ultimately did not get funded. On the other hand, the committee voted 8-3 against LD 1665, sponsored by Sen. Anne Carney (D-Cumberland), which covered similar ground but with a wider scope. It proposed increasing the benefit base to varying levels based on age and number of children. The majority of the committee ultimately rejected the plan, with Grohowski and Quint agreeing that the state shouldn't muddy the waters by adding another track for people with dependents to the property tax fairness credit when the state already has a specific child tax credit, which the committee has separately recommended be expanded. Enacted in 2022, the Property Tax Stabilization Program allowed people 65 years old and over to freeze their property taxes at the previous year's level regardless of income, as long as they owned a permanent residence for at least 10 years and were eligible to receive a homestead exemption. Mills allowed the law to take effect without her signature. However, the Legislature repealed that program after just one year in effect, following skyrocketing cost projections, concern about wealthy property owners taking advantage due to a lack of income restrictions and the administrative burden it left on municipalities. The eligibility expansion for the Property Tax Fairness Credit and the creation of a Property Tax Deferral Program had been some of the ways lawmakers tried to soften the blow of this repeal last session. With unanimous votes among those present, the Taxation Committee rejected Republican proposals to reinstate the program, albeit with some changes aimed to address the program's shortcomings. LD 1481, sponsored by Rep. Wayne Parry (R-Arundel), would add income limits for eligibility, and LD 1541, sponsored by Sen. Joseph Martin (R-Oxford), would exempt all Mainers over 65 from property taxes. The latter bill is co-sponsored by Republican leaders, Sen. Trey Stewart of Aroostook and Rep. Billy Bob Faulkingham of Winter Harbor. 'We should have fixed it,' Parry said of the program during a Wednesday press conference, 'not gotten rid of it.' In 2024, the Legislature repealed a law that limited the total levy that could be raised by a municipality via property taxes each year. LD 542, which is sponsored by Rep. Jeffrey Sean Adams (R-Lebanon), proposed reestablishing municipal property tax levy limits. The State and Local Government Committee was split on the proposal and not along party lines. Six legislators voted for its passage, while six voted against it. The majority of the House opposed the bill on Tuesday, with a 79-62 vote against passage, and the Senate tabled it on Wednesday. Regardless of how the Legislature's final votes come down, the Mills administration is also opposed to both bills, so they would likely get vetoed. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Legislature considers paths to afford Wabanki Nations more revenue from gambling
Chief of the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians Clarissa Sabattis testifies in favor of a bill to provide parity in gaming revenue among the Wabanaki Nations on May 7, 2025. (By Emma Davis/ Maine Morning Star) Among the many federal laws that do not apply to the Wabanaki Nations due to a land settlement act is one that offers federally recognized tribes the right to exclusively regulate and take in revenue from gambling on tribal lands. Last month, the majority of the Maine Legislature's Veterans and Legal Affairs Committee voted in favor of a bill, LD 1164, that would give the Wabanaki Nations exclusive rights to operate internet gaming in Maine, though Wabanaki leaders say there is not much appetite from the governor for that change and the privately owned casinos are opposed, which could hamper that bill's chance of success. On Wednesday, the committee heard testimony on another proposal, LD 1851, which, rather than altering the structure of who controls gaming, seeks to provide equality among the Wabanaki Nations in how much revenue they are provided from slot machine income in the state. 'One of the primary purposes of this bill is parity,' said Zeke Crofton-Macdonald, Tribal Ambassador for the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians. The federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 codified that tribes have the exclusive right to regulate gaming on their lands, unless the state in which it operates prohibits such gaming under its criminal laws. However, the 1980 Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act has made it so the Wabanaki Nations are treated more akin to municipalities than independent nations, one way being that the Tribes are unable to benefit from any federal law passed after 1980, unless they are specifically mentioned in the law. In 2022, the Maine Legislature amended the Settlement Act to permit the Tribes to handle sports betting, so the legislation being considered this session would build off of that earlier expansion. Sponsored by Rep. Marc Malon (D-Biddeford) and co-sponsored by Sen. Rachel Talbot Ross (D-Cumberland), LD 1851 would increase the total net slot machine income to be collected and distributed by a casino from 39% to 46%, which would only impact Hollywood Casino, Hotel and Raceway in Bangor, as Oxford Casino is currently at that percentage. It would then provide 7% of that income to the tribal governments of the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians and the Mi'kmaq Nation. 'It is a matter of fairness and brings us a small step closer toward a more just relationship with the sovereign Indigenous nations whose land we live on,' Malon said. The bill would not change the arrangement that is currently in place between the Oxford Casino and the other two tribes of the Wabanaki Nations — the Passamaquoddy Tribe and Penobscot Nation. Oxford Casino pays 4% of its slot revenue to those two tribes, which Penobscot Chief Kirk Francis said was a deal struck when the casino first opened as a way for the Tribes to benefit without pursuing competing gaming, an agreement he said has been helpful for economic development. 'We don't want to take from the other tribes,' Chief of the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians Clarissa Sabattis said, regarding the reasoning as to why the bill doesn't pull from the same pot of revenue as the other two tribes. While the percentages are different, they equate to roughly the same revenue, around $3.5 million. The bill would also bring parity among the casinos, as Mi'kmaq Nation Chief Edward Peter Paul put it, because it would raise the slot machine income provided by both casinos to the same percentage. However, Chris Jackson, a partner in the lobby firm Mitchell Tardy Jackson in Augusta who spoke on behalf of his client Hollywood Casino, argued that change would be harmful to the casino financially because it would alter its tax rate. 'As long as our effective tax rate stays the same,' Jackson said, 'we are open to suggestions.' While both bills related to gaming revenue could be passed, Sabattis told Maine Morning Star she anticipates the slot revenue bill will not be as necessary should the Tribes gain control of internet gaming, though she sees that path as the less likely outcome. Testimony from the casinos against the online gaming bill also signal that. Steve Silver, chair of the Maine Gambling Control Board, argued that should that bill pass, Oxford Casino should no longer be required to pay slot revenue to the tribes. Another bill the committee heard on Wednesday, LD 1838, would authorize electronic wagering terminals to conduct electronic beano by federally recognized tribes, among some other changes, which Sabattis and Francis testified in support of. Overall, Wabanaki leaders argue their inability to access the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, and other restrictions under the Settlement Act, has caused them to lose out on revenue and therefore hurt their ability to provide services to their citizens. This is supported by a 2022 report by a team of researchers from the Harvard Kennedy School that the comparatively lower economic growth the Wabanki Nations have seen compared to other federally recognized tribes and the average Mainer is likely the result of the Settlement Act. 'All of our tribes have significant unmet needs and underfunded programs,' Sabattis told the committee, noting that her tribe would put revenue provided through this bill toward its wellness court, in turn reducing strain for social services on the state and towns. The Wabanaki Alliance, a nonprofit created in 2020 to advocate for the recognition of the Wabanaki Nations' inherent sovereignty, hasn't taken a position on LD 1851, according to executive director Maulian Bryant. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Legislature rejects state recognition process following request of Wabanki Nations
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Generate Key Takeaways Senators listen to remarks on May 7, 2025. (By Emma Davis/ Maine Morning Star) The Legislature on Tuesday rejected two bills related to the state recognition of tribes, a longstanding effort that Wabanki leaders argue would have undermined their continued push for the sovereignty afforded to other federally recognized tribes. The Wabanaki Nations — the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians, Mi'kmaq Nation, Passamaquoddy Tribe and Penobscot Nation — have federal recognition, which, in theory, gives them the right to self-govern and makes them entitled to certain benefits and federal protections. However, the 1980 Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act has left the Wabanaki Nations with footing more akin to municipalities than independent nations. Overhauling that act is the fight for sovereignty Wabanki leaders and a growing number of bipartisan lawmakers have been pushing for years, though so far have only seen success with piecemeal change. The Wabanaki Nations do not have state recognition, though that's not as abnormal. Some states have adopted state recognition processes, affording non-federally recognized tribes a path to official acknowledgement but in a way that doesn't afford the same sovereignty or access to resources. That's the type of process Rep. Jennifer Poirier (R-Skowhegan) tried to establish in Maine, though lawmakers rejected it, arguing the state recognition process would subvert the federal process, which is also comparatively a more rigorous one. Poirier's bill, LD 813, would have established a commission appointed by the governor to review applications for state recognition. The House voted 82-57 against this measure on Tuesday and the Senate rejected it without a roll call vote or discussion on Wednesday. On the floor on Tuesday, Rep. Adam Lee (D-Auburn) pointed to what's happened with Vermont's state recognition process as a reason for Maine to not establish its own. After a Canadian tribe asserted groups afforded state recognition by Vermont are not Indigenous and are instead appropriating their identity and culture, Vermont is now considering a task force to reconsider past tribal recognition decisions by the state. Poirier has said she'd hoped LD 813 would be unnecessary because of another bill she proposed, LD 812, which sought to provide state recognition for a group called the Kineo St. John Tribe. That measure would afford such recognition without the processes detailed by the former bill. The House rejected the bill without a roll call vote on Tuesday and the Senate followed suit on Wednesday. This group, formerly under the name the Kineo Band of Malecite, another spelling for Maliseet, has pushed for this recognition for more than a decade but legislative attempts have so far failed. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
