How the Public-Private Government Codified the Cabal and Dismissed the Maine Home Rule Amendment
Maine Statutes permit secret agreements to which the community is bound in perpetuity
Paul Coulombe has been giving a lot of money to the Boothbay Peninsula to advance what he wants the Peninsula to become - a place where uniform flowers march in manicured armies around brand new buildings with nothing old in sight and asphalt, asphalt everywhere.
The Boothbay Register duly reports Mr. Coulombe’s generosity but details about how the donations are processed are scarce.
I looked into the Town Report and could not identify the contribution that Mr. Coulombe made to Clifford Park at the end of 2021 and so I wrote to the Town accountant and asked him to explain it to me but as yet it is too soon to expect a reply.
I wondered what the general law might be about private donations to public governments. Subpart 9: FISCAL MATTERS of the Maine Statute Titled Municipalities and Counties begins with contributions to public educational systems.
2. Funding municipal education foundations. A municipality may accept endowment funds from citizens, estates, municipal contributions and bond money to fund a municipal education foundation to support local education pursuant to section 5724, subsection 10. The foundation may not spend the funds until it meets certain growth standards recommended by the Department of Administrative and Financial Services.
section 5724, subsection 10 Municipal education foundations. A municipal education foundation is established with the assistance of the Department of Administrative and Financial Services and must contain the following provisions.A. The endowment of a municipal education foundation is funded by contributions by citizens, estates, municipalities and bond money if the foundation meets standards pursuant to section 5652, subsection 2. [PL 2011, c. 655, Pt. DD, §12 (AMD); PL 2011, c. 655, Pt. DD, §24 (AFF).]
This says a municipal educational foundation can be established and that a municipality may accept donations through the foundation but it does not say that giving through another channel is prohibited or even that there must be public transparency about the donations, as is the case in a foundation, but not required for money contributed via another channel. Other channels are neither mentioned nor prohibited by the statute. This vagary in the Legislative mandate is not surprising in a State that charters corporations by special act of legislation and includes the provision that money may be accepted from any source, with no further stipulations- such as “any legal source” This is how the public-private state writes legislation, with loopholes, always with an eye to the message as conveyed to skimming eyes.
The FAME Corporation
§969-A. Powers and duties of the authority
14-A. Receive funds. Receive and accept from any source allocations, appropriations, loans, grants and contributions of money or other things of value to be held, used or applied to carry out this chapter, subject to the conditions upon which the loans, grants and contributions may be made, including, but not limited to, appropriations, allocations, loans, grants or gifts from any federal agency or governmental subdivision or the State and its agencies. ….[1991,c. 780,Pt. P,§1(AMD).]
The Maine Municipal section 9 Section on Fiscal Matters goes on to trusts and conditional gifts and unconditional gifts. Mr. Coulombe’s donations fit into conditional gifts, which says”
2. Perpetually comply with conditions. When the donor or the donor's representative has completed the donor's part of the agreement concerning the execution of a conditional gift, the municipality shall perpetually comply with, and may raise money to carry into effect, the conditions upon which the agreement was made. [PL 1987, c. 737, Pt. A, §2 (NEW); PL 1987, c. 737, Pt. C, §106 (NEW); PL 1989, c. 6 (AMD); PL 1989, c. 9, §2 (AMD); PL 1989, c. 104, Pt. C, §§8, 10 (AMD).]
That leaves a lot of conditions wide open while not providing a public referendum on the terms of the agreement or a provision for public transparency about conditions that are sealed for perpetuity.
When the public-private state was formed under Governor Longley in 1976, the report, written by the heads of the largest businesses in the state, stated as its second objective”
2, eliminate the requirement for a local referendum on municipal bond issues. -Governor’s Task Force for Economic Redevelopment-1976
The requirement for a municipal referendum is found in the Home Rule Amendment added to the Maine Constitution in 1969
Section 2. Construction of buildings for industrial use. For the purposes of fostering, encouraging and assisting the physical location, settlement and resettlement of industrial and manufacturing enterprises within the physical boundaries of any municipality, the registered voters of that municipality may, by majority vote, authorize the issuance of notes or bonds in the name of the municipality for the purpose of purchasing land and interests therein or constructing buildings for industrial use, to be leased or sold by the municipality to any responsible industrial firm or corporation.
By 1987 when the section on conditional gifts was codified, the public-private state was deeply entrenched. One could argue that to be consistent with the intent of the Maine Constitution, the section on accepting gifts of private money or property should include a provision for a public referendum on the acceptance and conditions of the gift.
However, when the public-private state was added to the statutes, its architects expressed their will to eliminate the part of the Home Rule Amendment calling for a municipal referendum on bonds, so why would the newly structured public-private government incorporate that intent going forward? As it is, the statutory words authorize a government by a private cabal, operating in secret. The public is left out of the process that creates conditions to which the public is forever bound.
One might ask what were the conditions of Mr. Coulombe’s gift(s). One condition might be a prohibition from revealing the terms of the agreement. Statutory law as the product of the public-private state does not protect the public from that condition because statutory law is written in the interest of public-private relationships- another way of saying special interests.
On Fri, 12/04/2020. the earliest story about Clifford Park was published in the Register Clifford Park receives $250,000 grant. The grant is from Paul Coulombe. The article echoed the announcement in July 2021 that Community members raise $2.5 million for Boothbay/Boothbay Harbor CSD. Both stories are by Michelle Amero. The July story is labeled a press release. The story in December identifies that Ms. Amero is on the payroll of the Country Club. The funding concepts in both stories, a forty to eighty-million-dollar school, and a sports park were initiated by Paul Coulombe. In introducing the idea of the school, Coulombe described it as a means to attract “well-heeled families” to the Peninsula, the same follows with the sports park. In both stories, the supporting parties are identified as “community members” Could that be community members meeting at the Country Club?
The optics is that the project is wanted by community members but the process leaves the general public out of the knowledge and voting loop, never identifying the community members who are instigating aggressive radical irreversible change on the Peninsula sealed with unseen terms of the agreement to which the community is forever bound.
Mr. Coulombe is involved in multiple projects including, the eighty million dollar school, the 36-acre housing zone with a housing density of 3.5 the surrounding area, a sports park with a massive network of asphalt parking, roads, and pathways situated on the edge of Adam’s Pond, our endangered water supply. I am waiting for plans for Industrial Park to be announced- and lest we forget- the obstacle in the middle of the road- AKA the roundabout- and that’s the shortlist.
Pursuant to §5654. Conditional gifts, all of these gifts by Mr. Coulombe, unless otherwise stated, have terms of agreement known only to the parties who signed the deal but to which the community is bound in perpetuity.
The story, Clifford Park receives $250,000 grant, begins with the depiction of our existing park as lackluster and fallen into disrepair, in the manner that Paul Coulombe and his circle of community members habitually portray our pre-existing community in order to justify bulldozing over all sorts of historical locations for no other reason than the buildings are old and the thought of repairing them is- well unthinkable to the community members. If something needs repair- tear it down and replace it with whatever the secret group of community members wants.
However, the old park was much more environmentally sound than the new urbanized institutionalized park with its large asphalt parking lot and many asphalt roads and walkways. On this beautiful fall day, as I was passing by the new asphalt parking lot, my car dashboard told me that the door was open so I closed the door and took another walk around. It is apparent that the asphalting has only just begun. It looks like a wide road going around the baseball field is being set up for pavement. Further on down the hillside through the trees is Adams Pond. It’s that close!
It’s stunning to think of the vicious attack that community members have been launching against the Working Waterfront Park over the reconfiguration and reduction in the size of an existing asphalt parking lot. This is all new asphalt in yet another community members’ project and much more extensive than what is in the Working Waterfront Park.
The press release tells that the idea was initiated by Paul Coulombe when he offered a matching grant of up to $250,000 to advance his vision of what the park should be (asphalt laden with nothing predating his arrival in sight!).
Seizing upon the opportunity to take the money, Town Manager Dan Bryer landed on the federal Land and Water Conservation Grant as a matching fund. With Clifford Park in such close proximity to the Peninsula’s main endangered drinking water, the Park should qualify as a conservation cause.
This is what the Federal land and Water Conservation Fund website says:
Land and Water Conservation Fund
What is the Land and Water Conservation Fund?
The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) was established by Congress in 1964 to fulfill a bipartisan commitment to safeguard natural areas, water resources and cultural heritage, and to provide recreation opportunities to all Americans.
That was 1964. today this is how an informational website describes the grant, which is also reflected by the federal manual
Land and Water Conservation Fund State and Local Assistance Program: The National Park Service provides matching grants to states and through states to local governments for the acquisition and development of land and water for outdoor recreation purposes.
“This a great opportunity for our community, said Bryer. “The grant funds of $250K coupled with the $250K matching funds from Paul means that the long-awaited park improvements can now be made. We can move forward with the improvements at no cost to the taxpayer. I would like to thank the Coulombe family for making this possible and for their continued generosity.” source
No cost from the taxpayers means no input from the community or freedom of access to the terms of the agreement. The way that the conditional gifts statute is written it could be argued to conflict with the requirements stated in the federal manual:
Submission of SCORP documentation. The minimum documentation required to be submitted by each State to NPS as evidence of conformance with this chapter is a new or updated SCORP. The SCORP must be approved by and contain a certification by the governor that ample opportunity for public participation has taken place in the plan’s development. The State must submit three (3) copies of the SCORP to the NPS. States are encouraged to post the SCORP on the agency’s website and use other means as appropriate to make it available to the public. federal manual
The state statutes governing municipalities do nothing to insure public participation and transparency. Towns can add measures to their Town Charter that insure fair public involvement and the public’s right to know the terms of the agreement struck between private investors or donors and public representatives.
Federal Guidelines “encourage” the State to post copies of agreements made on the agency website.
Hopefully with enough public outcry §5654. Conditional gifts can be amended at the state level. It isn’t right to tell the public that they are bound to the terms of the agreement in perpetuity but that they are not allowed to know what those terms say.