Maine Question 1, Electric Transmission Line Restrictions and Legislative Approval Initiative (2021)

Maine Question 1
Election date November 2, 2021
Topic Energy
Status a Approved
Type State statute	Origin Citizens

2021 measures
November 2
Maine Question 1
Maine Question 2
Maine Question 3
Polls
Voter guides
Campaign finance
Signature costs

Maine Question 1, the Legislative Approval of Certain Electric Transmission Lines Initiative, was on the ballot in Maine as an indirect initiated state statute on November 2, 2021. It was approved.

A "yes" vote supported this ballot initiative to: * prohibit the construction of electric transmission lines defined as high-impact in the Upper Kennebec Region, including the NECEC, and * require a two-thirds vote of each state legislative chamber to approve high-impact electric transmission line projects.

A "no" vote opposed this ballot initiative, thus allowing the NECEC project to continue construction and not requiring a two-thirds legislative vote to approve electric transmission line projects defined as high-impact.

Election results

Maine Question 1
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		243,943	59.20%
No		168,143	40.80%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Aftermath

Legislative Document 810

See also: Legislative alteration

In 2025, the 132nd Maine Legislature introduced and passed legislation altering Question 1. Legislative Document 810 (LD 810) declares that a proposed high-impact transmission line does not need to be approved by the legislature if it is approved for a contract following a "competitive procurement conducted by the commission or state agency." Some legislators, including State Rep. Melanie Sachs (D-102) and State Rep. Christopher Kessler (D-121) stated that the bill is meant to clarify the law implemented by Question 1, and avoid unintended consequences of the 2021 initiative. State Rep. Elizabeth Caruso (R-72), who was against LD 810, said that altering the law "opposes the will of the people and the vote."

The state Senate passed LD 810 on June 4 in a vote of 18-16, and Gov. Janet Mills (D) signed the bill into law on June 17. Eighteen Democrats voted yes, and two Democrats and 14 Republicans voted no, with one Republican absent. The state House passed LD 810 on June 10 in a vote of 74-69. Seventy-two Democrats and two Republicans voted yes, and two Democrats, 65 Republicans, and two Independents voted no. Two Democrats and six Republicans were absent.

Suspension of license for NECEC

On November 19, 2021, NECEC, LLC halted construction of the project at the request of Gov. Janet Mills (D), who said, "While these matters are being considered by the DEP and the court, I believe CMP should give deference to the will of the voters." Thorn Dickinson, CEO of NECEC, LLC, said the firm decided to stop construction until courts act upon the firm's request for an injunction. The Maine Department of Environmental Protection suspended the license needed for construction of the NECEC on November 23, 2021. DEP Commissioner Melanie Loyzim said the project needed to cease construction until legal issues are addressed by the courts.

NECEC Transmission, LLC et al. v. Bureau of Parks and Lands et al.

Lawsuit overview
Issue: Does Question 1 violate the separation of powers or the companies' vested rights?
Court: Cumberland County Superior Court
Ruling: Jury ruled in favor of plaintiffs, agreed enough work was completed in good faith for the developers to have a right to complete the project.
Plaintiff(s): Russell Black et al.	Defendant(s): Maine Bureau of Parks and Lands, Maine Public Utilities Commission, Maine Senate, and Maine House of Representatives

  Source: WCVB

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court ruled on November 29, 2022, that a citizens' initiative cannot retroactively invalidate a lease. The ruling said that the Bureau had the constitutional and statutory authority to grant the lease of public land that is part of the corridor path, and that the lease was not voided by Question 1. The case was remanded to the Business and Consumer Court, and a trial was scheduled for April 2023.

Previously, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court ruled on August 30, 2022, that Section 6 of Question 1 would be unconstitutional if "NECEC performed substantial construction in good faith according to a schedule that was not created or expedited for the purpose of generating a vested rights claim." The Supreme Judicial Court remanded the case to a lower court to determine whether NECEC performed construction in good faith.

On November 3, 2021, NECEC Transmission, LLC and Avangrid Networks, Inc. filed a lawsuit in the Cumberland County Superior Court. NECEC and Avangrid argued that Question 1 violated the separation of powers and the sanctity of contracts. They also argued that it was unconstitutional because the companies had a vested right to construct and complete the project in good faith. The lawsuit read, "Any other conclusion would render any major development project in the State – in fact, any effort by any person or business in the State to build any project, no matter how big or how small – vulnerable to discriminatory and prejudicial efforts to kill the project by after-the-fact changes to the law. Such retroactive deprivation of vested rights is contrary to the fundamental principles of fairness and equity embodied in Maine law."

Sandra Howard, director of No CMP Corridor, responded, "Despite an onslaught of money that CMP, Hydro Quebec and their assortment of front groups interjected into this campaign, the people of Maine strongly and clearly rejected the NECEC project at the ballot box. CMP should respect the vote of Maine citizens and immediately stop the continued destruction of our precious forest and its habitat."

On Aug. 30, 2022, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court declined to uphold the initiative, saying that the initiative could be unconstitutional. The justices wrote, "The limited question that we answer is whether retroactively applying the initiative would violate the due process clause of the Maine Constitution, if NECEC undertook substantial construction consistent with and in good faith? Our answer is yes."

The trial at the Cumberland County Superior Court commenced in April 2023. On April 20, 2023, the jury decided in a 9-0 unanimous verdict that Central Maine Power can resume construction. The plaintiffs decided not to appeal on May 12, 2023, and the Natural Resources Council of Maine, a group opposed to the construction of NECEC, said, "A jury of nine Mainers has spoken, and while we don't agree with the decision, we respect the process and have decided not to pursue an appeal."

Overview

What was the ballot initiative designed to change?

Question 1 was designed to stop the New England Clean Energy Connect (NECEC), a 145-mile long, high-voltage transmission line project that would transmit around 1,200 megawatts from hydroelectric plants in Quebec to electric utilities in Massachusetts and Maine. Construction of NECEC began after the project received a presidential permit on January 15, 2021. The ballot initiative prohibited the construction of high-impact electric transmission lines in the Upper Kennebec Region, retroactive to September 16, 2020, thus prohibiting Segment 1 of NECEC. Segment 1 was permitted to begin construction on May 13, 2021.

The ballot initiative also required a two-thirds vote of each state legislative chamber to approve high-impact electric transmission lines. Question 1 defined high-impact electric transmission lines as those that are (a) 50 miles in length or more, (b) outside of a statutory corridor or petitioned corridor, (c) not a generator interconnection transmission facility, or (d) not constructed to primarily provide electric reliability.

What was the status of the NECEC on Election Day?

See also: Background

The NECEC received a presidential permit from the federal government on January 15, 2021, allowing the project to begin construction. An injunction was placed on Segment 1 of NECEC, the 53-mile stretch of new corridor in northern Maine; the injunction was lifted on May 13. On August 10, 2021, the Kennebec County Superior Court ruled that, during the permitting process for use of one-mile of public lands, the Bureau of Parks and Lands (BPL) did not conduct an assessment of whether the lease would cause no substantial change to the public lands. If the BPL determined that the lease would cause a substantial change, Question 5 (1993) would have required a two-thirds vote of the legislature to approve the lease. On August 11, Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Melanie Loyzim notified NECEC LLC that the firm no longer had a lease for the 1-mile of land through West Forks Plantation and Johnson Mountain Township. On September 17, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the NECEC project could continue except in the contested one-mile area while the court considered the case.

Who was behind the campaigns surrounding the ballot initiative?

Question 1 saw $99.91 million raised between supporters and opponents. According to the Bangor Daily News, Question 1 was the most expensive ballot measure in Maine history, and second most expensive political election after the $200-million U.S. Senate race in 2020.

No CMP Corridor led the campaign in support of Question 1. The PACs Mainers for Local Power and NRCM Yes on Question 1 were also registered to support the ballot initiative. Together, the PACs had raised $27.95 million, including $20.20 million from NextEra Energy Resources, LLC, which owned a natural gas-fired plant in Cumberland, Maine, and six solar fields or projects in southern and central Maine; $3.61 million from Vistra Energy Corp., which owned a natural gas-fired plant in Veazie, Maine; and $3.26 million from Calpine Corp., which owned a natural gas-fired plant in Westbrook, Maine.

Clean Energy Matters, Hydro-Québec Maine Partnership, Vote No to Protect Maine, Mainers for Fair Laws, and Mainers for Clean Energy Jobs PAC were registered to oppose the ballot initiative. Together, the PACs had raised $71.96 million, including $48.45 million from Central Maine Power (CMP), NECEC Transmission LLC, and the companies' parent firm Avangrid; and $20.59 million from H.Q. Energy Services (U.S.) Inc., which was a subsidiary of Hydro-Québec.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot question was as follows:

“

Do you want to ban the construction of high-impact electric transmission lines in the Upper Kennebec Region and to require the Legislature to approve all other such projects anywhere in Maine, both retroactively to 2020, and to require the Legislature, retroactively to 2014, to approve by a two-thirds vote such projects using public land?

”

Fiscal impact statement

The Maine Office of Fiscal and Program Review wrote a fiscal impact statement, which was as follows:

“

This citizen initiative would require the approval of 2/3 of all the members elected to each House of the Legislature for the construction of high-impact electric transmission lines in the State and for leases of public reserved lands for utilities and rights-of-way, retroactively applied to September 16, 2014. The initiative would also prohibit any construction of a high-impact electric transmission line in the Upper Kennebec region of the State that has not commenced construction by September 16, 2020. A recent court decision has vacated the lease of certain land that would have generated at least $65,000 annually for the next 25 years to the Public Reserved Lands Management Fund managed by the Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry (ACF). Without that decision, this initiative would have caused termination of that lease and necessitated renegotiation of it. With the lease already vacated, this initiative will still require any renegotiated lease to receive a vote of 2/3 of each House of the Legislature if the new use of the land is deemed to be substantially altered. Any additional costs to the PUC or the ACF resulting from this initiative are within the scope of normal budgeted activities and are not anticipated to require supplemental appropriations or allocations. It is also assumed that any required legislative considerations and approvals would occur within currently planned sessions of the Legislature and could be absorbed within existing budgeted resources. Provisions prohibiting the construction of high-impact transmission lines in the Upper Kennebec region and those requiring retroactive Legislative approval of projects already approved by the PUC may result in litigation against the State initiated by the parties impacted. No estimate is made at this time on the potential cost to the Attorney General to defend or participate in such litigation.

”

Full text

The full text of the ballot initiative is below:

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2021

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The Maine Secretary of State wrote the ballot language for this measure. The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 25, and the FRE is 14. The word count for the ballot title is 54, and the estimated reading time is 14 seconds.

Support

No CMP Corridor, Mainers for Local Power, and NRCM Yes on Question 1 were registered as political action committees (PACs) in support of the ballot initiative.

Supporters

Officials

• State Sen. Richard Bennett (R)
• State Sen. Russell Black (R)
• State Sen. Paul T. Davis (R)
• State Sen. Chloe Maxmin (D)
• State Rep. Seth Berry (D)
• State Rep. Nicole Grohoski (D)
• State Rep. Allison Hepler (D)
• State Rep. H. Scott Landry Jr. (D)
• State Rep. William Pluecker (Independent)
• State Rep. Jennifer Poirier (R)
• State Rep. Lynne Williams (D)

Corporations

• Calpine Corp.
• NextEra Energy Resources, LLC
• Vistra Energy Corp.

Organizations

• Food and Water Watch
• Natural Resources Council of Maine
• Sierra Club Maine

Arguments

• Former Sen. Thomas Saviello (R-17): "Mainers know they’re being lied to by these two foreign corporations, and they know that this project will forever change our state’s character, environment and economy in ways that will not benefit us."
• State Rep. Jennifer Poirier (R-107): "... I have strongly opposed the CMP Corridor because I am concerned about what we are giving up, all for 38 permanent jobs. We are not an extension cord for Massachusetts and the CMP Corridor is a terrible deal for Maine."
• Vivian Mikhail, treasurer of Mainers for Local Power: "Western Maine is home to the largest contiguous forest east of the Mississippi River. What we have here is unique and special. Let's preserve the way life should be and search out real climate solutions. This destructive corridor will forever change western Maine. It will damage our environment, threaten heritage brook trout fisheries and do nothing to address climate change. It will cost Maine's biomass, tourism, renewable energy and forestry industries hundreds of jobs. All of this to send power from Canada to Massachusetts."
• Darryl Wood, treasurer of No CMP Corridor: "Pair Hydro-Quebec's emissions up with a permanent clearcutting of a massive swath of contiguous forest in western Maine, and it spells a recipe for environmental disaster. Perhaps that is why CMP sent 30 lobbyists to Augusta to fight a bill that would have studied this project's greenhouse gas reduction claims."
• Sierra Club Maine: "The [Sierra Club Maine] Executive Committee has been closely following the projections of destruction of the boreal forest in Canada and the resultant ecological damage to riverine systems that will result from furthering Mega Dam projects in North America. This results in the poisoning of water sources, and in addition to releases of methane, which over time can be considered equivalent to the environmental impact of coal fired power plants. This greenwashed energy source is not the answer to our climate crisis."

Opposition

Four PACs—Clean Energy Matters, Hydro-Québec Maine Partnership, Vote No to Protect Maine, and Mainers for Fair Laws—registered to oppose the ballot measure.

Opponents

Officials

• Gov. Janet T. Mills (D)
• U.S. Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm (D)

Former Officials

• Gov. Paul LePage (R)

Corporations

• Central Maine Power Company
• Hydro-Québec Energy Services (U.S.) Inc.

Organizations

• Maine State Chamber of Commerce

Arguments

• Jon Breed, executive director of Clean Energy Matters: "It’s bad public policy and sets a bad precedent for our state if we take a project that has cleared every major regulatory milestone at the state and federal level, and then turn around and pull permits."
• Hope Pollard, president of the Maine Chapter of Associated Builders and Contractors: "We believe the November referendum jeopardizes our future. If the ballot question passes, this will likely kill the project and take away all the jobs, customer savings, tax reductions, and other benefits that go along with it. But, what’s more, it puts politicians in charge of how you pay for and what electricity sources are available to Mainers. This could hamper the development of new electricity sources, including in-state wind and solar and keeps out low-cost energy solutions. ... If project opponents get their way, it also paints a bleak portrait of Maine’s future — this is a project that secured all its federal, state, and local approvals, based on the laws in effect at the time. If those laws can be changed and applied retroactively, who will want to invest in Maine?"
• Richard Anderson and Richard Barringer, former commissioners of the Maine Department of Conservation: "Question 1 asks Mainers to support a law that provides no new guidance on how to protect our wildlife, our ecosystems, or our economy. Instead, the bill removes permitting decisions from impartial experts and hands them over to the partisan politics of the state legislature. People of good will can disagree over which infrastructure projects ought to be built here in Maine; but it would be reckless to dismantle the very process we have long and successfully used to learn the truth about these project proposals."
• Serge Abergel, director of communications for Hydro-Québec: "Fossil fuel providers Calpine, part-owned by the Canadian Pension Plan, NextEra and Vistra spent more than two million dollars to gain access to Maine’s November ballot for a vote on high-impact electric transmission lines. ... In fact, there’s a pattern of deception. Fossil fuel providers go from American state to American state trying to delay or kill projects that aim to provide clean, renewable energy. One Google search will uncover results from Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Florida, California, and New York. Their “playbook” is always the same. Find an environmental group willing to play ball in exchange for an off the books monetary donation and identify a few locals willing to spread misinformation in exchange for cash. That recipe produces the misdirection campaign they are looking for."
• Dana Connors, president of the Maine State Chamber of Commerce: "It is a project that provides for access from Quebec to our New England grid, passing through Maine, that offers economic opportunity in terms of employment, tax base, catalysts for other things that depend on power to come to our state."
• Gov. Janet Mills (D): "I ran for Governor promising to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels and to do something about climate change. And I told you I would tell you exactly how I feel. We just can’t afford just to do nothing. I support the New England Clean Energy Connect, and I urge you to vote No on Question 1, because it is about climate change. Utilizing clean hydropower already in existence, this project will put our state and our region on the road to a zero-carbon economy. Enhancing the reliability of our grid to avoid a loss of power in storms, it will also reduce carbon emissions in New England by 3.6 million metric tons a year — It’s like taking 767,000 gas guzzling cars off the road."

Campaign finance

The campaign finance information on this page reflects the most recent scheduled reports that Ballotpedia has processed, which covered through December 7, 2021.

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Maine ballot measures

Three PACs—No CMP Corridor, Mainers for Local Power, and NRCM Yes on Question 1—registered to support the ballot measure. The committees also supported the Maine NECEC Transmission Project Certificate Initiative, which failed to make the ballot in 2020. Together, the committees received $27.95 million, including:

• $20.20 million from NextEra Energy Resources, LLC, which owns a natural gas-fired plant in Cumberland, Maine, and six solar fields or projects in southern and central Maine;

• $3.61 million from Vistra Energy Corp., which owns a natural gas-fired plant in Veazie, Maine; and

• $3.26 million from Calpine Corp., which owns a natural gas-fired plant in Westbrook, Maine.

Five PACs—Clean Energy Matters, Hydro-Québec Maine Partnership, Vote No to Protect Maine, Mainers for Fair Laws, and Mainers for Clean Energy Jobs PAC—registered to oppose the ballot measure. Together, the committees raised $71.97 6million, including:

• $48.45 million from Central Maine Power (CMP), NECEC Transmission LLC, and the companies' parent firm Avangrid; and

• $20.59 million from H.Q. Energy Services (U.S.) Inc., which is a subsidiary of Hydro-Québec.

	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Support	$26,336,289.65	$1,609,236.27	$27,945,525.92	$25,134,017.64	$26,743,253.91
Oppose	$70,513,539.53	$1,446,287.59	$71,959,827.12	$70,464,591.80	$71,910,879.39
Total	$96,849,829.18	$3,055,523.86	$99,905,353.04	$95,598,609.44	$98,654,133.30

Support

The contribution and expenditure totals for the committees supporting the ballot measure were as follows:

Committees in support of Question 1
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Mainers for Local Power	$25,604,766.00	$1,491,101.58	$27,095,867.58	$24,403,390.12	$25,894,491.70
No CMP Corridor	$481,523.65	$109,311.93	$590,835.58	$480,945.84	$590,257.77
NRCM Yes on Question 1	$250,000.00	$8,822.76	$258,822.76	$249,681.68	$258,504.44
Total	$26,336,289.65	$1,609,236.27	$27,945,525.92	$25,134,017.64	$26,743,253.91

Donors

The following were the top five donors to the support committees:

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
NextEra Energy Resources, LLC	$20,025,000.00	$174,014.00	$20,199,014.00
Vistra Energy Corp.	$2,866,323.00	$744,657.18	$3,610,980.18
Calpine Corp.	$2,688,823.00	$567,752.65	$3,256,575.65
Natural Resources Council of Maine	$100,000.00	$3,609.54	$103,609.54
Food and Water Watch	$95,000.00	$0.00	$95,000.00

Opposition

The contribution and expenditure totals for the committees opposing the ballot measure were as follows:

Committees in opposition to Question 1
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Clean Energy Matters	$30,276,801.28	$408,193.25	$30,684,994.53	$30,231,069.22	$30,639,262.47
Hydro-Québec Maine Partnership	$22,377,960.07	$10,231.00	$22,388,191.07	$22,377,960.07	$22,388,191.07
Mainers for Fair Laws	$11,920,513.63	$908,266.31	$12,828,779.94	$11,920,513.63	$12,828,779.94
Vote No to Protect Maine	$5,911,540.36	$111,372.00	$6,022,912.36	$5,911,539.36	$6,022,911.36
Mainers for Clean Energy Jobs PAC	$26,724.19	$8,225.03	$34,949.22	$23,509.52	$31,734.55
Total	$70,513,539.53	$1,446,287.59	$71,959,827.12	$70,464,591.80	$71,910,879.39

Donors

The following were the top five donors to the opposition committees:

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
NECEC Transmission LLC	$31,883,187.00	$0.00	$31,883,187.00
H.Q. Energy Services (U.S.) Inc.	$19,935,033.93	$0.00	$19,935,033.93
Central Maine Power Company	$7,417,498.00	$198,039.90	$7,615,537.90
Avangrid Service Company	$5,622,000.00	$173,375.43	$5,795,375.43
Avangrid Management Company	$3,078,642.00	$78,551.08	$3,157,193.08

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Media editorials

See also: 2021 ballot measure media endorsements

Support

Ballotpedia did not identify media editorial board endorsements in support of a "Yes" vote on Question 1.

Opposition

• Bangor Daily News Editorial Board: "We fear that passage of Question 1 would send a worrying message to those who may want to invest in and develop major projects in Maine that the state’s regulatory environment is too uncertain. The corridor has received approval from seven federal and state agencies and more than a dozen municipal approvals, which in most instances, included opportunities for public comment or hearings."
• The Sun Journal Editorial Board: "Even so, the reduction in emissions and the sustained tax revenue for Maine are enough to support completion. The alarm over timber cutting in what is existing working forests has been overwrought, and the disputed lease in the Upper Kennebec Valley was the state’s failing. ... The politics of this project must not override the positives, and the promises and concessions made by NECEC must not wither. Vote “No” and hold NECEC accountable for every word and deed."
• Portland Press Herald Editorial Board: "Despite still-unresolved questions and strong objections to the conduct of the campaign, especially on the vote “no” side, we see this project as part of the fight against climate change. A “yes” vote on Question 1 is a vote to do nothing about the greatest challenge of our time and at this point in history, we don’t have time to do nothing."

Background

NECEC corridor

The following is a map of the planned NECEC corridors, including the new corridor from Quebec to The Forks and the existing corridor, some of which was intended to be expanded:

Maine NECEC Transmission Project Certificate Initiative (2020)

See also: Maine NECEC Transmission Project Certificate Initiative (2020)

In 2020, No CMP Corridor was behind a ballot initiative to require the Maine Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to reverse an order made on May 3, 2019, that provided the New England Clean Energy Connect (NECEC) transmission project with a certificate. The ballot initiative would have appeared on the ballot for November 3, 2020 but was deemed unconstitutional in a court opinion.

On February 3, 2020, the campaign filed about 75,253 signatures with the office of Secretary of State Matt Dunlap. On March 4, 2020, Dunlap announced that 69,714 signatures were valid, surpassing the required minimum of 63,067.

Avangrid Network, Inc., the parent firm of Central Maine Power (CMP), filed a legal complaint against Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap in the Cumberland County Superior Court on May 12, 2020. Avangrid asked the court to issue an injunction to prevent the ballot initiative from being decided at the election on November 3, 2020. Avangrid argued that the ballot initiative violated the state constitution because, according to Avangrid, the proposal is not legislative in character but rather affects a single administrative order. On August 13, 2020, the Supreme Judicial Court issued an opinion that the ballot initiative violated the “procedural prerequisites for a direct initiative” found in the Maine Constitution. According to the Supreme Judicial Court, the Maine Constitution “requires that a citizens’ initiative constitute legislative action,” and the ballot initiative's “effect is to dictate the [Public Utility] Commission’s exercise of its quasi-judicial executive-agency function in a particular proceeding..."

Sandi Howard, executive director of the No CMP Corridor, responded to the ruling, saying, "It’s a very sad day when Maine’s highest court sides with foreign corporations over the people of Maine. The fact that CMP’s parent company sued the state of Maine to silence their customers, and it worked, is astounding." She continued, "We are weighing all our options (legal, political and legislative) on how to best proceed, but I promise you, this fight is far from over. No CMP Corridor, and our army of volunteers, will not rest until we stop this for-profit project once and for all."

Timeline of NECEC

• August 8, 2016: Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker (R) signed House Bill 4568 (HB 4568), which required electric distribution companies, in coordination with the state Department of Energy Resources (DOER), to solicit and contract for a combined 9,450,000 megawatts from hydropower or hydropower and a mix of other renewable sources.

• March 31, 2017: The Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources (DOER) submitted a request for contract proposals from bidders, with a submission deadline of July 27, 2017.

• July 27, 2017: Hydro-Québec filed a contract proposal for delivering hydropower or a hydro-wind blend to electric distribution companies in Massachusetts. Hydro-Québec proposed three possible transmission routes: (1) Northern Pass Transmission, in partnership with Eversource Energy, through New Hampshire; (2) New England Clean Power Link, in partnership with Transmission Developers Inc., through Vermont; and (3) New England Clean Energy Connect, in partnership with Central Maine Power, through Maine.

• January 25, 2018: Gov. Baker announced that Hydro-Québec, with transmission via the Northern Pass Transmission in New Hampshire, was selected for contract negotiations with the state's electric distribution companies.

• February 1, 2018: The New Hampshire Site Evaluation Committee voted 7-0 to reject Eversource Energy's Northern Pass Transmission over concerns about how the project would impact development, local business, tourism, and the environment. The committee rejected a motion to reconsider the application, and the New Hampshire Supreme Court upheld the committee's decision as legal.

• March 28, 2018: The electric distribution companies in Massachusetts terminated their contract with the Northern Pass Transmission. The companies instead entered into negotiations with New England Clean Energy Connect in Maine.

• June 14, 2018: The electric distribution companies announced an agreement with Central Maine Power and Hydro-Québec for the New England Clean Energy Connect.

• October 19, 2018: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) approved the transmission service agreements (TSAs) that Central Maine Power filed in order to provide point-to-point transmission via the New England Clean Energy Connect from Canada to the regional grid, known as ISO New England.

• February 21, 2019: The Maine Public Utilities Commission and Central Maine Power (CMP) entered into a stipulation agreement with the support of Gov. Janet Mills (D). The agreement required CMP to transfer the NECEC to a new firm called NECEC Transmission LLC, which would have the same parent firm, Avangrid, as CMP but different accounting systems and activities. The agreement also included a benefits package worth $258 million, which included funds for low-income electric consumer projects, rural broadband internet, electric vehicle charging stations, electric heat pumps, education grants, workforce development, and business retention.

• May 3, 2019: The Maine Public Utilities Commission granted a certificate of public convenience and necessity for the New England Clean Energy Connect.

• June 26, 2019: The Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities approved power purchase agreements between the electric distribution companies and Hydro-Quebec for the New England Clean Energy Connect.

• January 8, 2020: The Maine Land Use Planning Commission, which is responsible for planning and zoning in Maine's unorganized and deorganized areas, certified that NECEC complied with "with all applicable land use standards." The commission's members voted 7-2.

• April 8, 2020: NECEC Transmission LLC announced that $300 million had been awarded for contracts to build the project’s infrastructure. Contractors that received awards included Cianbro (Maine), Irby Construction (Mississippi), Sargent Electric (Pennsylvania), and Northern Clearing Inc. (Wisconsin).

• April 17, 2020: NECEC Transmission LLC announced that an additional $700 million had been awarded for contracts. Contractors that received awards included Eastern Forest Products (Maine), Maine Mats (Maine), Dimensional Timber (Maine), and Sunset Development Inc. (Maine).

• May 11, 2020: The Maine Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) issued a license for New England Clean Energy Connect. DEP conditioned the license on several requirements and design changes. Central Maine Power (CMP) needed to provide a financial guarantee of $1.875 million for stream culvert replacements and conserve 40,000 acres in western Maine. The width of the cleared NECEC corridor strip below the transmission lines in Segment 1 (from Quebec to The Forks) needed to be 54 feet, rather than the proposed 150 feet, and managed as scrub-shrub habitat. The license required a 100-foot riparian filter along all perennial streams in Segment 1 and coldwater fisheries streams and streams containing threatened or endangered species in the other segments.

• July 10, 2020: While NECEC was originally planned to deliver hydroelectric power to Massachusetts, Gov. Janet Mills (D) announced that Maine had also secured 500 megawatt (MWh) hours per year from hydroelectric plants at a discounted rate of $4.00/MWh via NECEC. Gov. Mills also announced that Hydro-Québec agreed to start payments for the benefits package upon the issuance of final permits instead of the start of commercial operation.

• November 4, 2020: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers granted a permit for the project. The Sierra Club, Natural Resources Council of Maine, and Appalachian Mountain Club sued the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding its environmental assessment of the project. A federal district judge declined to grant an injunction against the NECEC, but plaintiffs appealed the decision.

• January 15, 2021: The U.S. Department of Energy provided a presidential permit for NECEC. The presidential permit was the last of the federal and state permits required to start construction activities.

• January 15, 2021: The U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals issued an injunction to prevent the construction of Segment 1 of NECEC, the 53-mile stretch of new corridor in northern Maine, pending a future court decision.

• May 13, 2021: The U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals lifted the injunction on Section 1 of NECEC, ruling that plaintiffs "failed to show a likelihood of success on the merits." The order had the effect of allowing construction of the segment to begin.

• August 10, 2021: The Kennebec County Superior Court ruled that, during the permitting process for use of one-mile of public lands, the Bureau of Parks and Lands (BPL) did not conduct an assessment of whether the lease would cause no substantial change to the public lands. If the BPL determined that the lease would cause a substantial change, Question 5 (1993) would have required a two-thirds vote of the legislature to approve the lease. On August 11, Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Melanie Loyzim notified NECEC LLC. that the firm no longer had a lease for the 1-mile of land through West Forks Plantation and Johnson Mountain Township.

• September 17, 2021: The Maine Supreme Judicial Court ruled that construction of the NECEC could continue, except in the contested one-mile, 33-acre tract, while an appeal was considered.

Impact of Question 5 (1993)

See also: Maine Question 5, Two-Thirds Legislative Vote to Change Purpose of State Lands Amendment (1993)

In 1993, voters approved Question 5, a constitutional amendment to require a two-thirds vote of the legislature to reduce or substantially change the uses of state park, conservation, or recreation land.

The NECEC was designed to cut a 150-foot wide, one-mile long corridor across the two parcels, West Forks Plantation and Johnson Mountain Township, that are considered Public Reserved Land. In 2014, the Bureau of Parks and Lands (BPL) and Central Maine Power Company (CMP) entered into a lease agreement for portions of the two parcels. In Black v. Cutko, plaintiffs argued that Question 5 required the lease agreement to receive a two-thirds vote of the state Legislature. The Maine State Legislature also passed a resolution declaring that the BPL-CMP lease agreement required a two-thirds legislative vote. BPL Director Andy Cutko argued that while the substantial changes required a two-thirds legislative vote, the department was responsible for determining whether a substantial change would occur.

Black v. Cutko

In June 2020, Maine Sen. Russell Black (R-17), along with 18 other individuals and entities, filed a legal complaint against BPL Director Andy Cutko and CMP in the Kennebec County Superior Court.

Plaintiffs argued that the Maine Constitution required a two-thirds legislative vote before the New England Clean Energy Connect (NECEC) could bisect about 1 mile of two parcels, West Forks Plantation and Johnson Mountain Township, that are considered Public Reserved Land. The NECEC was designed to cut a 150-foot wide, one-mile long corridor across the two parcels. In 2014, the BPL and CMP entered into a lease agreement for portions of the two parcels.

Plaintiffs stated that the BPL-CMP lease agreement did not receive a two-thirds vote of the Maine State Legislature despite changing the essential uses of conservation and recreation land. Plaintiffs asked the Superior Court to invalidate the BPL-CMP lease agreement for West Forks Plantation and Johnson Mountain Township, located in Segment of the NECEC.

BPL Director Andrew Cutko said that BPL staff had determined that the lease would cause no substantive change to land. He stated that BPL staff should determine what actions constitute a substantive change to land and, therefore, what changes require a two-thirds legislative approval. "Fundamentally, familiarity with these nuances, and the technical expertise of our staff, makes our staff best qualified to weigh these issues and make such determinations," said Cutko.

On August 10, Judge Murphy vacated the lease for NECEC to bisect the public lands, stating that the bureau did not make a "finding of no 'reduction' and/or no 'substantial alteration'" during the permitting process. "BPL exceeded its authority when it entered into the 2020 lease with CMP, and BPL’s decision to do so is reversed ," wrote Judge Murphy. Sen. Black responded to the ruling, "Even though it's a small parcel of land it's in the middle of the corridor and will keep the corridor from being connected. It's (going to) put a gap in the corridor and I believe because of that gap and no legal permit they have to stop the process and get this corrected."

On August 11, Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Melanie Loyzim notified NECEC LLC that the firm no longer had a lease for the 1-mile of land through West Forks Plantation and Johnson Mountain Township. Loyzim wrote, "While this portion of the transmission line is only a small part of the overall project, this portion is necessary to the overall project purpose of delivering electricity from Quebec to the New England grid."

On August 13, the Maine Bureau of Parks and Lands and CMP appealed the superior court's decision to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court. NECEC Transmission LLC CEO Thorn Dickinson said, "Today, the Maine Bureau of Parks and Lands filed a notice to appeal a Superior Court decision about BPL leasing practices. As one of many current leaseholders impacted by the court’s ruling, CMP and NECEC LLC also filed a notice of appeal."

Senate Proclamation 594

On July 19, 2021, the Maine State Legislature passed a resolution, Senate Proclamation 594 (SP 594), declaring that the BPL-CMP lease agreement violated Question 5, a constitutional amendment. SP 594 stated that "the lease provided to CMP to cross the public reserved lands in West Forks Plantation and in Johnson Mountain Township constitutes a substantial alteration of those lands, requiring a 2/3 vote of all the members elected to each House of the Legislature."

In the Senate, SP 594 was approved 28-6. Senate Democrats were divided 20-1, and Senate Republicans were divided 8-5. In the House, SP 594 was approved 66-52, with 32 members not voting. House Democrats were divided 58-10, with 12 members absent or not voting. House Republicans were divided 7-42, with 16 members absent or not voting. One independent member of the House supported the resolutions, while others were absent or did not vote.

Sen. Rick Bennett (R-19), who voted for the resolution, quoted Judge Michaela Murphy, who said, "That is certainly the concern of the court because of recognition that I think the court has made, that the legislature is supposed to be a constitutional partner and have the final say in these lands, but it seems as if there was a concerted effort to keep the Legislature in the dark both times." Sen. Trey Stewart (R-2), who voted against the resolution, stated, "You may not like the corridor for whatever reasons you may or may not have. But the point is that this precedent that's being set by this [resolution], and what we're trying to do, who we're trying to influence and the other branches (of government) that we're trying to say, 'You acted inappropriately and we're going to have this [judicial] branch hold you accountable, but we're not going to change the law. We're not going to change the law. We're not going to do our actual job."

Debate on Hydro-Québec's campaign activities

See also: Campaign finance

On July 29, 2020, 25 current and former state legislators sent a letter to Quebec Premier François Legault and Hydro-Québec CEO Sophie Brochu regarding "Hydro-Quebec’s political campaign aimed at influencing the outcome of a citizen-initiated ballot measure this November." The legislators requested that Hydro-Québec cease campaign activities in Maine. The following is an excerpt from the letter:

“

Because Hydro-Quebec is a Crown Corporation, wholly owned by the Province of Quebec, the government and residents of Quebec have a direct financial interest in Hydro-Quebec’s profit-making enterprises. This stands in marked contrast with any private company based in Maine that may have foreign owners. In such cases, the residents of those foreign countries have no financial interest in the outcome of a Maine election. Hydro-Quebec provides billions of dollars annually to its sole shareholder, the Province of Quebec, which means that the residents of Quebec have a direct financial stake in the outcome of the CMP corridor referendum. ... If the shoe were on the other foot and Maine voters were directly connected with a campaign to overturn public opinion on a construction project in Quebec, we would hear protests from the people of Quebec. But the shoe is on our foot, and we are not comfortable with it.

”

Serge Abergel, the director of external relations for Hydro-Québec, responded to the letter, stating that Hydro-Québec should be allowed to provide information to voters after spending years to obtain permits. Abergel said, "So once you want to take that away, at least give us the right to give the facts when it comes to us. We don't view this as a loophole at all. We're compliant to the rules, and we're just trying here to give a straight story, so people can understand and make their own choices."

Legislation to ban foreign government-owned corporate contributions

During the 2021 legislative session, Sen. Richard Bennett (R-19) introduced a bill, Legislative Document 194 (LD 194), to prohibit corporations and other entities that are at least 10% owned by a foreign government from making contributions or expenditures for or against a citizen-initiated ballot measure. LD 194 was approved in the Maine House of Representatives on June 15, 2021, and the Maine State Senate on June 16, 2021.

Gov. Janet Mills (D) vetoed the legislation, saying, "Even more troubling is this bill’s potential impact on Maine voters. Government is rarely justified in restricting the kind of information to which the citizenry should have access in the context of an election, and particularly a ballot initiative."

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Maine

Process in Maine

In Maine, the number of signatures required to qualify an indirect initiated state statute for the ballot is equal to 10 percent of the total votes cast for governor in the most recent gubernatorial election. Petitions can be circulated for up to 18 months, but signatures must be no more than one year old to be valid. Signatures must be filed with the secretary by the 50th day of the first regular legislative session or the 25th day of the second regular session. Maine's initiative process is indirect, which means sufficient initiative petitions first go to the legislature and only go to the ballot if the legislature rejects or does not act on the initiative.

The requirements to get an initiated state statute certified for the 2021 ballot:

• Signatures: 63,067 valid signatures were required.
• Deadline: The deadline to submit signatures was January 21, 2021 (50 days after the state legislature convenes the 2021 session).

Each petition signature is certified by the local registrar of voters. The signatures are then submitted to the secretary of state. If enough signatures are verified, the initiatives are sent to the legislature. If the legislature approves the initiative, it becomes law. If the legislature does not act on the initiative or rejects it, the initiative goes on the ballot. The legislature may submit "any amended form, substitute, or recommendation" to the people alongside the initiative; this alternative is treated as a competing measure.

Stages of this initiative

Former Sen. Thomas Saviello (R-17) filed the ballot initiative, which was approved for signature gathering on October 30, 2020. On November 8, the campaign reported collecting 23,000 signatures on Election Day.

On January 21, 2021, the campaign No CMP Corridor submitted 95,622 raw signatures. Mainers for Local Power hired Revolution Field Strategies to organize a signature drive. At least 63,067 of the signatures needed to be deemed valid for certification.

On February 22, 2021, Secretary of State Shenna Bellows announced that 80,506 signatures were valid.

The indirect ballot initiative was introduced into the Maine State Legislature on March 30, 2021, as Legislative Document 1295 (LD 1295). The state Legislature adjourned on March 30, but the bill was carried over into a special session that began on April 28, 2021. On May 19, 2021, LD 1295 was placed in the legislative files (dead bills) after the Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry Committee voted that the legislature ought not to pass the bill.

Signature gathering cost

See also: Ballot measures cost per required signatures analysis

Sponsors of the measure hired Revolution Field Strategies to collect signatures for the petition to qualify this measure for the ballot. A total of $2,048,794.68 was spent to collect the 63,067 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $32.49.

Caiazzo v. Bellows

  

Lawsuit overview
Issue: Does state law require splitting the ballot initiative into three separate questions?
Court: Cumberland County Superior Court and Maine Supreme Judicial Court
Ruling: Ruled in favor of Secretary of State Bellows; Ruling said that state law does not require the secretary of state to divide a ballot initiative into separate questions
Plaintiff(s): State Rep. Christopher Caiazzo	Defendant(s): Secretary of State Shenna Bellows
Plaintiff argument: State law requires that voters decide each issue contained in the ballot initiative as a separate question.	Defendant argument: State law provides a recommended format for petitioners, but it is not mandatory.

  Source: Portland Press Herald

State Rep. Christopher Caiazzo (D-28) filed a lawsuit against Secretary of State Shenna Bellows (D) in Cumberland County Superior Court on June 3, 2021. Rep. Caiazzo asked the court to divide the ballot initiative into three questions—(1) whether transmission lines retroactive to 2014 require a two-thirds legislative vote; (2) whether high impact transmission lines require a two-thirds legislative vote; and (3) whether to ban transmission lines in the Upper Kennebec Region. He wrote, "Maine voters could reasonably have different opinions on the different changes to Maine statutes proposed by the initiative." The Superior Court ruled against Rep. Caiazzo, who appealed to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court.

Attorney Joshua Dunlap, representing Rep. Caiazzo, argued before the court that state law "guarantees voters the right to consider each issue on its own merits. ... It prevents logrolling by ensuring that separate issues cannot be wrapped into a single bill without permitting separate votes." Justice Joseph Jabar asked Dunlap, "That’s a decision they made when the formed the petition. Isn’t that what the vote should be on? An all-or-nothing – you either take the whole package or none of it?" Secretary of State Bellows was represented by attorney Jonathan Bolton, who said that it is up to petitioners to file multiple questions and that its a suggested format, not a mandatory format. The state departments' legal team wrote that no citizen-initiated measure in Maine history had ever been divided into multiple questions by the secretary of state.

On July 29, 2021, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court said that state law did not require the secretary of state to divide a ballot initiative into separate questions. Justice Thomas Humphrey wrote, "Requiring the Secretary of State to separate provisions of an initiative into multiple questions could infringe on the electors’ right of direct initiative because splintering a single bill that was proposed to be presented for a yes-or-no vote into multiple pieces of legislation might be inconsistent with the intent of those who drafted or signed the petition."

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Maine

Click "Show" to learn more about voter registration, identification requirements, and poll times in Maine.

How to cast a vote in Maine

Poll times In Maine, municipalities with a population of 500 or more open their polls between 6:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m., while municipalities with a population of less than 500 open their polls between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. All polls close at 8:00 p.m. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote. Registration Check your voter registration status here. To register to vote in Maine, one must be "a United States citizen, at least 16 years of age to pre-register to vote, and have established a fixed principal home in Maine. To vote in a Referendum or General Election, you must be registered in the community where you reside, and be at least 18 years of age. A 17 year old may vote in a Primary Election, if that person will be 18 by the General Election." Voters can return completed registration cards in person or by mail to their town office or city hall, any Motor Vehicle branch office, most state & federal social service agencies, or a voter registration drive. There is no deadline for voter registration if completed in person. If registering by mail or online, the deadline is 21 days prior to the election. If registering through a qualified state agency, the deadlines is seven days prior to the election. When registering for the first time in Maine, voters must provide documents verifying their identity and residence. The following documents are acceptable identification for the purpose of registering to vote: Government ID with a photo (i.e. driver’s license, State ID, valid U.S. Passport, military ID, ID card issued by a federally recognized Indian tribe) Government ID without photo (i.e. certified birth certificate or signed Social Security card) Other official document showing the name and address of voter (i.e. eligibility for public benefits, utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck) Student photo ID from a state-approved public or private school or institute of higher education in Maine Maine driver’s license number or last four digits of Social Security Number Automatic registration On June 19, 2019, Gov. Janet Mills signed an automatic voter registration bill into law that was scheduled for implementation in 2022. The law registers voters through the Department of Motor Vehicles. Online registration See also: Online voter registration Maine has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website. Governor Janet T. Mills (D) signed L.D. 1126 into law on July 9, 2021, allowing online voter registration in Maine. This legislation went into effect on November 1, 2023. Same-day registration Maine allows same-day voter registration. Residency requirements To register to vote in Maine, you must be a resident of the state. State law does not specify a length of time for which you must have been a resident to be eligible. Verification of citizenship See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States Maine does not require proof of citizenship for voter registration. An individual must attest that they are a U.S. citizen when registering to vote. All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment. Seven states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming — have laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration, whether in effect or not. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allows noncitizens to vote in some local elections. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters. Verifying your registration The Maine voter information lookup service allows residents to check their voter registration status online. Voter ID requirements Maine does not require voters to present identification while voting. If a voter registers to vote on Election Day, he or she must provide identification and proof of residence.

See also

2021 measures

• 2021 ballot measures
• Energy on the ballot

Maine

• Maine ballot measures
• Maine ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls