Well, here we are again, expending energy to protect ourselves from actions devoid of coherent policy. This time from politicians convening in Augusta determined to upend state-allocated financial resources for our municipal and school budgets.

I find it amazing, if not shameful, that elected officials are willing to place in jeopardy funding for the basic services of their citizens. Then again, this behavior is becoming an unfortunate trend, which from my perspective needs some deep introspection.

After efforts to compromise on a supplemental budget failed back in March, the governor signed into law a two-year, $11.3 billion budget that maintained operation of current government programs with no major cuts or tax increases. This ensures funding is in place for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2025; a sound plan for good governance.

Not so fast, though. Enter the people’s veto petition drive on LD 609 initiated by legislators intent on stuffing the gears of governance indiscriminately. It reads: “Do you want to stop most state government operations and programs, including new and ongoing state funding for cities, towns and schools, by rejecting the state’s two-year budget?”

My answer is no, I decline to sign, and I urge others to do the same.

Petition organizers must gather 67,682 signatures from registered Maine voters by June 18 for the question to be on November’s referendum ballot. Yet, there is a significant catch noted by Secretary of State Shenna Bellows. If the petition meets its required number of signatures, then implementation of the fiscal year budget automatically stops. That means state government essentially shuts down from July 1 to the tally on the referendum in November. This is four months!

Now we have a minority of state politicians actively promoting the abdication of their oath to care for the welfare of their constituents. Instead of legislating in good faith, they have chosen to circumvent those duties by enlisting themselves as common citizens and not as representatives. Their choice of action is a petition drive, certainly their prerogative, yet indicative of their willingness to disrupt and upend our communities, especially our children’s lives.

This choice could deliver us anarchy and chaos, because without state support, towns and school districts will scramble to find ways for funding our basic services. This is cynical, cruel and no way to govern. It rejects the empathetic values to foster healthy, safe and prosperous communities.

How will municipalities and school districts plan for this potential financial disruption? It will vary on the resources available in each town or district. As an example: I want to clarify the monetary implications this referenced petition could impose on RSU 35 (South Berwick and Eliot) and the town of South Berwick.

The total state contribution to the RSU 35 budget is $14,569,847 for FY 2026. As verified by the school board, the state disburses monthly its revenue sharing of $1,214,253 to the school district; this commences July 1. If the petition receives the necessary signatures to enact the veto, then the budgetary shortfall would be this monthly amount, at a minimum, for four months.

This is $4,857,012 and counting shared between South Berwick and Eliot. What are the mechanisms available to fund the school district if this disastrous petition prevails? This school district does not have monetary reserves.

This does not take into account state funding for each of these municipalities. As for South Berwick, the council confirms that the state provides $1.3 million annually or $108,333 per month. For four months, this is a $433,332 budgetary shortfall, yet fortunately, the town’s undesignated fund can cover it. What about your town?

Although tiresome, it remains important to understand these financial issues. Otherwise, I truly look forward to a time of positive, thoughtful and respectful governance for ourselves with less focus on a type that disrupts and divides us.