PO BOX 17766 PORTLAND, MAINE 04112 207.358.

7000 AUTHORIZED BY THE CANDIDATE AND PAID FOR BY CUTLER FOR MAINE


E-W Corridor Questions for Gubernatorial Candidates
& Maine Public Servants
1) Do you perceive the proposed E/W Corridor as beneficial or detrimental to our Regions and our
States economic development, agriculture, and natural resources? Please explain how?
I think that our economic resources would be better spent fixing the roads that we have and have largely
ignored for decades and investing in improving Maines rail system. If any group makes a serious effort,
public or private, to build an East-West corridor or any other project of this scale in Maine, it needs to
undergo exhaustive siting, environmental and economic impact studies, as well as have extensive input from
citizens in the affected communities before any governor or government agency gives it serious
consideration.
My first transportation infrastructure priority is to fix the roads and bridges we already have. They are in
deplorable condition. My second priority would be to invest in an upgraded rail system that would enable us
to move goods from Atlantic Canada and the Port of Eastport and other locations in Maine through our
state and on into the mid-west.
2) Please explain how this proposed project would be taxed, as a private entity and as a public private
partnership, as an entire commercial unit or otherwise, and how would those taxes directly benefit the
impacted communities along the projects route and benefit the entire State?
This is a moot point, as I do not perceive a serious and meaningful proposal for any such project to have been
put on the table. Should we ever consider any such facility an East-West highway or anything else
affected communities and the state as a whole would need to receive a significant share of the revenue.
3) If a mega industrial project such as the E/W Corridor were to commence and operate in Maine,
particularly our region, what mitigation of equivalent measure would you endorse, such as the North
Woods National Park, State Parks, and/or local environmental interests?
Whatever mitigation is required a park, recreation area or preserve should be commensurate with the
environmental losses or damages that the project would cause. (I already am on record as willing to study
the creation of a North Woods National Park or National Recreation Area.)
4) As the Alaskan Citizens have their Permanent Fund Dividend, entitling them to have a percentage of
the profits from the oil pipeline that runs through their State, what measure would you take to ensure
that Maine people get the maximum benefits from this or any future mega-project considering that the
terms will most likely demand perpetuity?
Please note that the oil production in Alaska is declining, and the Dividend payments are not at all
permanent. Indeed, any damages from oil extraction may outlast and overwhelm the benefits of the
Dividend payments. If we in Maine ever find ourselves in a position where we need to make a similar deal, I
want to ensure that any fund or agreement can be evaluated or adjusted at regular intervals so that Maine
people dont get stuck with a deal that over time proves to be inadequate based on the real revenues and
impacts of the project.




PO BOX 17766 PORTLAND, MAINE 04112 207.358.7000 AUTHORIZED BY THE CANDIDATE AND PAID FOR BY CUTLER FOR MAINE

5) If the proposed E/W Corridor becomes a reality, as a Maine public servant, how will you ensure that
the communities/towns/counties/unorganized territories along the route have a say in its location,
impact, and benefits to those communities?
One of the serious flaws in the Cianbro proposal has been the lack of transparency. People in towns along
the proposed route dont know exactly where it will go, and many are worried about losing their lands or
having their properties and communities bi-sected forever by the Corridor.

As Governor, I would insist that the communities, towns, counties and unorganized territories along the
route have a major say in determining the location and evaluating the impacts and benefits of the Corridor. I
would never allow them to be cut out of the process.

6) Do they believe the North American Energy Infrastructure Act (HR3301), a bipartisan legislation
introduced in the House last week, will expedite the proposed E/W Corridor here in Maine? For it
includes . . .
Eliminates Presidential permit.
National boundaries between US, Canada, & Mexico.
120 date limit on State Department approval/denial.
Expedite process for natural gas pipelines and electrical lines.
For the whole thing: http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF03/20131120/101525/BILLS-113HR3301ih-
HR3301NorthAmericanEnergyInfrastructureAct-U1.pdf

Unless the proposed act purports to preempt state and local land use control and environmental regulations
which I would oppose I should think the answer would be no, it wouldnt expedite a corridor like the one
that has been proposed.