Following its release in 2006, and for a few years after, no publication was cited as often as the Brookings report.

Entitled “Charting Maine’s Future: An Action Plan for Promoting Sustainable Prosperity and Quality Places,” it was a collaboration of the Brookings Institution, a national think tank, and GrowSmart Maine. The report acted as a blueprint for public policy on the local and statewide level.

The Brookings report argued Maine should capitalize on its natural resources and quality of life, increase investment in research and development, target governmental overlap and inefficiencies, and encourage “smart” growth that builds up Maine’s cities and towns while putting less strain on services. It articulated what it was that people love and value about Maine, then determined how those things can fuel the economy.

Six years on, the groups have released a follow-up, “Charting Maine’s Future: Making Headway,” to review the recommendations laid out in the initial report, tally up the wins and losses, and see what there is to learn.

“Making Headway” shows that the state, whether as a result of the 2006 report or because of other societal and economic forces, is at least moving in the right direction in some respects. Maine has continued to make land and historical preservation a priority, the farming industry is evolving and adapting in exciting ways, and steps are being taken to protect working waterfronts.

But the new report is in large part a reminder of the challenges that face Maine, and the forces that keep the state from addressing those issues. A lot of blame for the inertia can be place on the economic crisis that has gripped the world since shortly after the 2006 report was released. But far more damaging is a political philosophy that, to paraphrase the latest report, incorrectly equates small government with efficient government, and is dismissive of public investment.

Nowhere has this attitude been more apparent than in the area of research and development. After some initial gains, momentum has slowed. Gov. Paul LePage’s veto of a $20 million research and development bond earlier this year is the kind of shortsighted and ideological decision that puts Maine behind its competition. LePage has argued that Maine shouldn’t spend any more until its fiscal house is in order. But without these kinds of investments, Maine will remain in an economic slumber well after the rest of the country has turned around.

At the same time, Maine continues to resist changes at the local level that would make government leaner without sacrificing service. Implementation of the school consolidation plan was handled poorly and had to be scaled back. Still, administration costs have fallen because of consolidation, and there are certainly more opportunities for costs to be shared between districts.

The same can be said of municipalities. Economic realities have forced some communities to look to their neighbors for collaborations. Incentives should be put in place for these kinds of partnerships, and the successes shared so that others can follow.

Ben Bragdon, managing editor

Copy the Story Link