Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court

146 Me. 249
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided April 21, 1951·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

House of Representatives Order Propounding Questions

STATE OF MAINE

In House of Representatives

Whereas, there is now pending before the House of Representatives of the 95th Legislature of the State of Maine,

Bill, “An Act to Facilitate Extension of the Maine Turnpike” (House Paper 686) (Legislative Document 416), a printed copy of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof; (Exhibit “A”)
Whereby it is proposed to add a new subsection VIII to Sec. 107 (Limitation on Use of General Highway Funds) of Chap. 20 (State Highway Department) of the Revised Statutes of 1944, which proposed new subsection VIII provides for the payment by the Treasurer of the State to the Maine Turnpike Authority created by Chap. 69 of the Private and Special Laws of 1941, a portion of the state tax on gasoline for the purposes more fully stated therein, and
Whereby in the last sentence of the proposed new subsection VIII it is provided that “Upon the issuance of Turnpike revenue bonds or Turnpike revenue [250]*250refunding bonds by the Authority under the provisions of Chap. 69 of the Private and Special Laws of 1941, as amended and supplemented, the provisions of this subsection shall be deemed to constitute a material part of the contract between the authority and the holders of such bonds,” and

Whereas, an amendment is proposed to said Bill, a copy of which proposed amendment is hereto attached and made a part hereof; (Exhibit “B”) and

Whereas, grave doubt has arisen as to the constitutionality of such Bill, with or without the proposed amendment, with relation to

1. The pledging of the credit of the State, directly or indirectly, and
2. The diversion of State Highway funds, and

Whereas, to the House of Representatives of the 95th Legislature it appears that the questions of law herein raised are important and that the occasion is a solemn one; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDERED, That the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court are hereby respectfully requested to give to the House of Representatives, according to the provisions of the Constitution in this behalf, their opinion on the following questions, to wit:

Question 1. Is the Maine Turnpike Authority a “State Department” within the meaning of Article LXII of the Constitution?
Question 2. Would Bill, “An Act to Facilitate Extension of the Maine Turnpike” (House Paper 686) (Legislative Document 416) if enacted by the Legislature, in its present form, pledge the credit of the State directly or indirectly, contrary to the Constitution?
[251]*251Question 3. Would Bill, “An Act to Facilitate Extension of the Maine Turnpike” (House Paper 686) (Legislative Document 416) if enacted by the Legislature, in its present form, divert State Highway Funds contrary to the Constitution?
Question 4. Would Bill, “An Act to Facilitate Extension of the Maine Turnpike” (House Paper 686) (Legislative Document 416) if amend-, ed as proposed (Exhibit “B”) and if enacted, pledge the credit of the State directly or indirectly, contrary to the Constitution?
Question 5. Would Bill, “An Act to Facilitate Extension of the Maine Turnpike” (House Paper 686) (Legislative Document 416) if amended as proposed (Exhibit “B”) and if enacted, divert State Highway Funds contrary to the Constitution?

Exhibit “A”

NINETY-FIFTH LEGISLATURE

Legislative Document No. 416

H. P. 686 House of Representatives, February 2,1951.

Referred to Committee on Highways. Sent up for concurrence and ordered printed.

HARVEY R. PEASE, Clerk.

Presented by Mr. Sinclair of Pittsfield.

IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD NINETEEN HUNDRED FIFTY-ONE

AN ACT to Facilitate Extension of the Maine Turnpike.

Preamble. Whereas, by chapter 69 of the private and special laws of 1941, approved April 17, 1941 (herein some[252]*252times called the “act”), the Maine Turnpike Authority (herein sometimes called the “authority”) was duly created as a body corporate and politic and was authorized and empowered to construct, maintain and operate in integral operating units a turnpike from a point at or near Kittery in York county to a point at or near Fort Kent in Aroostook county, and to issue turnpike revenue bonds payable solely from revenues to pay the cost of such construction; and

Whereas, it is declared by the act that the accomplishment by the authority of the authorized purpose stated in the act is for the benefit of the people of the state of Maine and for the improvement of their commerce and prosperity in which accomplishment the authority will be performing essential governmental functions, and when all bonds issued by the authority for paying the cost of the turnpike and the interest thereon shall have been paid or a sufficient amount for the payment of all such bonds and the interest to maturity thereon shall have been set aside in trust for the benefit of the bondholders and shall continue to be held for that purpose, the authority shall be dissolved and the turnpike, its connecting tunnels and bridges, overpasses and underpasses, its leases, rights, easements, franchises, land and property shall become the property of the state of Maine and all revenue therefrom shall become payable to the treasurer of state as a part of the highway funds of the state and the turnpike, its connecting tunnels, bridges, overpasses and underpasses shall be maintained and operated by the state highway commission, and all funds of the authority not required for the payment of the bonds and all machinery, equipment and other property belonging to the authority appertaining to the maintenance and operation of the turnpike shall be vested in the state highway commission; and

Whereas, the first integral operating unit of the turnpike, extending from a point in the town of Kittery at or near [253]*253the approach to the interstate toll bridge over the Piscataqua river to a point in the city of Portland in Cumberland County connecting with Congress street in the Stroudwater section, with an approach connecting with U. S. Route No. 1 at or near Cash Corner in South Portland, has been constructed by the authority and such construction was financed by an issue of turnpike revenue bonds of the authority in the aggregate principal amount of $20,600,000, all of which are now outstanding and unpaid; and

Whereas, .the construction of an additional unit of the turnpike, extending from the present northern terminus of the first unit at Portland into or through the heart of the state will greatly improve the commerce and prosperity and the health and living conditions of all the people in the state; and

Whereas, the construction of such additional unit will relieve traffic congestion on existing highways which is rapidly becoming a menace to the safety of the inhabitants of the state, and will relieve the highway funds of the state of enormous expenditures for widening and constructing extra lanes on existing highways; and

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court, 146 Me. 249 (Me. 1951).

146 Me. 249 (Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Portland Pipe Line Corp. v. Environmental Improvement Commission
307 A.2d 1 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1973)
Nelson v. Maine Turnpike Authority
170 A.2d 687 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1961)