Judge revives Baker-backed plan to tap into Canadian hydropower

PORTLAND, Maine  — Maine’s highest court on Tuesday breathed new life into a $1 billion power line that would bring renewable Canadian hydropower into Massachusetts, ruling that a statewide vote rebuking the project was unconstitutional.

The Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the retroactive nature of the referendum last year violated the project developer’s constitutional rights, sending it back to a lower court for further proceedings.

The project has been backed by Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker, would be paid for by Bay State ratepayers and formed a key part of his energy and climate policy.

The Baker administration has said the project could supply about 17% of the state’s electricity demand and reduce rates on Massachusetts electric bills between 2% and 4% each year under contracts already approved by the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities.

The court did not rule in a separate case that focuses on a lease for a 1-mile portion of the proposed power line that crosses Maine state land.

Most of the proposed 145-mile power transmission line would be built along existing corridors, but a new 53-mile section was needed to reach the Canadian border.

Workers were already clearing trees and setting poles when the governor asked for work to be suspended after the referendum. The Maine Department of Environmental Protection later suspended its permit but that could be reversed depending on the outcome of legal proceedings.

The high court was asked to weigh in on two separate lawsuits. Developers sought to declare the November 2021 referendum unconstitutional while another lawsuit focused on a lease allowing transmission lines to cross a short segment of state-owned land.

Supporters say projects such as this one, funded by ratepayers in Massachusetts, are necessary to battle climate change and introduce renewable electricity into a region that’s heavily reliant on natural gas, which can cause spikes in energy costs.

Critics say the project’s environmental benefits are overstated — and that it would harm the woodlands in western Maine.

It was the second time the Supreme Judicial Court was asked to weigh in on a referendum aimed at killing the project. The first referendum proposal never made it onto the ballot after the court raised constitutional concerns.

Although the project is funded by Massachusetts ratepayers, the additional electricity would serve to stabilize or reduce electricity rates for all consumers, proponents contend.

The referendum on the project was the costliest in Maine history, topping $90 million and underscoring deep divisions in the state.

The high-stakes campaign put environmental and conservation groups at odds and pitted utilities backing the project against operators of fossil fuel-powered plants that stand to lose money.