Portland city leaders are standing firm against proposed cuts to General Assistance, arguing that Maine’s largest city shoulders a disproportionate burden in providing services to vulnerable populations. The debate intensified Monday as local officials traveled to Augusta to push back on efforts to slash spending.
Portland Pushes Back Against Budget Cuts
City officials made their case during a public hearing, emphasizing that Portland’s General Assistance spending is not a city-specific issue but a statewide responsibility. Mayor Mark Dion was direct in his remarks.
“They’re there because we haven’t determined how to allocate that responsibility to other municipalities,” Dion said, referring to individuals who rely on assistance. “You can cut the budget. You have the authority to do that. But, you don’t make people disappear.”
General Assistance funds help municipalities cover essential needs for those who cannot afford them. While Democratic Gov. Janet Mills had initially proposed restrictions as part of her budget adjustment plan, legislative leaders postponed those discussions to the two-year budget. However, Republicans continue to advocate for immediate reductions.
The Numbers Tell a Story
House Minority Leader Billy Bob Faulkingham (R-Winter Harbor) has been vocal in his criticism of Portland’s General Assistance expenditures. In a recent video posted on the House GOP’s Facebook page, he highlighted the stark spending disparities between Portland and other parts of Maine.
“General Assistance is a good program when it’s used correctly,” Faulkingham said. “But here in Portland, they spend 50 times more per person on General Assistance than the rest of the state. As a matter of fact, this city alone gobbles up most of the General Assistance state-wide.”
The numbers underscore his point. Portland received $7.46 million in General Assistance in 2023—88% of the statewide total of $8.5 million. In stark contrast:
- South Portland received just $156,340.
- Lewiston got $123,707.
Portland’s leaders say these figures reflect the concentration of services in the city rather than misuse of funds.
Why Portland Bears the Burden
Cumberland County District Attorney Jacqueline Sartoris told lawmakers that Portland’s spending levels are intentional, given the location of critical services.
“We don’t have the population densities to support hospitals, service centers, nonprofits, etc., at a cost-effective scale except mostly in Portland,” Sartoris explained.
Portland’s resources—mental health facilities, homeless shelters, and substance use treatment centers—make it the state’s de facto hub for individuals in crisis. That reality, officials argue, drives up the city’s assistance costs.
What’s at Stake if Cuts Move Forward?
Sartoris warned lawmakers that cutting General Assistance without providing alternative support structures could backfire. If assistance for individuals in crisis is reduced before they find stable housing, they could end up requiring more costly interventions down the road.
“Rather than adopt policies that claim to be concerned about equalizing General Assistance between very different communities, I hope the committee will instead focus on the data that shows Portland is serving a unique and essential role for our entire state,” she said.
Portland law enforcement and prosecutors have increasingly sought to use legal mechanisms to steer people into treatment and housing rather than incarceration. Sartoris suggested that slashing General Assistance funding would undercut those efforts, potentially leading to higher public safety and healthcare costs in the long run.
Comments