Vote “No” on Question 3

Blue is not Green: ...What, exactly, is the money for? 

Steve Ahlquist

These signs can be found across North Kingstown

(Frank Carini/ecoRI News)

Rhode Island will soon be voting on five ballot measures to borrow money for education, housing, economic development, cultural improvements, and the green economy. 

I want to focus on Question 3: a $100 million investment in the so-called Blue Economy. The question reads:

• Economic Development $100 million: Approval of this question will allow the State to issue general obligation bonds, refunding bonds, and/or temporary notes in an amount not to exceed one hundred million dollars to fund industrial facilities infrastructure improvements for economic development purposes, to fund site development and growth industry infrastructure, to be allocated as follows:
• Site Development: Provides $55 million for land acquisition or assembly, environmental remediation, infrastructure and utility installation, site preparation or development, and project investments. Eligible uses include, but are not limited to, large-scale industrial site development to create pad-ready locations and/or facilities, infrastructure improvements and investments within the Quonset Business Park, and land acquisition, preparation, and project investments within the I-195 District.
• Growth Industry Infrastructure: Provides $45 million for infrastructure, facilities, projects, and investments that support Rhode Island’s ocean, defense, life sciences, data analytics, and related industries. Eligible uses include, but are not limited to, water-based test ranges and onshore ocean- or defense-related innovation/production facilities, as well as facilities, projects, and investments that advance businesses and job growth in the life sciences.

Question 3 will almost certainly pass. As far as I can tell, every bond question sent to Rhode Island voters for approval over the last two decades has passed. [Note: A $100 million bond, paid back over 20 years at 5% interest, will ultimately cost Rhode Island taxpayers over $160 million.] But what, exactly, is the money for? 

The phrase “[e]ligible uses include, but are not limited to” is extremely broad. A literal reading of the phrase could include any imaginable expenditure. Similarly broad is the phrase, “investments that support Rhode Island’s ocean, defense, life sciences, data analytics, and related industries.” Does “data analytics” include data centers? Such an investment is certainly covered by the phrases “related industries” and “not limited to.”

The Blue Economy is bullshit

You may have heard the phrase “Blue Economy” bandied about by our federal delegation and local state and corporate leaders. The Grow Blue Partnership, a Rhode Island-based coalition of industry groups, environmental organizations, government agencies, and academic institutions, including the University of Rhode Island (URI), defines the Blue Economy as “the sustainable use of the ocean to create a resilient economy and good-paying jobs.” Which sounds great, until you realize that defense contractors make up a substantial chunk of the Blue Economy.

 

The Bureau of Economic Analysis estimates that defense accounts for 23-33% of all Blue Economy dollars and is the second-largest sector, after tourism and recreation.

The Blue Economy is sold as wind turbines, fisheries, quahog farms, and sailboats, and it is that, but it also includes nuclear submarines, missile guidance systems, and surveillance technology.

For more on the Blue Economy and why it’s bullshit, see:

• The ‘Blue Economy’ Myth: We Have to Stop Thinking the Ocean Can Be Run Like a Business
• It’s the (Blue) Economy, Stupid! Marine Regeneration and Prosperity Beyond Growth at the UNOC 2025 Ocean Basecamp
• Rethinking the Blue Economy: Integrating social science for sustainability and justice

The R.I. Ports Coalition, a 501(c)4 organization

Driving passage of Question 3 is the R.I. Ports Coalition, a 501(c)4 nonprofit organization “formed in 2016 to advocate for Rhode Island’s ports and maritime industry, and the overall growth of our state’s economy.” Who are they? Take a look:

• Board of Directors
• Gavin Black, President; Moran Shipping
• Patricia Testa, Treasurer; Quonset Development Corporation
• Justin Miranda, Secretary; North Atlantic Distribution (NORAD, not to be confused with the North American Aerospace Defense Command)
• Top 5 Donors
• Electric Boat: General Dynamics regularly ranks as one of the top five military contractors in the United States
• DiPrete Engineering Associates
• J. Goodison Company: Shipyard and Marine Repair Services
• J.R. Vinagro Corporation
• New England Waste Systems: Recently constructed a 47,500-square-foot road-to-rail construction and demolition debris transfer station in Quonset.

This is the Blue Economy. It’s not about seafood, beaches, and saving the whales. It’s about the profit-driven exploitation of the oceans as a resource and a theater of war.

Blue is not Green

Rhode Island made a big investment in offshore turbines. Revolution Wind just came online and will soon provide almost a third of Rhode Island’s electric power. Future wind projects, now canceled or imperiled by the Trump Administration, might have made Rhode Island energy independent, and will hopefully resume one day. This is what people commonly think of when they think about a Blue Economy: green energy projects and a cleaner, greener future for our oceans.

If Question 3 were honestly phrased, we would read about a series of investments - some good, some bad - some in keeping with what Rhode Islanders desire in terms of energy independence and a cleaner, greener future, and some in direct contradiction to those desires. Even carefully phrased Bond questions have resulted in money being spent in ways voters did not intend to support.

Under Governor Daniel McKee, the Rhode Island Public Transit Authority (RIPTA) repurposed $17 million from a 2014 transit bond to fund the relocation of Providence’s main bus hub out of Kennedy Plaza. The bond said nothing about relocating the bus hub; the bond was intended to “fund enhancements and renovations to mass transit hub infrastructure…”

Economic development can be a worthwhile investment. But voters should know exactly what kind of development we’re paying for. Any promises made today about how the money will be spent will be meaningless: the decisions will be made years from now, likely by people who have yet to be elected. Rhode Islanders don’t want their money contributing to fossil fuel projects and data centers. We should reject ambiguously worded bond questions that leave such possibilities open.