Does the Baxter State Park Authority have to get the Maine Bureau of Purchases to sign off before buying equipment or hiring contractors for the park?

Plain-English summary

Ron Lord at the Maine Bureau of Purchases asked the AG's office whether the Baxter State Park Authority had to clear its equipment and services purchases through the Bureau before spending money. Assistant Attorney General Terrance J. Brennan, working from research by Paul Stern (who represented the Park Authority) and Bill Stokes of the same office, concluded that the Authority did not need to seek Bureau approval. The reasoning rested on three pieces.

First, the statutory grant. 12 M.R.S.A. § 901 gives the Park Commission "full power in the control and management" of the Park. That language is broader than the supervisory grants typical of state line agencies and reads as a complete delegation of operational control, including purchasing.

Second, donor intent. Governor Percival Baxter donated the land that became Baxter State Park in trust, and the Park is governed under the terms of that gift. Governor Baxter's trust documents pushed strongly toward operational independence, and the AG memo treated that intent as a controlling consideration in how to interpret the Authority's procurement autonomy.

Third, funding source. The Park is not funded through general state appropriations for procurement purposes. State funds, in the sense covered by central purchasing law, are not the financial source for Park acquisitions. The funding-source point reinforced the legal point: a body that does not spend state appropriated money does not fall within the kind of state-department procurement oversight Bureau approval is designed to police.

Brennan's memo also explicitly aligned with the conclusions of Paul Stern and Bill Stokes, who had already worked the question, on a separate ground: the Baxter State Park Authority is an "independent Authority" and not a "department or agency" of the State for purposes of 5 M.R.S.A. § 1816, the statute requiring Bureau of Purchases approval. That section reaches state departments and agencies; an independent authority sits outside its coverage.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1989. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

What was Bureau of Purchases approval, and why did it matter?

5 M.R.S.A. § 1816 set a centralized approval requirement for procurement by Maine state departments and agencies. The Bureau acted as a gatekeeper for state purchasing to prevent fragmentation and to ensure consistency. Anything classified as a "department or agency" had to clear purchases through the Bureau.

Why was Baxter State Park outside that requirement?

Three reasons stacked up. The 12 M.R.S.A. § 901 grant of "full power in the control and management" of the park was a broad operational delegation. Governor Baxter's trust framework intended operational independence. And the Park's funding came from trust assets, not the kind of state appropriations the purchasing law was set up to oversee. Each reason alone might be debatable; together they pointed clearly to independence.

Was the Park Authority a state agency at all?

The memo treated it as an independent authority, deliberately structured to sit outside the regular state-agency procurement framework. The AG memo paired that conclusion with the substantive policy reasons described above.

Who else weighed in on this question?

The memo was authored by Assistant AG Terrance J. Brennan in response to a Bureau of Purchases inquiry, but it ratified earlier conclusions reached by Assistant AGs Paul Stern (who represented the Baxter State Park Authority) and Bill Stokes. The opinion was the formal answer that the Bureau of Purchases could rely on going forward.

What exactly did the memo decide?

Only the narrow procurement question: that the Baxter State Park Authority did not have to obtain Bureau of Purchases approval before buying equipment and services. The memo did not address audit oversight, trust duties, or any other accountability mechanism; those were outside the question asked.

Background and statutory framework

Baxter State Park sits at the unusual intersection of state institution and private trust. Governor Percival Baxter conveyed the land to the State of Maine in trust, and the Baxter State Park Authority operates the park under terms set in those gifts. 12 M.R.S.A. § 901 carries the grant of "full power in the control and management" of the park. 5 M.R.S.A. § 1816, the central purchasing statute, applies to state departments and agencies and routes their procurement through the Bureau of Purchases. The 1989 AG memo concluded that the Park Authority's structure as an independent authority took it outside § 1816's reach for purchasing purposes, and the broader trust and funding context reinforced that conclusion.

Citations

• 12 M.R.S.A. § 901
• 5 M.R.S.A. § 1816

Source

• Landing page: https://www.maine.gov/legis/lawlib/lldl/agops/agops.htm
• Original PDF: https://lldc.mainelegislature.org/Open/AG/Opinions/1989/ag_19890223.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain, the linked PDF is authoritative.

Department of Attorney General

MEMORANDUM

To: Ron Lord, Bureau of Purchases
From: Terrance J. Brennan, Assistant Attorney General
Date: February 23, 1989
Subject: Baxter State Park Purchases

At the request of Assistant Attorney General Paul Stern who represents the Baxter State Park Authority, I have recently researched the issue as to whether the Baxter State Park Authority must have the approval of the Bureau of Purchases prior to making purchases of equipment and services.

I have concluded that the Authority is not required to seek such approval. I base this conclusion upon 12 M.R.S.A. § 901 which states that the Commission "shall have full power in the control and management" of the Park, upon the clearly expressed intent of Governor Baxter in establishing the trust, and upon the fact that State funds are not used for such purposes. I also concur with Paul Stern and Bill Stokes of this office who have reached the same conclusion reasoning that the Baxter State Park Authority is an independent Authority and not a "department or agency" of the State and that therefore 5 M.R.S.A. § 1816 does not apply.

Should you have further questions or comments regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.

TERRANCE BRENNAN
Assistant Attorney General

cc: Paul Stern