Peatbog Faeries

See all the posts in this series here.

Peatbog Faeries is the sort of band I could just listen to on random shuffle and get a consistently rewarding listening experience where I constantly think “oh yeah, I love this one!” It’s hard to say they’re my #1 favorite because there are so many good bands in this genre but they’re 1000% among my top favorites.

According to Wikipedia, the band started in 1994 and the consistent members since then are Peter Morrison on pipes & whistles and Innes Hutton on bass. Regarding their first album, 1996’s Mellowosity, Wikipedia says “A key aspect is Morrison’s bagpipes being fused with world genres.” While bagpipes are present throughout many of their albums, I think Morrison’s whistle playing is maybe more central to their musical identity. They definitely draw inspiration from many different musical styles around the world, but I would say that Trance is one of the primary components added to traditional Scottish music to define their sound. Drums and electronic sounds are a big part of their music. They have fiddle too, but it plays a supporting role, less central than many other bands. Some of their albums also include horns, which I think only further improve things.

Track I always reach for first is the title track from 2005’s Croftwork:

At other times I’ve thought of The Anthropologist from the same album as my favorite:

They played this when I saw them live in Edinburgh. I remember one of my friends there told me this was her favorite track.

2000’s Faerie Stories is also emblematic, both the title track and The Folk Police:

The Folk Police is a concept familiar to anyone exploring the boundaries of traditional music: the hypothetical people who tell you when you’ve stepped out of line for what “folk” should be. They don’t exist. This track does, and it slaps.

Another good one from Faerie Stories is Caberdrone:

There are so many good tracks that in looking for those I know are my favorites, I kept on coming across others I felt I need to share with you as well, like this one from 2011’s Dust:

Oh hey, here’s another one that at some points has been my favorite, The Phat Controller from 2003’s Welcome to Dun Vegas:

Dun-Dun-Dun, Dunvegan (that’s the name of the town on the Isle of Skye where they’re from or something?)

I can tell when I did most of my listening of Peatbog Faeries, because I think of both 2007’s What Men Deserve to Lose and 2011’s Dust as “the new album” and now they have two more which I haven’t listened to yet: 2015’s Blackhouse (which I can’t find to purchase digitally; if you have let me know!) and 2023’s I See A World. Here’s a good one from What Men Deserve to Lose:

What more can I say; if you like these as I do, go dive deep into their whole catalog.

Wolfstone

See all the posts in this series here.

So far I’ve been roughly progressing in this Scottish music series in order of importance to me. Wolfstone is great but they’re not #3 for me; they’ve just been stuck in my head recently.

Wikipedia says “Wolfstone perform pieces from the traditional folk and Celtic repertoire permeated with rock and roll sensibilities.” They’re anchored by fiddler Duncan Chisholm and guitarist/vocalist Stuart Eaglesham, and had a rotating slate of other musicians filling out their number over the years. Seems like in the past 15 years or so they haven’t been recording and maybe they’re mostly dissolved, but they have some great albums from the 90s and early 2000s.

I mainly know the music from three of their middle albums, Year of the Dog (1994), The Half Tail (1996), and Almost an Island (2002). For some reason I don’t really know 1999’s “Seven”. I especially like The Half Tail and Almost an Island.

The Piper and the Shrew was the first track I heard from Almost an Island, probably on Thistle and Shamrock. I’d still call it my favorite Wolfstone track. I love the slow-building nature of it.
I already knew the Live Wizardry version of Queen of Argyll when I heard this version that slaps hard, you can imagine I was pretty elated when I listened to Almost an Island

Some other tracks I love on Almost an Island include Elav the Terrible (especially notable in my listening to it is how it flows right in from the end of Piper and the Shrew) and 5/4 Madness.

From The Half Tail, my favorite track is definitely Bonnie Ship the Diamond, a popular whaling song in the pub sing scene. I largely love this track because it’s paired with the chorus of another song, The Last Leviathan, about the grief of whales being hunted to extinction (I’m noticing the theme of grief coming up a lot in these posts; it’s not just because of losing our cat recently or all the news worth grieving about in the world, but also aesthetically I think I just appreciate the pairing of grief themes with joy & energy themes: acknowledging that there’s a lot to be distraught about in the world but we keep soldiering on and find joy where we can).

Other tracks I enjoy from The Half Tail include Zeto, Tall Ships, and Heart and Soul. A lot of other Wolfstone tracks are fine contributions to the average background of my Celtic playlists, stuff I wouldn’t skip over, but those mentioned above (and Black Dog from Seven, the only one I know from that album) are the ones I would highlight for purposes such as this post.

Shooglenifty

See all the posts in this series here.

The first track of Shooglenifty I heard was Venus in Tweeds, and I was instantly hooked:

I can’t seem to find the original album recording from their 1994 debut album in an embeddable format (see Spotify link above) but this live recording is fairly honest to its energy (the drummers are not on the original track, but it 100% makes sense that Shooglenifty would be excited to collaborate with them)

For me the band’s sound is epitomized by Luke Plumb’s mandolin and Angus R. Grant’s fiddle doubling on the melody, consistently supported by drums and electric guitar and with a banjo riff showing up in most tracks. Angus brought an energy that feels vaguely similar to Eugene Hütz from Gogol Bordello (maybe just the energetic charisma and wild dark facial hair, but I think also a sense of internationalism). I have not heard any of the band’s music since Angus’s death in 2016, though they brought on a new fiddler, Eilidh Shaw, and have continued to make music. I haven’t seen the full documentary yet made recently about the band’s grief and reimagining following their frontman’s death, but here’s the trailor:

Here’s the filmmaker talking about the documentary.

I first heard Shooglenifty on pretty much every compilation album I shared in the first post in this series, and then I got their albums and immersed myself in 1994’s Venus in Tweeds, 1996’s A Whiskey Kiss, 2001’s Solar Shears, 2003’s The Arms Dealer’s Daughter (which was new when I acquired all the above), and later, 2007’s Troots. I also got the two live albums, 1996’s Live At Selwyn Hall and 2005’s Radical Mestizo (I listened to the former a lot and the latter very little).

Shooglenifty, as one review I read earlier put it, “wanders all over the musical map” in their influences, bringing in tunes and influences from all over the world, and often collaborating with musicians from other world music traditions as well. I associated them with internationalism and a perhaps-fictionalized affiliation with the seedy underbelly of European culture. At the center of it all though is “dance music” and traditional Scottish music influences, pepped up with an indomitable rejection of any orthodoxy around keeping things traditional.

Here are some of my favorite tracks, which don’t exist on YouTube as much as some bands, but which I’ve tried to link to in a streamable format for your listening pleasure:

Da Eye Wifey (a colloquial Scots name for an ophthalmologist) is from A Whiskey Kiss and has apparently been a popular part of concert sets. This concert was just a year or so before Angus R. Grant died.

The band’s Bandcamp has all their music since 2003. Check them out!

Martyn Bennett

See all the posts in this series here.

I associate Martyn Bennett with great musical talent gone too soon, and grieving the joyous feeling his music brought. He was firmly rooted in the traditional music of Scotland, and fused that with electronic dance beats and other cool things. I probably first heard his music on Thistle & Shamrock right after he died in 2005 at the age of 33 from Hodgkin’s Lymphoma. The first album I got was GRIT, which I interpreted as being thematically grappling with the struggle with illness that weighed on his final years. Just a few years ago, my friend Alex shared with me this fantastic 28 min documentary about the album made in 2003:

I wish there was a recording of the Banks of the Lee collaboration with Sheila Stewart being played around with in this video! So good. If it exists and I just haven’t found it, please let me know!

I love almost every track on Grit, especially Blackbird, Chanter, Nae Regrets, Ale House, and Rant.

His eponymous first album in 1995 sounds a lot like other celtic fusion music I listened to (including Mouth Music which he contributed to and whose leader Martin Swan engineered some of Bennett’s albums) with drums, bass, synths, and Bennett’s piping and fiddling alongside samples of Scottish people singing or talking. I also like Bothy Culture which is rather playful, though it too has an infusion of grit and death in my favorite track from it, Hallaig:

The description on YouTube says this video itself is also by Martyn Bennett

He composed a longer piece called Mackay’s Memoirs for the 1999 centennial of the Edinburgh Music School, and which was also played for the opening of the Scottish Parliament, and I believe it was performed at Celtic Connections in tribute on the 10-year anniversary of his death. I didn’t realize that the recording of the composition that I’m familiar wasn’t recorded for several years and according to Wikipedia, “It was recorded on the morning after Bennett’s death on 31 January 2005 by the young people of Broughton High School who were unaware that he had died, the news being kept back until recording was over.”

In 2000 he was diagnosed, and the album he released that year, Hardland, and his final album, Grit, are more electronic and grittier (though Glen Lyon released in between is softer and focuses on his mother’s Gaelic singing). Hardland is the clubbiest of his albums, and these tracks really set the bar for the danceclub sub-sub-genre of celtic fusion music (which I associate a little less with Shooglenifty, who I’ll write about soon, but I do associate with their exhortation at the start of The Pipe Tunes on Live at Selwyn Hall, Box: “This is dance music!” This vibe is also articulated by Elias Alexander in his music which I consider very much a descendent of Martyn Bennett’s if not the grittiest Bennett vibes. If you’re into it you can watch a full set by Elias here.)

My favorite tracks on Hardland (also Distortion Pipe and This Sky Thunders, the first of his songs I had a recording of, which I can’t find videos for):

I had decided to write my first artist deep dive about Martyn Bennett a week or so ago because I really think he’s the greatest of all time, and because the early loss of him demands loving tributes hold him up as such. But then yesterday, I had to say goodbye to my beloved cat Lilly and I’m feeling extra appreciative of those who are passed. So I guess this post is dedicated to Lilly: may she and Martyn Bennett both be free of pain somewhere enjoying a sunny armchair and some kickass music.

Scottish Music: Introduction

See all the posts in this series here.

I was recently talking with my friend Anna who’s been sharing some pretty great contemporary Scottish traditional music that she’s been getting into the past few years. I don’t know a ton about recent Scottish music but I was pretty into it 15-20 years ago and I got excited about the idea of a music exchange for people familiar with different eras of this fairly niche genre. 

Me in 2007 at Stirling Castle. I loved this picture; thought it was so brooding and cool. #early20s

During college from 2004-2008 I had a radio show called “Celtic Fusion” at Connecticut College’s WCNI in New London, CT. I found my way to that genre through teenage obsession with Enya, Stan Rogers, and Simon and Garfunkel, then to exposure in high school to a diversity of music from the Thistle & Shamrock radio show hosted by Fiona Ritchie. Another way I broadened my exposure was through compilation albums: Best of Thistle & Shamrock (1999), Putomayo Celtic Odyssey (1993), Green Linnet Records 25 Years of Celtic Music (2001), Greentrax 10th Anniversary (1996), and my favorite, The Future Sounds of Gaeldom (2002). The music I loved most was more than just fiddle & Gaelic vocals: I liked the traditional dance music and the artists bringing in influences from newer/other styles of dance music.

I found over time that a lot of the music I liked was specifically Scottish, so much so that when I studied abroad in 2007 I went to Edinburgh. I don’t think I actually broadened my listening much while I was there, but I did make sure to go see many of my favorite bands and attend the Folk Music Society regularly.

Here are a few songs from Future Sounds of Gaeldom that I love but whose artists I haven’t dived deeper into:

Big Sky: Biro Guiro

It’s a little unclear if Big Sky was a band or just a concept album! That link lists its members as Charlie McKerron & John Saich of Capercaillie plus Charlie’s cousin Laura McKerron, but on the Capercaillie website Charlie’s bio says “Charlie also co-produced the album ‘Big Sky’ which involved some of Scotland’s top contemporary Celtic musicians.” It’s also bizarre that Future Sounds of Gaeldom seems to have gotten the wrong track name for the one they included from the Big Sky album! it seems like it’s actually the track called “Biro Guiro”, not the one called “Las Temporadas”, which the compilation calls this track.

NUSA, S’fhada Bhuainn Anna

NUSA is Rory Campbell & Malcolm Stitt from Deaf Shepherd. Here are the lyrics.

Alyth McCormack, Hi Horó

https://alythmccormack.bandcamp.com/track/hi-horo

Tartan Amoebas, New Day Dawning

I got their eponymous first album because of this track, but felt this was the best one on it. Every time I listen to this track I relax a little; each day is something of a blank emotional slate and you never know what new hope or joy awaits you.

Keltik Elektrik, New Mullindhu/Mullindhu

Seems like Keltik Elektrik is mostly Jack Evans from The Easy Club. The album this track is from seems cool too though I never listened to it, but it does have my favorite version of Wild Mountain Thyme, sung by Jim Malcolm who I know from the Old Blind Dogs.

Salsa Celtica, You Mi Voy/Maggie’s Pancakes

I’m going to write some more of these blog posts about specific bands (not these ones) that I got pretty into. Hope you enjoy!

Best Wordle Starting Words

I, like many people, have been enthralled this month by Wordle. Being data-minded, I have been yearning for a statistical analysis of what the best starting word is. I found something very close to what I was looking for in this piece, but unfortunately the author used a random dictionary word universe rather than one tailored to this game. Luckily a clever person scraped Wordle’s code and identified both the full list of answers and the full list of accepted words, and posted both on Github. So I went about replicating Bakhtiari’s work with this list. Here is what I found.

Letter distribution

In the thousands of programmed answer words, the letters of the alphabet have the following distribution in total, and distribution in each of the letter places (relevant for guessing a letter in the right location):

lettercontain1st2nd3rd4th5th
e46%3%10%8%14%18%
a39%6%13%13%7%3%
r36%5%12%7%7%9%
o29%2%12%11%6%3%
t29%6%3%5%6%11%
l28%4%9%5%7%7%
i28%1%9%11%7%0%
s27%16%1%3%7%2%
n24%2%4%6%8%6%
u20%1%8%7%4%0%
c19%9%2%2%7%1%
y18%0%1%1%0%16%
h16%3%6%0%1%6%
d16%5%1%3%3%5%
p15%6%3%3%2%2%
g13%5%1%3%3%2%
m13%5%2%3%3%2%
b12%7%1%2%1%0%
f9%6%0%1%2%1%
k9%1%0%1%2%5%
w8%4%2%1%1%1%
v6%2%1%2%2%0%
x2%0%1%1%0%0%
z2%0%0%0%1%0%
q1%1%0%0%0%0%
j1%1%0%0%0%0%

Best starting words

I put my finger on the scale here a little bit to focus on words that are common enough that it doesn’t feel like cheating to guess them, even if they’re acceptable. Your results may vary if you have different standards.

Another strategy I like to use is treating the second word like a starting word: ignoring what I learned from the first word and hoping to get sufficient information from the first 10 letters to stand a better chance of guessing the final word on the 3rd try.

There are several metrics that one could use to determine what the optimal starting word is, so here are a few options for you:

First wordRankReasonBest 2nd wordNext 5 letters after
IRATE1Best score combining probabilities for yellow and green resultsLOCUSNYHDP
LATER16Next best score combining probabilities for yellow and green results, only considering common words for each of first 2 words. The differences in probability among the top words are so minor relative to the brain work of solving the puzzle that going with #1 is really not that important unless you feel compelled to.ICONSUYHDP
RACED79Highest chance of getting a green while only using the top 15 letters by overall frequency (CABER is marginally better but B isn’t that common overall)TOILSNUYHP
ADIEU1295My old starting word. If you’re going to maximize your vowels on the first word this is still a good one, but that’s not necessarily a good strategy for getting the most information you can.SCORNTLYHP

Here’s my work if you’re interested. Hope this post gives you what you’re looking for and have fun solving the puzzles!

Purple Rhode Island 2016

You may have seen election results maps from the presidential election showing that we don’t live in a “red vs. blue” country so much as a “Purple America”. The same is true in Rhode Island, but from mainstream coverage in the days following last month’s Presidential Election you wouldn’t know it.

The Providence Journal published a map a few days after the election titled “The two Rhode Islands: blue state, red state“. It heavily featured the map at right. While this map is nominally accurate, the state doesn’t operate the same as the national Electoral College, where the winner is determined by who wins each internal jurisdiction. Instead, Rhode Island’s election victor is determined essentially by a popular vote, agnostic of city and town boundaries. Classifying towns as simplistically red or blue is a deceptive use of data. News organizations should make an effort to avoid divisively and arbitrarily misconstruing the data in this way.


Here is the precinct-level map I made along the lines of “Purple America” that shows a more granular depiction of where Rhode Islanders voted for Clinton and where they voted for Trump. Click on the map to see it larger. Importantly, this also shows by what margin we voted, something the binary map published by the Projo does not show. Some trends this confirms or clarifies:

  • The margins by which Clinton won the urban core of Rhode Island completely dwarf the margins by which Trump won anywhere in the state. Even in West Greenwich, Scituate, and Burrillville precincts, no less than 35% of people voted for Clinton.
  • The interesting pattern of precincts next to the water (or next to the Blackstone River) going more for Clinton holds true.
  • There are surprisingly few precincts that were close (white in my map). Mostly in Warwick, Lincoln, and Tiverton.

I am proud to live in Providence, which not only voted overwhelmingly for Clinton but which has also been leading the resistance to his intedned appointment of ultra-conservatives and corporate executives. I’m also proud to live in a state that has blue areas and red areas close by, because talking to each other and pursuing the wellbeing of everybody is a big part of how we must move forward as a society.

RIPTA starts pushing real-time data to Transit App!


Almost two years ago, I wrote a blog post expressing with frustration how important it is for RIPTA to get real-time bus location data to Rhode Islanders through existing apps such as Transit and Google Maps. I just heard that the former, as of a week or two ago, is now available!

Transit is a pretty cool app; it exists specifically for the purpose of showing you real time information about when buses are going to be arriving near you. For each transit line close to your phone’s location, it shows you how many minutes away the next bus is. For each route, you swipe left or right to get information for the other direction.

I understand that not all RIPTA routes have the real time information available through Transit yet, but the “pulsing waves” symbol next to the time indicate that a lot of the forecasts are based on real-time data. Where such data isn’t available, the app relies on schedules.

Congratulations to RIPTA for this big step forward into the 21st Century. It’s not easy making innovative things happen in government, and there are great people working on navigating that quagmire inside RIPTA. Next stop, getting this data into Google Maps!

6-10 Connector plan is way better than it could have been

This post first appeared on RI Future

I’ve been talking up a progressive, urban solution for the 6-10 Connector almost as long as James Kennedy has. So I was excited and cautious and skeptical yesterday at the press event revealing the compromise plan for the corridor negotiated between RIDOT and the City of Providence. There were words from Governor Raimondo, Mayor Elorza, Providence Planning & Development Director Bonnie Nickerson, and RIDOT Director Peter Alviti.

As it turns out, I left the room more optimistic than I went in. If everything in the plan gets built as laid out yesterday, I will be pretty pleased. Here are some pros and cons as I see them:

Pros

Good bike connections: The connection between the Washington Secondary Bike Path (aka the Cranston Bike Path), the Woonasquatucket River Greenway, and downtown Providence is one of the most critical gaps in the state, and the most logical connection is intimately tied to the 6-10 Connector. It’s great to see both the City and the State hear the public’s plea to make this connection. We need to keep holding their feet to the fire to make sure the connections pledged yesterday get built, and are separate from traffic, but their repeated emphasis of this yesterday was a great sign.

“The Missing Move”: It’s a pretty dumb name, but it’s a really important problem with the existing infrastructure. There’s not currently a way you can stay on the highway and get from 10 North to 6 West. Consequently, most people get off the highway and go through Olneyville Square to get on 6 West on the other side. This plan fixes that. While you might think all that traffic would be good for Olneyville businesses, most of them aren’t stopping, and consequently the opposite is true. All that car traffic squished through the awkward alignment of Olneyville Square makes it not a place people want to spend time, and its local economy suffers. Rebalancing the modal preference in Olneyville Square just slightly toward bike/ped may do wonders for the neighborhood.

Tobey Street: The highway onramp at Tobey Street now chokes the Federal Hill neighborhood around it with highway-bound traffic, and the plan calls for replacing the onramp with a local road crossing the highway. There’s even a protected bike lane on Tobey in the plan. While even more bike/ped-scaled crossings of the corridor would have been better, Tobey Street is a big win.

No more flyover shadowing Westminster & Broadway: it was great to hear Director Alviti and others tout the removal of the bird-poop-generating flyover as removing a “physical barrier” from these streets. Today’s flyover really is that, a psychological deterrent from visiting Olneyville Square from its east. The compromise plan does away with the flyover, which will again address residents’ concerns about connectivity.

Connecting Olneyville & Silver Lake: Space is allocated in the plan for new streets connecting the Dyke Street neighborhood of Olneyville under Route 6 to Silver Lake, as well as new development on the south side of the highway. A new street crossing under Route 6 will be built right next to the train tracks as part of this plan, and Agnes Street, another potential crossing, will not be built as part of this project but the City specifically left space in the highway rebuilding to connect Agnes across in the future. The plan also calls for enhancements under Route 6 there to make it more welcoming as a place to be. More connections across = good.

Cons

Image from Ian Lockwood’s presentation at City’s 3/23 Forum

It’s still a highway: One of the primary entreaties of the Fix the 6-10 Coalition has been “a place, not a highway.” James’s whole vision with the Boulevard idea was for it to not be a highway. The whole point of the City’s initial forum with national experts was that it doesn’t need to be a highway and it shouldn’t be a highway. All the national press the issue has gotten says it shouldn’t be a highway. Well…it’s still a highway. Even with the hard work of the City of Providence to make RIDOT’s plan more urban-friendly, we’re still prioritizing and encouraging suburban auto-dependent travel over our capital city’s neighborhood livability and public health. That sucks. Traffic going through urban places should go through on the terms of the people living in the urban places. The alternative we see here is called spatial injustice and engineers obsessed with upholding the traffic flow of the status quo perpetuate it [Side note: RIDOT has repeatedly used suspect traffic volume figures throughout this whole process: “100,000 vehicles a day, mostly regional not local” without producing the data to back this up. If there’s any chance of reversing this decision, challenging that data is part of it]. Even beyond the public health of neighborhoods abutting the 6-10 Connector and the perpetuation of unsustainable regional travel, maintaining a highway in the corridor screws up the walkability of the Memorial & Francis intersection by Providence Place Mall. Realistically, politically, I’m not optimistic that the paradigm will change on this, but maybe if enough people call the Governor, it can.

Dean Street isn’t until “phase 2”: One of the worst parts about the 6-10 Connector today is Dean Street over the highway. Getting from Atwells Ave to Pleasant Valley Parkway by foot or bike? Fuhgedaboudit. It’s a nightmarish highway bridge with multiple on/off ramps making it extremely unsafe. If yesterday’s plan brings the Washington Secondary Trail connection to fruition, Dean Street will be one of the biggest priorities for bike/ped connections in all of Providence. “Phase 2” can’t come soon enough. Don’t hold your breath, but do call the Governor.

The “Halo” is gone: Totally debatable whether this is a pro or a con. I liked it because it was iconic, but I totally hear people who think it wasn’t an ideal part of the plan. One silver lining is that the iconic rendering that replaced it in the slide decks was the Westminster Street bridge. Here’s to making mundane urban arterials beautiful!

Conclusions

Is this plan perfect? No. Can we pack up and go home on this issue? No; we need to hold the State to all the good things in this plan and push to get the best details we can. But a few things are certain:

  1. The advocacy of Moving Together PVD & the Fix the 6-10 Coalition absolutely saved us from the as-is rebuild. I’ve heard that repeatedly from multiple sources. Never underestimate the power of bringing together lots of legitimacy-bearing partners around a compelling vision. We should keep this energy going.
  2. The offices of Governor Raimondo, Mayor Elorza, and Providence Planning & Development all did commendable jobs sculpting this huge project into something better than what it started as. See the Fix the 6-10 Coalition’s statement for more detailed acclamations. Even RIDOT came around somewhat to a plan that’s really pretty decent, and its staff & leadership should be proud of the distance they’ve come on this.
  3. If there’s one thing we learned from Trump’s election, it’s that complacency is absolutely never warranted. The same is true here. While yesterday was a big milestone in the development of this project, none of us should drop our guard, none of us should unsubscribe from that Google Alert, until the ribbon-cutting starts to fade into memory. That’s why I told every reporter I talked to after yesterday’s meeting that “the devil is in the details” and “I look forward to seeing these plans implemented”. We have to keep holding RIDOT’s feet to the fire, and I look forward to standing arm in arm with you as we do that!

RI Budget 2017 – bond language comparison

Last night at 1:30am the Rhode Island House of Representatives’ Finance Committee finished voting on their version of the FY2017 state budget. While we saw the Governor’s budget proposal on February 2nd, the House’s version was secret until last night.

I’ve been very active through RIBike working to make sure voters get a chance to vote on the Green Economy Bond in the fall, which has $10 million for bike paths in addition to a bunch of other important investments. So I was really interested in the article of the budget with all the bonds in it. The House made some changes, but mostly the bonds stay intact. See below for a side-by-side comparison:

Governor’s budget House budget
Sections that were the same between versions of the budget are shown here spanning the whole width; sections that differ are shown side-by-side
ARTICLE 5
RELATING TO CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

SECTION 1. Proposition to be submitted to the people. — At the general election to be held on the Tuesday next after the first Monday in November 2016, there shall be submitted to the people for their approval or rejection the following proposition:”Shall the action of the general assembly, by an act passed at the January 2016 session, authorizing the issuance of bonds, refunding bonds, and temporary notes of the state for the capital projects and in the amount with respect to each such project listed below be approved, and the issuance of bonds, refunding bonds, and temporary notes authorized in accordance with the provisions of said act?”
Project

  1. Veterans Home $27,000,000
    Approval of this question will allow the State of Rhode Island to issue its general obligation bonds, refunding bonds and temporary notes in an amount not to exceed twenty-seven million dollars ($27,000,000) for the construction of a new Veterans Home and renovations of existing facilities.
  2. Leveraging Higher Education to Create 21st Century Jobs $45,500,000
    Approval of this question will allow the State of Rhode Island to issue general obligation bonds, refunding bonds, and temporary notes in an amount not to exceed forty-five million five hundred thousand dollars ($45,500,000) to make capital investments in higher education-related projects, to be allocated as follows:

    1. University of Rhode Island College of Engineering $25,500,000
      Provides twenty-five million five hundred thousand dollars ($25,500,000) to renovate and construct an addition on Bliss Hall, one of the University of Rhode Island College of Engineering’s oldest buildings. This project is the second phase of a comprehensive program to replace outdated buildings with a major new building and to renovate and build additions to the existing complex of buildings serving the University of Rhode Island College of Engineering.
  1. Innovation Campus at a Rhode Island-Based University $20,000,000
    Provides twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) to build one or more innovation campuses involving a university/business collaboration where cutting-edge research can be turned into new products, services and businesses.
  1. University of Rhode Island Affiliated Innovation Campus Program $20,000,000
    Provides twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) to build one or more innovation campuses involving business collaborations with the University of Rhode Island and may include other higher education institutions where cutting-edge research can be turned into new products, services and businesses.
  1. Port of Davisville Infrastructure at Quonset $70,000,000
    Approval of this question will allow the State of Rhode Island to issue general obligation bonds, refunding bonds, and temporary notes in an amount not to exceed seventy million dollars ($70,000,000) to fund infrastructure modernization and repairs to the Port of Davisville at Quonset, including Pier 2.
  1. Port of Davisville Infrastructure at Quonset $50,000,000
    Approval of this question will allow the State of Rhode Island to issue general obligation bonds, refunding bonds, and temporary notes in an amount not to exceed fifty million dollars ($50,000,000) to fund infrastructure modernization and repairs to the Port of Davisville at Quonset, including Pier 2.
  1. Green Economy $35,000,000
    Approval of this question will allow the State of Rhode Island to issue general obligation bonds, refunding bonds, and temporary notes in an amount not to exceed thirty-five million dollars ($35,000,000) for environmental and recreational purposes, to be allocated as follows:
  1. Historic State Park Development Program $7,000,000
    Provides seven million dollars ($7,000,000) for major capital improvements to State properties, including Fort Adams State Park, Brenton Point, Colt State Park and Goddard Memorial State Park.
  1. Historic State Park Development Program $4,000,000
    Provides four million dollars ($4,000,000) for major capital improvements to State properties, including Fort Adams State Park, Brenton Point, Colt State Park and Goddard Memorial State Park.

[I understand that this decrease will be canceled out by a commensurate increase elsewhere, so it is not a reason for concern.]

  1. State Land Acquisition Program $4,000,000
    Provides four million dollars ($4,000,000) for the State to acquire fee simple interest or conservation easements to open space, farmland, watershed, and recreation lands with matching funds from federal and private entities. Funds would be leveraged on average 1:3 of state to other dollars.
  1. State Land Acquisition Program $4,000,000
    Provides four million dollars ($4,000,000) for the State to acquire fee simple interest or conservation easements to open space, farmland, watershed, and recreation lands.
  1. State Bikeway Development Program $10,000,000
    Provides ten million dollars ($10,000,000) for the State to design and construct bikeways, including the completion of the Blackstone River Bikeway and the South County Bikeway.
  1. State Bikeway Development Program $10,000,000
    Provides ten million dollars ($10,000,000) for the State to design and construct bikeways.
  1. Brownfield Remediation and Economic Development $5,000,000
    Provides up to eighty percent (80%) matching grants to public, private, and/or non-profit entities for brownfield remediation projects.
  2. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program $3,000,000
    Provides up to seventy-five percent (75%) matching grants for public, private and/or non-profit entities for projects that reduce stormwater pollution.
  1. Local Recreation Development Matching Grant Program $2,000,000
    Provides up to eighty percent (80%) matching grants to municipalities to develop public recreational facilities in Rhode Island.
  1. Local Recreation Development Matching Grant Program $5,000,000
    Provides up to eighty percent (80%) matching grants to municipalities to develop public recreational facilities in Rhode Island.
  1. Local Land Acquisition Matching Grant Program $4,000,000
    Provides fifty percent (50%) matching grants to municipalities, local land trusts and non-profit organizations to acquire fee-simple interest, development rights, or conservation easements on open space and urban parklands in Rhode Island.
  1. Housing Opportunity $40,000,000
    Approval of this question will allow the State of Rhode Island to issue general obligation bonds, refunding bonds, and temporary notes in an amount not to exceed forty million dollars ($40,000,000) for affordable housing.
  1. Housing Opportunity $50,000,000
    Approval of this question will allow the State of Rhode Island to issue general obligation bonds, refunding bonds, and temporary notes in an amount not to exceed fifty million dollars ($50,000,000) for affordable housing, urban revitalization, and blight remediation, to be allocated as follows:

    1. Affordable Housing Development $40,000,000
      Provides forty million dollars ($40,000,000) for the state to develop affordable housing opportunity programs through the redevelopment of existing structures and/or new construction.
    2. Urban Revitalization and Blight Remediation $10,000,000
      Provides ten million dollars ($10,000,000) for the state to provide funding for the improvement of properties that are blighted or in need of revitalization, including residential and commercial properties and public and community spaces.
  1. (5) School Construction $40,000,000
    Approval of this question will allow the State of Rhode Island to issue general obligation bonds, refunding bonds, and temporary notes in an amount not to exceed forty million dollars ($40,000,000) to be placed in the School Building Authority Capital Fund to repair, upgrade, and modernize Rhode Island public schools, with a focus on high priority projects that demonstrate immediate need (urgent health and safety projects) and those that reflect investments in science, technology, engineering, arts/design, and math (STEAM), and career and technical education learning spaces.
Legalese that stayed the same in both budget versions
SECTION 2. Ballot labels and applicability of general election laws. — The secretary of state shall prepare and deliver to the state board of elections ballot labels for each of the projects provided for in section 1 hereof with the designations “approve” or “reject” provided next to the description of each such project to enable voters to approve or reject each such proposition. The general election laws, so far as consistent herewith, shall apply to this proposition. SECTION 3. Approval of projects by people. — If a majority of the people voting on the proposition provided for in section 1 hereof shall vote to approve the proposition as to any project provided for in section 1 hereof, said project shall be deemed to be approved by the people. The authority to issue bonds, refunding bonds and temporary notes of the state shall be limited to the aggregate amount for all such projects as set forth in the proposition provided for in section 1 hereof, which has been approved by the people.
SECTION 4. Bonds for capital development program. — The general treasurer is hereby authorized and empowered with the approval of the governor and in accordance with the provisions of this act to issue from time to time capital development bonds in serial form in the name and on behalf of the state in amounts as may be specified from time to time by the governor in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed the total amount for all projects approved by the people and designated as “capital development loan of 2016 bonds,” provided, however, that the aggregate principal amount of such capital development bonds and of any temporary notes outstanding at any one time issued in anticipation thereof pursuant to section 7 hereof shall not exceed the total amount for all such projects as have been approved by the people. All provisions in this act relating to “bonds” shall also be deemed to apply to “refunding bonds.” Capital development bonds issued under this act shall be in denominations of one thousand dollars ($1,000) each, or multiples thereof, and shall be payable in any coin or currency of the United States which at the time of payment shall be legal tender for public and private debts. These capital development bonds shall bear such date or dates, mature at specified time or times, but not beyond the end of the twentieth state fiscal year following the state fiscal year in which they are issued, bear interest payable semi-annually at a specified rate or different or varying rates, be payable at designated time or times at specified place or places, be subject to expressed terms of redemption or recall, with or without premium, be in a form, with or without interest coupons attached, carry such registration, conversion, reconversion, transfer, debt retirement, acceleration and other provisions as may be fixed by the general treasurer, with the approval of the governor, upon each issue of such capital development bonds at the time of each issue. Whenever the governor shall approve the issuance of such capital development bonds, he or she shall certify approval to the secretary of state; the bonds shall be signed by the general treasurer and countersigned by the manual or facsimile signature of the secretary of state and shall bear the seal of the state or a facsimile thereof. The approval of the governor shall be endorsed on each bond so approved with a facsimile of his or her signature.
SECTION 5. Refunding bonds for 2016 capital development program. — The general treasurer is hereby authorized and empowered, with the approval of the governor and in accordance with the provisions of this act, to issue from time to time bonds to refund the 2016 capital development program bonds in the name and on behalf of the state, in amounts as may be specified from time to time by the governor in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed the total amount approved by the people, to be designated as “capital development program loan of 2016 refunding bonds” (hereinafter “refunding bonds”). The general treasurer with the approval of the governor shall fix the terms and form of any refunding bonds issued under this act in the same manner as the capital development bonds issued under this act, except that the refunding bonds may not mature more than twenty (20) years from the date of original issue of the capital development bonds being refunded. The proceeds of the refunding bonds, exclusive of any premium and accrual interest and net the underwriters’ cost, and cost of bond insurance, shall, upon their receipt, be paid by the general treasurer immediately to the paying agent for the capital development bonds which are to be called and prepaid. The paying agent shall hold the refunding bond proceeds in trust until they are applied to prepay the capital development bonds. While such proceeds are held in trust, they may be invested for the benefit of the state in obligations of the United States of America or the State of Rhode Island. If the general treasurer shall deposit with the paying agent for the capital development bonds the proceeds of the refunding bonds or proceeds from other sources amounts that, when invested in obligations of the United States or the State of Rhode Island, are sufficient to pay all principal, interest, and premium, if any, on the capital development bonds until these bonds are called for prepayment, then such capital development bonds shall not be considered debts of the State of Rhode Island for any purpose from the date of deposit of such moneys with the paying agent. The refunding bonds shall continue to be a debt of the state until paid. The term “bond” shall include “note,” and the term “refunding bonds” shall include “refunding notes” when used in this act.
SECTION 6. Proceeds of capital development program. — The general treasurer is directed to deposit the proceeds from the sale of capital development bonds issued under this act, exclusive of premiums and accrued interest and net the underwriters’ cost, and cost of bond insurance, in one or more of the depositories in which the funds of the state may be lawfully kept in special accounts (hereinafter cumulatively referred to as “such capital development bond fund”) appropriately designated for each of the projects set forth in section 1 hereof which shall have been approved by the people to be used for the purpose of paying the cost of all such projects so approved. All monies in the capital development bond fund shall be expended for the purposes specified in the proposition provided for in section 1 hereof under the direction and supervision of the director of administration (hereinafter referred to as “director”). The director or his or her designee shall be vested with all power and authority necessary or incidental to the purposes of this act, including but not limited to, the following authority: (a) to acquire land or other real property or any interest, estate or right therein as may be necessary or advantageous to accomplish the purposes of this act; (b) to direct payment for the preparation of any reports, plans and specifications, and relocation expenses and other costs such as for furnishings, equipment designing, inspecting and engineering, required in connection with the implementation of any projects set forth in section 1 hereof; (c) to direct payment for the costs of construction, rehabilitation, enlargement, provision of service utilities, and razing of facilities, and other improvements to land in connection with the implementation of any projects set forth in section 1 hereof; and (d) to direct payment for the cost of equipment, supplies, devices, materials and labor for repair, renovation or conversion of systems and structures as necessary for the 2016 capital development program bonds or notes hereunder from the proceeds thereof. No funds shall be expended in excess of the amount of the capital development bond fund designated for each project authorized in section 1 hereof. With respect to the bonds and temporary notes described in section 1, the proceeds shall be used for the following purposes:
Question 1 relating to bonds in the amount of twenty-seven million dollars ($27,000,000) will provide funds to the Office of Veterans’ Affairs for the construction of a new Veterans Home and renovation of existing facilities in Bristol, Rhode Island. Question 4 of the November 2012 Ballot authorized the issuance of general obligation bonds of up to ninety-four million dollars ($94,000,000) for the construction of a new Veterans Home, but the authorizing language limited the amount of bonds that could be issued by the amount of any federal funding received for this project. The federal government is expected to contribute up to sixty million, five hundred thousand dollars ($60,500,000) for this project, which would authorize the state to issue only thirty-three million, five hundred thousand dollars ($33,500,000) in general obligation bonds under the 2012 ballot authorization. The overall project cost is estimated to be one hundred twenty million, five hundred thousand dollars ($120,500,000). This new bond authorization would allow the state to issue an additional twenty-seven million dollars ($27,000,000) in general obligation bonds, which when combined with the thirty-three million, five hundred thousand dollars ($33,500,000) from the 2012 ballot authorization will provide a total of sixty-one million dollars ($61,000,000) for the completion of this project. The total borrowing for the project from this proposal plus the maximum amount allowed to be borrowed under the 2012 ballot authorization will be thirty-three million five hundred thousand dollars ($33,500,000) less than the ninety-four million dollars ($94,000,000) authorized on the 2012 Ballot.

Question 2 relating to bonds in the amount of forty-five million five hundred thousand dollars ($45,500,000) to be allocated as follows:

(a) University of Rhode Island – College of Engineering $25,500,000 Provides funds to renovate and construct an addition on Bliss Hall, which is one of the University of Rhode Island College of Engineering’s oldest buildings. This project is the second phase of a comprehensive program to replace outdated buildings with a major new building and to renovate and build additions to the existing complex of buildings serving the University of Rhode Island College of Engineering. In addition to constructing an addition to historic Bliss Hall, the project will restore the building and upgrade building systems, improve classrooms, modernize teaching laboratories, and provide advanced research facilities for the next generation of Engineering students and faculty.

  1. University-Backed Innovation Campus Program $20,000,000
    Provides funds to build one or more innovation campuses involving a university/business collaboration where cutting-edge research can be turned into new products, services, and businesses. The State will run a competitive selection process to determine the location and type of campus or campuses to build. A winning proposal must involve a Rhode Island-based university, more than match the state’s investment with private or federal funds, include at least one business partner, and spur a substantial number of new jobs at a variety of skill levels. Preference will be given to proposals that include a state university as a sponsor.
  1. University of Rhode Island Affiliated Innovation Campus Program $20,000,000
    Provides funds to build one or more innovation campuses involving business collaborations with the University of Rhode Island and may include other higher education institutions where cutting-edge research can be turned into new products, services, and businesses. The state will run a competitive selection process to determine the location and type of campus or campuses to build. A winning proposal must involve the University of Rhode Island, more than match the state’s investment with private or federal funds, include at least one business partner, and spur a substantial number of new jobs at a variety of skill levels. Preference may be given to proposals that include multiple higher education institutions.
Question 2 relating to bonds in the amount of seventy million dollars ($70,000,000) to modernize the port infrastructure at the Port of Davisville in the Quonset Business Park, including Pier 2. The Port handles a majority of shipping imports into Narragansett Bay and supports one of the largest auto importers in North America. A primary goal of this program will be modernizing of Pier 2, which has exceeded the 50-year lifespan for which it was originally designed. Question 3 relating to bonds in the amount of fifty million dollars ($50,000,000) to modernize the port infrastructure at the Port of Davisville in the Quonset Business Park, including Pier 2. The Port handles a majority of shipping imports into Narragansett Bay and supports one of the largest auto importers in North America. A primary goal of this program will be modernizing of Pier 2, which has exceeded the 50-year lifespan for which it was originally designed.
Question 3 relating to bonds in the amount of thirty-five million dollars ($35,000,000) for environmental and recreational purposes to be allocated as follows:

  1. Historical State Park Development Program $7,000,000
    Provides funds for major capital improvements to state properties, including Fort Adams State Park, Brenton Point, Colt State Park and Goddard Memorial State Park.
  2. State Land Acquisition Program $4,000,000
    Provides funds to acquire fee interest or conservation easements to open space, farmland, watershed, and recreation lands with matching funds from federal and private entities.
  3. State Bikeway Development Program $10,000,000
    Provides funds for the State to design and construct bikeways, including the completion of the Blackstone River Bikeway and the South County Bikeway.
  4. Brownfield Remediation and Economic Development $5,000,000
    Provides up to eighty percent (80%) matching grants to public, private, and/or non-profit entities for brownfields remediation projects.
  5. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program $3,000,000
    Provides up to seventy-five percent (75%) matching grants for public, private and/or non-profit entities for projects that reduce stormwater pollution.
  6. Local Recreation Development Matching Grant Program $2,000,000
    Provides up to eighty percent (80%) matching grants to municipalities to develop public recreational facilities in Rhode Island.
  7. Local Land Acquisition Matching Grant Program $4,000,000
    Provides fifty percent (50%) matching grants to municipalities, local land trusts and non-profit organizations to acquire fee-simple interest, development rights, or conservation easements on open space and urban parklands in Rhode Island.
Question 4 relating to bonds in the amount of thirty-five million dollars ($35,000,000) for environmental and recreational purposes to be allocated as follows:

  1. Historical State Park Development Program $4,000,000
    Provides funds for major capital improvements to state properties, including Fort Adams State Park, Brenton Point, Colt State Park and Goddard Memorial State Park.
  2. State Land Acquisition Program $4,000,000
    Provides funds to acquire fee interest or conservation easements to open space, farmland, watershed, and recreation lands.
  3. State Bikeway Development Program $10,000,000
    Provides funds for the State to design and construct bikeways.
  4. Brownfield Remediation and Economic Development $5,000,000
    Provides up to eighty percent (80%) matching grants to public, private, and/or non-profit entities for brownfields remediation projects.
  5. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program $3,000,000
    Provides up to seventy-five percent (75%) matching grants for public, private and/or non-profit entities for projects that reduce stormwater pollution.
  6. Local Recreation Development Matching Grant Program $5,000,000
    Provides up to eighty percent (80%) matching grants to municipalities to develop public recreational facilities in Rhode Island.
  7. Local Land Acquisition Matching Grant Program $4,000,000
    Provides fifty percent (50%) matching grants to municipalities, local land trusts and non-profit organizations to acquire fee-simple interest, development rights, or conservation easements on open space and urban parklands in Rhode Island.
Question 4 relating to bonds in the amount of forty million dollars ($40,000,000) to promote housing opportunity programs through redevelopment of existing structures, new construction and/or foreclosure assistance. Question 5 relating to bonds in the amount of fifty million dollars ($50,000,000) to promote affordable housing opportunity programs, urban revitalization, and blight remediation, to be allocated as follows:

  1. Affordable Housing Development $40,000,000
    Provides funds for the state to develop affordable housing opportunity programs through the redevelopment of existing structures and/or new construction
  2. Urban Revitalization and Blight Remediation $10,000,000
    Provides funds for the state to provide funding for the improvement of properties that are blighted or in need of revitalization, including residential and commercial properties and public and community spaces.
Question 5 relating to bonds in the amount of forty million dollars ($40,000,000) will be used to repair, upgrade, and modernize Rhode Island public schools, with a focus on high priority projects that demonstrate immediate need (urgent health and safety projects) and those that reflect investments in science, technology, engineering, arts/design, and math (STEAM), and career and technical education learning spaces.