AUGUSTA
The Senate rejected a bill Thursday that would have expanded the Midcoast Regional Redevelopment Authority Board of Directors by two seats — one each for host communities Brunswick and Topsham.
Senators voted 30-5 not to endorse LD 1476, authored and submitted by Rep. Mattie Daughtry, D-Brunswick.
The bill is an attempt to remedy what Brunswick residents and municipal officials complain has been a lack of regard and communication from MRRA’s board when deciding how to repurpose the former naval air station.
The 11-member board is appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Legislature. Elected public officials are prohibited from serving on the board.
Brunswick several times has nominated Town Manager Gary Brown for a seat. Each time, Brown has been rejected.
Daughtry calls it the equivalent of taxation without representation. But Sen. Stan Gerzofsky, D-Brunswick, has opposed the the bill from the start.
He voted against it in session Thursday and called it “bad public policy.”
“It takes away any Legislative oversight,” he said. “It’s a direct appointment to the board with no supervision and no legislative confirmation.”
Daughtry rejected Gerzofsky’s claims that the debate had become “personal” or partisan; Sen. Rebecca Millett of Cape Elizabeth was the only Democrat among the five senators who supported the bill. The other four — Reps. James Hamper, Roger Sherman, Brian Langley and Douglas Thomas — are Republicans from northern, eastern and western Maine constituencies.
Despite the Senate’s rejection, there still is a chance LD 1476 can become law. The House today “insisted” on a committee of conference, which will select three state representatives and three senators to convene and discuss the bill. If the committee reaches an agreement, the bill would be resubmitted to the Senate. If the members don’t, it would die of nonconcurrence.
Results of the conference were not available by The Times Record’s press deadline.
jtleonard@timesrecord.com
The Times Record Sustaining Sponsor
We believe a community must be informed to thrive. bowdoin.edu
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less