Maine Senate Bill LD382

Maine 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/4/25
• Refer: 2/4/25
• Failed: 2/3/26

Caption

An Act to Establish a System of Revenue Sharing for the Use and Management of Coastal Resources

Summary

LD 382 is a concept draft that proposes creating a statewide system for revenue sharing tied to the commercial, industrial, and recreational use of Maine’s coastal resources. The bill describes a standardized fee and royalty schedule based on the type and scale of coastal activities, with the goal of ensuring that the use of those resources produces direct benefits for the communities most affected while also supporting broader statewide economic growth. The draft also contemplates a formal distribution formula for the revenue collected. Under the proposal, some funds would be retained by the State to cover administration, enforcement, and oversight of coastal resource activities, while the remainder would be distributed to affected communities and other stakeholders. A statutorily created revenue sharing board, made up of representatives from state agencies, municipal governments, and other stakeholders, would oversee collection and distribution.

Impact

Because LD 382 is a concept draft, it does not itself amend specific statutes or establish final fee amounts, but it signals a potential new statutory framework for managing and monetizing coastal resource use. If enacted in a developed form, it would likely affect state coastal management, licensing or permitting systems, and the allocation of revenues derived from coastal activities. It would also create a new board and administrative structure, and could shift some financial benefits from general state revenue toward coastal communities and other designated recipients.

Sentiment

There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history available for LD 382, so there is no documented public debate or formal sentiment in the provided materials. Based on the bill text alone, the proposal is framed positively, emphasizing fairness, equity, local benefit, and statewide economic growth. However, the absence of discussion and votes means support or opposition cannot be reliably assessed from the record provided.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the available materials. That said, a proposal of this kind would likely raise questions about how fees and royalties are set, which communities qualify as “affected,” how revenue is divided between the State and local stakeholders, and how the proposed board would be structured and controlled. Potential concerns could also include the impact on businesses and recreational users of coastal resources, as well as whether the revenue-sharing formula would be viewed as equitable across different regions and industries.