By David Farmer,Staff Writer

LEWISTON – Gov. John Baldacci killed two bills Friday, including one which had badly divided Democrats as it worked its way through the Legislature.

Baldacci refused to sign L.D. 1481 and L.D. 1943. Without the governor’s signature and with the Legislature out of session, the bills can’t become law.

L.D. 1481 tore at the seams of the Democratic Party, badly dividing the caucus and playing a role in the demise of two other bills that were a high priority for Baldacci and Democratic leaders.

The bill would have placed new restrictions on the ability of communities to change their minds on development once a permit had been issued. The bill, heavily backed by the lobbying community and advocates for public housing, would have given developers a time-certain end to challenges and limited residents to only 75 days to complete a referendum after a permit was approved in order to retroactively change zoning rules.

As the bill was being considered in the Legislature, the attorney general issued an advisory opinion that said it would likely be considered unconstitutional if signed into law in its current form.

“I recognize and appreciate the fact that businesses and developers need certainty in the permitting process. In light of the attorney general’s opinion questioning the enforceability of the legislation, it is not clear that this bill brings that certainty to the process desired by the business community. It is clear, however, that it creates new restrictions on the citizen initiative process, ” Baldacci said.

“This bill, as presented to me, does not strike an acceptable balance between the legitimate goal of providing more certainty in the regulatory process and the long-standing traditions of home rule and citizens initiative in Maine,” Baldacci said.

With Democrats meeting not far from the State House for their annual convention in hopes of building the unity necessary to maintain control of the Legislature and Blaine House, Baldacci’s pocket vetoes, as his action is commonly called, aren’t likely to soothe the rift over L.D. 1481.

“I give the governor great credit for standing up to all the pressure placed on him to sign this bill,” said state Sen. Peggy Rotundo, D-Lewiston, an ardent foe of the legislation. “I’m glad that he decided to stand up for the rights of the people.”

The second bill Baldacci vetoed was L.D. 1943, which would have overturned a rule adopted by the Maine State Housing Authority providing incentives for contractors who provide health insurance to their workers.

“Maine people need and deserve affordable, quality health care that we can depend upon. It’s unacceptable to undermine the decision of the Board of Maine State Housing Authority to provide an incentive for employers to offer health care coverage,” Baldacci said.

L.D. 1943 passed unanimously in the House and by a 22-12 bipartisan vote in the Senate.

State Sen. Lynn Bromley, D-South Portland, was the sponsor of both bills, and along with state Sen. Elizabeth Schneider, D-Orono, had helped to defeat the governor’s efforts to reorganize his DirigoChoice health insurance program.

Bromley said Thursday that she didn’t think the veto of L.D. 1943 was tied to her vote on Dirigo or her strong support for L.D. 1481.

“I think the governor had decided to veto that bill before L.D. 1481 ever came up,” Bromley said.

The bill, she said, was about protecting the Legislature’s authority to set policy.

According to Bromley, legislation that would have accomplished the same thing as the MSHA rule was defeated in the Legislature, but the agency decided to put it into place anyway.

“For me, it’s about the executive branch of the government usurping the authority of the Legislative branch,” Bromley said. “It was a process bill. It’s the majority party’s responsibility to protect those boundaries. … To me, it’s about who’s got the authority to make the policy.”

On L.D. 1481 and the Dirigo votes, Bromley said that the governor never had her support for the idea of turning DirigoChoice into a self-insured program.

“Of course I’m disappointed (about L.D. 1481),” Bromley said. “We worked very hard on that bill and have been working on the issue for six years or more. … Our intent was to make it predictable and fair for instate developers. That’s who’s really hurt.”

Rotundo was far from disappointed with Baldacci’s decision.

“It was a bipartisan, tripartisan group of people who opposed this bill,” Rotundo said. “The opposition was from all over the political spectrum who came together to recognize that this was an undemocratic law.”