AUGUSTA — A 1,500-slot-machine facility planned for Lewiston’s former Bates Mill No. 5  took a step toward being approved by the Legislature on Monday.

The House of Representatives voted 78-61 to directly authorize the project rather than send the proposal to voters. The vote came on the heels of the House’s landslide decision, 94-49, to give first approval to a planned Biddeford racino and partner facility in Washington County.

Both proposals now face votes in the Senate where support for full authorization and bypassing the traditional citizen referendum process is uncertain.

The Veterans and Legal Affairs Committee decisively voted against legislative approval for the projects.

One thing is clear: The Lewiston casino appears to have benefited from the House’s decisive endorsement of the Biddeford-Washington county project, a  proposal spurred by significant lobbying efforts this session.

Stavros Mendros, a former state legislator and stakeholder in the Lewiston project, acknowledged that Monday’s vote on the Lewiston casino was likely assisted by the initial approval for Biddeford.

The House vote on the Lewiston proposal came without debate. Biddeford, by contrast, was debated for nearly two hours.

“I’m ecstatic,” Mendros said. “We figured that if (Biddeford) went, most of the (lawmakers) would have to vote for both.”

Mendros acknowledged that both proposals face a tough haul in the Senate, as well as an expected veto from Gov. Paul LePage. However, he said, the preliminary approval would give the city leverage in choosing a developer for the downtown project.

Dan Billings, LePage’s legal counsel, in April said the governor preferred that voters decide the merits of casino projects.

Rep. Mike Carey, D-Lewiston, originally planned to vote against both projects Monday. However, he and six of the seven members representing the Lewiston-Auburn delegation ended up supporting legislative authorization. 

Two members of delegation, Rep. Bruce Bickford, R-Auburn, and Rep. Brian Bolduc, D-Auburn, supported the Biddeford approval.

Carey said his decision to support the Lewiston vote came after the House moved to approve Biddeford.

“The game has changed and it only makes sense that both projects play by the same rules,” he said.

Proponents for the Lewiston project had hoped the Legislature would authorize the development. However, a majority of lawmakers indicated Monday that their decision was shaped by Maine’s precedent of sending gaming projects to voters.

The disparity in the margin between the two votes irked Rep. Jarrod Crockett, R-Bethel. Crockett argued that both gaming projects should be sent to voters as they traditionally have been.

“If you vote for Biddeford you have to vote for Lewiston just out of straight fairness,” he said. “But if you look at the roll call, there were people who voted for Biddeford who didn’t vote for Lewiston, and that’s not right.”

Like other gambling legislation, LD 985, the Lewiston project, and LD 1203, the Biddeford project, are citizen initiatives and written so that the Legislature can authorize them. However, the Legislature has typically pushed gambling projects to a statewide vote.

Supporters of the Lewiston casino had hoped to entice lawmakers by guaranteeing that the project would go to a county vote.

Lewiston residents voted 5,041 to 2,574 last June in support of selling the Bates Mill property to Great Falls Recreation and Redevelopment LLC for $150,000. The developer has gathered enough signatures to bring the issue to voters in November.

The developer and city officials wanted to avoid the referendum, but Mendros said Monday that they’ve been preparing for that outcome all along. Mendros said he was confident the project would win on its merits.

Proponents say the casino will create 500 jobs.

Lewiston Mayor Larry Gilbert testified during the public hearing in April that the casino was part of a major revitalization effort.

Previous gambling proposals have all gone before voters.

In 2005, the Legislature approved a 1,500-slot-machine racino at a tribally owned facility in Washington County. However, support for that project was not enough to override Gov. John Baldacci’s veto.

In November, voters narrowly approved a casino in Oxford County.

[email protected]