Questions about how updated definition of ‘coastal wetland' would impact landowners, developers
The Maine Department of Environmental Protection is looking to update the definition of coastal wetlands in some areas of statute, but lawmakers have questions about how much it could affect landowners and developers along the state's 3,500 miles of shoreline.
Rep. Vicki Doudera (D-Camden) presented a bill (LD 65) on behalf of the department to the Legislature's Environment and Natural Resources Committee Monday with the proposed definition change in the Natural Resources Protection Act. Rather than reference the highest annual tide to define the area of a coastal wetland, the department is proposing a switch to the highest astronomical tide.
As its name suggests, the highest annual tide is the highest predicted tide in a given calendar year. Whereas the highest astronomical tide predicts the highest tide for a 40 year period, but is updated every 20 years, explained Naomi Kirk-Lawlor, who represented the DEP.
Because it is stable over a 20-year period, Kirk-Lawlor said the highest astronomical tide would be a 'more consistent delineator.'
She pointed out that the Maine Geological Survey has an interactive graphic that the public can access online to see the highest astronomical tide line along the state's coast.
Development projects along Maine's coast have been top of mind recently as many communities have had to rebuild after a series of severe storms and flooding events last winter. While Gov. Janet Mills earmarked more than $21 million in her supplemental budget last year to rebuild working waterfronts, there have also been multi-million dollar federal investments to make Maine's infrastructure more resilient to the effects of climate change, especially along the coast.
As it reads, the bill only proposes the language change for the Natural Resources Protection Act, but Kirk-Lawlor said the department would like to see the same definition change in the Mandatory Shoreland Zoning Act. This would align those statutes with the Land Use Planning Commission, which made this proposed change in 2018.
Although the department told the committee in written testimony that this change would provide more consistency and stability for long-term planning, members of the committee raised questions about how the change would affect landowners and any pending coastal development projects.
Kirk-Lawlor said the difference between the highest annual and the highest astronomical tides is normally no greater than six inches, so it would not be a significant change.
Even with that, multiple committee members asked to see maps and other details outlining how the change may impact people living and working on the coast. Sen. Joseph Martin (R-Oxford) also questioned whether coastal landowners have been notified of this potential change and if it would cause any loss of property value.
Denise Tepler (D-Sagadahoc), Senate co-chair of the committee, said she doesn't see potential property value loss from this bill, but asked for more information about what happened after the Land Use Planning Commission made this definition change and how it affected planning for development.
Rep. Laurie Osher (D-Orono), who has a PhD in soil science and currently works for Eastern Maine Development Corporation assisting communities to be more resilient to climate change, said she believes the new definition would benefit businesses, homeowners and the department by creating more consistency — 'even with the concern that some people will be unnerved or caught feeling like they didn't have all the information they needed.'
'Instead of having to worry about whether the calendar year changes and the definition of where something is a wetland changes, it would be much more stable,' Osher said. 'For future planning and permit pulling, you would know what area of the land that you're looking at is a wetland.'
Environmental organizations including Maine Audubon and Sierra Club Maine also testified in support of the bill, again emphasizing the stability an updated definition could provide, especially as more extreme weather patterns have shaped Maine's coast in recent years.
Bill Ferdinand, an attorney with Eaton Peabody in Augusta who spoke on behalf of the American Council of Engineering Companies of Maine, said the organization had similar questions as some of the legislators regarding impact. While he didn't speak for or against the bill, Ferdinand suggested there could be alternatives that may have less of an impact such as using the average tide.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
California Supreme Court rejects GOP effort to halt Newsom's redistricting push
The California Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected a petition filed by state Republican legislators seeking to halt Gov. Gavin Newsom's (D) plan to redistrict California's congressional map. 'Petitioners have failed to meet their burden of establishing a basis for relief at this time under California Constitution article IV, section 8,' reads a brief order posted to the docket. Newsom has hit back at Republican redistricting efforts in Texas by pushing for a special election this November to get voters' approval on a more favorable House map for Democrats in California in time for the 2026 midterms. The ruling paves the way for the California Legislature to proceed with voting as soon as Thursday on a package that would set up the special election. Republicans' legal challenge revolved around a 30-day waiting period mandated under the state constitution before an introduced bill can be passed, unless three-fourths of lawmakers agree to waive the requirement. Democrats looked to get around the requirement by gutting the text of bills introduced in February and replacing them with the redistricting plans. Four state Republican legislators — Sen. Tony Strickland, Sen. Suzette Martinez Valladares, Assemblymember Tri Ta and Assemblymember Kate Sanchez — went to the state's high court Tuesday seeking to effectively block the effort. The petition sought to stop Democrats from moving ahead until Sept. 18, far past the window that state officials have said would be necessary to prepare for a Nov. 4 election. The lawmakers' attorneys acknowledged in court filings that it was a case of first impression but said permitting Democrats' strategy would be 'comically absurd.' In a joint statement, the lawmakers stressed the court did not explain its ruling and said it is 'not the end of this fight.' 'This means Governor Newsom and the Democrats' plan to gut the voter-created Citizens Redistricting Commission, silence public input, and stick taxpayers with a $200+ million bill will proceed,' the statement reads. 'We will continue to challenge this unconstitutional power grab in the courts and at the ballot box. Californians deserve fair, transparent elections, not secret backroom deals to protect politicians,' it continued. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword


Politico
4 hours ago
- Politico
Redistricting tests Trump's finely tuned influence machine
Marrying the two, Trump has a singular strategy that he's employed to great effect so far this term to compel Republican lawmakers into supporting his appointees and legislative agenda. There are very few exceptions, in part because Trump has made clear the consequences for dissent. Trump and his team have repeatedly threatened primary challenges for GOP lawmakers who do not bend to his will, going as far as standing up a super PAC that's raising millions of dollars to target Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) for voting against the 'big, beautiful bill.' And the White House is vetting potential primary challengers to Massie, including Kentucky state Sen. Aaron Reed, who traveled to Washington for a meeting last month, two people familiar with the trip confirmed to POLITICO. 'Incumbent presidents have broad sway over their party…The only real difference is that Trump will operate with language and threats we haven't seen from other presidents,' said Doug Heye, a GOP strategist who has worked for House Republican leadership. 'He's more YOLO than lame duck.' The White House did not respond to a request for comment. Now Trump and his team are trying their playbook on GOP governors and state lawmakers as they push as many red states as possible into mid-decade redistricting. They are on the cusp of success in Texas, where the Republican-controlled Legislature is imposing a new map designed to net the party five seats. Missouri Republicans are widely expected to follow suit when they return to Jefferson City in September for their annual veto session — despite still smarting from a knock-down, drag-out redistricting fight just two years ago in which they ultimately rejected drawing an additional GOP district. While Republicans in the state Legislature are reluctant to revisit the difficult inter-party politics at play, the Trump administration is working to force them to submit anyway, calling up Gov. Mike Kehoe and local lawmakers who have expressed skepticism about the effort. There's also a less direct form of pressure at play — one that has guided GOP decision-making throughout Trump's time as the party's standard-bearer.


Fox News
4 hours ago
- Fox News
WATCH LIVE: California State Assembly considers Democrat-backed redistricting efforts
California state Democrats are pushing new redistricting efforts as a new Trump-backed congressional map makes its way through the Texas legislature.