House rejects bill to place entire Sears Island under conservation easement

Representative Paul of Winterport led an extended floor debate opposing LD 226, a bill that would have directed the state to place the entirety of Sears Island under a conservation easement. "This bill would put the entirety of Sears Island into a conservation easement, ending decades of division and strife for the people of Penobscot Bay region, protecting an irreplaceable natural resource, and maintaining the economic benefit the island provides to the area," Paul said on the House floor.

Supporters of the bill, including Passamaquoddy tribal representative Aaron Dana, argued the measure would protect a site of cultural and ecological importance and said renewable energy goals can be pursued without sacrificing sacred lands. "By supporting and moving to pass LD 226, we show that Maine is capable of leading on climate, while also honoring its commitments to justice, equity, and indigenous rights," Dana told members.

Why it matters: The bill would have removed the smaller transportation parcel held for future marine uses and directed the Department of Transportation to forfeit that land, effectively placing the island entirely in conservation status. Proponents said the change would end decades of uncertainty for local communities and indigenous peoples; opponents said it would break a long-standing 2007 consensus that conserved two-thirds of the island while retaining roughly one-third for potential marine transportation or port needs.

Key debate points: Supporters described Sears Island as an undeveloped coastal sanctuary and emphasized its cultural importance to Wabanaki peoples. Aaron Dana said the island is "a sacred place for the Wabanaki tribes" and urged members to "stand with the Wabanaki peoples." Opponents cited the 2007 stakeholder agreement and said the state needs to preserve capacity for marine-transportation projects and future economic development; Representative Dudera described the site as a "941 acre island" and noted an existing causeway, jetty and other infrastructure. Several members cited federal grant denials and state spending on prior development planning as part of their arguments; Representative Paul said the state had spent "almost $4,000,000 of Maine taxpayer money just since 2020" pursuing a port at Sears Island.

Action and outcome: The House voted to accept the committee's majority recommendation that the bill "ought not to pass." The chair announced the final tally as recorded in the transcript: 76 in favor, 68 opposed; the motion prevailed and the committee recommendation was accepted, meaning the bill will not advance.

Background: Two-thirds of Sears Island (about 600 acres) was placed under permanent conservation in 2009 with Maine Coast Heritage Trust as easement holder; roughly one-third remained under state control for possible marine-transportation uses under a 2007 consensus agreement. The 2024 state announcement naming Sears Island a preferred site for a floating offshore wind hub sharpened debate over whether to retain the transportation parcel.

What's next: With the House accepting the "ought not to pass" report, LD 226 will not proceed from the House floor under current action. Supporters and opponents indicated continuing interest in both conservation measures and alternative sites and uses, and speakers urged further planning that respects both renewable energy goals and cultural sites.