AUGUSTA – Supporters of two unrelated gambling bills told lawmakers Friday their proposals would dramatically improve the quality of life for two groups facing rising poverty and a stagnant economy: Maine’s Indian tribes and the people of Greater Bangor.

The hearing before the Legislature’s Judiciary Committee on plans by the Penobscot Indian Nation and the Passamaquoddy Tribe to construct a $650 million casino in southern Maine was attended by about 100 people, more than half of whom were represented by tribal members or casino backers.

An afternoon hearing before the Legal and Veterans Affairs Committee on a proposal to install slot machines at Bangor Raceway attracted about 50 people and only one opponent, the Baldacci administration.

The hearings were perceived by several lawmakers as largely pro forma exercises since both bills were automatically triggered under Maine law after gambling proponents launched successful citizen initiatives to place the questions on the Nov. 4 ballot.

Lawmakers may not amend either bill and can only give the measures an up-or-down vote. They may offer a competing measure to appear on the ballot with one or both of the referendum questions. Affirmative votes of at least two-thirds of the House and Senate would be needed for the Legislature to send the question to the voters. That unlikely prospect would make a threatened veto of both bills by Gov. John E. Baldacci irrelevant.

In an effort to avoid the complexities of the legislative process, supporters of both proposals actually urged the committee members to give the bills an “ought-not-to-pass” recommendation, which would automatically send the questions directly to the voters without further interference from lawmakers.

The casino bill, LD 1370, was touted by many tribal members as the Penobscots’ and Passamaquoddys’ last realistic hope of obtaining any significant amount of money for economic development. The Penobscot Indian Nation owns land in central and northern Penobscot County, while the Passmaquoddys maintain two reservations in Washington County. Both regions are desperately seeking stability in an ever-changing economic landscape.

Sen. Kevin Shorey, R-Calais, told his fellow lawmakers that the tribal casino did not represent a false economy simply because its revenues were derived from gambling – an activity he described as widely recognized in the rest of the country as part of the tourism industry. Pointing to casino critics who would rather see economic development expand in the manufacturing sector, Shorey said recent layoffs and shutdowns in northern Maine’s papermaking industry were harbingers of the new economic realities facing the region.

“We only have to look towards Millinocket, or more recently Old Town, to see that the industries that do ‘make things’ are not secure in Maine and neither are the jobs they represent,” he said. “I just can’t imagine turning away an employer and a taxpayer of this size based on some theory that tourism isn’t ‘real’ economic development.”

Joe Socobasin, the 30-year-old Passamaquoddy lieutenant governor at Indian Township, told the committee he was “lucky” to have always had a job. But he conceded the same could not be said for many tribal members who choose to remain in Washington County. Since Maine and the tribes expect to split about $200 million annually from the casino profits, Socobasin said the new injection of revenue would give a desperately needed cash infusion to regions of the state where it is needed most.

“Think what a difference we can make when we have the profits from the casino to reinvest in our people and in businesses in Washington County,” he said.

There were several opponents from York County, where the tribes have found a willing potential partner in the town of Sanford. Most of the opposition to the plan came from southern York County business owners, who worried a casino would siphon off tourist dollars and deplete the local work force. Representing the Baldacci administration, Michael Cantara, commissioner of the Department of Public Safety, said the social and economic costs of a casino far outweighed any benefit associated with gambling.

“We believe that casinos represent a false pretense of strong economic growth,” he said. “Casinos may be consistent with a ‘get rich quick, easy money’ view of economic growth. They are, however, inconsistent with the administration’s vision of productive, long-term economic growth.”

As many as 1,500 slot machines operating on a year-round basis would be coming to Bangor’s Bass Park harness racing complex under LD 1371. Shawn Scott, of Capital Seven LLC, said his proposal would allow slot machines at Maine’s commercial tracks, which currently include Bangor Raceway and Scarborough Downs. Officials at Scarborough Downs said they do not support Scott’s legislation in its current form and are instead backing a similar measure that will be presented to the lawmakers next week.

The slot plan, which faces a local referendum vote in Bangor on June 10, was described by Scott as an exciting new form of economic development for the city and the region. Although 70 percent of the gambling profits would remain with Scott’s organization as the track’s licensee, 25 percent would go to the state’s General Fund and 5 percent would be given to the city of Bangor.

“We were attracted to the Bangor Raceway because it presents a great opportunity to breathe new life into the track and Maine’s harness racing industry while providing meaningful economic benefits to the Bangor region and the state of Maine,” Scott said.

Scott was enthusiastically supported by one of his employees, David Nealley, who introduced himself as a representative of Capital Seven and as a member of the Bangor City Council said the Bangor region couldn’t afford to be as “choosy” as some areas of the state when it came to economic development. He cited poverty rates of 20 percent in Washington County, 17 percent in Aroostook County and 15 percent in Piscataquis County as reasons why the state needed to take advantage of the economic opportunity the so-called “racino” would provide.

“And we’re supposed to be at 141/2 percent in Penobscot, but my guess is that it’s gotten worse,” he said, adding that the slot machine proposal had already provided new employment to the area by employing him. “There’s one new job already and it’s a good job and it’s the only job I have.”

Nealley, who occasionally referred to himself in the third person, seemed to confuse at least two members of the Legal and Veterans Affairs Committee, who were having trouble determining whether the proponent was speaking for Capital Seven, the Bangor City Council or himself. Rep. Kevin Glynn, R-South Portland, probed the issue twice and received the following response.

“David Nealley has opinions whether he’s on the Bangor City Council or not or whether he works for Capital Seven or not,” Nealley said. “I’m answering as David Nealley and all the capacities that David Nealley fills.”

After the hearing, Glynn, a former City Council member in South Portland, said he had hoped Bangor could have sent a representative that could have delivered a clearer and less subsidized message.

“It was very problematic for me,” Glynn said. “On one hand, he said he was speaking for his citizens. On the other hand he said he was speaking on behalf of the company. I’m sure it’s not just a coincidence that the company chose a sitting city councilor for an employee in their quest to obtain local approval. I think that actually harms his reputation and harms the reputation of Capital Seven.”

Only Cantara spoke against the proposal, citing similar arguments as those outlined in his response to the tribal bill. A work session and likely vote on the Bangor slots bill has not yet been scheduled. Similar action for the casino bill has tentatively been set for April 30.