A bill to raise the stipends of the members of the Land Use Regulation Commission and the Board of Environmental Protection offers lawmakers an opportunity to have an overdue conversation of the changed roles of these panels and whether updates in their structure and mandate are necessary.

LD 1969 proposes to raise the daily pay of the seven LURC members and the 10 BEP members from $55 to $100 a day. Raising their pay is a proxy for a larger question: Are the board and commission properly set up to handle increasingly complex land-use decisions?

The answer, according to Sen. Peter Mills, the bill’s sponsor, is no. His goal in proposing the pay raise was to push for the professionalization of the boards. A secondary question could be whether the boards need to remain separate. Is there a compelling need, for example, for one set of rules for wind power projects and other development in the Unorganized Territories, which are overseen by LURC, and another for the rest of the state, which is the purview of the Department of Environmental Protection? Are two sets of staffs necessary to evaluate projects based solely their location (although LURC does rely on expertise from DEP and other agencies)?

A second concern is the growing and increasingly complex workload of the two bodies. Currently, LURC is considering the state’s largest development and conservation proposal in Plum Creek Timber Co.’s rezoning request for the Moosehead Lake area, three wind power projects, a 180-mile trail and hut system, resort development in the Millinocket area and the expansion of the Saddleback ski area. It has had to postpone required revisions to its comprehensive land use plan because of the workload.

Just for the Plum Creek plan, the commission held 230 hours of public hearings in December and January. It has also hired, at the expense of Plum Creek, experts to evaluate the plan, further highlighting the shortcomings of the current set up.

In addition to the increased workload, LURC and BEP are handling increasingly complex issues such as new energy projects and resort development spread over thousands of acres. This is much different than deciding whether a camp is far enough from a lake.

Sen. Mills points to another problem with LURC – it makes the rules and then decides whether people have complied with them. In doing both legislative and judicial functions it serves like a town council, planning board and zoning board of appeals all in one. While this may be efficient, it doesn’t give landowners anywhere other than court to go when they feel a decision was wrong.

Combining the boards into one, with an appeal body, could improve the process.

Sen. Mills envisions another alternative, a full-time board of experts like the Public Utilities Commission. He estimates this would cost $500,000 a year. State budget problems make this a nonstarter.

His bill, however, should start a thorough examination of more efficient and responsive ways to regulate land use throughout the state.