AUGUSTA – Rep. Terrence McKenney did not intend to kick the hornet’s nest that is the debate over the future of Sears Island, but kick it he did with LD 277.

The bill, proposed at the outset of the current legislative session, would direct the state Department of Transportation to manage the 941-acre state-owned island “primarily for industrial and commercial purposes.”

Industrial and commercial uses are not the kinds of activities being contemplated for most of the island by a Searsport town committee planning for Sears Island.

Committee Chairwoman Dianne Smith said Friday committee members were not pleased to learn about McKenney’s bill, which they believe fails to “respect the process” the town has been engaged in since residents rejected a liquefied natural gas terminal that had been briefly considered for the island more than a year ago.

McKenney, of Cumberland, is the ranking Republican member of the Legislature’s Transportation Committee. When he read newspaper stories in recent months about the possibility of the state Department of Conservation taking over management of the island – an idea proposed by members of Smith’s committee – McKenney wanted to assert DOT’s control of the island’s fate.

“There’s been a lot of misunderstanding about this bill,” McKenney said Friday.

“I just wanted to ensure that Sears Island would continue to be an economic development tool,” he said.

The northwest quadrant of Sears Island has rare deep-water access in a naturally protected port, McKenney said, and he does not want to see DOT lose control of that economic asset.

When the town committee formed last year to study future uses of the island, a DOT representative was included on the panel. He later stepped down to avoid a perception of conflict of interest, but the DOT has continued to monitor the planning closely.

And while the DOT has indicated it would not oppose passive, recreational uses for most of the island, it has asserted its intent to retain 280 acres in the northwest quadrant for possible future port uses. No port uses are being considered now, Transportation Commissioner David Cole has said, but the state wants to keep such transportation options viable.

Though his proposal would have the DOT manage the island “primarily” for industrial and commercial uses, McKenney said, he did not mean to imply that most of the island would be developed for those activities.

“That’s not the intent,” he said. “The intent is to leave it up to DOT.”

Such language conflicts would be handled during the legislative process, McKenney said.

“That’s why we have hearings,” he said.

McKenney said he has heard that he plans to advocate for an LNG terminal on the island, a notion he dismisses as ridiculous.

“I don’t want to lose it for economic development,” he said. “It’s a transportation asset.”

Smith said the bill is unnecessary because the DOT has not been shy about asserting its control over the 280 acres, and the town committee has agreed to leave that portion of the island out of its plans. Members have discussed a walking trail that would pass through the DOT acreage.

“I think the Department of Transportation is doing a pretty good job of protecting that,” she said.

A memorandum of understanding between the DOT and the town, a draft of which is scheduled to come before selectmen on Tuesday, also reserves DOT’s control of the 280 acres, she said. After initial suspicions about DOT, the town has come to believe the state is acting in good faith on Sears Island, she added.

Told that McKenney did not intend for his bill to exclude other uses for the remaining 660 acres, Smith remained skeptical.

“That is not what his bill is saying,” she said.

LD 277 has been referred to the Transportation Committee.