AUGUSTA – A bill that would restrict public access to some information the state gathers as part of the racino licensing process was tabled Wednesday, pending a review by the Legislature’s Judiciary Committee.

During a work session at the State House, members of the Legislature’s Legal and Veterans Affairs Committee voted 10-2 to table the bill, LD 90, to comply with a change made last year to the state’s Freedom of Access law. The change requires that any new exceptions to the right-to-know law undergo a review to determine if they are warranted and in the public’s best interest.

The legal and veterans affairs panel plans to continue its work on the bill at 1:15 p.m. Feb. 7 at the State House.

Because LD 90 is the first bill subject to the new provision, legal committee members grappled with whether the committee could submit the original version or if they needed to hammer out a final version before requesting the review.

“I think the debate we’re having is [which comes first] the chicken or the egg?” Rep. David Ott, R-York, a committee member, said.

The confidentiality bill, submitted at the Maine Gambling Control Board’s request, would allow Penn National Gaming Inc. and other license applicants to submit sensitive personal and corporate information to state gaming regulators with the understanding that the information would remain under wraps.

What happens with the bill is critical to Penn National’s plans to develop a $75 million racetrack casino at Bass Park, home to Bangor Raceway. Without assurance that such information will be protected, Penn National officials say they cannot submit the rest of the information state gaming regulators need to complete the slots operator licensing process.

In addition, Penn National spokesman Eric Schippers said last week that the state’s inability to keep personal and propriety information under wraps has prevented a slots distributor from stepping forward.

Rep. Patricia Blanchette, D-Bangor, a committee member, minced no words in expressing her feelings about the delay.

“I guess I’m having some problems with this committee,” Blanchette said. Maine’s inability to protect racino application information, unlike other gambling states, was an inexcusable oversight, as she saw it, especially given the number of lawyers involved so far.

“That somebody didn’t pick up on this [omission] is causing some people heartburn,” she said, adding that the oversight is fueling a perception that lawmakers are “dragging our feet” with regard to creating the legal and regulatory framework needed to get the racino up and running.

“I hate to be repetitive, but I’m going to have to hammer it in again,” she said, adding, “I’m the only one sitting at this table with a dog in this fight. … I’m just not comfortable with the delay tactics I’m seeing.”

“I’m personally not satisfied with the bill as written,” Sen. Kenneth Gagnon, D-Waterville, committee co-chairman, said in recommending the bill be tabled. He said the judiciary panel review should take place first because it made little sense to hammer out a final version and submit it for review only to have to amend it later.

“My thought was we would go ahead and let them take this bill in raw form,” he said, adding that the judiciary committee also would be given testimony from last week’s public hearing to consider as part of the review.

Rep. John Tuttle, D-Sanford, said it was important that the committee get it right the first time.

“Unless we do it right, we’re not going to get the two-thirds [voted needed to enact the LD 90 as emergency legislation],” the committee member said.

Public Safety Commissioner Michael Cantara said Wednesday he is working with staff from the Attorney General’s Office on an amended version of the confidentiality bill that should be ready in time for next week’s work session.

“I believe we can craft a bill that will address the concerns that have been raised,” he said.

Opponents and supporters of the bill weighed in during a public hearing last week. People on both sides of the issue agreed such information as Social Security numbers and birth dates should remain under wraps.

But some – including Chief Deputy Attorney General Linda Pistner – thought LD 90 went too far in extending confidentiality to such areas as criminal and civil litigation histories, which already are a matter of public record, and because some definitions of what would be protected were overly broad and vague.

Schippers said last week that the criminal and civil litigation history was “not an issue” for Penn because if its key employees had such issues in their backgrounds they would not be licensed in other states.