§ 4302, it would have either expressed its intent in the statutory language or legislative history or, more likely, expressly enacted one.” Larrabee, 486 A.2d at 101. [¶ 19] Although Delekto, an abutting land owner, violated a land use ordinance and committed a nuisance pursuant to 30-A M.R.S.A. § 4302, the Legislature, in enacting section 4302, did not intend to provide the Charltons with a cause of action for nuisance. Instead, by enacting 30-A M.R.S.A. § 4452, it provided the Town with an enforcement mechanism. Specifically, section 4452 gives a municipality, and only a municipality, the authority to enforce land use regulations. Accordingly, only municipalities may bring an action for violations of such regulations. Herrle v. Town of Waterboro, 2001 ME 1, ¶ 11, 763 A.2d 1159, 1162 (<HOLDING>). The trial court, therefore, did not err in
recognizing that private citizens do not have standing to initiate proceedings to enforce municipal zoning regulations recognizing third partys right to initiate dependency proceedings under chapter 39 holding that religious corporation which owned property had standing to challenge zoning ordinance holding that general creditors do not have standing to contest forfeitures holding that zoning boards of appeal do not have the inherent power to grant a rehearing