Missed petition deadline at issue

By PAUL CARRIER, Portland Press Herald Writer

Copyright © 2006 Blethen Maine Newspapers Inc.

E-mail this story to a friend

Today's Question Each day, we ask MaineToday.com readers for their reactions to events in the news: This survey is not scientific. The results are a snapshot of what readers who choose to take the survey are thinking. It is designed to allow readers to interact with the news of the day, and is not intended to be used for reference purposes. The survey questions are created daily by the MaineToday.com staff. If you have questions, comments or suggestions about the online survey, you can e-mail us. See the results of past questions from the past seven days and find out about how the survey works, check Previous Days' Questions. To top of story

AUGUSTA — Maine's secretary of state accepted tax reform referendum petitions bearing more than 4,000 signatures even though they were submitted three days after the statutory deadline last October. That decision is prompting questions from a state legislator who is wary of the so-called taxpayer bill of rights, which would cap government spending and make it harder to raise taxes.

Democratic Sen. Ethan Strimling of Portland said Wednesday that state officials probably should not have accepted all of the petitions because some of them came in after the Oct. 21 deadline spelled out in state law.

Strimling has not challenged the state's decision in Superior Court, which is the only way to get a binding ruling on the issue. He does not plan to go to court, he said, because he is not sure the state broke the law.

It remained unclear Wednesday whether any of the many groups opposing the referendum will file a court challenge.

The referendum, to be held on June 13 or Nov. 7, would peg any growth in state spending to inflation and population increases, and limit spending increases at other levels of government.

Tax and fee increases would require two-thirds votes by the Legislature, town council or other governing body, followed by majority approval by voters.

Strimling raised the timing issue in letters to Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap, whose office accepted the late petitions, and to Attorney General Steven Rowe, who is being asked for a legal opinion on the matter.

Chuck Dow, Rowe's spokesman, said Rowe had no comment because he had not yet seen Strimling's letter.

Mary Adams of Garland and other activists who support the measure submitted 58,151 signatures. Dunlap ruled Tuesday that 51,611 were valid, topping the 50,519 threshold required by the state Constitution.

Most of the signatures came in on time, but 4,024 were not filed until Oct. 24 - three days after the deadline.

Without that last batch of petitions, organizers may not have had enough valid signatures to qualify for a spot on the ballot, so the issue is far from academic.

In his ruling Tuesday, Dunlap wrote that referendum organizers planned to file that last box of petitions with the others on Oct. 21, but inadvertently left the lone box behind when they delivered the rest of the signatures to the state.

Dunlap said Wednesday that the late petitions were "unimpeachably" circulated, notarized and certified by municipal officials before the deadline, so he accepted them after consulting with election experts in his office and lawyers in the Attorney General's Office.

Dunlap said the courts have said the rules governing citizen-initiated referendums "should be liberally construed to facilitate the people's sovereign right to legislate" at the ballot box.

The fact that one box of petitions was left behind on Oct. 21 was "a stupid mistake" by the organizers, Dunlap conceded. "The question is, do you penalize them for it?"

Dunlap said he was "just trying to be reasonable and do the right thing," but he said Strimling has raised a valid question.

Strimling contends that a deadline is just that - the last legally valid date for taking action. In this case, he wrote to Rowe Wednesday, "it appears to clearly be a violation of the letter of the law for the petitioners to turn in signatures after the statutory deadline in order to boost signature totals."

If that is not the case, Strimling wrote, "future petitioners need to know where the timeline is drawn," so they will know how late they can submit petitions.

In his letter to Dunlap, Strimling asked where the late box of petitions was stored between the Oct. 21 deadline and the Oct. 24 filing, "the level of security" that existed during that delay, why referendum organizers believe the late petitions are valid and what precedent exists for finding that they are valid.

Adams, who described those who want to derail the referendum as "scalawags," took Strimling's letters in stride, saying the Oct. 21 deadline spelled out in state law conflicts with a Jan. 30 deadline spelled out in the state Constitution.

"I'm going to hang my hat on the Maine Constitution," she said, "but Ethan Strimling can do whatever he wants."

Staff Writer Paul Carrier can be contacted at 622-7511 or at:

To top of page