‘Defective’ Petitions

Training for: Legal Notes

As we’ve noted here before, there are a variety of reasons why a town meeting petition may be rejected (see “Voter Petitions: What’s a ‘Reasonable’ Refusal,” Maine Townsman, Legal Notes, March 2010). For instance, if it lacks the requisite number of signatures or fails to request a meeting or include a proposed warrant article. Or it is unintelligible. Or it calls for action that is beyond the voters’ authority. Or it asks for reconsideration of a recent vote. Or it demands an immediate meeting but the subject matter is not an emergency.

These are all legitimate grounds for refusing a town meeting petition. But there are other technicalities that would not justify rejecting a petition as “defective.” These include:

Petition not addressed to selectmen. Though it is customary for a town meeting petition to be addressed to the selectmen, no law explicitly requires it. Provided the petition clearly asks for a town meeting vote, and presupposing that it bears the required number of signatures, meets all other legal requirements, and is otherwise lawful, it should be honored.

Petition not delivered to selectmen. As long as the petition is physically delivered to an official who is customarily an agent or intermediary for the selectmen, such as the clerk or the selectmen’s secretary or assistant, this should be sufficient.

Petition fails to specify “article.” If it is reasonably clear what the proposed question is, without guesswork or additional drafting, the failure to characterize it as an “article” should not disqualify the petition. (But if a petition proposes adoption of an ordinance but does not include the wording of the ordinance itself, it is legally insufficient – the selectmen are not required to draft anything.)

Petition includes multiple articles. The law does not limit town meeting petitions to just one article apiece, so this shouldn’t disqualify the petition.

Petition includes both legal and illegal articles. This does not justify rejecting the entire petition. Only those articles that are illegal should be refused; the others should go to the voters, again assuming the petition is signed by a sufficient number of voters and complies with all other legal requirements.

Alert readers will recall that there are some significant new legal requirements for voter petitions, including: (1) circulators must be Maine residents and registered voters somewhere in Maine; (2) they must personally witness all signatures to the petition; and (3) they must verify this by circulator’s affidavit (a signed, notarized statement). These are not mere “technicalities” that may be overlooked – failure to fully comply with them justifies refusing a petition. For full details, see “New Requirements for Local Petition,” Maine Townsman, Legal Notes, April 2016. (By R.P.F.)

As we’ve noted here before, there are a variety of reasons why a town meeting petition may be rejected (see “Voter Petitions: What’s a ‘Reasonable’ Refusal,” Maine Townsman, Legal Notes, March 2010). For instance, if it lacks the requisite number of signatures or fails to request a meeting or include a proposed warrant article. Or it is unintelligible. Or it calls for action that is beyond the voters’ authority. Or it asks for reconsideration of a recent vote. Or it demands an immediate meeting but the subject matter is not an emergency.

These are all legitimate grounds for refusing a town meeting petition. But there are other technicalities that would not justify rejecting a petition as “defective.” These include:

Petition not addressed to selectmen. Though it is customary for a town meeting petition to be addressed to the selectmen, no law explicitly requires it. Provided the petition clearly asks for a town meeting vote, and presupposing that it bears the required number of signatures, meets all other legal requirements, and is otherwise lawful, it should be honored.

Petition not delivered to selectmen. As long as the petition is physically delivered to an official who is customarily an agent or intermediary for the selectmen, such as the clerk or the selectmen’s secretary or assistant, this should be sufficient.

Petition fails to specify “article.” If it is reasonably clear what the proposed question is, without guesswork or additional drafting, the failure to characterize it as an “article” should not disqualify the petition. (But if a petition proposes adoption of an ordinance but does not include the wording of the ordinance itself, it is legally insufficient – the selectmen are not required to draft anything.)

Petition includes multiple articles. The law does not limit town meeting petitions to just one article apiece, so this shouldn’t disqualify the petition.

Petition includes both legal and illegal articles. This does not justify rejecting the entire petition. Only those articles that are illegal should be refused; the others should go to the voters, again assuming the petition is signed by a sufficient number of voters and complies with all other legal requirements.

Alert readers will recall that there are some significant new legal requirements for voter petitions, including: (1) circulators must be Maine residents and registered voters somewhere in Maine; (2) they must personally witness all signatures to the petition; and (3) they must verify this by circulator’s affidavit (a signed, notarized statement). These are not mere “technicalities” that may be overlooked – failure to fully comply with them justifies refusing a petition. For full details, see “New Requirements for Local Petition,” Maine Townsman, Legal Notes, April 2016. (By R.P.F.)