AUGUSTA — Whether Maine voters will be asked to repeal a law that calls for major changes to the state tax code will be decided in the coming weeks, as two petition-related lawsuits make their way through the court system.
On Tuesday, Charles L. "Wick" Johnson III of Hallowell sued Secretary of State Matt Dunlap, challenging his decision to certify people's veto petitions.
The lawsuit says Dunlap made mistakes when he ruled that Still Fed Up With Taxes had 56,107 valid signatures to call for a vote in June.
A second lawsuit, filed earlier this month, alleges that Dunlap lost his authority to certify the signatures when he missed the 30-day deadline to complete the work.
Dan Billings, a Waterville attorney representing Maine Republican Party Chairman Charlie Webster, said he believes the two lawsuits against Dunlap should be heard together.
Billings contends that because Dunlap missed the deadline, the issue should go directly to voters. "If we're correct, the secretary's decision and (Johnson's) appeal are moot," he said. "There should be no appeal."
The law would make major changes to the state's tax structure. With Democratic support, Gov. John Baldacci signed a bill into law in June to lower the top marginal income tax rate from 8.5 percent to 6.5 percent for people earning less than $250,000 a year.
It would eliminate deductions and exemptions by replacing them with a credit system that Maine Revenue Services estimates would lower the income tax for 95 percent of Mainers. The law also would expand the sales tax to dozens of additional goods and services.
Republicans who opposed the law started a repeal campaign this summer and turned in signatures in September to call for a vote.
When he announced his decision certifying the signatures, Dunlap threw out 14,928 signatures as invalid, for a variety of reasons. The group still had 1,020 signatures more than it needed to call for a referendum.
But John Paterson of Bernstein Shur in Portland, the attorney representing Johnson, said a review shows Dunlap should have thrown out "an extensive number" of other signatures, including entire pages circulated by people who were not registered Maine voters.
When asked whether 1,021 additional signatures are invalid – the number required to keep the question off the June ballot – Paterson said, "We think they missed more than that."
Reader comments
Click here to view or add comments on this story
Were you interviewed for this story? If so, please fill out our accuracy form