An Act To Modify the Citizen Initiative Process
Maine Legislature, Session 124, LD 0235
Committee: Legal and Veterans Affairs
Sponsors: CAIN, MILLS, CAREY, MILLER, PINGREE, PIOTTI, ROTUNDO, BARTLETT, MITCHELL, ROSEN
Amends: 21-A MRSA §901

Legislative Document 
No. 235 
H.P.189 
House of Representatives, January 23,2009 
An Act To Modify the Citizen Initiative Process 
Reference to the Committee on Legal and Veterans Affairs suggested and ordered printed. 
Presented by Representative CAIN of Orono, 
Cosponsored by Senator MILLS of Somerset and 
'7Y/~ 1J? 71!tU~{ 
MILLICENT M. MacFARLAND 
Clerk 
Representatives: CAREY of Lewiston, MILLER of Somerville, Speaker PINGREE of North 
Haven, PIOTTI of Unity, ROTUNDO of Lewiston, Senators: BARTLETT of Cumberland, 
President MITCHELL of Kennebec, ROSEN of Hancock. 
PrilHeJ llli recycleLi pap .... r 
. ., 
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows: 
Sec. 1. 2l-A MRSA §901, sub-§3-A, as amended by PL 2007, c. 234, §1, is 
further amended to read: 
3-A. Review for proper form. The Secretary of State shall review the proposed law 
for a direct initiative of legislation within 10 business days after receipt of the application 
and either reject the application or provide a fIrst revised draft of the initiative legislation 
to the applicant within that time. The Secretary of State may rej ect the application if the 
Secretary of State determines that the proposed law: 
A. 
Does not conform to the form prescribed by the Secretary of State; or 
lOB. Does not conform to the essential aspects of the drafting conventions established 
for the Maine Revised Statutes. The drafting conventions include but are not limited 
to: 
(1) 
Correct allocation to the statutes and correct integration with existing 
statutes; 
(2) Bill titles and statute section headnotes that objectively reflect the content of 
the bill, section or sections to which they apply; 
(3) Conformity to the statutory numbering system; and 
(4) Ensuring that bills enacting statutes do not contain provisions that describe 
intent or malce testimonial statements without creating a legal requirement or 
duty. 
By consent of the applicant the proposed law may be modified to conform with the 
requirements of this section. The Secretary of State may request assistance from the 
Revisor of Statutes in reviewing the proposed law. 
The Secretary of State shall request assistance from the Office of Fiscal and Program 
Review to determine whether the proposed law will have a fiscal impact. The Office of 
Fiscal and Program Review shall prepare an estimate of the fiscal impact of the proposed 
law on state revenues, appropriations and allocations. The fiscal impact estimate must 
summarize the aggregate impact that the proposed law will have on the General Fund, the 
Highway Fund, Other Special Revenue Funds and the amounts distributed by the State to 
local units of government. If the Office of Fiscal and Program Review determines that 
the proposed law has a cost other than the cost associated with conducting a referendum 
on the proposed law, the applicant shall indicate in a subsequent draft of the legislation 
submitted to the Secretary of State how the cost ofthe proposed law will be funded. 
The applicant shall submit each subsequent draft of the legislation to the Secretary of 
State for review following the same process. The Secretary of State shall review each 
subsequent draft from the applicant and provide a revised draft or written response 
suggesting how the proposed law may be modified "to conforrri with the requirements of 
this section within 10 business days. The applicant must give written consent to the final 
language of the proposed law to the Secretary of State before the petition form is 
designed by the Secretary of State. 
') 
./' 
) 
') 
('\ 
( 
\ 
Sec. 2. 21-A MRSA §901, suh-§4, as amended by PL 2007, c. 234, §2, is further 
amended to read: 
4. Ballot question. The ballot question for aH: a direct initiative or a people's veto 
referendum must be drafted by the Secretary of State in accordance with section 906 and 
rules adopted in accordance with the Maine Administrative Procedure Act. The Secretary 
of State shall provide the ballot question to the applicant for a people's veto referendum 
within 10 business days after receipt of a properly completed application. If aH: a direct 
initiative is filed with the Secretary of State and certified pursuant to the Constitution of 
Maine, Article N, Part Third, Section 18 as having a sufficient number of signatures and 
is not enacted without change by the Legislature at the session at which it is presented, 
then the Secretary of State shall propose a ballot question to be submitted for public 
comment as provided in section 905-A. If a direct initiative is determined pursuant to 
subsection 3-A to have a cost other than the cost associated with conducting a referendum 
on the direct initiative, the Secretary of State shall include in the ballot question 
information on the cost of the direct initiative and how that cost will be paid. 
Sec. 3. 21-A MRS A §901, suh-§8 is enacted to read: 
8. Lack of funding. If a direct initiative is determined pursuant to subsection 3-A 
to have' a cost other than the cost associated with conducting a referendum on the direct 
initiative and a means of paying for or accounting for the cost is not included in the 
legislation, then the direct initiative may not be enacted into law until it is funded through 
the normal legislative process. 
SUMMARY 
This bill requires the Secretary of State to request assistance from the Office of Fiscal 
and Program Review to determine whether a direct initiative will have a fiscal impact. If 
the Office of Fiscal and Program Review determines that the direct initiative has a cost 
other than the cost associated with conducting a referendum on the direct initiative, the 
person who submitted the direct initiative must indicate in a subsequent draft of the direct 
initiative submitted to the Secretary of State how the cost of the direct initiative will be 
paid. The bill also requires the Secretary of State to include in the ballot question 
information on the cost of the direct initiative and how that cost will be paid. The bill 
also indicates that if a means of paying for or accounting for the cost is not included in 
the legislation, then the direct initiative may not be enacted into law until it is funded 
through the normal legislative process.