SDP PRESS RELEASE -Sept 23, 2005: With 3966 signatures required, SDP submits 4500 signed petitions for ballot question with more to be submitted Monday.

First, we thank all 4500 citizens of Somerville that signed the petition. Below is a condensed version of a letter to the Somerville Journal's editor by Christina Bolton, Spring Hill Neighborhood Coordinator that explains the events that led to the refusal by the city to accept the 4500 petitions gathered by SDP.

Before the Somerville Divestment Project began collecting signatures in the spring, we read all the state and city laws on ballot question initiatives. We spoke to the State Elections Department who told us that under Chapter 53- Section 18A we could begin collecting petition signatures at any time, and that the form we use need only be "substantially similar" to the state form. We also spoke to people in the city's elections office who told us we could use any form we like as long as the names and addresses were legible and the form was signed, they even said "you can write them on notebook paper if you need to, the form doesn't matter."

However, on August 9th we received the City Solicitor's opinion which said we'd have to use some special form the city came up with and that we could only begin collecting signatures 90 days before the election. The city's form changed all the language on the petition we'd submitted to the Board of Alderman, earlier in the summer. We'd filed as a Ballot Question Committee months before and we filed the petition with the Board of Alderman as we were supposed to which is at least 90 days before the election. Thus, the city had plenty of time and many opportunities to tell us of its "opinions".

Our lawyers thought that the city's action of changing the petition's original language may have been just another way to trap us into a different technicality: a form that does not have the language submitted to the Board of Alderman is not valid. Our lawyers filed an immediate injuction against the city and encouraged us to go on collecting signatures with our original form. They pointed out that the laws, as written, do not rule that the city has the right to come up with its own form, nor to set a 90-day before the election proclamation.

Eventually, our case was heard by a judge. He denied an inmediate unjuction: he said the city demanded use of its form and that we should have used it, even after admitting that the form was fatally flawed because the change in language made it invalid. The judge also commented on how the city inappropriately "took the heart" out of the petition.

SDP is now filing suit to get the city to accept the petition. The MA constitution gives citizens the right to petition government without government changing the petition. As the case progresses in court, we will post updates.

Excellent report by The Bridge: City Hall blocks Somerville divestment petition

Other commentaries:
City should be proud of divestment effort
by Bob Cable, SDP Coordinator, Union Square area
Somerville Divestment Project: What will it take to win?
by John Spritzler, SDP member