Opinion
Questions Propounded by the Senate in an Order Dated February 1, 1977.
Answered March 8, 1977.
Appeal from the Supreme Judicial Court.
ARMAND A. DUFRESNE, Jr. CHARLES A. POMEROY SIDNEY W. WERNICK JAMES P. ARCHIBALD THOMAS E. DELAHANTY EDWARD S. GODFREY.
SENATE ORDER PROPOUNDING QUESTIONS State of Maine In the Year of Our Lord One Thousand Nine Hundred and Seventy-Seven
In Senate, February 1, 1977
Whereas, it appears to the Senate of the 108th Legislature that the following are important questions of law and that the occasion is a solemn one; and
Whereas, it is the desire of the 108th Legislature to enact legislation affecting the rates of the uniform property tax assessed in accordance with the Maine Revised Statutes Annotated, Title 36, section 451; and
Whereas, there is pending before the 108th Legislature and its Committee on Taxation bills entitled: "AN ACT to Provide that the Uniform Property Tax Rate Shall be Established in Conformity with Statutory Limits on Educational Funding," House Paper 6, Legislative Document 16 (Exhibit A); and "AN ACT to Reduce the Uniform Property tax by 1 1/4 Mills," House Paper 205 (Exhibit B); and "AN ACT to Insure that the Uniform Property Tax Rate Conforms to Limits on Educational Funding Established by Statute," House Paper 66, Legislative Document 91 (Exhibit C); and
Whereas, there is pending before the 108th Legislature and its Committee on Appropriations and Financial Affairs the Governor's proposed budget for fiscal years 1978 and 1979, which budget includes recommendations regarding funding for educational programs, and which budget must be enacted by appropriation's legislation during the first session of the 108th Legislature; and
Whereas, amendments to the uniform property tax which may affect proceeds of the uniform property tax in fiscal years 1978 and 1979 must be considered before any budget for fiscal years 1978 and 1979 can finally be enacted by appropriation's legislation; and
Whereas, in accordance with the provisions of the Maine Constitution, Article IV, Part Third, Section 18, there have been presented to the Legislature petitions with sufficient signatures calling for initiative legislation to repeal the uniform property tax and other laws (Exhibit D); and
Whereas, the Legislature is now in session and is expected to remain in session until May or June and a popular vote on such initiated legislation (Exhibit D) thus will not occur until after July 1, 1977; and
Whereas, the Maine Constitution, Article IV, Part Third, Section 18, has been interpreted to stay effectiveness of legislation which is construed as a substitute for initiated legislation until the initiated legislation is enacted without change or until there is a referendum on the initiated legislation and the substitute or substitutes; and
Whereas, the constitutionality of the provisions of Legislative Document 16 (Exhibit A) has been questioned as they relate to the initiative legislation which has been presented (Exhibit D) and as they relate to the Maine Constitution, Article IV, Part Third, Section 18; and
Whereas, the constitutionality of the provisions of House Paper 205 (Exhibit B) has been questioned as they relate to the provisions of the initiative legislation (Exhibit D) and as they relate to the Maine Constitution, Article IV, Part Third, Section 18; and
Whereas, the constitutionality of the provisions of Legislative Document 91 (Exhibit C) has been questioned as they relate to the provisions of the initiative legislation (Exhibit D) and as they relate to the Maine Constitution, Article IV, Part Third, Section 18; and
Whereas, it is important that the Legislature be informed as to the answers to these important and serious questions hereinafter raised; now, therefore, be it
Ordered, that the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court are hereby respectfully requested to give to the Senate, according to the provisions of the Maine Constitution, on its behalf, an opinion upon the following questions, to wit:
QUESTION #1
If the bill contained in the initiative petition (Exhibit D) is either enacted by the Legislature so that it is effective after July 1, 1977, or passed by the electorate and proclaimed by the Governor so that it is effective after July 1, 1977, will the initiative measure repeal the uniform property tax for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1977 and terminating June 30, 1978?
QUESTION #2
Will Legislative Document 16 (Exhibit A) or Legislative Document 91 (Exhibit C), if enacted with an effective date prior to July 1, 1977, alter the mill rate of the uniform property tax, (a) for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1977 and terminating June 30, 1978 and (b) for any subsequent fiscal year?
QUESTION #3
Will House Paper 205 (Exhibit B), if enacted with an effective date prior to July 1, 1977, alter the mill rate of the uniform property tax for the year beginning July 1, 1977 and terminating June 30, 1978?
EXHIBIT A (EMERGENCY) ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTH LEGISLATURE
Legislative Document No. 16
H.P. 6 Office of the Clerk of the House
Filed December 7, 1976, under Joint Rule No. 6 by Mr. Jalbert of Lewiston. To be printed and delivered to the House of Representatives of the 108th Legislature.
EDWIN H. PERT, Clerk Presented by Mr. Jalbert of Lewiston.
STATE OF MAINE IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD NINETEEN HUNDRED SEVENTY-SEVEN AN ACT to Provide that the Uniform Property Tax Rate shall be Established in Conformity with Statutory Limits on Educational Funding.Emergency preamble. Whereas, Acts of the Legislature do not become effective until 90 days after adjournment unless enacted as emergencies; and
Whereas, there has been a recent increase in the state valuation; and
Whereas, the current 12 1/2 mill tax rate is expected to produce more than 1/2 of the total cost of education, and therefore would be in violation of the Revised Statutes, Title 20, section 3747 which states that not more than 50% of the funding for education shall come from the uniform property tax; and
Whereas, the Legislature must act immediately to avoid this unintended conflict of the mill tax rate with Title 20, section 3747; and
Whereas, in the judgment of the Legislature, these facts create and emergency within the meaning of the Constitution of Maine and require the following legislation as immediately necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health and safety; now, therefore,
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine, as follows:
36 M.R.S.A. § 451, sub- § 2, as enacted by PL 1975, c. 660 § 5, is amended to read:
2. Uniform property tax. Pursuant to the Maine Constitution, Article VIII, Part First, and in addition to subsection I, a uniform property tax is assessed which shall be determined as follows: The Legislature shall annually,
LEGISLATIVE DOCUMENT No. 16
prior to April Ist, enact legislation establishing the uniform property tax rate. The uniform property tax rate shall be 13 mills for the period beginning July 1, 1976, and ending June 30, 1977 and 12.5 mills thereafter. Thereafter, the uniform property tax rate shall be established each year by the Legislature in accordance with Title 20, section 3747. The rate shall be applied to the state valuation of each municipality and property in the unorganized territory.
Emergency clause. In view of the emergency cited in the preamble, this Act shall take effect when approved.
STATEMENT OF FACT
The purpose of this bill is reflected in the emergency preamble.
EXHIBIT B (EMERGENCY) ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTH LEGISLATURE
Legislative Document No. 193 H.P. 205 House of Representatives, February 1, 1977
Referred to Committee on Taxation. Sent up for concurrence and ordered printed. On Motion of Mr. Carey of Waterville, rules suspended and ordered sent forthwith.
EDWIN H. PERT, Clerk Presented by Mr. Carey of Waterville.
STATE OF MAINE IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD NINETEEN HUNDRED SEVENTY-SEVEN AN ACT to Reduce the Uniform Property Tax by 1 1/4 Mills.
Emergency preamble. Whereas, Acts of the Legislature do not become effective until 90 days after adjournment unless enacted as emergencies; and
Whereas, a reduction of the uniform property tax is of the greatest urgency to the citizens of Maine; and
Whereas, the following legislation reducing the mill rate from 12.5 to 11.25 mills is vitally necessary to accomplish that goal; and
Whereas, in the judgment of the Legislature, these facts create an emergency within the meaning of the Constitution of Maine and require the following legislation as immediately necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health and safety; now, therefore,
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine, as follows:
36 M.R.S.A. § 451, sub- § 2, 3rd sentence, as enacted by PL 1975, c. 660 § 5, is amended to read:
The uniform property tax rate shall be 13 mills for the period beginning July 1, 1976, and ending June 30, 1977, and 12.5 11.25 mills thereafter for the period beginning July 1, 1977 and ending June 30, 1978. Emergency clause. In view of the emergency cited in the preamble, this Act shall take effect when approved.
EXHIBIT C (EMERGENCY) ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTH LEGISLATURE
Legislative Document No. 91 H.P. 66 House of Representatives, January 13, 1977
Referred to Committee on Taxation. Sent up for concurrence and ordered printed.
EDWIN H. PERT, Clerk Presented by Mr. Jalbert of Lewiston.
Cosponsors: Mr. Norris of Brewer, Mr. Kelleher of Bangor, Mrs. Lewis
of Auburn.
STATE OF MAINE IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD NINETEEN HUNDRED SEVENTY-SEVEN AN ACT to Ensure that the Uniform Property Tax Rate Conforms to Limits on Educational Funding Established by Statute.Emergency preamble. Whereas, Acts of the Legislature do not become effective until 90 days after adjournment unless enacted as emergnecies; and
Whereas, there has been a recent increase in the state valuation; and
Whereas, the present statutory mill tax rate will probably produce more than 1/2 of the total cost of education and therefore will be in violation of the Revised Statutes, Title 20, section 3747; and
Whereas, inadvertently a conflict between the existing mill tax rate and that provided under Title 20, section 3747 has been created which the Legislature must resolve; and
Whereas, in the judgment of the Legislature, these facts create an emergency within the meaning of the Constitution of Maine and require the following legislation as immediately necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health and safety; now, therefore,
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine, as follows:
36 M.R.S.A. § 451, sub- § 2, as enacted by PL 1975, c. 660 § 5, is amended to read:
LEGISLATIVE DOCUMENT No. 91
2. Uniform property tax. Pursuant to the Maine Constitution, Article VIII, Part First, and in addition to subsection 1, a uniform property tax is assessed which shall be determined as follows. The Legislature shall annually, prior to April 1st, enact legislation establishing the uniform property tax rate. The uniform property tax rate shall be 13 mills for the period beginning July 1, 1976, and ending June 30, 1977 and 12.5 mills thereafter. After June 30, 1977, the Legislature shall set the uniform property tax rate in accordance with Title 20, section 3747. The rate shall be applied to the state valuations of each municipality and property in the unorganized territory.
Emergency clause. In view of the emergency cited in the preamble, this Act shall take effect when approved.
STATEMENT OF FACT
The purpose of this bill is stated within the emergency preamble.
EXHIBIT D STATE OF MAINE
To the 108th Legislature of the State of Maine:
In accordance with Section 18 of Article IV, Part Third of the Constitution of the State of Maine, the undersigned electors of the State of Maine, qualified to vote for Governor, residing in said State, whose names have been certified, hereby respectfully propose to the Legislature for its consideration the following entitled bill: "AN ACT to Repeal the State Property Tax." The full text of said Act is printed on page 1 of this Petition.
The undersigned electors further request that should the Legislature not enact said measure without change, that said measure be referred to the People at a Special Election, ordered by proclamation of the Governor, to be held not less than four nor more than six months after such proclamation.
STATE OF MAINE IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD NINETEEN HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-SIX AN ACT TO REPEAL THE STATE PROPERTY TAX
Be it enacted by the people of the State of Maine, as follows:
Sec. 1. 20 M.R.S.A. § 3742, first and second paragraphs, as enacted by P.L. 1975, C. 660 § 2 are repealed and the following enacted one in place thereof:
It is the intent of the Legislature to provide at least 50% of the cost of operation of the public schools from general fund revenue sources.
Sec. 2. 20 M.R.S.A. § 3747[8] as enacted by P.L. 1975 C. 660 § 2 and amended by P.L. 1975 C. 754 § 3 is repealed.
Sec. 3. 36 M.R.S.A. § 451[2] as enacted by P.L. 1975 C. 660 § 5 is repealed.
Sec. 4. 36 M.R.S.A. § 452 second paragraph as enacted by P.L. 1975, C. 660 § 5 is repealed.
Sec. 5. 36 M.R.S.A. § 453 as enacted by P.L. 1975, C. 660 § 5 and P.L. 1975, C. 754 § 6 is repealed.
Sec. 6. 36 M.R.S.A. § 453-A, as enacted by P.L. 1975, C. 754 § 7 is repealed.
STATEMENT OF FACT
This bill repeals the Uniform State Property Tax and returns to the municipalities the authority to set the property tax rate for public school purposes.
INSTRUCTIONS
INSTRUCTIONS REGARDING INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM PETITIONS COMPILED BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 1353 OF TITLE 21 OF THE REVISED STATUTES.
A. PETITIONERS
Each petitioner
[a] Must be a registered voter
[b] Must sign his or her own name
[c] Must not write another person's name
[d] Must sign but once
[e] Must spell out first name in full
[f] Must, if married woman, spell out her own first name and surname instead of using husband's name preceded by "Mrs." [If married woman registered under maiden name, she must sign in that manner]
[g] Must not use typewriter
[h] Should follow the name with the correct name of town or city of residence, together with street address, if any
B. VERIFYING CIRCULATOR
Each verifying circulator
[a] Must be a resident of this State and a registered voter in the community in which he resides
[b] Must verify that all signatures on petition were made in his presence and to the best of his knowledge and belief the signatures are of the persons they purport to be
[c] Must make his oath after the registrar/board of registration has completed his certificate
C. REGISTRAR OF VOTERS/BOARD OF REGISTRATION
Each registrar/board of registration must personally sign a certificate appended to the petition specifying that each name on the petition appears on the voting list of his municipality as qualified to vote for Governor. A registrar/board of registration may be a verifying circulator.
D. COMPLETING AND FILING THE PETITION
[a] If more than one sheet makes up the same petition these must be permanently fastened together; the attestations of the verifying circulator and the registrar/board of registration to be appended last and to refer to the whole document.
[b] Referendum petitions must be filed in the office of the Secretary of State by 5 p.m. on the 90th day after the recess of the Legislature, or if such 90th day is a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, by 5 p.m. on the preceding day which is not a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday; initiative petitions must be filed either in the office of the Secretary of State, or presented to either branch of the Legislature by 5 p.m. on the 50th day after the date of convening the Legislature in regular session, or if the 50th day is a legal holiday, the period runs until 5 p.m. on the next day.
[c] Petitions cannot be amended after filing.
MARKHAM L. GARTLEY Secretary of State
REGISTRAR BOARD OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE STATE OF MAINE
County of __________, 19 _________
I hereby certify that I am the Registrar/Member Board of Registration . . . . . duly elected and qualified, and that the names of all the foregoing petitioners, numbered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . appear on the voting list of . . . . . as qualified to vote for Governor.
Signed . . . . . Registrar/Member Board of Registration . . . . .
VERIFYING CIRCULATOR'S SIGNATURE (Several petitions may be fastened together and, if so, one certificate is sufficient)
County of _________,ss _________ 19 _________
I _________ of _________
Name of verifying person Municipality
hereby make oath that the signatures of all the petitioners upon the petition are the original and authentic signatures of the same persons whose names the Registrar/Board of Registration has (have) certified thereon as being on the voting list of . . . . . as qualified to vote for Governor therein.
. . . . . (Signature of verifying petitioner) . . . . . (Residence of verifying petitioner)
Subscribed and sworn to by the said . . . . .
Before me
. . . . . Justice of the Peace Notary Public ANSWERS OF THE JUSTICES
To the Honorable Senate of the State of Maine:
We, the undersigned Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court, have the honor to submit answers to the questions propounded by the Senate on February 1, 1977. We do this, in our opinion, agreeably to the provisions of Article VI, Section 3 of the Constitution of Maine.
Whenever a question is asked of us by the Governor, the Senate, or the House of Representatives, we must first determine whether the question asked and the occasion is one to which we are constitutionally authorized to respond, i.e., "important question of law, and upon solemn occasion."
That the questions asked are important in a constitutional sense is self-evident.
Ordinarily, no solemn occasion can be said to exist whenever the subject matter of the question is pending in committee and not yet before the inquiring branch of the Legislature. Opinion of the Justices, Me., 355 A.2d 341, 389 (1976). As we there informed the Senate, the status of a bill in committee is not alone conclusive. We do not say that the Justices may never answer questions put to them by a branch of the Legislature concerning proposed legislation which has not yet been reported out of committee.
We consider the questions now before us, though they concern proposed legislation still in committee, to present a situation not unlike that to which we addressed ourselves in Opinion of the Justices, Me., 338 A.2d 802 (1975).
Here, as there, the Legislature is faced with a problem of overwhelming magnitude.
Much of the legislative work to overcome this problem must necessarily be undertaken in committee.
Since the whole question relates to a major source of tax revenue, it is of great immediate public concern.
It seems reasonably certain that whatever happens in committee to the legislative documents to which the questions relate in part, the Legislature during this session will be directly involved with the issues raised by the questions about which our opinion is sought.
We conclude a solemn occasion exists.
Before undertaking to give specific answers to the questions asked, we consider it helpful in our analysis of the issues presented to recite the factual framework in which the occasion for the requested opinion arose.
The 108th Legislature has before it a legally sufficient initiative which has as its objective the repeal of the uniform property tax and a return to the municipalities of authority to set the property tax rate for public school purposes.
Also pending before the 108th Legislature is the Governor's proposed budget for fiscal year 1978-79, which budget includes recommendations regarding funding for educational programs.
Also pending before the 108th Legislature, now in committee, are L.D. 16, entitled "AN ACT to Provide that the Uniform Property Tax Rate shall be Established in Conformity with Statutory Limits on Educational Funding;" L.D. 193, entitled "AN ACT to Reduce the Uniform Property Tax by 1 1/4 Mills;" and L.D. 91, entitled "AN ACT to Ensure that the Uniform Property Tax Rate Conforms to Limits on Educational Funding Established by Statute." All the above legislative documents carry emergency preambles.
Obviously, any amendment to the uniform property tax which would affect proceeds of the uniform property tax in fiscal year 1978-79 must be considered before any budget for such fiscal year can be enacted.
Although in some jurisdictions which have adopted initiative and referendum, specific provision is to be found excluding revenue legislation as the subject of initiative and referendum, we are satisfied from a historical analysis of Amendment XXXI to the Constitution of Maine that initiative can properly be used when the subject matter is revenue legislation.
An excellent history of Amendment XXXI may be found in: Black, Maine's Experience with the Initiative and Referendum, 43 Annals 159 (1912); Pelletier, The Initiative and Referendum in Maine, Bowdoin College Bulletin 7 (1951); Address of Governor Cobb to the 73rd Legislature, Acts and Resolves of Maine 1907, 1555, 1562; Address of Governor Fernald to the 74th Legislature, Acts and Resolves of Maine 1909, 1436, 1450-51. See generally, Galbreath, Provisions for State-Wide Initiative and Referendum, 43 Annals 81 (1912).
QUESTION #1: If the bill contained in the initiative petition (Exhibit D) is either enacted by the Legislature so that it is effective after July 1, 1977, or passed by the electorate and proclaimed by the Governor so that it is effective after July 1, 1977, will the initiative measure repeal the uniform property tax for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1977 and terminating June 30, 1978?
ANSWER: We answer in the negative.
By the express terms of 36 M.R.S.A. § 452 it is clear that the liability of the municipality for the uniform property tax becomes fixed on July 1 annually for the fiscal year ending June 30 of the following calendar year. It is likewise clear that the procedure employed contemplates that the tax for which each municipality is liable under the formula described in § 451 (3) must be "cranked into" the municipality's taxing process by adding "the amount of such tax to the amount of county and municipal taxes to be by them assessed in their municipalities."
The issue generated by Question #1 is whether Exhibit D, if enacted or approved so as to be effective after July 1, 1977, will negate the liability for payment of the uniform property tax which attaches as of July 1, 1977.
Exhibit D contains nothing purporting to give it retroactive effect. It is the well settled rule in Maine that statutes are to be considered prospective in their application in the absence of language showing a contrary intent. See Miller v. Fallon, 134 Me. 145, 13 A. 416 (1936). In general, retroactivity in legislation is disfavored, although it is now established that a tax statute is not unconstitutional merely because it is retroactive in effect. See Tiedemann v. Johnson, Me., 316 A.2d 359, 365 (1974), and cases cited therein.
The power of the Legislature, and likewise the power of the people in initiating legislation, to enact retroactive measures is limited. For example, in Maine the Legislature may enact statutes retroactively affecting remedies but not substantive rights. See generally, Morris v. Goss, 147 Me. 89, 83 A.2d 556 (1951).
A subsidiary issue which is generated by Question #1 merits some discussion. We have expressed the opinion that Exhibit D will not retroactively repeal the uniform property tax for the fiscal year 1977-78 if it is enacted or approved sometime after July 1, 1977. It might be argued, however, that the State Tax Assessor's power under the second paragraph of 36 M.R.S.A. § 452 to direct the collection of such tax from the municipal authorities will cease as of the effective date of Exhibit D if it is enacted or approved.
We reject this contention.
We have said that Exhibit D, if approved or enacted, will be applied only prospectively; that is, it will repeal the uniform property tax for the fiscal years beginning 1978-79. In our opinion, it would be completely illogical to hold that one section of the bill contained in Exhibit D, that is, the repeal of the actual assessment of the tax, will not be effective to abolish the tax for which the wheels of the collection process are already in motion, while another section, i.e., the repeal of the power to certify the amount to be collected, will have immediate application. It is our opinion that the power to direct collection of the tax assessed as of July 1, 1977 survives the enactment or approval of Exhibit D until July 1, 1978. Hence, we conclude that even if Exhibit D is enacted or approved, the State Tax Assessor will retain the power to direct the collection of the uniform property tax from the municipalities for the entire fiscal year 1977-78.
QUESTION #2: Will Legislative Document 16 (Exhibit A) or Legislative Document 91 (Exhibit C), if enacted with an effective date prior to July 1, 1977, alter the mill rate of the uniform property tax, (a) for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1977 and terminating June 30, 1978 and (b) for any subsequent fiscal year?
ANSWER: We answer in the affirmative as to part (a).
Legislative Document 16 (Exhibit A) and Legislative Document 91 (Exhibit C) both include an emergency preamble and an emergency clause. It appears that in the event either of these legislative documents is enacted into law, the bill would be emergency legislation as defined in Article IV, Part Third, § 16 of the Maine Constitution.
The importance of emergency legislation and the need that it be insulated from premature or ill-conceived disruption is recognized in § 17 of Part Third, Article IV of our Constitution. This section exempts emergency legislation from the referendum process — a process which suspends the effectiveness of laws until the law is ratified by popular election. This constitutional exemption from suspension is particularly important in the area of emergency tax legislation. Morris v. Goss, supra.
The people may use the initiative process as provided by Article IV, Part Third, § 18 to challenge emergency legislation. But even this section refers only to the people's power to repeal emergency legislation. No mention is made of their power to suspend existing legislation. To read such a power into section 18 would be to undercut the policies expressly recognized in sections 16 and 17.
There is no inherent conflict between the power of the Legislature to enact immediately effective emergency legislation and the power of the people to repeal that legislation through the initiative process. Cf. Johnson v. Diefendorf, 56 Idaho 620, 57 P.2d 1068 (1936).
The existence of the pending initiative does not vitiate the constitutional provision of immediate effectiveness of emergency legislation. Likewise, it should be noted that if either of these legislative documents becomes law, the right of the people to have the initiated legislation submitted to a vote of the people in accordance with Article IV, Part Third, § 18 is not frustrated.
Legislative Document 16 or Legislative Document 91 will become effective, as written, when enacted.
As presently written, both Exhibit A (L.D. 16) and Exhibit C (L.D. 91) make it impossible for the Legislature to set a tax rate for fiscal year 1977-78. Since the Legislature must set the new rate "prior to April 1st" of each year, and since under the language of both legislative documents the new method of establishing a rate may not be used until after June 30 of 1977, then no rate can be set until "prior to April 1st" 1978 when the rate for fiscal year 1978-79 is established.
Likewise, we point out that 20 M.R.S.A. § 3747 as presently written does not provide a formula for determining a tax rate. That subsection merely prohibits the establishment of a rate which will produce an amount exceeding 50% of the basic education allocation. It does not by its terms establish what particular percentage under 50% shall be produced by the tax rate.
We respectfully decline to answer as to part (b) because we consider the issue there posed is not appropriate for consideration by the Legislature at this first regular session. See footnote 2.
QUESTION #3: Will House Paper 205 (Exhibit B), if enacted with an effective date prior to July 1, 1977, alter the mill rate of the uniform property tax for the year beginning July 1, 1977 and terminating June 30, 1978?
ANSWER: We answer in the affirmative.
For the reasons set out in our answer to Question #2, if House Paper 205 (Exhibit B) is enacted as emergency legislation, it will become effective when enacted. It will affect the mill rate for fiscal 1977 only if it is enacted before April 1, 1977, as the proposed legislation does not purport to amend that part of 36 M.R.S.A. § 451(2) which requires the mill rate to be set before April 1 of the following fiscal year.
Dated at Portland, Maine, this 8th day of March, 1977.
Respectfully submitted: