The Secretary of State initially determined that the petition was about 70 signatures short of the required number, and members of the anti-rent control Homeowners Coalition, disputing the claim, sued.

In response, the pro-rent control Campaign for Affordable Housing and Tenant Protection also filed suit, challenging the validity of the signatures and charging that the petition was, in fact, short of the required number of signatures.

The groups spent much of the year battling in court, and on April 22, Suffolk County Superior Court Judge Martha Sossman ruled that the petition did, in fact, have the minimum number of valid signatures.

But the pro-rent control Campaign for Affordable Housing and Tenant Protection has appealed the ruling.

Bill Cavellini, a Cambridge taxi driver and a member of the pro-rent control interest group, says 1,300 signatures were written by the same several individuals, although only 300 of those were confirmed in the court.

Cavellini says he expects the appeal to be heard in September or October. And he notes that if the signatures are ruled invalid in an appeal trial, the anti-rent control Homeowners Coalition would have to restart the process of collecting signatures for the petition.

And that would mean no rent control referendum on Election Day, 1994.

The Second Petition

The State Legislature has a right to refuse the first set of petitions and require another set to demonstrate additional popular support. It did so for the rent control case.

And throughout the wrangling over the first petition, the anti-rent control Homeowners Coalition moved ahead with the process and onto the second one. The second petition required 11,715--a number equivalent to one-half of one percent of those who voted in the last gubernatorial election--additional signatures to put the rent control question to the voters.

Denise A. Jillson, president of the anti-rent control Homeowners Coalition, says her group has gathered about 21,000 signatures.

"It was overkill, so we would not be challenged," she says.

But the pro-rent control Tenant Union refusing to die easily, has questioned this petition's validity anyway.

Cavellini says the pro-rent control Tenant Union is "in the process of examining" the signatures for fraud, duplications and illegal repeats from the first petition.

Cavellini declined to give an early estimate of how many signatures he believes are invalid, saying the prorent control Tenant Union is still "deep in the midst of the process."