He said the examination would likely conclude in a few days.

And if the pro-rent control Campaign for Affordable Housing and Tenant Protection can successfully persuade a court that enough signatures are invalid, the Homeowners Coalition would have to restart the process of collecting signatures for the petition.

Once again, Election Day, 1994, could come and go without a rent control referendum.

Home Rule

But all the grappling over signatures would be moot if yet another court decision supports the rent control activists.

Pro-rent control advocates, as well as the City of Cambridge, have sued the attorney general, charging that he should not have certified the petition as valid under the initiative petition process.

The suit alleged that the purpose of the petition was to end rent control in Boston, Brookline and Cambridge--the only three municipalities in the state which allow the practice.

Sending rent control to a referendum, the suit claimed, would infringe on the autonomy of each of the cities by violating the home rule portion of the state constitution.

The Supreme Judicial Court held a hearing on the constitutionality of the petition on May 4, and, according to Jillson, it focused almost entirely on whether it violated the home rule clause.

Jillson says the ruling could come as early as this week.

Indeed, the Secretary of State needs a decision by July 13 in order to include explanations of the question in its voters' guide, which is distributed to all voters in the state.

If the court rules in favor of the anti-rent control Homeowners Coalition, the rent control foes have just two more obstacles to clear before the question goes to the voters.

But if the court upholds the suit, rent control foes will never be able to bring the issue to the voters--and will have yet another avenue cut off in their quest to end the price ceilings.

The Referendum

If the referendum goes through, a vote against rent control would prohibit the practice in the state except when voluntarily adopted.