AUGUSTA – The state ethics commission delayed until after the election consideration of a complaint filed against the Maine Heritage Policy Center for its role in the Taxpayer Bill of Rights referendum.

The question is simple: Should the center be required to file financial disclosure reports either as a political action committee or as an interested party because of its work supporting the Taxpayer Bill of Rights – Question 1 on the Nov. 7 ballot?

The issues involved, however, are far from simple and the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices decided further investigation and study was necessary before it would tread into the deep waters.

In a 3-0 vote, the commission deferred any action on the complaint until its next regularly scheduled meeting in either November or December.

Bill Becker, the president of the Maine Heritage Policy Center, described the vote as a victory for his organization.

“We didn’t walk out of here having to do anything we didn’t want to do or pay anything like a fine that we didn’t think we should have to pay,” Becker said.

In October, Carl Lindemann, a former Mainer and current Texan with plans to move back here, asked the commission to investigate whether the Maine Heritage Policy Center should be required to file disclosure forms concerning its activities around TABOR.

Political action committees, which are formed to support candidates or referendum elections, are required to report the sources of their money and how it is spent. Other groups, including nonprofits, can be required to report some of their financial activities in support of or opposition to a ballot question if they raise or spend more than $1,500 for the purpose of influencing the election.

The Maine Heritage Policy Center has been deeply involved in the campaign to pass TABOR, which would place spending and taxation limits on local, county and state governments. Becker and other members the center’s staff has debated with TABOR’s opponents, and the center was the original author of the bill.

Becker and the center’s lawyer, Dan Billings, argued before the commission that the group’s activities do not represent “express advocacy” on behalf of TABOR because the group never says “vote for” the law. Without that express advocacy, they argued, MHPC is not required to file financial disclosure reports.

The Maine Heritage Policy Center is a nonprofit education organization. Its purpose is the research public policy and education the public, Becker and Billings testified. “The MHPC doesn’t claim not to have a point of view,” Billings told commissioners, only that it hasn’t expressly advocated for TABOR.

While commissioners seemed reluctant to fully accept the argument offered by Becker and Billings, they were also unwilling to re-interpret the statute so close to an election.

Commissioners were concerned that any ruling could affect groups beyond the Maine Heritage Policy Center and that those groups should have an opportunity to testify.

“The prudent thing to do is for the commission to ask staff and counsel to review it further and seek input for other groups,” said commission Chair Andrew Ketterer.

After the hearing, Lindemann said that he wasn’t disappointed at all, and that his primary concern isn’t over TABOR or this particular election.

“This is a very substantive issue and it can’t be resolved so quickly,” Lindemann said. “TABOR’s not my issue. The question is transparency.”

Ketterer assured Lindemann and others at the hearing that the issue would be fully considered. “It’s not going to slip through the cracks,” Ketterer said. “This is an important issue that’s going to get a lot of attention.”