MECHANIC FALLS – Dick Sabine of Lewiston wanted to hear Carol Palesky talk about her own efforts to limit property taxes in Maine

But crossed wires between forum organizers and Palesky left Saturday’s Elm Street School audience thinking that Palesky was going to be a last-minute no-show.

“I wanted to see Carol Palesky in the flesh,” said Sabine. “I think that this cap is not going to solve the problem, but I believe in sending the message.”

An hour after the 9 a.m. start time, Palesky gingerly walked into the gym with the aid of a cane.

“I received notice less than 24 hours ago that the time was changed and that it had turned into a debate,” said Palesky. “I left messages that I couldn’t be there until 10. It didn’t bother me that the format was changed. I love to debate.”

Volunteers from the Constitution Party of Maine, which organized Saturday’s forum, said they received word late Friday that Palesky would be unable to attend. Constitution Party Chairman Eric Greiner said he received a call from Palesky saying that she only learned at the last minute that she was expected to debate and that she did not have enough time to prepare.

“In the past week, there have been constant calls and faxes going between us and Mrs. Palesky,” said Paula Stotts, a Mechanic Falls resident and Constitution Party volunteer. “I was surprised to hear the message from her on my answering machine that said she wasn’t coming.”

For the first hour, Mechanic Falls Town Manager Dana Lee answered questions solo and even tried to provide information in support of the tax cap in Palesky’s absence.

“There’s a disproportionate burden and reliance on property taxes in Maine,” said Lee, when asked to speculate why property taxes were targeted. “Property taxes are definitely too high, and people are sick of it.”

Lee, vice president for the Maine Municipal Association and the group’s incoming president for 2005, opposes the November referendum that would limit property taxes to 1 percent of assessed property valuation plus annual local debt obligations.

To back up his claim that the tax cap would detrimentally affect local schools and municipalities, Lee shared local budget numbers, state revenue sources, and statistics resulting from California’s property tax cap.

“There’s not a lot of waste here. A lot of what we have to provide is mandated,” said Lee. “When we try to challenge some of these things, we get tied up in mediation and in court, and we lose. We’re not just making this stuff up.”

Lee also cited a recent Maine Supreme Court opinion that suggested two of the referendum’s three elements would be unconstitutional.

Palesky cited other states with property tax caps that did not see the wholesale elimination of public schools or emergency services. Palesky claimed that most excess spending occurs in government and school administration.

“We cannot afford the reputation of being the highest-taxed state in the nation,” said Palesky. “Good businesses will never move to Maine.”

Palesky suggested that regionalization of municipal services may be necessary, and that educational systems may need changing.

Mechanic Falls resident Linda Harvey said she was confused on the issue before Saturday and hoped to get answers.

“I thought it was a good idea at first,” said Harvey. “People hear tax cut’ and then don’t hear anything after that. But I think our town is doing the best it can. Now that I hear what it really is, I don’t think I’m going to vote for it.”

After listening to three hours of questions and answers, Sabine said he still supports the proposed property tax cap. He said that he agreed with Palesky that children will continue to receive education if the cap passes, but that Maine school systems may need a different approach.