EARLVILLE – Just days after 134 residents in Earlville signed a petition seeking a public vote on a proposed $3.4 million water project, a letter of objection was filed with the village clerk. The letter, which points out several procedural errors in the petition, may be enough to destroy any hope of a public vote.

On Aug. 27, the village board passed a resolution authorizing the issuance of bonds for a capital water improvement project pending a period of permissive referendum. During the 30-day period, village residents had the chance to submit a petition signed by 20 percent of voters registered at the last election in order for the project to be put up for referendum. A total of 104 signatures were needed.

When the petition was submitted on Sept. 25, 134 signatures had been obtained.

One day later, Earlville resident and planning board member Thomas E. Thompson submitted a letter of objection. The letter lists 12 objections to the petition, including: The witnesses of the petition all witnessed their own signatures, witness statements and the text of the reason for the petition do not appear on each page, two of the three witnesses did not include their addresses on the witness statements, three signers did not list addresses and six of the petition signers are not registered voters. Other objections included minor issues, such as names being printed instead of signed, names appearing incomplete or illegible, dates being listed incorrectly and a couple of spelling errors.

Mitch Mullenax, who gathered signatures for the petition along with former board member Myron Wilson and current board member Gerald Hayes, said if the objection letter nullifies the petition, he feels the village voices are not being heard. “Mr. Thompson is free to oppose this petition, but one man’s opposition shouldn’t stand in the way of 134 who are for it,” Mullenax said, pointing out that the possibility of an objection letter canceling out the petition was never mentioned.

Mayor Toni Campbell said she applauded the three petitioners for their efforts, but thought they failed to equip themselves with the proper knowledge to move forward with the project. “Hard work and due diligence are not one and the same. The tools were there for the petitioners; it’s pretty clear that they did not use them,” Campbell said.

The tools she spoke of include the New York State Legislature web site, which is free and available to the public. “Between Mr. Mullenax, the many years that Mr. Wilson served on the board and our current Trustee Hayes, I would say with certainty that a legal petition was well within reach for their drafting.”