Casco residents will be voting on a lot of ballots Nov. 4, but should pay special attention to two local referendum questions before rejecting them.

Question 2 seeks approval of an ordinance to recall selectmen, and Question 3 seeks to spend up to $290,000 on a property revaluation. The questions, which are interrelated, are too costly financially and make for bad policy.

The questions come from petitions initiated by Bob Levesque of the Casco Tax Fairness Association. Levesque has led the fight for 225 waterfront property owners seeking abatements on 233 pieces of property totaling more than $24 million.

Those abatement requests are now under consideration by the Cumberland County Commissioners, having been rejected by Casco Assessor John O’Donnell, who also performed the revaluation.

Allowing O’Donell to be the arbiter of the process he performed is wrong, even if it is legal. But Casco voters should let the commissioners decide on the abatement requests and consider whether the whole town revaluation seems fair to them before paying for a new revaluation that could be favorable to a select few.

The Casco Board of Selectmen have recommended against the recall ordinance. That may seem as surprising as O’Donell denying abatement requests on his revaluation work, but selectmen are right.

Instead of promoting guidelines for good governance in town, it only invites select groups carrying grudges to challenge elected officials for having the temerity to disagree with them while costing taxpayers money for special elections.

If passed, 10 percent of the registered voters in Casco who cast ballots in the last gubernatorial election could force a vote for the removal of an elected official without giving any reason for a recall vote. That is hardly a way to attract the qualified people needed to govern.

It is not hard to imagine 10 percent of voters disliking an official enough to want them ousted. What is unfathomable is that what began with legitimate complaints about the property valuation in Casco could lead to such a misguided petition.

Levesque and other residents elaborated well on the procedural errors they feel led to unjustified tax hikes. That same elaboration is needed to create recall standards that would make this ordinance palatable.

The recent history of recalls in southern Maine includes two selectmen removed from office in Hollis in 2005, the entire board of three recalled in Brownfield in 2006. Recall attempts were also made in Waterboro and Lyman.

Not in one instance were the recalls brought about because of illegal behavior.

Even in the bruising sport of local politics, three-year terms for elected officials are needed and should be respected instead of allowing disgruntled segments of the population the smallest pretext to toss anyone aside.

Casco residents should vote no on questions 2 and 3.

David Harry, editor