Mass. Gen. Laws » Part I Title VII Chapter 43
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 43, § 38 (2026)

Initiative petitions; validity of signatures; objections

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 38. Signatures to initiative petitions need not be all on one paper. The papers constituting a petition shall be filed in the office of the city clerk, with the endorsement thereon of the names and addresses of three persons designated as filing the same, but all the papers need not be filed at the same time. The petition shall be considered filed whenever the designated persons notify the board in writing that the filing is complete. Before receiving such notice, the registrars of voters may, but shall not be required to, certify signatures on the papers already filed. With each signature to the petition shall be stated the place of residence of the signer, giving the street and number, if any.

Within five days after the filing of said petition the registrars of voters shall ascertain by what number of registered voters the petition is signed, and what percentage that number is of the total number of registered voters, and shall attach thereto their certificate showing the result of such examination.

The city clerk shall forthwith transmit the said certificate with the said petition to the city council or to the school committee, according as the petition is addressed, and at the same time shall send a copy of said certificate to one or more of the persons designated on the petition as filing the same.

When such certificate has been so transmitted, said petition shall be deemed to be valid unless written objections are made thereto by a registered voter of the city within forty-eight hours after such certification by filing such objections with the city council or the school committee, and a copy thereof with the registrars of voters or the board or commission having similar duties. Section seven of chapter fifty-five B shall apply to such objections, and the board of registration of voters shall transmit a copy of its decision to the city council or school committee.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1926–2000 · leading case: O'Shea v. City of Holyoke, 186 N.E.2d 608 (Mass. 1962).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
O'Shea v. City of Holyoke, 186 N.E.2d 608 (Mass. 1962). · cites it 3× “Thereafter, a group of citizens circulated a referendum petition (see G. L. c. 43, §§ 38, 42) 2 protesting the board’s action, which was filed on December 15, 1959, with the city clerk.”
Sharpe v. Registrars of Voters of Northampton, 174 N.E.2d 648 (Mass. 1961). “For G. L. c. 43, §§ 38 and 42, in Northampton, see St.”
Carriere v. Bd. of Registrars of Voters, 153 N.E. 564 (Mass. 1926). “This is a petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the defendants to examine and certify an alleged referendum petition as required by G. L. c. 43, § 38. The city of Fitchburg duly adopted as its charter Plan B of St.”
Stapleton v. Nyhan, 3 Mass. L. Rptr. 423 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1995). · cites it 2× “The procedure for this initial certification is set out in G.L.c. 43, §38: Within five days after the filing of said petition the registrars of voters shall ascertain by what number of registered voters the petition is signed, and what percentage that number is of the total…”
Fisher v. City of Holyoke, 175 N.E.2d 393 (Mass. 1961). “On November 18, the mayor returned the order to the board without his approval and with *674 a message setting forth his reasons. On December 1 the board passed the order over the veto.”
Chopelas v. City Clerk of Malden, 295 N.E.2d 395 (Mass. App. Ct. 1973). · cites it 4× “See G. L. c. 43, § 38. 1 The sole question presented is whether the referendum petition was seasonably filed under the provisions of G.”
City of Springfield v. Dreison Investments, Inc., 11 Mass. L. Rptr. 379 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2000). “(See G.L.c. 43, §38, for procedural requirements.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.