Voters in Middlesex Township might have lost the chance to vote on a referendum to permit the sale of liquor in the township after a typographical error in the petition led to its rejection by the county Bureau of Elections earlier this month. Filers appealed the decision, making their case before the court Wednesday.

In the petition, filers collected more than the required number of signatures, but mistakenly listed the date of the upcoming primary as May 31, rather than the correct date of May 21.

The elections bureau said this was a serious enough error to warrant a rejection, with petitioners filing an appeal requesting the court reverse its decision and allow it to proceed.

Judge Timothy McCune heard the case, listening to testimony from county officials and the organizer leading the push to end the alcohol moratorium in Middlesex.

Attorney David McMaster, representing the petitioners, argued that the error was a clerical mistake and that organizers had elsewhere advertised the correct date in fliers, social media posts and signs throughout the township.

He presented the signs and fliers as evidence, each listing the correct May 21 date. McMaster added that the intent of the petition was clear, and that residents understood what they were signing on to.

Mary Lou Tabisz, organizer of the petition, testified that she believed the error caused no confusion and that it did not affect residents' decision to sign.

Shari Brewer, elections bureau director, also testified, explaining that she received the petition March 12 and confirmed the requisite signatures were collected.

After culling a few due to errors or incomplete forms, she counted 770 signatures, well over the required 486.

Brewer said she then sent it to the county solicitor's office, which is when the error was noticed.

Brewer explained that the elections bureau is required to reject any petitions that contain material errors and that it considered the date error to qualify.

She said it could imply that the county would hold a special election if it was accepted, and that for it to move forward despite the error, a judge would have to make that decision.

McMaster asked if the date of the primary had to be listed on the petition to be accepted. Brewer said she wasn't sure, leading McMaster to argue that if the date was not required, then it should not be considered a material error.

He added that elsewhere, the petition references the “next ensuing election,” which he argued refers to May 21.

McMaster said most people don't know the exact date of a primary, but that doesn't stop them from voting on the correct day.

McCune was told by Brewer that the bureau would need his decision by April 5.