Maine officials have provided inconsistent accounts about whether they contacted a public notary before denying ballot access to a marijuana legalization initiative based solely on the belief the notary's handwriting was inconsistent on forms containing 17,000 otherwise valid signatures.

The various tellings of whether the notary was asked for an explanation come amid debate on whether they should have been contacted and whether the signature, which is required on petition forms, actually was inconsistent.

On Wednesday, Maine Secretary of State Matt Dunlap seemed to imply his office contacted the notary before its decision, telling Maine Public Radio, “it became apparent to us that we could not get good answers to our questions about the relationship between the notary and the circulator.”

But on Thursday, a spokeswoman for the secretary of state’s office, Kristen Schulze Muszynski, told U.S. News election staff “did not directly follow up with the notary,” as their signature on forms was "markedly different" from one the state had on file and on other documents they had notarized.

Later on Thursday, an interview with Dunlap aired on WGME-TV, in which he said his office had contacted the notary.

"We did talk to them about that," he told the local TV station. "Obviously the answers were unsatisfactory."

The notary has not been publicly named by the state or the legalization campaign, but initiative campaign manager David Boyer says he knows the person and that the signatures looked consistent to him. The notary, he said, denies ever being contacted.

On Friday morning, Muszynski clarified to U.S. News that Dunlap misspoke because he assumed his office followed its common practice of contacting notaries when there’s an issue.

“The secretary’s comment was not accurate yesterday; he spoke with that news outlet prior to when I had a chance to confirm with elections [staff] that we had not reached out to that notary,” she says. “Since that process he cited is often pursued, he thought we had undertaken it with this notary as well, when in fact we did not.”

Boyer says that the disavowal of Dunlap’s latest remarks raises questions about how Dunlap could be unaware of what happened and why the common practice of contacting notaries about potential problems was not followed, particularly when an election initiative hinged on the outcome.

“We're very concerned about the apparent lack of consistency in statements from the secretary of state,” Boyer says. “When you are about to disenfranchise 17,000 registered voters based on a technicality, it is only logical to take a few simple steps to determine whether the notary signed the petitions or not.”

Earlier, Boyer said the secretary of state’s office had contacted him about the residency status of one petition circulator. He provided pay stubs to the office, and he says the circulator’s landlord was contacted for confirmation.

In Maine, notaries such as the one in question administer an oath to people who collect petition signatures for ballot initiatives. The canvassers must be state residents and swear to the notary they witnessed every signature be made on petition forms.

In defense of officials’ decision not to contact the notary, Muszynski says “there is no requirement for us to reach out to notaries to review signatures that are in question,” though “we often do, in our attempts to be thorough and ensure the integrity of the process.”

This time, she says, “the time constraint of making the deadline to certify this petition was a significant a factor in not reaching out to all notaries whose signatures were questioned.” Elections staff were also working to certify four other initiatives at the time, she says, and the office has just 30 days to certify initiatives from the date of submission.