PERRY – The Maine Municipal Association said town officials “acted reasonably” when they decided to wait until the annual town meeting in March to ask voters if they want a committee to negotiate a financial package with an Oklahoma-based liquefied natural gas developer.

But LNG opponents want the question of establishing a negotiating committee placed before voters immediately. A special town meeting is scheduled for 7 tonight at the Perry Elementary School to discuss that very question.

Proponents of LNG say the meeting tonight and any subsequent vote is not legally binding.

For months now, Chairman David Turner, who has said he supports LNG, and the town’s attorney have been negotiating with Quoddy Bay LNG. The company hopes to build a liquefied natural gas facility in neighboring Pleasant Point, but the company’s tank farms would be in Perry. The town hopes to strike a deal with the company that would provide economic relief for its Fire Department as well as for law enforcement, among other things.

The question of who should be negotiating on behalf of the town has been brewing for months. Last week Selectman Jeanne Guisinger, who has said she opposes LNG, and others presented a petition that asked the town to form a committee to negotiate with the company. The petition requested the question be placed before voters at a special town meeting as soon as possible. LNG opponents have maintained that their voice has not been heard at the negotiating table.

Guisinger said Wednesday night she has raised issues during executive sessions but has not had any face to face contact with the company, except for one meeting earlier this week. She said she’s been excluded from earlier discussions between the town and Quoddy Bay LNG.

“The three selectmen can’t possibly address all of the concerns in the town,” she said, referring to the creation of a negotiating committee.

Turner announced at last week’s selectmen’s meeting that the petition requesting a special town meeting had been certified and moved to put the question on the ballot in March and not call a special town meeting, as requested by the petitioners. Guisinger countered with her own motion, which asked that the question be placed before voters as soon as possible. Selectman Dick Adams voted with Turner; Guisinger’s motion died for lack of a second.

A second petition was circulated and signed by a notary. It called for a special town meeting tonight. This latest petition again asks that a special negotiating committee be created.

In separate e-mails, Guisinger and Turner turned the question over to MMA. Becky Seel, senior staff attorney for MMA, responded, saying “I am not convinced that a court would find that waiting to vote on this in March is unreasonable.” She concluded that tonight’s vote “isn’t legally binding.”

Contacted Wednesday, Turner said he agrees with MMA. “The bottom line is it’s not a legally called meeting,” he said.

Turner said that if things remain on track, the petition question and the negotiated package will be before voters in March.

The law requires that public hearings be held to discuss the issues. Asked if both questions would be discussed at the same public hearing, Turner said, “I don’t know if that’s practical. That will be up to the selectmen.”

But Guisinger countered Wednesday night that the meeting tonight was legal. She said it will be up to the voters to decide if they want a negotiating committee to strike a deal with the company. After the meeting, she said, it would be up to the selectmen to decide if they want to accept the results of the special town meeting or ignore them. “Then the participants who voted on it can challenge [the selectmen] ignoring it and then that would take it to court,” she said.

Guisinger said she hopes for a large voter turnout tonight. “MMA’s letter has no standing at all. [Seel] said in there several times that that’s their opinion and that a court would have to decide if it was legal or not,” Guisinger said.