With less than two days before Orrington residents take a largely symbolic vote on a clean-up plan for one of Maine's most hazardous waste sites, both sides are applying last-minute pressure to get people to the polls. The company responsible for clean-up has been promoting its preferred option in mailings, phone calls and by going door-to-door. Opponents maintain they've been vastly outspent in the campaign. And an apparent loophole in the state's campaign finance law doesn't require further disclosure.

There's nothing unusual about candidates and campaign supporters going door-to-door in the weeks and months leading up to an election. Having a corporation like Mallinckrodt LLC try to influence a vote in a small town like Orrington is a little more out of the ordinary, but it's understandable. That's because Mallinckrodt is on the hook for cleaning up the site, which was contaminated by mercury and other toxic chemicals several decades ago.

"We've told the community directly, and we've been very transparent, that we are prepared to spend $100 million to get the site cleaned up," says Mallinckrodt spokesperson JoAnna Schooler.

Schooler says the company has been working with the community for well over two years, long before the Department of Environmental Protection ordered an alternative clean-up plan that is more comprehensive and more costly, but which Mallinckrodt maintains is unnecessary, potentially riskier for the environment and which could take twice as long to achieve.

Mallinckrodt has appealed the order, which will ultimately be decided by the Board of Environmental Protection. But Schooler says as part of its longterm commitment, the company is willing to set up an escrow account to ensure that work is completed, no matter what. "And this account would assure the town that we will be responsible for the future maintenance of the site for the longterm."

In the meantime, residents are being asked whether they support the company's plan, which has been unanimously endorsed by the town's selectmen. To educate voters, Schooler says Mallinckrodt's efforts have consisted of a regular newsletter, a Web site that was launched this week and direct communications with residents.

"We've addressed their questions head on," Schooler says. "This is the behavior of a responsible company fulfilling our duties in the community."

Schooler declined to say how much those communications have cost. And that's something Orrington resident Diane Jordan and others would like to know. "Because whoever has the most money could put more into -- and contact more people -- with their convincing side of the issue."

Jordan says Mallinckrodt representatives have visited her house twice during the campaign and also called her a couple of times. Other residents report similar contact, including multiple mailings and informational meetings over coffee.

Timothy Conmee is a member of the Maine Peoples' Alliance, which opposes Mallinckrodt's clean-up plan and supports the alternative ordered by the DEP. Conmee is also a resident of Orrington. "I certainly think that we've been out-gunned for sure," he says. "I don't think - I don't think they're beating us at the polls or anything. I think that definitely we're at a severe disadvantage, but I think it's to be expected. They've been fighting this in the courts for 24 years."

Because Orrington has fewer than 15,000 residents -- about 3,500 to be exact -- Maine's campaign finance laws do not require Mallinckrodt or any other entity to disclose how much they've spent on a referendum. Attorney Dan Billings, a Republican activist who specializes in election law, says there should be more transparency.

Billings suggests that a spending threshold might also be appropriate. "For example, if anybody spends more than $5,000 to influence a referendum, they would then have to report ,even if that happened in a smaller community," he says. "Because it's not just the size of the community that matters. I think it matters the amount of money that's being spent."

Billings joined the president of the League of Women Voters of Maine in calling on Mallinckrodt to voluntarily disclose how much it's spent in the campaign. For its part, the Maine Peoples' Alliance says it has spent $320 for a postcard mailing to voters, some staff time by a local organizer during the past two weeks and $11 hosting a Web site.

Whatever happens with the Orrington vote, a final determination is expected from the Board of Environmental Protection in the next couple of months.