Among those waiting for specific orders from the state is Duxbury’s Town Clerk, Nancy Oates.{sidebar id=1}

Earlier this month, state Registrar Stanley Nyberg sent a letter to all town and city clerks notifying them of informational sessions that will provide a forum for questions and answers regarding the impending deadline.

“These sessions can’t hurt,” she said.  “Right now, we have no guidance, but I’ll do whatever they tell us to do.”

Oates plans on attending the May 5 session in Hyannis that Nyberg’s letter says will “resolve legal questions, provide clear guidance andÖdevelop sound policy and procedure to correctly comply” with the Supreme Judicial Court’s November ruling.

“I expected something to happen,” said Oates.  “I’ve been getting updates in my e-mail from the Massachusetts Town Clerks’ Association, so I wasn’t surprised to see the letter on the sessions.”

One thing Oates would like clarified during the session is the interpretation of the May 17 deadline.  To her, the 17th marks the first day same-sex couples can apply for a marriage license, but they must still go through the three-day waiting period that applies for every couple.

Barbara Cook, Oates’ assistant, said that the office recently got a call from an area chapter of the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation asking if the office would be open extra hours on May 17 and provide a justice of the peace like towns in California did months ago to instantly marry couples.

“They may want us to do extra hours, but why would we?” asked Oates.  “Not to be mean, but we don’t do extra hours for anybody getting married.”

Oates added that couples will also have to wait three days and that there will be no marriage ceremonies to her knowledge at town hall, as she is not a justice of the peace like some town clerks.{sidebar id=4}

Beyond the recent inquiry from GLAAD, Oates says her office has not received a lot of calls from people with questions about same-sex marriage licenses.

The issue is definitely drawing attention among Massachusetts’ politicians, however.

This weekend, Governor Mitt Romney announced he would ban out-of-state gay couples from marrying in Massachusetts due to a 1913 law that prohibits clerks from issuing licenses if the marriage conducted in the state would be void in their home state.

To date, Massachusetts is the only state where gay marriages would be legalized come May 17. According to Shawn Feddeman, a spokeswoman from the governor’s office, Romney is sending a letter to the other 49 states to clarify whether or not same-sex marriages are performed in the state and to make them aware of the changes coming to Massachusetts.

“The Governor feels an obligation to carry out the law as it exists,” said Feddeman. Feddeman also said that a new notice of intention of marriage form will be sent to town and city clerks this week with a few changes.  Along with eliminating areas for “bride” and “groom” to fill out information as “party A” and “party B,” the new forms also ask applicants to show proof of residency in Massachusetts.

“Clerks will have the flexibility to accept whatever evidence of residency that is satisfactory and we have provided a list of suggestions,” said Feddeman, acknowledging that clerks will now have to police marriage applications more.

Oates said that she has never asked anyone for proof of residence in the past, and that the bride and groom sign the notice of intention of marriage stating there is “an absence of legal impediment to the marriage.”

Among these legal impediments listed in every clerk’s office is the following: “No marriage shall be contracted in this commonwealth by a party residing and intending to continue to reside in another jurisdiction if such marriage would be void if contracted in such other jurisdiction.”

“They sign this under penalty of perjury and swear to that on the form,” said Oates, who has not seen the new form.

Feddeman said that all applicants will still swear this on the new forms by their signatures.

While the upcoming training session may outline changes to the forms or will instruct clerks to police out-of-state applicants more closely, Oates said she will comply.

“They will tell us what to do and while I may not agree, it is my job to carry out the laws of the secretary of state,” said Oates.  “Clerks are mini-secretaries of state and I won’t deny the laws as they are now.”

She added that she does not agree with clerks in towns such as Provincetown and Worcester who have openly stated they will not ask couples where they live because it is not their current practice to do so with any couple.

“I’m surprised those clerks have already said they will disobey the 1913 law,” said Oates.  “We all took an oath to uphold the laws and I take that oath very seriously.”

Last week, State Representative Robert Spellane of Worcester filed a bill to undo the law, indicating that it was both discriminatory and violates the SJC’s ruling that prohibits excluding rights to gay and lesbian couples.

Oates said she is also concerned with what will happen if marriages are allowed starting this May and then repealed later by the court or by the will of voters later.

“These people will have their marriages in limbo and that should be a deep concern for everybody,” she said.

In March, the state’s legislature gave initial approval to a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages outright while permitting civil unions, but this issue will not reach voters until at least 2006.