But for all the star power of his candidacy for city comptroller, Mr. Spitzer now faces the gritty and mundane realities of an 11th-hour campaign, as he must collect at least 3,750 valid signatures by the end of Thursday to qualify for the September primary. He faces a public ambivalent about his desire to return to government five years after scandal forced him from office. And his opponents, fellow Democrats as well as Republicans, say they plan to scrutinize every signature he collects, eager to block his candidacy on technical grounds.
The challenge became obvious within hours of Mr. Spitzer’s first campaign appearance on Monday, when he visited Union Square. After he departed, a small number of campaign workers, tired and complaining of sweltering heat, trolled the park in search of signatures to get Mr. Spitzer on the ballot. At the end of a few hours, many returned with pages of blank sheets.
In a radio interview on Tuesday, Mr. Spitzer said he recognized the hurdles. He said he hoped to collect 7,500 signatures — a cushion that he hopes will withstand scrutiny, but far fewer than the number of signatures being collected by other major candidates for city offices.
“The lawyer’s answer: Of course I’m concerned,” Mr. Spitzer said. “We have many, many people out in the streets gathering signatures and petitions, and I feel comfortable that we will get there.”
Mr. Spitzer’s spokeswoman, Lisa Linden, said that there were at least 100 campaign workers gathering signatures, a mix of volunteers and paid staff. Small teams of canvassers were seen in Union Square Park, and there were reports of campaign workers in the East Village and on the Upper East Side.
Still, there were signs of desperation. On Monday, the campaign posted an ad on Craigslist and other job sites, offering to pay canvassers $12 an hour, a standard rate. By Tuesday, the campaign was reportedly willing to pay $800 a day. On Wednesday night, the Spitzer campaign plans to hold a “petitioning party” at a Manhattan restaurant.
Asked about Mr. Spitzer’s petitioning challenges, Sascha Owen, campaign manager for Mr. Spitzer’s Democratic opponent, Scott M. Stringer, the Manhattan borough president, contrasted Mr. Spitzer’s “using his personal fortune to pay canvassers upwards of $800 per day” and Mr. Stringer’s collecting more than 100,000 signatures through an “all-volunteer grass-roots effort.”
Manpower aside, Mr. Spitzer must also overcome byzantine rules that are a Tammany-style holdover from when the city’s power brokers were determined to limit ballot access.
As recently as 20 years ago, petitions required that signatories list their Assembly and election districts. An erroneous abbreviation or date could invalidate a name, or an entire sheet of names.
The process has been simplified recently — city charter revisions in 2010 reduced the number of signatures required and the amount of information voters must supply. Any registered Democrat who has not already signed a petition for a candidate for comptroller can sign Mr. Spitzer’s petitions. But some active Democrats are likely to be ineligible to do so because they have already signed omnibus petitions listing multiple candidates, including Mr. Stringer.
Most campaigns strive to collect at least three times the number of required signatures because errors frequently lead to the disqualification of signatures. The most common mistakes, said Martin Connor, an election lawyer who is not working on the comptroller’s race, include information that is altered without proper attribution, signature counts that are erroneous and incorrect dates.
“I think it’s a daunting task,” said Alan Handell, a senior vice president at Content Critical, who has printed petitions for many candidates for the last 40 years. “I think it’s hard to do 3,750 clean signatures in three days.”
The signatures must be submitted to the city’s Board of Elections, and can be challenged until Monday. The board would most likely adjudicate any disputed petitions by the end of July, election lawyers say.
During the last two days, Mr. Spitzer’s petition-gatherers have initiated conversations with questions unlikely to offend: Are you registered to vote? Are you a Democrat? Would you be interested in helping a fellow Democrat get on the ballot?
When it came time to mention Mr. Spitzer’s name, many of them said it as quickly as possible, or used only his first name.
Brian Bailey, 30, a camera loader, asked a canvasser about Mr. Spitzer’s background but was told only that he would push for higher corporate tax rates. Mr. Bailey offered his signature. Later, when informed by a reporter that Mr. Spitzer had resigned from office amid scandal, Mr. Bailey said he felt duped.
“I wouldn’t have signed if I had known that,” he said. “I don’t want someone with loose morals running our finances.”
When canvassers approached Rebecca Kelly, a preschool teacher who lives on the Upper East Side, she shooed them away. “No way, no way,” she said. “He’s a sleaze.”
Mr. Spitzer’s team delicately reminded Ms. Kelly that her signature did not mean she was voting for him, only that she believed he should be on the ballot. She was not persuaded. “He tarnished the reputation of New York and left us New Yorkers to the wind,” she said. “He’s untrustworthy.”
But every so often, the team was rewarded for its persistence.
Jerry Tucker, 76, who lives near Union Square and is the retired owner of a photo business, said he thought it was time to forgive Mr. Spitzer. “He had personal problems,” he said, “but that doesn’t change who he is deep down: a fighter.
”