End of Session Wrap Up: Elections

April 14, 2011

Now that the dust has settled, this post provides the final status of many election related bills of interest.

Voter Registration Data Exchange: HB 561/SB 765 authorizes the State Board of Elections (SBE) to enter into agreements with other states to exchange any data that the State Administrator of Elections determines is relevant to maintaining accurate voter registration lists.  Status:  Both bills have passed the General Assembly and are awaiting the Governor’s signature.

Online Voter Registration: HB 740/SB 806 authorizes the State Board of Elections (SBE) to operate an online voter registration system that allows an individual to electronically apply to become a registered voter or change the individual’s name, address, or party affiliation in the individual’s existing voter registration record.  Concerns were expressed regarding the fiscal effect on local governments since the local boards of elections were to be responsible for covering the cost of development and implementation.  Understanding these concerns, the bill was amended to use funds from the Fair Campaign Financing Fund for the implementation of the system.  Status:  Both bills have passed the General Assembly and are awaiting the Governor’s signature.

Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) ActHB 671/SB 820 changes the dates of the gubernatorial and presidential primaries to allow Maryland to be in compliance with the MOVE Act which requires states to, among other things, send absentee ballots to military and overseas voters no later than 45 days before an election for federal office if a request is received prior to that time.  The gubernatorial primary election will now be the last Tuesday in June and the presidential primary election will be the first Tuesday in April.  Status:  HB 671 passed the General Assembly and is awaiting the Governor’s signature.  SB 820 was not acted on by the Senate Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs Committee.


Court of Appeals Ruling – Unreadable Signatures Are Valid on Referendum Petitions

March 23, 2011

The Maryland Court of Appeals issued an Opinion March 22 in a case brought by Montgomery County Volunteer Firefighters Association against the Montgomery County Board of Elections.  The firefighters sought to roll back a new county-levied charge for ambulance service, similar to that used in multiple other jurisdictions.  The firefighters contended they had enough valid signatures to meet the state requirement to place a referendum on the Montgomery County ballot this past November to allow citizens to decide whether the fee should be “rolled back.”  In the original argument filed by the firefighters with the County Board of Elections, the County Board of Elections ruled the firefighters’ petition failed to meet the state requirements to get on the November ballot because only 13,021 of the 33,740 signatures were legible enough to comply as signatures of valid registered voters.  The firefighters subsequently filed suit against the Board of Elections and the lower court sided with the Board of Elections.  The Board of Elections indicated that if legible signatures were not an issue, the petition would have been successful.  The case brought to the Court of Appeals pertained to the “legibility” of the signatures.

In the Opinion issued by the Court, the ruling states:

Legibility is not a statutory requirement in order for a signature on a referendum petition to be validated and then verified pursuant to §§ 6-203 and 6-207 of the Election Law Article.

According the Baltimore Sun’s Maryland Politics blog,

This fall, in an emergency ruling, prior to the March 22 opinion,  the Court of Appeals  gave the ballot question the go-ahead, overturning the board of elections’ and a lower court’s ruling that it had not met the petition requirements. County voters rejected the transportation fee in the November election.

Left unchanged by today’s ruling was the tricky matter of middle initials. State law requires someone who signs a petition to the name he or she used when registering to vote.

The example used in state election board guidelines is John Henry Smith. If Smith signs a petition, he would have to indicate that his name is John Henry Smith, J. Henry Smith or John H. Smith to be counted as valid. He could not use John Smith or J.H. Smith.

Some signature collectors have complained that the requirement is too restrictive because people don’t always remember how precisely they registered to vote. But Delegate Jon Cardin said today that petition rules are “absolutely effective enough.” Delegate Cardin said no one has complained to the election law subcommittee about the registration name issue.


MACo Seeks County Consent for Additional Early Voting Centers

March 3, 2011

MACo offered support for  HB 436/SB 443 in the House Ways and Means and Senate Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs Committees with an amendment to allow a county with fewer than 150,000 registered voters to establish up to three early voting centers with the county governing body’s consent.  Under current law, counties with fewer than 150,000 registered voters are required to have one early voting center.

Due to the geographic size of some counties, there is a substantial argument to be made for multiple early voting sites. An individual is more inclined to vote if the voting location is nearby. However, there are  financial concerns associated with the additional equipment and subsequent operational costs for the establishment of additional sites. With State aid having been reduced to local governments since FY 2007 and measurable declines in property assessments, county’s should be provided with flexibility in accommodating program needs.


Congressional Midterm Election Results Indicate Possbile Challenges for Local Government Interests

December 1, 2010

A recurring theme throughout the 2010 midterm elections was the spending of the federal government and how to address the $13.73 trillion national deficit.  As the election result rolled in,  it became increasingly evident that change was afoot as Congressional and committee control and membership altered.  Now with over 60 new members to Congress, local governments throughout the nation are concerned that in an effort to reduce government spending, Congress may tighten funds on domestic programs. The National Association of Counties (NACo), an organization representing county interests to the U.S. Congress,  recently published an article on how the decisions made by the incoming Congress could fiscally impact counties.  NACo reports:

“Defending the programs that directly affect county constituents, small businesses and other partners in our nation’s counties is essential,” said Ed Rosado, NACo legislative Affairs director. 

“To make that case, it is important to inform the incoming Congress of the effects any reductions would have on the people who are served by the programs counties run, and alert them to tax increases counties will need to implement in order to continue providing the services their residents require,” he added.

…..

On the proverbial “chopping block” are funding for secure rural schools, payments in lieu of taxes, community and economic development, workforce investment, justice assistance programs, airports, highway, rail-transit, bridge and water infrastructure development, broadband deployment, rural development, health safety net responsibilities, social welfare programs and others. Rumors are in the 5 percent to 20 percent cut range, which still would only produce a sliver of what would be needed to make a dent in America’s debt problems.

Counties will be challenged to do more with less, reform what exists and meet the needs of constituents in creative new ways. NACo’s Legislative Department is analyzing these changes and how they may affect the issues it advocates for. As of this writing, committee leadership and assignments have not yet occurred.

NACo provides a further breakdown of the committee composition and the possible implications this has for local governments. Click here to read.


County General Election Results – MACo Summary

November 2, 2010

Today MACo’s staff will be following and posting county general election results. We are working with the most current published results-most of them unofficial but at least nearly complete, while some races remain close. Please check back throughout the day to see updated information on results in county races and gain insight on trends from the statewide elections.

MACo’s most current county general election results information can be found here: County General Election Results Summary

An additional analysis of the overall turnover among county officials is also posted here: 2010 County Elections Analysis

A county-by-county listing of local election results can be found here:

Allegany County Anne Arundel County Baltimore City
Baltimore County Calvert County Caroline County
Carroll County Cecil County Charles County
Dorchester County Frederick County Garrett County
Harford County Howard County Kent County
Montgomery County Prince George’s County Queen Anne’s County
St. Mary’s County Somerset County Talbot County
Washington County Wicomico County Worcester County

Absentee Ballot Deadline Extended 10 Days for Overseas Voters

November 1, 2010

An October 29 Daily Record article describes a ruling by a Federal judge to extend the absentee ballot deadline by 10 days to accommodate service members and other who may be overseas.

The absentee ballot deadline for Tuesday’s election was to be Nov. 12. Judge Titus’ order would push that deadline back to Nov. 22. The ballots must still be postmarked by Nov. 2.

On Oct. 8 — the Friday before the Columbus Day postal holiday — the state began sending ballots for the state and federal races.“Given that international mail to military personnel can take 36 days for round-trip processing, and some absentee ballots for state office sent to these individuals were not likely postmarked until October 12, 2010, even the most diligent absent uniformed services or overseas voter might be unable to return his ballot by November 12th,” Titus wrote.

While the judge was “reluctant to interfere with Maryland’s election machinery,” he found the state’s interest in timeliness was outweighed by the risk of disenfranchising overseas voters.

Additional coverage can be found in the Baltimore Sun.


Court of Appeals Overturns Montgomery Referendum Case

October 4, 2010

An October 1 Gazette.net article discusses a Maryland Court of Appeals holding that could have a significant impact on both State and local referendums.

In a 5-2 ruling Wednesday, the appellate court overturned a lower court decision to prevent voters from deciding whether the county should charge a fee for ambulance rides. The question on ambulance fees now will appear on Montgomery County ballots in the Nov. 2 general election.

At this point it is unclear what effect the decision will have on referendums in Maryland, but the court’s opinion, which could be issued in several months, will determine any changes on how petition signatures for ballot questions are validated, said Ross Goldstein, deputy administrator for the state Board of Elections. …

At the heart of the case was the election board’s interpretation of rules for qualifying signatures from registered voters. The standards, which stem from a 2009 court case, required signatures in favor of ballot questions statewide to match voter registration records exactly, or meet other specifications.

The appeals court ruling will prevent Montgomery County from collecting about $14 million in ambulance fee revenue, County Executive Isiah Leggett (D) said Thursday.

Leggett said the loss of revenue increases the size of the county’s fiscal 2012 budget shortfall, which already stood at $145 million.

September 30 Washington Post article


Emergency Reg Changes When Early Votes Must be Tallied

October 1, 2010

The tabulation of early-voting totals, which caused delays in tallying votes in the primary election, should not be a problem in the general.  As reported by the Gazette, the State Board of Elections approved an emergency regulation requiring all early-voting totals to be processed and submitted two hours before polls close on the night of the general election.

For the general election, local boards will be permitted to start canvassing early votes anytime on Election Day, Nov. 2. They must submit figures to the state elections board by 6 p.m., allowing several hours for officials to upload and properly format the results before they are posted online once polls close at 8 p.m.

“We recognize that people are anxious for this information and part of how we’re going to be judged is how quickly this information gets out,” Ross K. Goldstein, the deputy state elections administrator, said Monday.


Early Voting Yields Positive Results

September 7, 2010

Early voting, which began last week in Maryland and will continue through Thursday of this week, has been very well received in many jurisdictions across the state.  While some areas yielded fewer voters than others, the Baltimore Sun reports that “participants in the primary elections expressed surprise at the ease with which they moved through the lines” and that turnout in the Baltimore region was good.  The Washington Post reports that turnout was light in Silver Spring and Landover, but according to the Gazette, other areas of Prince George’s saw much larger turnout.

According to the Cumberland Times-News, early voting is working well in Allegany County, and although it started slow in Washington County, the Herald-Mail reports, election officials believe it will pick up as residents become more familiar.

More local coverage of early voting can be found on the following sites:

Tune into WBAL for a discussion of early voting by the State Board of Elections Deputy Administrator Ross Goldstein.


Early Voting and Voter Turnout

August 30, 2010

As reported by the Gazette, it is unclear whether early voting will increase voter turnout or result in individuals voting early instead of waiting until election day.

Regardless of whether residents know about early voting — or take advantage of it — Maryland will initiate early voting statewide this year. For the primary election, early voting will take place between Sept. 3 and 9, except for Sunday, Sept. 5. The primary election is Sept. 14.

Early voting also will be conducted before the Nov. 2 general election — from Oct. 22 to 28, except for Sunday, Oct. 24.

Thirty-two states nationwide offer some type of early voting, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Most election officials say they have no idea how many voters will turn out for early voting.

“It could be thousands; it could be hundreds; it could be no one,” said Gail Carter, Carroll County’s election director. “We don’t know how receptive the public is going to be for it, so it’s going to be a learning experience for the whole state.”

In other states that have adopted early voting, overall voter turnout has not been affected, said Guy Mickley, Howard County’s deputy election director.

“I don’t think early voting is going to have any impact on anything,” he said.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 32 other followers