Rogue sample ballot referred to state office

‘Progressive ballot’ handed out at ealry voting center; creator unknown

Complaints about a sample ballot being handed out at the Gleneagles Neighborhood Center early voting primary polling station in Waldorf on Friday have been forwarded to the Office of the Maryland State Prosecutor for investigation, the Maryland Independent has learned.

Del. C.T. Wilson (D-Charles) and Edward Holland, who are both Democratic candidates for District 28 delegate, each filed separate complaints with the Maryland

State Board of Elections over the sample ballot, which Wilson claimed he witnessed being distributed only to African-American voters.

Maryland campaign finance laws require all candidate materials to include a clearly visible statement identifying the organization that has authorized the materials.

A copy of the sample ballot obtained by the Maryland Independent includes what appears to be an authority line, but the name of the organization is not completely legible and does not appear to correspond to any recognized campaign or

advocacy organization.

Although the names on the sample ballot are predominantly of African-American candidates, several of the listed candidates are white. All the candidates are either Democrats or nonpartisan.

The sample ballot being distributed on Friday, which was titled “Charles County Progressive Selection,” was apparently a revised version of a sample ballot that had been handed out the day before. The earlier version did not include an authority line.

Wilson claimed the earlier sample ballot had been distributed by people wearing T-shirts bearing the name of a county commissioner candidate. The candidate told the Maryland Independent

that their campaign had no connection to either version of the sample ballot.

Wilson accused the people who were distributing the sample ballot as “willfully misleading individuals that it’s some kind of official document, but it’s not.”

“When you’re running to make the laws, you can’t break the laws,” Wilson added.

Jared DeMarinis, director of candidacy and campaign finance at the Maryland State Board of Elections, told the Maryland Independent that referral of authority line complaints to the Office of the Maryland State Prosecutor is a standard action by his office and is not unique to this complaint.

“We take authority line issues seriously here, to make sure everyone understands who is trying to influence their vote,” DeMarinis said.

Wilson told the Maryland Independent that he has sought an immediate injunction to prevent further distribution of the sample ballot, which requires the elections board to ask the offices of Maryland Secretary of State John C. Wobensmith and Maryland Attorney General Brian E. Frosh (D) to intervene as well.

“These actions are always followed through,” DeMarinis said. “[Violators may be] subject to penalties and fines, and if it was done knowingly and willfully, it could be a criminal matter.”

The Maryland Independent has been unable to identify the origin of either version of the sample ballot.

Commissioner Debra Davis (D), who is an attorney, told the Maryland Independent that she had received a telephone call from one of the sample ballot distributors seeking her advice as to the legality of their actions.

“I said, ‘As long as you’re exercising your First Amendment rights and you’re not misleading anybody, then you’re fine,’” Davis said.

Davis declined to identify the caller, citing attorney confidentiality.

Although Davis’ name appeared on both versions of the sample ballot, she said that she had not asked to be included on

them and did not know who had created them.

“I haven’t seen it, but I would like to find it,” Davis said.

Davis said that she did not object to being included on the sample ballot.

“I can’t imagine what objection I would have, unless I was to find that this group stands for hate or something,” Davis said. “If it was the Ku Klux Klan handing out my name, I would have to argue. But probably anything short of that, I would not have a problem.”

A photograph of the first version of the sample ballot was widely circulated on social media over the weekend, generating much speculation about its origin and legality.