The Stealth-Like City Election

George Wenschhof

George Wenschhof

What if you held a municipal election and no one voted?  Well, The City of Frederick has been doing this for quite some time.  The city averages less than 25% turnout in the general election when everyone can vote regardless of political party affiliation.  The turnout is so low that the winning mayoral candidate receives a little over 4,000 votes and this in a city that likes to boast they are the second largest city in the state of Maryland with a population over 70,000.

The joke on the street is the only way you can tell the city is having an election is to hear the announcement by Jennifer Dougherty, she is running for mayor.  She has been running for mayor in every election since 1993, only skipping the 1997 election.  She has run as a Democrat and an Independent and did manage to win once out of the six times she has run to obtain the distinction of being the first woman mayor of Frederick.

However, she performed so poorly and alienated so many voters she would become the first incumbent Democratic mayor to be challenged in her own party primary election where she would lose to former four-term Democratic mayor Ron Young.

Not known as a team player, she has never endorsed or supported the Democratic candidate who wins the party mayoral nomination. This has resulted in a Republican mayoral win in a city where Democratic voters hold a solid majority.  Her unwillingness to support the Democratic nominee led her to run as an Independent in the 2013 election, but the result was the same, another loss.

Now in 2017, Jennifer is at it for the seventh time and back running as a Democrat.  Along the way since 1993 she added two more losses, one a county commissioner campaign and the other a congressional campaign.  All in all, her record is 1-8 and there are no indications to believe it will not be 1-9 after this year’s city election. Not known to be overly friendly, she has yet to discover the number one reason voters cast a ballot for a candidate; "They like them."

Lackluster and leaderless describes best Republican mayor Randy McClement, the beneficiary of the Democratic infighting.  He will be running again, hopeful for a third term.

Two term Democratic alderman Michael O’Connor has also announced his is running for the Democratic Party nomination for mayor.  However, his biggest challenge will be to demonstrate how he would be better than the mayor he consistently supported over the last seven plus years and how to overcome being labeled "McClement-like."

Other mayoral candidates will likely come forward on the Democratic side because of the perceived weakness in the two announced Democratic candidates.

Less than a handful of aldermen candidates have announced so far, partly because there is no need to announce early to campaign when so few voters participate in the election.  The deadline to register as a candidate is July 3, 2017.

The solution to a higher turnout and engagement by voters is simple and cost effective.  Move the city election to coincide with the presidential election.  This move would result in tripling the voter participation and reduce the cost the city wastes on a special election.  With this move, polling locations would stay the same for voters and they would not have to experience the hodgepodge polling locations that include churches the city uses today. This only adds to voter confusion and lower voter turnout.

The opposition to this change, including mayoral candidate O’Connor use the lame excuse, "we only want informed voters."  A phrase reminiscent of the poll tax and exams required in years past to limit voter turnout of “some” people.

Interestingly, I recently asked someone who believed this position: "Do you think voters who participate in the state and county elections are informed voters?"  Their answer was a quick “yes”.  Hmm, the state/county election has many more elected positions than the city election would have when combined with the presidential election.  In addition, I always ask, "How do you determine who is an informed voter?"  I suppose their answer would be "they voted for me."

Instead of the city election being lost in the hubbub of the presidential election, the opposite would take place with more interest among voters generated in the city election.

Another change needed to engage voters across the city would be to move to electing the aldermen from districts and to end the current at-large approach.  This would help ensure representation of all communities in city hall. Changing the name board of alderman to city council would be another helpful move.

The city is no longer the small town when I was a boy with a population of 20,000.  Much has changed and the city always destined to grow, primarily because of its strategic location in the state, has indeed grown. It has become a vibrant destination point and a place where you not only want to raise you family; you also want to retire here.

Let’s continue this positive growth by changing the city election date to coincide with the presidential election and by electing council members by representative districts across the city. This needed change is past due.

The primary election will be held on September 12, 2107 and the general election will be held on November 7, 2017.

Stay tuned.

What if you held an election and no one showed up to vote?

George Wenschhof

Sadly, with only two weeks to go until The City of Frederick election, we are about to find out.

I can confidently predict 10% or less of the 36,539 registered voters (as of January 1, 2013) will determine who the next mayor will be on November 5 and the mayor elect will not receive a majority of the vote.

City election law does not require a mayoral candidate to receive a majority of the vote. A runoff election between the top two finishers in a multiple candidate race, to ensure a majority vote, will not happen.

The three way race between incumbent Republican mayor Randy McClement, Democratic alderman Karen Young and unaffiliated Jennifer Dougherty has me predicting the winner will receive between 37-41% of the vote.

Assuming 22% of the registered voters go to the polls (the likely turnout based on past history), the winner will have been elected by only 9.1% of the registered voters, or 3,296 votes.  This represents just 5% of the estimated city population of 66,382.

For more years than I want to admit, I have been banging the drum to move the city election to coincide with the presidential election cycle.  The rationale is that voter participation would more than triple from the current anemic 22% average.  The bonus for taxpayers is the cost savings for the city would be in the $200,000 range and voters would go to polls in schools where they are accustomed to casting their ballot.

But, as most understand today, rational thinking does not often prevail in politics.  The naysayers main theme is the local election would be drummed out by the presidential election.

This is an interesting argument when so few voters are paying attention now. 

The other prevalent statement from opposition to a change in election cycle is the voters would not be as “informed”.

This argument is worrisome because it sounds eerily similar to the institution of the “poll tax” and the tests given to keep certain voters from the polls many years ago during the Jim Crow days. 

Of course, there is nothing in our constitution that requires a voter be “informed” when they go to the polls, or for that matter, a candidate be “informed” when they run for office.  I often wonder how these folks who make this argument determine the voters who are presently voting are “informed”.

Further confusing the change to coincide with the presidential election cycle are those few who clamor for nonpartisan or open elections, when nonpartisan data shows both reduce voter turnout.

Nonetheless, these collective arguments have been successful to date, primarily due to natural resistance to change.

In addition, why would the few people who are currently voting and determining the elected officials in the city want to give up their influence? 

What is known is that the national average of voter turnout for municipalities who hold off-year elections is 25%.

There is no current cry or political support to change the election cycle, so do not expect it to happen anytime soon.

Unfortunately, in the meantime, this allows less than 10% of the registered voters to determine the mayor of The City of Frederick.

Two hundred years of being wrong, doesn’t make it right.

Stay tuned.

 

---

 

Donate today to Frederick Politics by clicking on a Donation Button in the right hand margin of page - Thank You!