Petition for 4-seat Baltimore County Council expansion falls short

John Lee

The Baltimore Banner

July 30, 2024

The Baltimore County Council has a chance to expand, but not by as much as some activists wanted.

The Vote4More! campaign failed to get enough valid signatures on petitions to put the question of a four-seat expansion on the November ballot, but the question of whether to expand by two more will be as a result of council action this month.

With Vote4More! coming up short, it ends a more-than-two-year effort that Linda Dorsey-Walker, the grassroots group’s chair, said excited people countywide.

“What hurts me is that getting them so excited, I can’t deliver it,” Dorsey-Walker said.

Supporters of expanding the County Council believe it would open the door for more people of color and women to win election. The current seven-member council is all male, with only one Black member.

They also point out that the county’s population has increased significantly since the seven-seat County Council was established in 1956. The county is roughly 30% Black, with a fast-growing immigrant population from Arab and Hispanic countries.

Dorsey-Walker criticized Ruie Lavoie, the director of the Baltimore County Board of Elections, for tossing out a number of the collected signatures for technical reasons, such as incorrect dates or incomplete names.

“She threw out almost 1,400 signatures, maybe more, because people didn’t put in their middle name or their middle initial,” Dorsey-Walker said.

Lavoie has declined to comment.

According to the Maryland State Board of Elections, a signature on a petition has to match the name as it appears on the statewide voter registration list. It can also be accepted if it contains the surname and at least the first or middle name and the initials of any other names.

“For example, if a voter is registered as Margaret Hall Smith, it is permissible for her to sign as Margaret H. Smith or M. Hall Smith. But M.H. Smith or Margaret Smith is not permissible and will be invalidated,” according to the state’s election law.

According to the county board of elections, Vote4More! Submitted 7,284 valid signatures as of July 28. On July 29, it submitted an additional 1,428 signatures, which were not enough to put the issue on the ballot.

At least 10,000 valid signatures were needed by Monday to put the four-seat expansion question to voters.

Dorsey-Walker said on Tuesday that the group may consider an appeal, depending on the final number of verified signatures reported by the Board of Elections.

“Too many people care about this,” Dorsey-Walker said.

The County Council can also put a referendum on the ballot.

Earlier this month, the council agreed to let voters decide whether two seats should be added to the seven member council.

The council rejected Dorsey-Walker’s request that it put the four-seat expansion on the ballot and opted for two instead.

Republican Councilman David Marks had criticized the Vote4More! effort as being partisan. He and other Republicans were concerned that expanding the council to 11 seats would be a gift for Democratic candidates. The current council now is almost evenly split, with four Democrats and three Republicans.

The two-seat ballot question approved by the County Council includes a redrawn district map for nine seats.

“In a bipartisan vote, the County Council responded to those who want a larger body by allowing voters to have their say this fall,” Marks said in a statement. “Our map proposes fair districts that give both parties a fighting chance.”

County Executive Johnny Olszewski, a Democrat, backed the four-seat expansion and signed the petition.

He is disappointed that the four-seat effort fell short but supports the addition of two council seats, said Erica Palmisano, Olszewski’s press secretary.

“We will continue to support efforts by our Council partners to add much-needed seats at the table on behalf of residents and bring our council in line with neighboring jurisdictions,” Palmisano said.