Fennel objects to distribution of party affiliation mailings in Montgomery County

Mark Fennel (R-Silver Spring), the GOP nominee to replace the late Marilyn Praisner (D) on the Montgomery County Council, District 4, issued a statement yesterday objecting to the distribution of what his campaign called "an unnecessary 4-page letter to 90,000 plus voters in council District 4 to try to stimulate voter turnout for Don Praisner," his Democratic opponent in Tuesday's special election.

The issue revolves around the Montgomery County Board of Elections sample ballots, which include the candidates' names, but not party affiliation.

Today, the county board of elections began distributing the mailings to District 4 residents, which Fennel called "a political waste of the taxpayers' money."

The county is heavily Democratic-likely the main reason why Fennel voiced his concern.

"Don Praisner failed to notice that the party designation was missing during the inspection period, while Mark Fennel inspected and was fine with the ballot," the Fennel campaign said in a statement. 

Praisner, however, denied that he ever inspected the ballot, telling PolitickerMD.com today, "I didn't take the time to look at it."

Fennel also accused the Praisner campaign of coordinating with the board to distribute the new information on party affiliation, saying, "The Don Praisner campaign could not afford this last-minute election reminder, so they are having the political board of elections do it for him."

Praisner flatly denied any such coordination, saying the decision to distribute the mailings was "up to the board of elections."

Marjorie Roher, a spokesperson for the county board of elections, was unavailable for comment.

According to Raquel Guillory, director of communications for Attorney General Doug Gansler, sample ballots "are not required before special elections."

"Only reasonable notification is required," Guillory said.

If sample ballots are produced during a special election they are not required to include party affiliation, according to Guillory.

"Mark Fennel and Don Praisner both received the same e-mail from (the board of) elections," the Fennel campaign statement read. "Now, just days before the election on Tuesday, May 13, the board has decided to correct the ballots to included party designation, mail letters to those who have requested absentee ballots, and mail letters telling party designation of the candidates to all other potential voters in District 4."

"What we have is a state entity spending tens of thousands of dollars to try to turn out voters to the polls for Don Praisner, in a low-turnout special election," Fennel accused.

"At a time of a $300 million budget deficit, and the largest property tax increase in 20 years looming on the horizon, this is despicable," he added.