Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bowie council debates election‑code updates; write‑in and recall provisions sent back for refinements
Summary
Council considered Ordinance O‑02‑26 to update chapter 6 (elections) to match recent charter changes. Members asked staff to clarify electronic‑filing language, keep write‑ins pending board review, and retain the 25% recall threshold for now; staff will return a revised section at a future meeting.
City Clerk Awilda Hernandez presented Ordinance O‑02‑26, a code update intended to align Bowie’s municipal code with a recent charter amendment (CAR‑3‑25) and modernize election procedures ahead of the 2027 municipal cycle.
The ordinance would clarify administrative roles between the board of elections and the city clerk, modernize terminology and permit broader use of electronic submissions for certain filings. Councilmembers praised staff for pruning dated language but raised specific drafting concerns. Councilman Brady asked staff to remove or reword several sentences that created ambiguity about which reports may be filed electronically; staff said candidate initial filings would remain in‑person but corrected reports and final filings could be accepted electronically for some items.
A substantial portion of the debate focused on write‑in candidates. Hernandez said the board recommended removing write‑ins because many are frivolous or fictitious (for example, obvious pseudonyms), and processing them imposes administrative burdens. Councilwoman Adebayo Madu urged the council to preserve write‑in access as a safeguard for ballot access and democratic participation. Staff agreed to keep write‑ins in the draft for further review by the board and to return a revised section to council.
Members also discussed the recall provision. Acting Mayor Wolfley proposed reducing the signature threshold from 25% to 15% of registered voters to reflect city growth. Several councilmembers cautioned that lowering the threshold could increase political volatility and frivolous recalls; others argued the current percentage imposes a high burden as the city expands. City Attorney staff noted the recently adopted charter amendments removed an odd 30‑day clause and left recall thresholds to the code; the council did not adopt a change during the meeting and asked staff to leave the recall threshold at 25% for now.
Next steps: staff will coordinate with the board of elections to refine language on electronic submission and write‑in candidates and return the ordinance (or a redlined section) at a subsequent council meeting. The council indicated it will also pursue planning for district redistricting in light of recent population growth.
