Board of Elections reviews draft election manual, flags accessibility and reporting gaps

The Board of Elections opened its meeting by approving an amended agenda and moved into a section-by-section review of a draft municipal election manual intended to guide local election operations.

Jessica, speaking for staff, told the board that "we learned last night, very late that our town attorney passed away unexpectedly this past weekend," and said that will affect the timing of the manual's legal review. She also flagged legislation in the Maryland General Assembly that "would require municipalities to report our election... the date of the election" directly to the State Board of Elections and to post that information on municipal websites; Jessica said the town already posts similar data to the county but will comply with the new reporting requirement and share the bill with the board.

The central discussion focused on structure and detail in the draft manual. The board debated replacing narrowly cited subsections with higher-level references so the manual remains valid if statutory sections are renumbered. One member summarized the approach as citing "Article 5 of the charter" and "Chapter 29 of the town code" rather than specific subsections, while others said retaining some specificity makes future revisions easier to locate.

Board members compared Riverdale Park's draft with manuals from University Park, Takoma Park and College Park. Jahara, who reviewed those documents, said the town's draft was generally sound but noted gaps: "the accessibility language... is pretty light in our manual," there were missing detailed policies on electioneering and challenger/watcher procedures, and other manuals included more judge-specific procedures and mail-in ballot processes. Jahara also raised that guidance about the different types of machines and how they are operated should clarify that the machines are provided by a vendor rather than operated directly by town staff.

Evan, reviewing the manual from a new-user perspective, said he "didn't really find anything that was too confusing" but acknowledged some details were fuzzy because he had read an earlier version.

The board agreed to hold detailed, changeable operational items in appendices so those can be updated after each election while keeping the main body of the manual higher-level. Jessica said she will resend the draft to the town's election judges and ask for written comments by Feb. 11 so the board can integrate feedback before the next meeting (scheduled for Feb. 18). Jahara will provide a written comparison report of the other municipalities' manuals for the board to review.

The meeting closed with members agreeing to proof and finalize the manual text after they receive judge feedback and the pending legal review. The chair said she would reach out to the mayor and council to ensure the town and board have aligned expectations on next steps.