This week, I’ve been tracking some consternation in the community regarding the Citizens’ Election Fund, Howard County’s public campaign financing program. In 2016, Howard County voters voted for a charter amendment via a ballot question to establish the fund, and the County Council introduced legislation instituting the program. Then-County Executive Allan Kittleman consistently and steadfastly opposed the CEF program, saying “our taxes should not go to boost the campaign coffers of any political candidate.” He opposed the ballot question and also vetoed the County Council’s legislation, but the County Council overrode Kittleman’s veto in 2017 and officially established the CEF for a 2022 launch. Kittleman was voted out of office the following year.
Well, it’s now 2022, and not only is Allan Kittleman making a run to return as County Executive, but he’s also seeking to use the CEF to finance his campaign. That’s… an interesting development. I mean, I like flip-flops as much as the next guy, but I prefer the ones you wear on your feet.
Which brings us to the consternation I mentioned: Kittleman’s fellow Republican David Yungmann has introduced CB6-2022 to make an emergency change to the CEF mid-cycle. Why? It appears that Kittleman and Councilmember Deb Jung, who is also seeking to use the CEF, have only just now read the complete text of the CEF law. It states that public funds will be disbursed to CEF candidates only if the office they seek has more than one candidate running as of the first Tuesday in August preceding the election in question:
- 10-306(a)(3)(i): For purposes of this paragraph, whether an election is contested shall be determined on the first Tuesday in August preceding the election.
- 10-306(a)(3)(ii): The Director shall not disburse a public contribution to a certified candidate in an election in which the candidate is the sole individual who has filed a certificate of candidacy for that office; however, a certified candidate may collect contributions during an uncontested election.
When Councilmember Jung recently requested her public fund disbursement, the county’s director of finance refused to release the funds – due to the fact that per the law, as of last August, she was the only candidate in the District 4 race. Hank Boyd has since filed to run against Councilmember Jung in District 4, so the race is now considered contested; the situation is the same for Allan Kittleman, given that incumbent County Executive Calvin Ball was the only candidate in the race as of last August. Kittleman filed to challenge Dr. Ball in September.
Now Councilmember Jung is outraged, she and Kittleman are urging an amendment, and Councilman Yungmann has introduced CB6-2022 to do just that. Their contention is that this is a technicality, that the text of the CEF law was never intended to have this effect. Given that the August clause of the CEF law was further clarified via an amendment during the legislative process at the time, I’m not entirely convinced it was an oversight or error. Either way, the current verbiage of the law is clear and doesn’t leave much room for any alternate interpretations.
I support the intent behind the public campaign financing program, and I support amending the law to change this deadline to something that makes more sense. However, I believe changing the CEF disbursement rules mid-cycle – a change that would provide campaign funding to some of the very people voting on it – seems like a significant conflict of interest. No doubt it’s a hardship not to receive the public funds as expected, but the law was written clearly, and candidates are free to continue to do grassroots fundraising. After all, as Kittleman stated in 2016, “it was through grassroots support from the community that I was elected, not by spending more money than my opponent.”
It’s pretty gross that Kittleman decided to use public financing after opposing it so fiercely and is now insisting on a change to the CEF that would directly and undoubtedly benefit him. But he doesn’t have a vote here, and Deb Jung does – and it’s my belief that Councilmember Jung and anyone else on the Council who is in a position to benefit from this change in the 2022 cycle should recuse themselves from voting on it.