This article was republished with permission from 草莓传媒’s news partners at .听Sign up for today.
This content was republished with permission from 草莓传媒鈥檚 news partners at Maryland Matters. Sign up for听听迟辞诲补测.
Nearly a month after the primary, Frederick County Democrats who live in County Council District 3 still don鈥檛 know who their nominee for the fall campaign will be.
And due to a bizarre set of circumstances that the head of the county鈥檚 Democratic Central Committee called 鈥渦nique,鈥� it may be several days more before a nominee emerges.
鈥淚t is not 鈥榲ery unusual,鈥欌�� central committee chair Deborah Carter said. 鈥淚t is, in fact, unique. It鈥檚 never happened. It is completely unprecedented.鈥�听
鈥淚t has so many moving pieces and it is so unprecedented, that we are consulting everybody we can think of and still don鈥檛 have clarity on some of the issues,鈥� she added.听听
This much is known:
Community activist Jazmin Di Cola (D) defeated Council President M.C. Keegan-Ayer (D)听听in the July 19 primary 鈥� 2,298 votes for the challenger versus 2,297 votes for the two-term incumbent.
Keegan-Ayer signaled almost immediately that she intended to seek a free recount, which she was entitled to given the closeness of the outcome, a mere 0.02% of the votes cast.
Against that backdrop, Keegan-Ayer sued to have Di Cola declared ineligible, claiming that she moved out of District 3 in the spring and therefore failed the county charter鈥檚 requirement that a candidate live in their district they wish to represent for a year prior to balloting.
On Friday, after an all-day hearing, Frederick County Circuit Court Judge Julia Martz-Fisher ruled that, in fact, Di Cola听.
Di Cola has five days to appeal the judge鈥檚 ruling. Although she did not respond to a request for comment on Monday, she听听on Sunday that she intends to fight on.
鈥淧lease do not feel discouraged about yesterday鈥檚 ruling; we will appeal the disqualification ruling,鈥� she wrote. 鈥淭his ruling wasn鈥檛 against me but against a whole community that took steps to raise its voice through voting.鈥�
鈥淪ince selling my home, I have always maintained a residence and domicile in the District,鈥� Di Cola claimed. A few paragraphs later, however, she wrote: 鈥淚 recently found a home to purchase in District 3 that I鈥檓 waiting to close on the sale鈥︹��
鈥淚 do business in the District; I invest in the District, I do community in the District, I pay taxes in the District, I volunteer in the District, I provide work for business owners that live in the District, I mentor entrepreneurs that live in the District, I cry with the difficulties my constituents feel daily in the District, I advocate for the people in the District, I know the District and I鈥檓 the District,鈥� she added.
This is where the situation gets even more complex.
If Di Cola wins the appeal and the recount, she becomes the Democratic nominee, said Carter.
If Di Cola loses the appeal but wins the recount, her victory would be nullified by the court ruling. The central committee would then appoint a nominee to the ballot vacancy.
If she loses the recount, her appeal to the Court of Appeals would become moot, because Keegan-Ayer would become the victor.
The Frederick County Board of Elections is scheduled to being the recount Tuesday at 9 a.m.
鈥淲hat we do not yet have clarity on is what happens if (Di Cola) loses the appeal but then it鈥檚 a tie in the recount,鈥� said Carter. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 what we don鈥檛 know yet.鈥�
Another wrinkle still to be sorted out 鈥� at least in theory 鈥� is whether Di Cola cast a District 3 ballot inappropriately. Since the judge ruled that she is ineligible to seek the District 3 seat on the county council, how could she be a District 3 voter?
鈥淭hat was not covered in the ruling,鈥� said Carter. 鈥淪o that is up in the air as well.鈥� (Since Di Cola won by the one vote, it鈥檚 not an insignificant question.)
Reached by phone on Monday, Keegan-Ayer said she鈥檚 ready for the drama to be over.
鈥淚t is highly unusual,鈥� she said with a laugh. 鈥淚 liken it to a really bad ride at the carnival, and I鈥檓 not ever buying a ticket to this ride again. It鈥檚 been incredibly stressful.鈥�
鈥楻umors鈥� of information-sharing prior to the lawsuit
Di Cola also posted to Facebook a two-paragraph notice that the central committee distributed on Sunday.
In it, the committee said 鈥渋t has come to our attention鈥� that Carter was rumored to have been a 鈥渟ource of information鈥� in the lawsuit. 鈥淎 plaintiff in the lawsuit testified that during a friendly coffee meeting, Ms. Carter informed her of a rumor about Ms. DiCola鈥檚 residency, and implied support of the rumor.鈥�
鈥淲e contend that this did not happen, and that we maintained neutrality throughout the primary,鈥� the notice added. 鈥淣o one on the Central Committee encouraged the lawsuit or even knew that there would be a lawsuit. We share in the pain this has caused for the community in district 3 and beyond鈥︹��
Keegan-Ayer said she 鈥渘ever talked to anyone on the central committee about鈥� Di Cola鈥檚 potential residency issue.
