More than seven months after a secretive write-in campaign ousted a longtime Town of Chevy Chase council member, the town is still mulling whether to require future write-in candidates to make their candidacy known before an election.
Last week, the town sent two potential new ethics laws to the State Ethics Commission for review. One would require write-in candidates to file a financial disclosure statement at least seven days before the town’s annual May election.
The other would require a write-in candidate to file a financial disclosure statement within seven days of winning an election. Mayor Al Lang said during a town council meeting Wednesday night that he expects the State Ethics Commission will review both proposals at its Dec. 17 meeting and that the council will be able to take action on the proposed laws at its January meeting.
The town’s current ethics law doesn’t specify when a winning write-in candidate must file a financial disclosure statement, something that caused controversy in May and has continued to divide the town.
More than 300 town residents signed an online petition urging the five-member council to require write-in candidates to file seven days before an election and recent council meetings have frequently featured larger-than-normal crowds, with members of the public interrupting council members and council members criticizing fellow council members.
Council member Fred Cecere, with the backing of a number of town residents unhappy with incumbent council member Pat Burda and the town’s building variance regulations, ran the successful write-in campaign that sparked the controversy.
In the days before the May 5 election, Cecere supporters circulated emails encouraging other like-minded residents to write in Cecere’s name but not to let potential Burda supporters know of the effort.
About an hour before the polls closed on May 5, Lang—a council member who frequently clashed with Burda and who will be up for re-election in 2016—submitted a financial disclosure form from Cecere to town officials.
The town’s Ethics Commission and Election Board in September released a report criticizing Lang, who became the town’s mayor with Cecere’s support, and Vice Mayor John Bickerman for refusing to discuss the role they played in Cecere’s campaign.
During a raucous council meeting a week later, Lang actually voted in support of the requirement that write-in candidates file before an election, apparently angering Bickerman, who promptly left the meeting.
In October, Lang reversed his position, pushing a change that would require write-in candidates file after winning an election.
In an email sent to fellow council members Dec. 4, Lang said the town should submit both options to the State Ethics Commission for review and that he might vote in favor of the seven-days-before-an-election requirement to quell the controversy.
“I have reached the conclusion that the likelihood of a controversial spontaneous write-in campaign occurring in the future is so remote that the issue is not worth the significant Council, staff, and attorney time it continues to consume, as well as the amount of energy it is consuming with our residents,” Lang wrote. “Although I may continue to believe that preserving write-in candidacy as currently allowed by Town law, is the correct policy decision, I may decide to change my vote, in favor of the opposing arguments, to put this issue to rest.”
Meanwhile, the Lang-led council is considering changes to the town’s building variance rules—which some have argued are too restrictive—that could mean some building variances are granted by the town’s mayor and town manager without a formal hearing before the full council.
Now, residents who want to build decks, large fences or home additions must present their cases to the council during its monthly meetings.
The town is also considering changing its ordinance when it comes to cutting down trees on private property.
