There is a race for mayor in Annapolis. It’s one of those off-year elections that people sometimes say is a bellwether for something else.

Few are probably paying attention.

I’m working with the Caucus of African American Leaders to change that. The group will host a forum at 6 p.m. Tuesday between the two declared candidates, both Democrats. I’ll moderate questions from a panel of journalists and the audience at the Wiley H. Bates Legacy Center, and the event will be streamed live on the caucus Facebook page.

Alderwoman Rhonda Pindell Charles and former Alderman Jared Littmann will face off in a Sept. 16 primary, with the general election Nov. 4.

Here’s the problem. No Republican, independent or third-party candidate has stepped forward to run.

That still could change. The deadline to file with the city Board of Elections is July 28. If history is any guide, some sacrificial lamb will offer him or herself for the Republicans.

Read More

Annapolis can be a lousy place for kids to play. The next mayor needs to fix it.

May 16, 2025

There is no talk of anyone planning a serious run other than Littmann and Charles. No financing, no organization and really, let’s be honest, no realistic chance of winning.

That makes Charles or Littmann likely the next mayor of Annapolis, chosen by whatever percentage of the 13,886 registered Democrats turn out in September.

The other 11,950 Republicans, independents and minor-party voters, well, they can take a flying leap at a rolling doughnut.

This campaign season, I’m exploring problems the next mayor of Annapolis and the new City Council will face when they take office in December — both leftover challenges from Mayor Gavin Buckley’s seven-plus years in office and new ones.

Voters should ask candidates about their vision for future local elections.

Changing them is not a new idea, and it’s fraught with political meaning. It always seems like it’s the Republicans, Maryland’s perennial second party, who want to rewrite the rules in a game they haven’t been winning.

Four years ago, the lone Republican on the City Council tried to shift the city to open primaries. It never got to a vote.

Buckley and the council created a task force after their resounding victories to look at improving future elections.

After 18 months of study, the group suggested open primaries, moving the city elections from odd years to the even-year general election cycle, creating a public financing option and adopting term limits.

The all-Democratic City Council has yet to vote on the recommendations.

You can chalk this up to partisan politics. If the system is working for you, why change it?

Two new developments have made the idea relevant in this election.

A group calling itself Annapolitans for a Better Community is collecting signatures to place a question on the November ballot that would open primaries. Voters could pick one, Republican or Democrat, and vote regardless of their party affiliation.

The term Annapolitan offers a clue as to who these folks are. Most have been in various aspects of city political life for some time.

Some are Buckley opponents, arguing that he let taxes get too high — cutting taxes is the other referendum they hope to get before voters. Some also hate portions of his plans for redeveloping City Dock to protect against climate change.

Bill Kardash, the leader of the group, said new referendum rules adopted last year mean they have to collect signatures from 10% of all registered voters, with at least 250 in each of the city’s eight wards.

That second requirement is the challenge, and so is the calendar. They have to get them certified before the council’s last meeting prior to the primary, July 28.

The petition could be moot if five Maryland voters win a lawsuit they filed against the state last month in Anne Arundel County Circuit Court.

Represented by Boyd Rutherford, Maryland’s former Republican lieutenant governor, they claim publicly funded primaries violate the state Constitution’s guarantee that registered voters are entitled to vote in “all elections to be held in this State.”

You could argue this is just so much sour grapes from the losers. I’ve heard Democrats say that.

The problem with that idea, of course, is that an election like this one in Annapolis leaves almost half the registered voters out of the equation. Disenfranchised.

It would be easy for people to change parties for the purposes of a primary, but that’s tantamount to a poll tax.

There can be mischief in open primaries.

Democratic voters in an open primary could vote for the weakest Republican to boost their party in the fall.

It’s the same with ranked-choice voting, another alternative gaining interest nationwide.

In New York City, where voters pick candidates for a runoff, five weaker candidates in the race for mayor are collaborating to beat the front-runner, former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

One of the recommendations of the election study group was a perennial favorite: term limits.

In a survey of almost 700 voters, the panel found the most support for limiting the terms of council members. More than 73% of voters who responded to the survey approved of the idea.

Charles, if she loses her bid for mayor in September, and two other departing council members have more than a combined 45 years of experience.

Each of them was returned to office over and over again.

So why not pursue that as a referendum?

The flip side of support for this idea is that voters generally want term limits for everyone but their own representatives.

Neither Littmann nor Charles has shown interest in the idea of changing how Annapolis chooses its mayor and council.

Between now and September, voters should ask them if proposals for a different kind of election deserve a final determination once the new council is sworn into office.

The idea deserves a vote.