The Maryland Courts of Appeal Building. File photo by Bennett Leckrone.
Baltimore City officials can count any votes cast for Question F, the city ballot question that could allow for the redevelopment of Harborplace.
The Supreme Court of Maryland on Thursday ended weeks of uncertainty and reversed a September ruling by an Anne Arundel County judge that would have prohibited the city from tallying the votes.
The unanimous five-page order from the high court came one day after the justices heard oral arguments in the case, in an appeal filed by the Maryland State Board of Elections.
State board officials had appealed after Anne Arundel County Circuit Court Judge Cathleen Vitale sided with opponents of the ballot initiative, who said Question F – a proposed change to the city charter that would allow current public park lands to be used for commercial purposes – was not “charter material” but a zoning question. Opponents also said the wording of the question was not clear enough for voters to understand.
Vitale agreed with the opponents on Sept. 16. Because ballots had already been printed and mailed by then, however, Vitale could not order the question stricken from the ballot. Instead, she barred city elections officials from counting any votes cast for or against the charter amendment.
Of the more than 63,000 mail-in ballots that were sent to Baltimore City voters, 18% had already been returned as of this week.
The state board of elections and the developer of the proposed Harborplace project appealed to the Supreme Court. They argued that the ballot question did not violate state law and claimed opponents waited to long to go to court – the state said that opponents did not file their petition with Vitale until late in the afternoon of the day before ballots were printed.
In their ruling, the justices Thursday unanimously sided with the state and developer. The court’s order reversed all three of Vitale’s rulings and remanded the case back to her to enter a judgment in favor of the election board.
The high court said it would explain legal reasons behind its Thursday order in an opinion that will be filed separately at a later date.
Neither board officials nor an attorney for the group of two dozen opponents, led by former Baltimore City Councilmember Anthony Ambridge, responded to a request for comment Thursday.