By Tara Fischer

Staff Writer

 The election vendor for the 2025 Ocean Pines Association Board of Directors election has yet to be named, after a motion to authorize contract negotiations with ACE Printing and Mailing of Berlin failed to carry.

ACE formally withdrew from consideration following the discussions at the OPA Board of Directors meeting on Saturday, April 26.

At the meeting, John Latham, board secretary and liaison to the elections committee, made a motion to select ACE Printing and Mailing as the company to conduct this summer’s election to choose the homeowner association’s governing body.

The motion failed to carry in a 3-3 vote. Directors Latham, Elaine Brady, and Steve Jacobs voted for it, while Rick Farr, Stuart Lakernick, and Jeff Heavner opposed. Director Monica Rakowski abstained.

Prior to the vote, a lengthy discussion among members focused on ACE’s ability to conduct the election efficiently and the election committee’s lack of follow-up questions asked of the potential vendor.

Elections Committee Chair Steve Ransdell said the group was split on whether to recommend ACE or MK Election Services, which handled the task last year. According to Ransdell, the election team voted 3-2 in favor of ACE. The chair added his choice was MK Elections Services of New Haven, Connecticut.

The board’s hesitancy to select ACE Printing and Mailing stemmed from the company’s assertion that it needed time to create a new custom online voting portal for Ocean Pines. OPA Board of Directors Vice President Rick Farr asked if it had been developed or tested. Ransdell said that, to his knowledge, that program has not been created at this point.

“Because on our committee there was strong support for ACE, and I was on the opposite side of the discussion, I reached out to [the ACE president] to ask a few questions, largely to see if I could come around to supporting the rest of the committee,” Ransdell said. “I asked him about that very thing, and he was, I don’t want to say dismissive, but he assured me that whatever needed to be done would be done in compliance with our timeline and would be ready to go in plenty of time.”

It was also stated that ACE did not provide references to past work similar to the style of hybrid election that Ocean Pines required election, citing confidentiality concerns.

“I know in any business, references as far as performances are critical and important,” Farr said. “Not being able to share references is a concern for me on that aspect of being able to show past performance. So, I will be brutally honest that that’s a red flag … I understand confidentiality. However, as far as providing references of past performance, I think it’s very important for us to make this type of decision.”

Heavner asked how ACE plans to count the physical ballots, as voters can vote online or by paper, and if they would use Ocean Pines’ reader or if they were in possession of their own. Ransdell said he was unsure, but that he suspected ACE “very well might sub out that work” just as MK Elections does.

The chair added that ACE also committed to an observable count and even offered to conduct it on site, to which Ransdell said he “didn’t know what to make of that.” He said he could reach back out if necessary.

In a letter written by ACE President Thom Gulyas to OPA formally withdrawing from consideration for the election contract, he wrote that requests not initially stated in the RFP have been placed on ACE following the discussions held on April 26. In the correspondence, he maintained that his company does have reader equipment for physical votes.

“Ownership of ballot scanning equipment was not specified as mandatory in the RFP (request for proposals), although we already own such equipment,” the letter said.

During the conversation, Brady said she was hesitant to decide, as there appeared to be a lack of vital information, like ACE’s experience with online voting.

“You said you don’t know if they have [handled a hybrid election], you didn’t really ask or nail that down,” she said, addressing Ransdell. “Quite frankly, that’s something we expect from the committee to be able to follow through and provide those kinds of answers. It makes me a little unsettled today to make a decision because we don’t really know if the answer is yes or no, or maybe so.”

Jacobs reiterated Brady’s concerns but noted that when he ran for the community board three years ago, he hired ACE to create his signs and will likely use their services again if he does run this year. However, he said that more information is needed about the company’s ability to conduct a hybrid election.

“It does seem to me that there are a number of questions that need further exploration that have been raised by the board,” Jacobs said. “… there appears to be some lack of clarity, might be the best way to put it.”

Ransdell said that he hoped to have a selected vendor by this week.

Ultimately, the motion to enter into negotiations with ACE failed. The intention was to receive additional information from the Berlin-based group and have conversations this week to create a plan for selecting a contractor. A wrench was thrown into the plan when ACE released a letter at the start of this week withdrawing from election service consideration.

“After reviewing the video and transcript of your recent Board meeting discussion, we must express serious concerns regarding the evolving nature of the selection process and the apparent deviation from the requirements set forward in the original RFP,” the note reads.

The correspondence claims that requests from OP were not included in the original RFP, such as providing client references, demonstrating a functioning online voting portal, and owning ballot scanning equipment. ACE also expressed concern at the “public questioning of their business model and service offerings” at the April 26 board meeting.

The letter adds that the “financial implications of the board’s actions cannot be ignored.” ACE’s bid was $18,685, while MK Elections’ was $31,539.

ACE handled Ocean Pines’ election before the association added an online voting option. In 2023, the board selected Election Trust of Washington State to run that year’s election. In 2024, the group chose MK Election Services.

In withdrawing his company from consideration, Gulyas wrote, “In light of the serious procedural irregularities and breaches already identified, we expect prompt corrective action from the board to restore compliance with the original RFP requirements and to ensure all vendors are treated equitably and fairly moving forward.

 “However, given the cumulative procedural irregularities, shifting requirements, confidentiality breaches, and demonstrable bias exhibited during this process, ACE Printing & Mailing formally withdraws all consideration from this RFP and disassociates from any further involvement under OPA’s current, tainted framework.

“We categorically reject any continued participation in a procurement exercise that so plainly violates the fundamental standards of fairness, transparency, and professional ethics.”