In a world where political donations and campaign spending routinely includes figures with multiple commas, $60,000 may not seem like enough money to cause much of a fuss. But when you’re an elected official who ostensibly gave that money to your own campaign with the hope you might one day get it back, only to find out years later you probably won’t — well, that’s a different thing.

That’s the position Baltimore County State’s Attorney Scott Shellenberger finds himself in after his campaign amended almost three years’ worth of finance reports earlier this year in an effort to reclassify $60,000 worth of contributions he made in 2022 as personal loans.

Maryland campaign finance regulations prohibit a contribution from being retroactively labeled a loan, according to State Administrator of Elections Jared DeMarinis, an effort to keep candidates and campaigns honest about where donors’ dollars are going.

But Shellenberger says he isn’t trying to pull the wool over anyone’s eyes — the mistake, he said, was an honest one. His campaign amended the reports earlier this year, around the same time Sarah David, the deputy Maryland state prosecutor, announced she would run against him in the 2026 Democratic primary. But that was coincidence, nothing more, he said.

“I can tell you my intent from the moment it happened was that it be a loan,” Shellenberger said in a telephone interview.

Here is what Shellenberger says happened:

It was the 2022 primary election and he was in a tight spot. His campaign was light on cash and his Democratic primary opponent, with the backing of billionaire liberal financier George Soros, was not.

So Shellenberger did what any candidate with means might do and loaned $65,000 of his own money to his campaign. The state’s attorney makes about $220,000 a year.

But the person who prepared Shellenberger’s campaign finance reports was new on the job and made a mistake when processing those checks, Shellenberger said.

They only declared a $5,000 loan and the other $60,000 was listed as two $30,000 contributions. No one noticed, at least in part, because Shellenberger went on to win the election and his health was the topic making headlines; he took a leave of absence after winning that primary.

To prove his intent that the funds were always meant to be loans, Shellenberger shared photocopies of what he said are the two $30,000 checks he wrote. Both have “loan” written in the memo line in a distinctive scratch.

“Both those checks are my handwriting, including the word ‘loan,’” Shellenberger said.

As to how the error was eventually caught some 2 1/2 years later, the five-term state’s attorney provided a letter from his fundraisers at Rice Consulting explaining their side of the story. The consulting firm caught the error during a “review of loan activity” late last year, which prompted the changes.

“Our sole intent was to rectify a genuine record-keeping error. At the time, we found no specific guidance in the Maryland Campaign Finance Summary Guide indicating that such a correction would raise compliance concerns,” an employee from the firm wrote.

“This was an isolated incident, and we respectfully request understanding and leniency in light of our intent to ensure accurate and transparent reporting,” the letter went on to say.

If a candidate or their committee erroneously label a loan a contribution, they may be able to correct it immediately thereafter without penalty, DeMarinis said. Circumstances differ when the supposed gaffe is caught years later.

Rice Consulting and Shellenberger have asked the State Board of Elections to consider approving the change from a contribution to a loan, but a timeline for when a decision may come is unclear.

While Shellenberger hopes to prevail and have an opportunity to recoup some of his money, he said he will ultimately respect whatever the board decides. David’s campaign declined to comment.