Agenda Item 25
May 26,2011
Action
MEMORANDUM
May 24, 2011
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
County Council
Amanda Mihill, Legislative
Analyst~
Action:
Bill 2-11, Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission - Staff Support
Government Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee recommendation (2-1):
do not enact
Bill 2-11. Councilmember Reimer recommended enacting Bill 2-11.
~--------------------
Bill 2-11, Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission - Staff Support, sponsored by the Council
President on recommendation of the Organizational Reform Commission (ORC), was introduced
on March 8, 2011. A public hearing was held on March 29. There were no witnesses at the
hearing on this issue, but the Council has received some correspondence from constituents
questioning the salary and position. The Executive opposed Bill 2-11; the Mid-County Citizens
Advisory Board supported the ORC recommendation (©13). The Government Operations and
Fiscal Policy Committee held a worksession on Bill 2-11 on April 14.
Background.
Bill 2-11 would eliminate the Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission (CJCC)
Director position and require the Police Department to provide staff support to the Commission.
In its report to the Council dated January 31, 2011, ORC recommended the County eliminate the
CJCC Executive Director position and house the Commission in the Police Department (©4).
The Executive opposed this recommendation (©5, 7). Bill 2-11 would implement the ORC
recommendation as it relates to the CJCc.
Fiscal Impact Statement (FIS,
©11). The Office of Management and Budget's FIS for Bill
2-11 argues that eliminating the Executive Director position and requiring the Police Department
to provide staffing for the CJCC would actually increase County expenditures by $2,680 each
fiscal year. The FIS assumes that a Police Captain would staff the CJCC. Council staff
questions whether a Police Captain is required to provide staff support and whether a less senior
staff person could fulfill the same functions. Additionally, Council staff questions why the FIS
assumes that the Police Department would hire an additional Police Captain rather than assign
the CJCC staffing duties to an existing staff member.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Staffing history.
Senior Legislative Analyst Linda McMillan provided the following
infonnation regarding the history of staffing the CJCC. Staffing for the Criminal Justice
Coordinating Commission has varied in size and organizational location. For example, in 1989,
the Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission was housed in the State's Attorney's Office. The
FY89 budget stated that, "The Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission (3.0 WYs) maintains
independent authority from the State's Attorney's Office, was established and authorized by
Section 2-60 of the Montgomery County Code. The Commission is responsible for inquiries
regarding the organization and adequacy of law enforcement and the administration of justice.
The Commission also involves itself in other matters relevant to the prevention and control of
crime, and seeks the achievement of fair and effective law enforcement." The budget further
noted that the staff included three full-time positions: a Senior Management Specialist (Grade
28); a Planning Program Coordinator (Grade 27); and an Office Services Manager (Grade 13).
In 1989, the CJCC's work included a task force to review alternatives to incarceration in order to
minimize the impact of a growing inmate population (this eventually led to development of
programs like the Pre-Trial Services Unit), coordination of victim services, a study of prisoner
transport, and coordination of the local Criminal Justice Infonnation System (CJIS).
In FY92, the CJCC staff was transferred from the State's Attorney's Office to the Office of the
County Executive. In FY94, the staff of the CJCC was reduced to an Executive Staff Specialist
(Grade 28) and a part-time Office Services Manager (Grade 15). The FY94 budget noted this
lower number of staff would impact the ability of the CJCC to provide the same quantity of
statistical analysis and research, write grant proposals, and administer grants. During FY95, the
staff support for the CJCC was absorbed by other staff in the Executive's Office. The CJCC
Director functions were assigned to a Senior Assistance Chief Administrative Officer. The
CJCC continued to be assigned to an Assistant CAO until the current Executive Director position
was added.
Committee recommendation
As part of its discussion of the FY12 operating budget for the County Executive's Office,
the
Councilmember Riemer
Committee recommended
(2-0) against enacting Bill 2-11.
recommended enacting Bill 2-11 and assign a Special Assistant to the Executive or Special
Projects Manager to provide staff support to the CJCC. The Council discussed the budget for the
County Executive's Office on May 16 and tentatively supported the Committee's
recommendation.
This packet contains:
Bill 2-11
Legislative Request Report
Excerpt of Organizational Refonn Commission Report
Excerpt of Executive response to ORC Report
Memorandum from Executive
Fiscal Impact Statement
Testimony from Mid-County Citizens Advisory Board
F:\LAW\BILLS\11 02 CJCC\Action Memo.Doc
Circle
#
1
3
4
5
7
11
13
2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Bill No.
2-11
Concerning: Criminal
Justice
Coordinating Commission - Staff
Support
Revised:
3/2/2011
Draft No. 2
Introduced:
March 8, 2011
Expires:
September 8,2012
Enacted: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Executive: _ _ _ _ _ _ _
~
__
Effective: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Sunset Date: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
ChI _ _, Laws of Mont. Co. _ _ __
COUNTY COUNCIL
FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND
By: Coilncil President on the recommendation ofthe Organizational Reform Commission
AN
ACT to:
(1)
(2)
(3)
eliminate the Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission Director position;
require the Police Department to provide staff support to the Commission; and
generally amend County law regarding the Commission.
By amending
Montgomery County Code
Chapter 2, Administration
Sections 2-26 and 2-60
Boldface
Underlining
[Single boldface brackets]
QQuble underlining
[[Double boldface brackets]]
* * *
Heading or defined term.
Added to existing law by original bill.
Deletedfro.mexisting law by original bill.
Added by amendment.
Deletedfrom existing law or the
bill by
amendment.
Existing lmv unaffected by bill.
The County Council for Montgomery County, Maryland approves the following Act:
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No.
2-11
1
Sec. 1. Sections 2-26 and 2-60 are amended as follows:
2-26. Non-merit positions.
The following positions in the Office ofthe County Executive are non-merit
positions:
(
a)
2
3
4
5
5 Directors of the Regional Services Centers;
Director, Office of Community Partnerships;
[Director, Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission;
4 Assistant Chief Administrative Officers; and
6
(b)
(c)
(d)]
7
8
9
10
11
[(e)]
@
Special Projects Manager.
2-60.
Criminal
Justice Coordinating Commission.
*
(9)
*
*
12
13
14
15
[(A) The County Executive must appoint, subject to Council
confirmation, a Director of the Commission.
(B)
The Director is not a voting member of the Commission.
(C) The Director must help the Commission achieve its
objectives by:
(i)
facilitating
meetings;
(ii)
facilitating the coordination and communication of
Commission members;
(iii) assisting the Commission in obtaining information
and assistance from other County .agencies and
programs as needed; and
(iv) assuring that the Commission has the staff and other
resources it needs.
(10)] The [Chief Administrative Officer] Police Department must
provide staff support to the Commission subject to appropriation.
the
coordination
of
Commission
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
*
*
*
f:\iaw\bills\1102 cjcc\bill 2.doc
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
LEGISLATIVE REQUEST REPORT
Bill 2-11
Criminal :Justice Coordinating Commission
-
StajfSupport
DESCRIPTION:
Bill 5-11 would eliminate the Criminal Justice Coordinating
Commission Director position and require the Police Department
0
provide staff support to the Commission.
The Organizational Reform Commission recommended that the
director position be eliminated and the Commission housed in the
Police Department.
The CJCC performs an important function in helping to coordinate
the programs and activities of the County's various criminal justice
agencies. However, it meets only 4 times a year, does not require an
annual report, and in other ways has had its duties modified in recent
years. In the past, it has been staffed by County personnel who also
had other duties, rather than by a dedicated staff of its own. The goal
is to restructure this function to reduce County expenses in response
to the County's fiscal constraints.
County
Ex~cutive,
Police Department
To be requested.
To be requested.
-To be requested.
To be researched ..
Organizational Reform Commission Report.
Amanda Mihil1, Legislative Analyst, 240-777-78.15
Not applicable.
PROBLEM:
GOALS AND
OBJECTIVES:
COORDINATION:
FISCAL IMPACT:
ECONOMIC
IMPACT:
EVALUATION:
EXPERIENCE
ELSEWHERE:
SOURCE OF
INFORLvlATION:
APPLICATION
WITIDN
MUNICIPALITIES:
PENALTIES:
None.
F:\LA W\SILLS\ll 02 CJCC\Legislative RequestjReport.Doc
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
-----
---.-~-----
Montgomery County Organizational Reform Commission
This change would result in saving a substantial portion of the $1.7 million
currently budgeted for the HRC. We propose that the HRC and Committee on
HateNiolence be combined to make their efforts more concentrated and provide a
singular focal point for research and dissemination of information. This new
combined commission can be aligned with the Office of Community Partnerships
or another suitable entity, as determined by the Council and Executive. Finally,
the activities of the Interagency Fair Housing Coordinating Group - currently
supported, by the Human Rights Office - should be returned to the Department of
Housing and Community Affairs, from which it was removed in 1996.
.
c) Interagency Coordinating Board
~for
Community Use of Public Facilities
(CUPF) - Current Budget - $9,325,840.
);>
I
1
!
f
,
f
I
I
l
I
j
~
i
The ORC recommends a major modernization of the property management system
for Community Use of Public-Facilities. We also believe it is appropriate that the
functions ofthe Office and Board move to the Department of General Services.
Since CUPF is an enterprise fund, no taxpayer savings would be generated by
these reforms, but it is highly likely that the efficiencies resulting from the moves
could reduce costs to users or· assist in improving services, thereby allocating a
portion of its $9.3 million budget to more effective uses.
d) Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission (CJCC) - Current Budget
$158,000 - The CJCC performs an important function in helping to coordinate the
programs arid activities of the County's various criminal justice agencies.
However,
it
meets only four times a year, does not require an annual report, and in
other ways has had its duties modified in recent years.
In
the past, it has been
staffed by. County personnel who also had other duties, rather than by a dedicated
staff of its own.
r
I
J
g
I
i
j
I
1
1
);>
The ORC believes that staff support for the CJCC does not require an executive
director post that is now staffed by a high-level appointee. We recommend
elimination of this position. We also recommend that the CJCC be housed in the
Police Department, which would provide for its part-time staffsupport.
r
i
1
J
I
:0)
/~
- 14;­
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
collaboration. The operation ofCUPF is intertwined closeJy
with
MCPS, and its
success today is
the
result of many
years
of relationship building.
Financial
impact:
As
noted above, no savings would be generated by moving
CUPF, an Enterprise Fund, under DOS.
It
should aJso be noted that Section 44­
SA
of the County Charter requires reimbursing MCPS for the costs of supporting
community
use,
which mean more than 70% of CUPP's budget
is
returned to
MCPS to cover staff, utility, custodiaJ, and maintenance costs,
with the
remaining
30% covering operations to include funds returned to the General Fund.
Another observation made by ORC'was that
with
efficiencies, perhaps fees could
be reduced. The lCB has continually worked t9keep rates affordable to ensure
access to public space by community groups (98% of which are non-profits) while
at the same time meeting its
OWn
fmandal obligations. Without any
tax
dollar
support, CUPFs fees remain among
the
most competitive in the area.
6. Reorganize the Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission and eliminate the
Exe£utivc Director
position.
County Executive Position:
Oppose
with
Explanation
The Executive Director is part of the County Executive's Office and staff.
I
have
already reduced my Office's direct support over the past few years with a 25%
reduction in FY 2011 and an additional 15% recommended in
my
FY 2012
budget. The additional loss of another positjon would further compromise
my
staffs ability to fulfill the mission of the County Executive's Office. Placement
of the Executive Director position as a collateral duty for an individual in another
agency would compromise the ability to implement the work of
the
Commission.
The Executive Director position must be
a
high-level, appointed position, directly
representing the County Executive in order to integrate the Executive's priorities
and work with the other high-level appointees on the Commission. In addition,
placing the position or dutjes of the Executive Director in one department would
create the appearance of either favoritism or
a
particular direction
which
would
undermine the rationale of the Commission. Further, adding the duties to an
already existing position would minimize the ability to coordinate inter-agency
activities.
The Executive Director, as either a representative of me or as an ex-officio
attends the following Board, Committee or Commission or agency meetings.: the
Disproportionate Minority Contact Committee of the Collaboration Council, the
Juvenile Justice Commission, the Domestic Violence Coordinating Council, the
Domestic Violence Fatality Review Team, the Commission on Veterans
Affairs,
the Criminal Justice Behavioral Health Initiative, and the Department of
Correction and
Reh~bilitation's
Re-Entry Program. Time constraints and the need
for overall coordination would not permit that to continue
if
the Executive
Director position were
eliminated~
regardless whether those memberships. are
distributed among several in5iividuaJs or one person.
or
4
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
While the
full
Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission (CJCC) meets
quarterly, the Steering Committee meets during the intervening months
(8
meetings per year) to discuss Commission policies, identify macro criminal
justice issues, resolve cont1icting inter-agency issues, discuss participation
in
agency proposals and discuss possible CJCe studies; addresses budget issues
facing either individual agencies or the entire Public Safety Clusters (the Steering
Committee had already been examining budget reductions and their ripple effects
prior to the
OMB
generated cluster budget meetings); discuss participation in
agency initiatives to address problems
in
other
ClCC
participating agencies (i.e.
the HHS initiative to establish a diversion program to address the pressures on the
District Court and the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation); and,
identify issues of macro concern for presentation to the
full
Commission. The
Steering Committee also identifies areas where studies are required to mitigate
problems being faced by one or more of the component agencies.
The public safety/criminal justice field is unique
in
that almost all of
the
participating agency criminal justice related programs are inextricably linked
to
the
point that the elimination of a program
1n
one agency
will
affect
several other
agencies.
As
to the comment about
ClCe
responsibilities having been moditied in recent
years,
if
anything, those modifications have
increased~
rather than decreased, the
responsibilities
of the
CICC.
Finally,
the
law does not require
the
eJCC to write
an
annual report because
all of
its activities are part of its constituent agencies. Any additional report would be .
duplicative of
the
other submissions.
7. Enable the Workforce Investment Board and the Division
ofWorkIorce
Services
to coordinate
oversight
of the
workf{}rc~.
grants awarded
by
the
Executive and the Council.
County Executive's Position: Support with Conditions
The County Executive generally supports the
ORe
recommendati.ons regarding
Workforce Training with the following exceptions:
• The Division of Workforce Services (DWS) contractors should only work
with the grantees to increase their knowledge and skills.
• The DWS should oversee grants and deveJop the network among the grantees.
• Checks are issued by
the
Department of Finance. Therefore, there would be no
assumption about lower costs due to oversight of grants by the one-stop
operator.
• Assigning
DWS
contractors to oversee other contractors would be
problematic. .
5
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE
ROCKVILLE. MARYLAND 20850
Isiah Leggett
County Executive
MEMORANDUM
April 11, 2011
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Valerie Ervin, County Council President
)~
_ __
Isiah
Leggett,
County ExeCUlive--?(
~
Bill 2-11, Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission - Staff Support
.
I am writing to express myconcems about the above referenced bill, which
implements the recommendation of the Organizational Reform Commission (ORC) to eliminate
the Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission (CJCC) Director position and require the Police
Department to provide staff support to the CJCC. I previously expressed my opposition to this
ORC recommendation in my February 21,2011 memorandum to you regarding all of the
recommendations in the ORC report. I am forwarding this additional memorandum to further
clarify
my position and address inaccurate statements that have recently appeared in the media
regarding the role and responsibility of the CJCC Director.
At the outset, it is important to understand that Bill 2-11 does not save money. As
reflected in the attached Fiscal Impact Statement, the CJCC Director currently handles CJCC
duties (0.8 work years) and non-CJCC duties (0.2 workyears). The FY12 cost associated with
the CJCC work is $153,470. If the CJCC Director position is eliminated, the CJCC work would
have to be transferred
to
a Police Captain at a cost of$155,620. The FY12 cost associated with
the non-CJCC work, including serving as a hearing officer for administrative hearings (e.g.,
transportation construction projects, Disruptive Behavior Order Hearings, taxicab-related
hearings, and other administrative hearings required by law), is $38,370. These duties were
previously assigned to a full-time Special Projects Director in my office for which funding has
been eliminated in my FY12 recommended budget. If the CJCC Director position is eliminated,
additional funding would have to be included in the budget to fund a part-time position in my
office to handle administrative hearings.
As
discussed in more detail below, the CJCC Director is an integral part of my
staff. I previously reduced the direct staff support for the Office of the County Executive by
about 25% in FYI1
--
and have recommended an additional 15% reduction for FYI2. The
additional loss of another position would further compromise the ability of my office to fulfill its
mission.
montgomery<:ountymd.gov/311
240-773-3556 TTY
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Valerie Ervin, County Council President
Aprilll,2011
The scope of the CJCC Director's duties and responsibilities are outlined in
County law. Under Section 2-60 ofthe County Code, the role of the CJCC Director is to help
the Commission achieve its objectives by:
(1)
facilitating the coordination of Commission
meetings; (2) facilitating the coordination and communication of Commission members; (3)
assisting the Commission in obtaining information and assistance from other County agencies
and programs as needed; and (4) assuring that the Commission has the staff and other resources
that it needs. A more detailed position description for the CJCC Director is set out in Executive
Regp.lation No. 12-07, which was approved by the Council on June 19,2007 (See Council
Resolution 16-191). This regulation outlines a position description, a definition ofwork,
examples of duties and responsibilities, and recommended qualifications, knowledge, skills, and
abilities for the position.
The mission of the CJCC is to coordinate the efforts of all County and State
agencies involved in the criminal justice system in Montgomery County for the purpose of fully
understanding and addressing issues that impact this system. The CJCC seeks to enhance
cooperation among the various criminal justice agencies, as well as mental health agencies that
support the criminal justice system. In recognition of the critical roles that the Fire Marshall and
Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) play in the administration ofjustice, Council
enacted legislation in 2007 at my request which added representatives ofthese two entities to the
CICC.
1
The CJCC is guided by a Steering Committee which, in addition to the CJCC's
quarterly meetings, meets in the eight intervening months to direct the efforts and deliberations
of the CJCC. Using a Steering Committee in this way allows the CJCC to operate as an efficient
and effective advisory body for the County Executive and County Council. In addition to setting
the agenda for CJCC meetings, the Steering Committee: directs
studies~
reviews and edits all
communications from the CJCC; reviews legislation; continually discusses issues and shares
information on a daily basis; resolves conflicting inter-agency issues; discusses participation in
member agency proposals; discusses possible CJCC studies; addresses budget issues facing
either individual agencies or the entire Public Safety Cluster; discusses participation in particular
initiatives aimed at addressing unique problems (such as the Drug Court and Criminal Justice
Behavioral Health Initiative (CJBHI»; addresses docket problems being faced by the District
Court, State's Attorney and Department of Correction and Rehabilitation (DOCR); and identifies
macro issues that need to be addressed by the CJCC.
Under former County Executive Duncan, Executive staff (led by DOCR Director
Arthur Wallenstein) collaborated with Council to enhance the functioning of the CJCC with the
primary goal of increasing member participation and visibility. These efforts were facilitated by
the involvement ofthe Chief Administrative Judges of the Circuit and District Courts, Public
Defender, and State's Attorney. The Council approved a number of changes, including changes
to the Steering Committee membership, new meeting times for the CJCC, and the annual rotation
of the Chair and Vice-Chair between a government member and a County resident member in
1
Bill
25-07) Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission - Amendments was adopted by the Council on October 30,
2007,
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Valerie Ervin, County Council President
April 11, 2011
order to increase public participation and leadership. As a result of these changes, attendance of
CJCC members increased dramatically, collaboration became the norm, and budget issues within
the Public Safety Cluster were resolved in a rational and effective way.
Currently, the CJCC Director, either as my designee or the CJCC's representative,
participates in the following Board, Committee and Commission meetings: the Disproportionate
Minority Contact Committee ofthe Collaboration Council; the Juvenile Justice Commission; the
Domestic Violence Coordinating Council; the Domestic Violence Review Team; the
Commission on Veterans Affairs; the Criminal Justice Behavioral Health Initiative; and the
Department of Correction and Rehabilitation;s Reentry Program.
In order to properly serve the CJCC, the CJCC Director must be a high-level,
appointed position that is filled by a person who directly represents the Executive and integrates
the Executive's priorities with the priorities ofthe other high-level appointees and elected
officials on the Commission, including the Chief Judge of the Circuit Court, Chief Judge ofthe
District Court, State's Attorney and Sheriff. Bill 2-11 would compromise the CJCC's ability to
accomplish its mission because it would create the appearance of either favoritism, or a
particular policy direction.
In
this regard, it is important to remember that the various
stakeholder agencies represented on the CJCC often have competing goals and interests.
Requiring the CJCC to be staffed by the Police Department, or any other single stakeholder
agency, would give rise to issues of conflict of interest and independence that would impede the
CJCC's work.
As you consider Bill 2-11, please keep in mind that the CJCC was originally
placed in the Judicial Branch with a staff complement that included a Director, an Assistant
Director (dedicated to research activities), and one full-time aide. That office also included a
number of positions funded with Local Law Enforcement Block Grants (LLEBG) and
Drug!Alcohol Highway Safety Coordination Grants obtained from the federal Law Enforcement
Assistance Administration (LEAA). The LEAA was abolished in 1982. When the CJCe's first
Director retired, the staffing function was moved to the Executive Branch, where the Assistant
Director continued to lead the effort.
Beginning in 1995, an Assistant Chief Administrative Officer (ACAO), supported
by a Senior Executive Administrative Aide, was assigned, to staff the CJCC on full-time basis.
Between 1995 and 2004, the County Executive and County Council approved a number of
innovative programs initiated by the CJCC, including: Community Accountability.
Reintegration, and Treatment Program (CART) (now called Home Confinement); Pre-Trial
Sentencing Unit (PTSU); Pre-Release Center (PRC); Prerelease and Reentry Services (PRRS);
Intervention Program for Substance Abuse (IPSA); and Jail Addiction Services (JAS).
In
2004,
CJCC staffing duties were re-assigned to another ACAO on a part-time basis. The ACAO
functioned primarily as a staff liaison for the various County criminal justice departments rather
than direct staff to CJCC.
-3­
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Valerle Ervin, County Council President
April 11, 2011
When I was elected in 2006, I decided to renew the County's focus and attention
on criminal justice issues by providing appropriate staff support to the CJCC. With Council's
help, I created a part-time Question A position to lead and coordinate all CJCC matters? Bill 2­
11
would take the County backwards in its efforts to adequately address criminal justice issues
that impact all of our interrelated State and County agencies. I urge you to reject Bill 2-11 and
retain the CJCC Director position so that the CJCC can continue to function
in
a manner that best
serves the County.
c;
Joseph Beach, Director, Office of Management and Budget
Kathleen Boucher, Assistant Chief Administrative Officer
Thomas Manger, Police Chief
Thomas Street, Assistant Chief Administrative Officer
Arthur Wallenstein, Director, Department of Correction and Rehabilitation
Council made the CJCC Director a Question A appointment at my request in Bill 6-07, Structure of County
Government - Non-Merit Positions, which was adopted
by
the Council
011
May 28, 2007.·
-4 ­
2
The
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
Isiah Leggett
County Executive
Joseph F. Beach
Director
MEMORANDUM
March 25, 2011
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Valerie Ervin, President, COlUlty COlUlcil
Joseph F.
Bill 2-11,
Beach~
Crimin~ce
Coordinating Commission - Staff Support
The purpose ofthis memorandum is to transmit a fiscal and economic impact statement
to the Council on the subject legislation.
LEGISLATION SUMMARY
The Bill would eliminate the Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission (CJCC) Director
position and require the Police Department to provide
staff
support to the Commission. For reference,
Executive Regulation No.
12-07;
provides a position description, a definition of the work, examples of
duties and responsibilities, and the recommended qualifications, knowledge, skills, and abilities for the
position. More importantly, enabling legislation contained in the Chapter 2-60
(b)
(9) of the Montgomery
County Code states that the Chief Administrative Office must provide
staff
support to the Commission
subject to appropriation.
FISCAL AND ECONOMIC SUMMARY
The fiscal impact ofthe legislation is dependent upon actions the Council takes in regards to
eliminating the CJCC Director's position and requiring the Department of Police to provide equivalent staff
support to the
ClCC.
Whereas the Director's position was budgeted in both FYI I and FYI2, elimination of
the position simply shifts costs from the Offices of the COlUlty Executive to the Department of Police. To
furnish the high-level of expertise and scope of responsibilities required, a position equivalent to a Police
Captain would either have to be hired or diverted from current job duties to serve in this capacity. For
purposes of this analysis, the number of staff work years needed to support the Commission will not change.
In
addition to personnel costs, other operating costs necessary for the
ClCC
Director, including furniture,
office space, personal computers, telecommunications, contract services, and other miscellaneous expenses
and supplies have historically been absorbed by the Offices ofthe County Executive, and will also be
absorbed by the Department of Police. The Chief of Police indicated that filling this position by the
Department of Police will be a staff person with the rank of Captain.
Officel)l the Direetor
101 Monroe Street, 14th Floor' Rockville, 'vIaryland 20850 • 240-777-2300
www.montgomerycountymd.gov
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Valene Ervin, President;, County Council
March
25,
20 II
Page 2
Below are the FYII-16 multi-year costs ofthe CJCC Director's Office. Underthe
assumptions listed, the FY12-16 budgeted costs are estimated at $191,840 annually.
BiIlJ-l1. Criminal Jnstice Coordinating Commission - Staff Support
CJCC Director's Office
Item
Estimates: One Director,
FYl2
budgeted PC's.
Year 1 (FV11)*
Year 2 FY12
Year 3 (FV13)
Year 4 !l1X14)
l.OWY
(l9I,840)
YearSQjX15) Yw6!l1X16)
1.0WY
(191,840)
l.OWY
(191,MO)
(985.610)
Pepoooel Costs:
1.0 WY
in
FYl2
and
beyond
to
reflect increasing CJCC
0.8WY
1.0WY
1.0WY
responsibilities.
Eliminate CJCC Director(Offices of
(26,410)
(191,840)
(191.840)
the COODty Executive)
(FYl2
and beyond Pel:SOnne1 Costs:
$144,700
base, pIns
$47,140
fringe beoefils estimate)
Shift CJCC Director postion
to
MCPD""
32,420
6,010
194.,520
2,680
194,520
2,680
194,520
2,680
194.,520
2.680
194.,520
2.680
1,005.020
19,410
/Net Fiscal
Impact***
Notes:
,.
Analpis
I1SSlU1leS
thai
tile. position dt{I1fge
is
effective tile
1ast
two
....A'PU1Jge.
FYI:J
cost
ofaposition with tile. TQ1fk ofCqtnin.
.....
CJCC Operating
Com
are
Glrrently
absorbed
by
Offices ofthe.
COUIIO' Exe.ClltWe
tmtl
assumes they will
be
paid through the.
PoliceDepartml!1lt's
ex:istbrg
resources
if
shifted.
The legislation will have no economic impact on the County, as it is internally focused on
helping
to
coordinate the programs and activities ofthe County's various criminal justice agencies; i.e.,
Circuit and District Courts, Corrections, Police, Sheriff, State's Attorney and multiple Boards, Committees or
Commissions
I.
The following contributed
to
and concurred with this analysis: Bryan Hunt;, John Cuff,
Edmond Piesen, Office ofManagement and Budget;, Michael Coveyou, Department ofFinance, and Neil
Shorb ofthe Department ofPolice.
JFB:bh
c:Kathleen Boucher, Assistant Chief Administrative Officer
J.
Thomas Manger, Chief ofPolice
Lisa Austin, Offices ofthe County Executive
Jennifer Barrett, Director, Department ofFinance
Michael Coveyou, Department ofFinance
Marc Hansen, County Attorney, Office ofthe County Attorney
Michael L. Subin, Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission
John Cuff, Office ofManagement and Budget
Edmond Piesen, Office ofManagement and Budget
Brian Hunt;, Office ofManagement and Budget
The Executive Director, as either the County Executive's representative or as an ex-officio member attends the
following Board. Committee or Commission or agency meetings: Disproportionate Minority Contact Committee of
the Collaboration Council, the Juvenile Justice Commission. the Domestic Violence Coordinating Council, the
Domestic Vidence Fatality Revlew Team, the Commission on Veterans
Mm,
the Criminal
Justice
Behavioral
I
Health Initiative,
and
the Depariment of Correction
and
Rehabilitation's Re-Entr'J Prog!'aD.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
-
~UO·COUNTY
CITIZENS ADVISORY
BOARD
March 29, 2011
The Honorable Valerie Ervin
President, Montgomery County Council
100
Maryland Avenue
Rockville, Maryland 20850
Dear Council President Ervin and Councilmembers:
061.730
The Mid-County Citizens Advisory Board (MCCAB) appreciates the opportunity to share
with you our suggestions on how
to
address the very serious budget crisis fac:ing our
County
and
to re-enforce your resolve
to
address our residents' most critical needs and services as well as
ensure that
we
lay a foundation that will lead
to
greater fiscal health and sol veney in {;oming
ye-MS.
The budget crisis that we are now facing has resulted in the need to make difficult but
necessary recommendations. However, we must confront the fact that by avoiding
Of
ignoring
some of these options, no matter how undesirable they may be, wil11ikely result in weakening our
county's resources over an extended period of time, and prolong the negative impact that the
economic downturn has imposed on our community.
We do w·.mt to acknowledge that both the C01.Dlcil and County Executive Leggett have
done an outst'mding job ofaddressing a number of stakeholders and in an attempt to address the
needs of a
large
and diverse population.
It
is with
OUf
appreciation and
thanks
that we move
forward with our recommendations to further promote
the
mission of the Council through a
financially healthy and stable
COtUlty
economy.
We have
fOLlr
recommendations that we will relay below.
Recommendation #1
We are in agreement with County Executive Leggett that, in order to prese.rve as many
services as our budget will aHow. and \vith the knowledge
that
the vast majority of our budget is
allocated to .fixed costs, we must attempt to reduce our operating costs in a way that will
be
fair,
?fill maximize the number ofjobs and services preserved, and transparent. To that end, we are in
agreement with the plan to restructure health insurance and pension benefits and support
extending it across all county employees, including those in the Montgomery County Public
School System. We also support changes
in
the Maintenance of Effort Law.and the State
Education Article to authorize the Council to approve and rej ect economic provisions ofa
collective bargaining agreement (see Attachment A).
While we understand that MCPS provides valuable services to the community and has
contributed to making the school system in our county among the most admired in the nation, we
belic;,;e that not only is the current restructuring plan modest, but that
by
extending
it
to all
employees, \ve are Indicating a commitment to parity and equality.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
The Honorable Valerie Ervin
President, Montgomery County Council
March 29, 2011
Page 2
All employees
contribute
to
the success and well-being
of our
community and,
our
suggestion
:is
that
in
these painful times, we stand together and ask everyone endure a little bit of
the pain instead of a select
few
absorbing the brunt of it.
Recommendation #2
Looking beyond the current moment, we believe there
is
a long-term structural budget
dencit, especially
if
you
account for the unfunded
County
liabilities and the potential for a rating
do"Wngrade and the ensuing reputational and opportunity cost this would create. We recommend
modest 3% cut, 3% in public employee salaries in order to preserve some critical services, with
signi.ficant savings going tm:'lard
reserves.
Recommendatioll
#3
.
While we
support creation of
the
Office ofCommunity
Engagement, we
do not support
proposed staffing reductions
in
the Regional Services Centers. We urge you to maintain current
staffing levels at the Regional Services Centers. We also support increased use ofthe Regional
Services Centers'
Citizens Advisory Boards (see Attachment A).
Recommendation
#4
The MCCAB recommends
that
the County Council and the
County
Executive pursue
efforts
to
reorganize and streamline cotmty functions as reflected
in
the
attached
recommendations proposed by the Organizational Reform Conunlssion (see
Attachment A).
Recommendation
#5
Given the
proposed
cutbacks to
the
Olney police satellite station in a time when
violent
crimes are occurring
in
that community, we recommend reconsidering and eliminating those
cutbacks, and funding the station to a level that
",ill
allow adequate service to Olney residents.
Recommendation #6
We support the $.05 bag tax to promote environmental concerns and promote consumer
responsibility.
We thank you for the opportuni
ty
to share our suggestions with you and we
""ish
you
fell
in your budget deliberations.
Sincerely,
~~~
Blaine Charak
Chair
cc:
Executive
Isuih
Leggett
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Attachment A
Dear Mr. Leggett and President Ervin,
The Montgomery County Organizational Reform Commission (the Commission) released
its final report on January 31,2011. The deliberations ofthe Commission have been discussed at
several meetings of the Mid-County Citizens Advisory Board (MCCAB).
Most recently the MCCAB reviewed the Commission's final report at its February
15,
2011
meeting and passed motions in support of the fonowing Commission recommendations:
1. Structural and Organizational Changes
Boards, Committees and Commissions
2.
Increase use of the Regional Services Centers' citizen advisory boards and the Office of
Community Partnerships, whenever possible,
in
lieu of creating new citizen boards or
committees.
4. Reorganize the Human Rights Commission, folding its functions into other entities, and
eliminate the
HRe
office.
6. Reorganize the Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission (CJCC) so that
it
is housed and
staffed within the County Police Department, and eliminate the executive director position.
~
.
Workforce Training
7. Enable the Montgomery County Workforce Investment Board, the Division of\Vorkforce
Services (DWS), and its contractors to coordinate oversight of the workforce grants awarded by
the Executive and the CounciL
Legal Services
8.
Increase efforts to substitute costly contracted legal services with in-house expertise.
9. Fonn a Task Force to create a consolidated Montgomery County Law Office that would serve
multiple agencies.
Housing
1