AGENDA ITEM #7A
November 27,2012
Action
MEMORANDUM
November 21,2012
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
County Council
Amanda Mihill, Legislative Attorneyo4tJJLO.-R
Action:
Bill 28-12, Personnel
Amendments
_-­
Merit System Review Commission -.
- - - - _ . _ - _
........
Government Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee recommendation (2-0):
enact Bill 28-12.
Bill 28-12, Personnel - Merit System Review Commission - Amendments, sponsored by the
Government Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee was introduced on October 16, 2012. A
public hearing was held on November 13 and a Government Operations and Fiscal Policy
Committee worksession was held on November 19.
Bill 28-12 would eliminate the requirement that the Council appoint the Merit System Review
Commission every 4 years. The Council would retain the authority to appoint the Committee as
necessary. The first Committee was appointed in 1980 and issued a report in 1981. Every
4
years since 1981, the Council has determined that it was not necessary to appoint the Committee.
The requirement for a Committee predates collective bargaining and the Management
Leadership Service.
The Council received a letter from Bruce Ervin Wood, Chair of the Merit System Protection
Board, supporting Bill 28-12
(©5).
As the letter notes, both the Board and the Government
Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee would continue to exercise oversight into personnel and
merit system issues.
Committee recommendation
(2-0, Councilmember Ervin temporarily absent): enact Bill 28­
12.
This packet contains:
Bill 28-12
Legislative Request Report
Memo from Merit System Protection Board
Circle #
1
4
5
F:\LAWIBILLS\1228 MSPB - Merit System Review Commission\Aclioll Memo.Doc
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Bill No.
28-12
Concerning: Personnel - Merit System
Review Commission - Amendments
Draft No. _1_
Revised:
9/13/2012
Introduced:
October 16, 2012
Expires:
April 16, 2014
Enacted: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Executive: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Effective: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Sunset Date: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Ch. _ _, Laws of Mont. Co. _ __
COUNTY COUNCIL
FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND
By: Government Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee
AN
ACT to:
(l)
eliminate the requirement that the Council appoint the Merit System Review
Commission every 4 years; and
(2) generally amend the personnel law.
By amending
Montgomery County Code
Chapter 33, Personnel and Human Resources
Section 33-5
Boldface
Underlining
[Single boldface brackets]
Double underlining
[[Double boldface brackets]]
* * *
Heading or defined term.
Added to existing law by original bill.
Deletedfrom existing law by original bill.
Added by amendment.
Deletedfrom existing law or the bill by amendment.
EXisting law 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. 28-12
Sec.
1.
Section 33-5 is amended as follows:
2
3
4
33-5. Statement of legislative intent; merit system principles; statement of
purpose; merit system review commission; applicability of article.
*
(
d)
*
*
5
6
7
Merit system review commission.
ill
In addition to the [county council's] County Council's legislative
responsibilities [authorized] under [sections] Sections 101 and
401 of the [county charter] County Charter, the Council, as
necessary, may appoint [there shall be convened no later than
July 1, 1980, and, if determined necessary in each instance by
county council resolution, subsequently at intervals of four (4)
years,] a [merit system review commission, the functions of
which are to] Merit System Review Commission
by
resolution.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
(ii)
The Commission's duties are to:
(A)
strengthen the system of checks and balances among those
officials and agencies of county government having merit
system responsibilities; and [to]
an
examine and recommend legislative or administrative
revision to the merit system
in
keeping with the intent of
the [county charter] Charter and this [article] Article and
with
new
developments
III
21
the
field
of public
22
23
24
administration and personnel management.
(iii)
The [commission shall be an eleven-member body composed oil
Commission has
11
members who are appropriately qualified
25
[county citizens] County residents [and established by a
resolution of the county council]. The [county executive shall]
Executive must appoint [five (5) of the]
.2.
members [of this
26
27
(I}:\laW\billS\1228 mspb - merit system review commission\bill1.doc
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 28-12
28
29
30
commission and the county council shall] and the Council must
appoint the remaining members.
(iv)
Each [commission shall terminate] Commission terminates after
it [renders to the county council] submits its final report to the
Council.
31
32
33
*
Approved:
*
*
34
35
Roger Berliner, President, COlUlty Council
36
Approved:
Date
37
Isiah Leggett, COlUlty Executive
38
This is a correct copy o/Council action.
Date
39
Linda M. Lauer, Clerk ofthe COlUlcil
Date
(j)
f:\law\bills\1228 mspb - merit system review commission\bill1.doc
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
LEGISLATIVE REQUEST REPORT
Bill 28-12
Personnel
-
Merit System Review Commission
-
Amendments
DESCRIPTION:
PROBLEM:
Bill 28-12 would eliminate the requirement that the Council appoint
the Merit System Review Commission every 4 years
The first Committee was appointed in 1980 and issued a report in
1981. Every 4 years since 1981, the Council has determined that it
was not necessary to appoint the Committee. The requirement for a
Committee predates collective bargaining and the Management
Leadership Service.
To eliminate the requirement that the Council appoint the Committee
every 4 years.
County Council; Merit System Protection Board
To be requested.
To be requested.
To be requested.
To be researched.
Amanda Mihill, Legislative Attorney, 240-777-7815
To be researched.
GOALS AND
OBJECTIVES:
COORDINATION:
FISCAL IMPACT:
ECONOMIC
IMPACT:
EVALUATION:
EXPERIENCE
ELSEWHERE:
SOURCE OF
INFORMATION:
APPLICATION
WITHIN
MUNICIP ALITIES:
PENALTIES:
N/A
F:\LA W\B ILLS\1228 MSPB - Merit System Review Commission\Legislative Request Report.Doc
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
MERIT SYSTEM PROTECTION BOARD
MKI\iORANUU1Vl
Berliner, President
FR()M:
SUBJECT':
Wriuen Testimony in
Support
of
Bill
28-11,
Persollnel-
Merit SysternRevlew
Commission Amendrncnts and Bill
t:2,
Merit System Protection
Board
Annual
Public
Forum -
Elimination
_0
The pUfl'ose of this memnnmdum is to
i
ndkute the Bourd' s stmng support for B
i
[1
12,
Personnel ,-
~lerit.
System Review
CCIHlmission
Amendments and Bill 29-12, Merit System
Protection Board·
Annual
Puh!ic Forum Eliminati
Oil.
Below is a discussion the rationale
fbr our
;;'~~·lwt"".H
Ther~
Is No NeedFul' A Merit Sntem Re'\1'iew
Commission
As The
CQ.untv
Charter'
Alrcadv Ensures Ongoing Ovenigbt And Protection Of the Merit System.
33-5(d) ofthc County
required that the County Council convene a Medt
System
Re~lie\v
Commission no
later
July
L
1980.
It
also provides
tbattif
deteml1ncd
ne,:eSSaf'Y
by
Council, the Council subsequently
would
appoint a Merit System
Commission at intervals of ihur years. The
Comrnission in 1980 and. the Merit
convened the first and only Merit
Review Commission
a report
County
established
merit
employees ofthe County
Government in
194ft
At (hat time, the predecessor to the fvferit
System
Protection
B(Jard
(hlSPB
and
or Board), the Personnel Board,
WitS
csutbHshed
and
taskeclwith
protecting the merit
Tnciny,
t.he MSPB continues this mandnte tu
employee rights guaranteed under [he merit
oversee and
pmkctmeril
system
and
employec·s
rights. Anmng the
duties oOhe
Bnard, pursuant to
404
(jf
Charter. is the review of and comment on
pmp()sed
as the condocting of
studies on
changes to the merit
law or
regul.ations.
as
administration the
Jnedt
and retIrement
pay
systems
as
the Board
\varmntcd.
The County Council's Government Operations and
continuIng oversight into personnel and merit system
Cornmittec on an
and
Cornmittel;!' also
The Board works
113 •
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Written Tcstirnooy
Supporting
BiHs 2&·12
I)ag"c 2
29·12
ongoing oversight
protection ofthc merit system, there is no need f'Or any additional
owrsight Il1is position is
supported
by
the fact
that
since the first Merit Systern Review
reported in 1981. the
Corulty
Council has determined
Commission was appointed in 1980
that itt:vas not
to appoint another Merit System Review
Commission.
'[,herCrUfe,
the
Board strongly
the enactment Bill 28-12.
There Is No N('ed
For
An
Annuall~ublic.Fo:rum
Section 33-7(j) ofthe County Code
establishes the
requirement that the Board
em
annual public fi:mun onpersonnd
management
in the
County Government
to
exmnine
the
la\v. While the Board has
implementation of the Charter requirements and the merit
fuithfuHy m.e!
requirement to hold such a
forum
each year,
it
has bt'en the Board's
experi{~nce
that the
f()ftlm
not
weH~attended
(t\g.,
for
tile
last two years
were thrl-"e
fmd
attendees
respectiveiy). It is the Board's opinion that the time and
rCs\IUfces
expended in
tilt:
thrum each
could
be
better spent on the ongoing
responsibilities of the Board.
Then..~J(H"e~
the Board strongly supports BiU 29-1:! to eliminate the requirement for un annual
puhlh.'. f(}rurn.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
AGENDA ITEM #7A
November 27,2012
Action
MEMORANDUM
November 21,2012
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
County Council
Amanda Mihill, Legislative Attorneyo4tJJLO.-R
Action:
Bill 28-12, Personnel
Amendments
_-­
Merit System Review Commission -.
- - - - _ . _ - _
........
Government Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee recommendation (2-0):
enact Bill 28-12.
Bill 28-12, Personnel - Merit System Review Commission - Amendments, sponsored by the
Government Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee was introduced on October 16, 2012. A
public hearing was held on November 13 and a Government Operations and Fiscal Policy
Committee worksession was held on November 19.
Bill 28-12 would eliminate the requirement that the Council appoint the Merit System Review
Commission every 4 years. The Council would retain the authority to appoint the Committee as
necessary. The first Committee was appointed in 1980 and issued a report in 1981. Every
4
years since 1981, the Council has determined that it was not necessary to appoint the Committee.
The requirement for a Committee predates collective bargaining and the Management
Leadership Service.
The Council received a letter from Bruce Ervin Wood, Chair of the Merit System Protection
Board, supporting Bill 28-12
(©5).
As the letter notes, both the Board and the Government
Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee would continue to exercise oversight into personnel and
merit system issues.
Committee recommendation
(2-0, Councilmember Ervin temporarily absent): enact Bill 28­
12.
This packet contains:
Bill 28-12
Legislative Request Report
Memo from Merit System Protection Board
Circle #
1
4
5
F:\LAWIBILLS\1228 MSPB - Merit System Review Commission\Aclioll Memo.Doc
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Bill No.
28-12
Concerning: Personnel - Merit System
Review Commission - Amendments
Draft No. _1_
Revised:
9/13/2012
Introduced:
October 16, 2012
Expires:
April 16, 2014
Enacted: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Executive: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Effective: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Sunset Date: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Ch. _ _, Laws of Mont. Co. _ __
COUNTY COUNCIL
FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND
By: Government Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee
AN
ACT to:
(l)
eliminate the requirement that the Council appoint the Merit System Review
Commission every 4 years; and
(2) generally amend the personnel law.
By amending
Montgomery County Code
Chapter 33, Personnel and Human Resources
Section 33-5
Boldface
Underlining
[Single boldface brackets]
Double underlining
[[Double boldface brackets]]
* * *
Heading or defined term.
Added to existing law by original bill.
Deletedfrom existing law by original bill.
Added by amendment.
Deletedfrom existing law or the bill by amendment.
EXisting law 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. 28-12
Sec.
1.
Section 33-5 is amended as follows:
2
3
4
33-5. Statement of legislative intent; merit system principles; statement of
purpose; merit system review commission; applicability of article.
*
(
d)
*
*
5
6
7
Merit system review commission.
ill
In addition to the [county council's] County Council's legislative
responsibilities [authorized] under [sections] Sections 101 and
401 of the [county charter] County Charter, the Council, as
necessary, may appoint [there shall be convened no later than
July 1, 1980, and, if determined necessary in each instance by
county council resolution, subsequently at intervals of four (4)
years,] a [merit system review commission, the functions of
which are to] Merit System Review Commission
by
resolution.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
(ii)
The Commission's duties are to:
(A)
strengthen the system of checks and balances among those
officials and agencies of county government having merit
system responsibilities; and [to]
an
examine and recommend legislative or administrative
revision to the merit system
in
keeping with the intent of
the [county charter] Charter and this [article] Article and
with
new
developments
III
21
the
field
of public
22
23
24
administration and personnel management.
(iii)
The [commission shall be an eleven-member body composed oil
Commission has
11
members who are appropriately qualified
25
[county citizens] County residents [and established by a
resolution of the county council]. The [county executive shall]
Executive must appoint [five (5) of the]
.2.
members [of this
26
27
(I}:\laW\billS\1228 mspb - merit system review commission\bill1.doc
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 28-12
28
29
30
commission and the county council shall] and the Council must
appoint the remaining members.
(iv)
Each [commission shall terminate] Commission terminates after
it [renders to the county council] submits its final report to the
Council.
31
32
33
*
Approved:
*
*
34
35
Roger Berliner, President, COlUlty Council
36
Approved:
Date
37
Isiah Leggett, COlUlty Executive
38
This is a correct copy o/Council action.
Date
39
Linda M. Lauer, Clerk ofthe COlUlcil
Date
(j)
f:\law\bills\1228 mspb - merit system review commission\bill1.doc
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
LEGISLATIVE REQUEST REPORT
Bill 28-12
Personnel
-
Merit System Review Commission
-
Amendments
DESCRIPTION:
PROBLEM:
Bill 28-12 would eliminate the requirement that the Council appoint
the Merit System Review Commission every 4 years
The first Committee was appointed in 1980 and issued a report in
1981. Every 4 years since 1981, the Council has determined that it
was not necessary to appoint the Committee. The requirement for a
Committee predates collective bargaining and the Management
Leadership Service.
To eliminate the requirement that the Council appoint the Committee
every 4 years.
County Council; Merit System Protection Board
To be requested.
To be requested.
To be requested.
To be researched.
Amanda Mihill, Legislative Attorney, 240-777-7815
To be researched.
GOALS AND
OBJECTIVES:
COORDINATION:
FISCAL IMPACT:
ECONOMIC
IMPACT:
EVALUATION:
EXPERIENCE
ELSEWHERE:
SOURCE OF
INFORMATION:
APPLICATION
WITHIN
MUNICIP ALITIES:
PENALTIES:
N/A
F:\LA W\B ILLS\1228 MSPB - Merit System Review Commission\Legislative Request Report.Doc
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
MERIT SYSTEM PROTECTION BOARD
MKI\iORANUU1Vl
Berliner, President
FR()M:
SUBJECT':
Wriuen Testimony in
Support
of
Bill
28-11,
Persollnel-
Merit SysternRevlew
Commission Amendrncnts and Bill
t:2,
Merit System Protection
Board
Annual
Public
Forum -
Elimination
_0
The pUfl'ose of this memnnmdum is to
i
ndkute the Bourd' s stmng support for B
i
[1
12,
Personnel ,-
~lerit.
System Review
CCIHlmission
Amendments and Bill 29-12, Merit System
Protection Board·
Annual
Puh!ic Forum Eliminati
Oil.
Below is a discussion the rationale
fbr our
;;'~~·lwt"".H
Ther~
Is No NeedFul' A Merit Sntem Re'\1'iew
Commission
As The
CQ.untv
Charter'
Alrcadv Ensures Ongoing Ovenigbt And Protection Of the Merit System.
33-5(d) ofthc County
required that the County Council convene a Medt
System
Re~lie\v
Commission no
later
July
L
1980.
It
also provides
tbattif
deteml1ncd
ne,:eSSaf'Y
by
Council, the Council subsequently
would
appoint a Merit System
Commission at intervals of ihur years. The
Comrnission in 1980 and. the Merit
convened the first and only Merit
Review Commission
a report
County
established
merit
employees ofthe County
Government in
194ft
At (hat time, the predecessor to the fvferit
System
Protection
B(Jard
(hlSPB
and
or Board), the Personnel Board,
WitS
csutbHshed
and
taskeclwith
protecting the merit
Tnciny,
t.he MSPB continues this mandnte tu
employee rights guaranteed under [he merit
oversee and
pmkctmeril
system
and
employec·s
rights. Anmng the
duties oOhe
Bnard, pursuant to
404
(jf
Charter. is the review of and comment on
pmp()sed
as the condocting of
studies on
changes to the merit
law or
regul.ations.
as
administration the
Jnedt
and retIrement
pay
systems
as
the Board
\varmntcd.
The County Council's Government Operations and
continuIng oversight into personnel and merit system
Cornmittec on an
and
Cornmittel;!' also
The Board works
113 •
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Written Tcstirnooy
Supporting
BiHs 2&·12
I)ag"c 2
29·12
ongoing oversight
protection ofthc merit system, there is no need f'Or any additional
owrsight Il1is position is
supported
by
the fact
that
since the first Merit Systern Review
reported in 1981. the
Corulty
Council has determined
Commission was appointed in 1980
that itt:vas not
to appoint another Merit System Review
Commission.
'[,herCrUfe,
the
Board strongly
the enactment Bill 28-12.
There Is No N('ed
For
An
Annuall~ublic.Fo:rum
Section 33-7(j) ofthe County Code
establishes the
requirement that the Board
em
annual public fi:mun onpersonnd
management
in the
County Government
to
exmnine
the
la\v. While the Board has
implementation of the Charter requirements and the merit
fuithfuHy m.e!
requirement to hold such a
forum
each year,
it
has bt'en the Board's
experi{~nce
that the
f()ftlm
not
weH~attended
(t\g.,
for
tile
last two years
were thrl-"e
fmd
attendees
respectiveiy). It is the Board's opinion that the time and
rCs\IUfces
expended in
tilt:
thrum each
could
be
better spent on the ongoing
responsibilities of the Board.
Then..~J(H"e~
the Board strongly supports BiU 29-1:! to eliminate the requirement for un annual
puhlh.'. f(}rurn.