HHS ITEM 1
July 10, 2017
Worksession
MEMORANDUM
July 6, 2017
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Health and Human Services Committee
Amanda Mihill, Legislative Attomey(,,~Yqi)W
Worksession:
Expedited Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools - Lifeguards - Amendments
Expedited Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools - Lifeguards -Amendments, sponsored by Lead Sponsor
Councilmember Katz and Co-Sponsors Councilmembers Floreen and Elrich and Council President
Berliner, was introduced on May 16, 2017. A public hearing was held on June 20.
Expedited Bill 16-17 would exempt certain public pools at certain facilities from the requirement
to have a lifeguard on duty present when the pool is open for use; require exempted public pools
to meet certain criteria, including posting certain warning signs; and require exempted pools to
have an emergency alert system. A memorandum from the lead sponsor is attached on ©6. The
Fiscal Impact/Economic Impact statements are on ©7-11
Public Hearing Testimony
At the June 20 public hearing, the Council heard from individuals and companies both supporting
and opposing Bill 16-17. Generally speaking, those representing the hotel industry supported the
bill while those representing the pool management companies and lifeguard opposed the bill. A
representative of the County Executive gave testimony supporting the bill (©12). The Council
received written correspondence from several lifeguards opposing the bill. The Council also
received written correspondence from several individuals, though Council staff is unsure if those
unsigned letters are from residents, visitors, or lifeguards. See select testimony and correspondence
on ©13-50.
Background
State law.
State rules for swimming pools are find
in
state regulations. Under state regulations, a
hotel/motel pool is considered a "semipublic pool". COMAR 10.l 7.0l.40D(6) requires a
semipublic pool that has a water surface area greater than 2,500 square feet to have a lifeguard on
duty. Therefore, under state law, a semipublic pool with a lesser water surface is not required to
have a lifeguard.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
County law.
County Code §51-lO(b) requires all public pools to have a lifeguard, regardless of
pool size. County regulations specify other requirements, including construction standards and
water quality standards. Bill 16-17 would not alter the requirements for water quality standards,
which are detailed on ©51-52.
Other jurisdictions.
Most other Maryland jurisdictions do not require lifeguards for hotel pools
under 2,500 square feet of surface area. As of the writing of this packet, only 2 Maryland
jurisdictions - Baltimore County and Montgomery County- require lifeguards in hotel pools. Two
other jurisdictions - Anne Arundel County and Prince George's County - enacted legislation in
2016 to repeal the requirement for lifeguards in hotel pools.
Discussion
There are no legal issues regarding Bill 16-17. The primary question for Councilmembers to
resolve is the policy question concerning whether to require hotels/motels to employ lifeguards for
their pools. In arriving in a decision, the following information may be helpful to Committee
members:
Safety.
Those in opposition to Bill 16-17 expressed concerns about the safety of pool users and
water quality issues. Pool companies provided statistics on the incidents that lifeguards they
employ respond to (©32 and 43). Sunset Pools, Inc. indicates that for 2016, they recorded 73
"distress/active drowning/rescues" incidents, 45 of which occurred at hotel pools, and 246
"vomit/fecal" incidents, 152 of which occurred at hotel pools. For 2017, they have recorded 29
"distress/active drowning/rescues" incidents, of which 16 were at hotel pools and 127
"vomit/fecal" incidents, of which 72 were at hotel pools. From late April 2015, the County Fire
and Rescue Service has not received any calls for drownings or near-drownings at hotel pools.
Council staff also questioned the fire departments of Anne Arundel County and Prince George's
County since those jurisdictions recently removed the lifeguard requirement for hotel pools.
Neither jurisdiction reported any increase in calls for drownings or near-drownings at hotel pools
since their legislation was enacted.
1
Finally, Council staff reached out to the health departments of Anne Arundel County and Prince
George's County seeking to understand if there had been an increase in water quality complaints
that can be attributed to the passage of the 2016 legislation. Council staff has not been able to
obtain relevant information from Prince George's County at the time this packet went to print.
Staff from the Anne Arundel County Department of Health stated that they didn't have data to
state whether complaints or violations of increased or decreased. That Department did note that
that they have had to put additional effort into the inspection of the pools because there was a drop
in the knowledge of what is required of pool operators. The Department has made "extra effort"
with these pools so that they are aware of the requirements.
From 2003 on, Anne Arundel County has only received 2 calls related to hotel pools and those were both before
the 2016 legislation. From Jan. I, 2016 on, Prince George's County has not received any calls related to hotel pools.
1
2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Cost oflifeguards.
Those who support the bill argue that the requirement for lifeguards puts hotels
at a competitive disadvantage with neighboring jurisdictions because requiring lifeguards at pools
results in less hours that the pool could be open. Council staff was unable to obtain objective
statistics regarding occupancy rates tied to limited pool hours. The hotel industry estimates the
average cost for a lifeguard to be $44,128 for year-round indoor pools (range $25,000-$69,850)
and $15,804 for outdoor pools (range $10,000-$27,834).
Council staff recommendation:
Though Council staff understands the concerns from the pool
operator/lifeguard industry, Council staff recommends enactment of Bill 16-17. The Council
should ask the Department of Health and Human Services to monitor the implementation of the
legislation and, if need be, provide a recommendation for legislation to reinstate the lifeguard
requirement if it determines that a lifeguard is needed for pool user safety or water quality reasons.
This packet contains:
Expedited Bill 16-17
Legislative Request Report
Sponsor memorandum
Fiscal and Economic Impact Statements
Testimony/Correspondence
County Executive
Support for Bill 16-17
Opposition to Bill 16-17
COMCOR 51.00.02.03
F:\LA W\BILLS\1716 Swimming Pools\HHS Memo.Docx
Circle#
1
5
6
7
12
13
24
51
3
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Expedited Bill No.
16-17
Concerning: Swimming
Pools
Lifeguards -Amendments
Revised:
5/4//2017
Draft No.
_£_
Introduced:
May
16, 2017
Expires:
November
16, 2018
Enacted: ___,__ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Executive: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Effective: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Sunset Date: -'N:...:..:o=n=e_ _ _ _ __
Ch. _ _, Laws of Mont Co. _ __
COUNTY COUNCIL
FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND
Lead Sponsor: Councilmember Katz
Co-Sponsors: Councilmembers Floreen and Elrich and Council President Berliner
AN EXPEDITED ACT
to:
(1)
exempt certain public pools at certain facilities from the requirement to have a
(2)
(3)
(4)
lifeguard on duty present when the pool is open for use;
require exempted public pools to meet certain criteria, including posting certain
warning signs;
require exempted pools to have an emergency alert system; and
generally amend County law relating to swimming pools.
By amending
Montgomery County Code
Chapter 51, Swimming Pools
Sections 51-1 and 51-10
Boldface
Underlining
[Single boldface brackets]
Double underlining
[[Double boldface bracketsn
* * *
Heading or de.fined 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 unqffected by bill.
The County Council for Montgomery County, Maryland approves the following Act:
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
ExPEDITED BILL NO.
16-17
1
2
Sec.1. Sections 51-1 and 51-10 are amended as follows:
51-1. Definitions.
3
4
In
this Chapter, the following words have the following meanings:
*
*
*
5
6
Hostel
has the same meaning as in Code §54-1.
*
*
*
7
8
9
51-10. Safety standards; lifeguards and spa guards.
*
*
*
(b)
Lifeguards.
10
(1)
Except for public spas and
as
provided in paragraph@, every
public swimming pool must have at least one lifeguard with a valid
infant/child/adult cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) certificate
from the American Red Cross, the American Heart Association,
the National Safety Council, or a comparable program approved
by the state Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, present
when the pool is open for use.
I1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
(2)
Whenever any person is in the water, a lifeguard must:
{A)
(B)
be on the deck and observing the pool; and
not leave the deck for any reason unless all persons are out
of the water.
20
21
22
23
(3)
The approving authority may require additional lifeguards to be on
the deck at any public swimming pool if the approving authority
finds that the pool is inadequately guarded because of the:
{A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
number of persons using the pool;
shape, dimensions, or layout of the pool;
existence of obstructions to vision; or
capabilities of the persons using the pool.
24
25
26
27
f:\law\bms\1716 swimming pools\bill 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
ExPEDllED BILL NO.
16-17
28
(
c)
Public spas.
A public spa must have at least one spa guard present when
the spa is open for use. The spa guard must be available immediately to
help in an emergency.
29
30
31
32
33
34
@
Hostels.
Paragraph
(hl
does not
filmly
to
~
pool that has
~
water surface
area less than 2,500 square feet located on the grounds of~ hostel for the
exclusive use of its registered guests if:
35
36
ill
ill
the hostel is properly licensed under Chapter 54;
the hostel posts warning~ that meet the following:
{A)
the size, color, design, application, symbol, and visual
layout of~ safety sign is in compliance with the ANSI Z-535
series of standards for Safety Signs and Colors as referenced
in American National Standard for Public Spas;
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
ill}
~
safety
fil@
is posted in
~
permanent location adjacent to
~
hostel in compliance with the American National Standard
for Public Spas;
the safety
mgn
includes the user load of the pool;
~
.(g
ill)
44
chemical warning
~
is posted at the entrance door to
~
45
46
chemical storage area and includes the text "Caution!
Chemical Storage Area";
47
48
49
ill)
~
chemical vat, feeder, pump, and line is labeled to identify
the chemical in use;
(E}
~
chlorine gas warning
_filgn
reading "Danger-Chlorine
50
Gas" is posted at the entrance to~ chlorine gas feed room
and storage area;
51
52
.(Q)
other warning, health advisory, and safety
filW
are posted,
as required
_gy
Executive Regulation, if necessary to protect
the public health and safety: and
f:llawlbills\1716
swimming
pools\bill
2.docc
53
54
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
ExPEDITED BILL NO.
16-17
55
56
57
(ID
~
pool that does not have
~
lifeguard on duty has
~
conspicuous
ggn
posted adjacent to entrances
to
the pool
reading "Warning: No lifeguard on duty. SWIM AT YOUR
OWN RISK. Children under the~ of 15 are not permitted
to use the pool without adult supervision"; and
58
59
60
ill
the pool area has
~
functional and visible emergency alert system
approved
QY
the Director of the Department of Health and Human
Services that:
(A)
.(fil
connects directly to 9-1-1; and
notifies an employee of the hostel when activated.
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
Sec. 2. Expedited Effective Date.
The Council declares that this legislation is necessary for the immediate
protection of the public interest. This Act takes effect on the date that it becomes law.
Approved:
68
69
Roger Berliner, President, County Council
70
Approved:
Date
71
Isiah Leggett, County Executive
72
This is a co"ect copy ofCouncil action.
Date
73
Linda M. Lauer, Clerk of
the
Council
Date
0
f:\law\bnls\1716 swimming
pools\biD 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
LEGISLATIVE REQUEST REPORT
Expedited Bill 16-1 7
Swimming Pools
-
Lifeguards -Amendments
DESCRIPTION:
Expedited Bill 16-1 7 would exempt certain public pools at certain
facilities from the requirement to have a lifeguard on duty present
when the pool is open for use; require exempted public pools to meet
certain criteria, including posting certain warning signs; and require
exempted pools to have an emergency alert system.
County hotel pools can only be open for swimming if a lifeguard is
present. This is a costly burden for the hotel industry that is not faced
in neighboring jurisdictions.
Maintain economic competitiveness in the tourism industry without
unduly jeopardizing the safety of our visitors.
Health and Human Services
To be requested.
To be requested.
To be requested.
To be researched.
Amanda Mihill, Legislative Attorney, 240-777-7815
Applies in municipalities
PROBLEM:
GOALSAND
OBJECTIVES:
COORDINATION:
FISCAL IMPACT:
ECONOMIC
IMPACT:
EVALUATION:
EXPERIENCE
ELSEWHERE:
SOURCE OF
INFORMATION:
APPLICATION
WITHIN
MUNICIPALITIES:
PENALTIES:
A violation of Chapter 54 is a Class A violation.
F:\LAW\BILLS\1713 Vet Property Tax Credit\LRR.Docx
(j)
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
MONTGOMERY COUNTY
COUNCIL
ROCKVIL.L.E,
MARYLAND
SIDNEY A. KATZ
COUNCIL.MEMBER· DISTRICT 3
MEMORANDUM
TO:
County Council
FROM: Councilmember Sidney
DATE: May 9, 2017
RE:
Katz~/,?-,
~
Bill
regarding Hotel Swimming Pools
Presently, in Montgomery County, our 36 hotel pools may only be open for swimming
if
a
qualified lifeguard is present and on duty. This presents a costly burden for our hospitality
industry that is not faced by our jurisdictional neighbors. That's because Montgomery County is
one of only two jurisdictions in Maryland that impose this requirement.
1
Local hotels are
choosing to close their pools altogether rather than upset patrons with limited hours and, when
tourists are choosing where to stay, this can put our county at a disadvantage whenever guests
are seeking this important amenity.
2
On Tuesday, May 16
th ,
my office
will
introduce the attached legislation which allows registered
guests to use their hotel pool when a lifeguard is not present, as long as there is (1)
appropriately posted signage that swimming is at one's own 'risk and (2) an emergency alert
system installed in the pool area to summon help. All hotel properties must have a CPR and
First-Aid certified employee on-site at all times to provide quick intervention while awaiting
rescue authorities. This proposal enhances measures that have recently passed in Anne Arundel
and Prince George's Counties and the bill that is pending in Baltimore County right now.
Nearby jurisdictions that allow hotel guests to swim at their own risk have reported no increase
in pool-related injuries, even in our tourist hotspot of Ocean City. Our goal with this proposal is
to strike a better balance without jeopa~dizing the safety of our visitors. We hope you will
support this sensible measure.
The other jurisdiction is Baltimore County where Bill 22-17
(http://resources.baltlmorecountymd.gov/Documents/CountyCouncll/bllls962020l7/b02217.pdf) Is currently
pending to change this rule. The District of Columbia also allows hotel guests to swim at their
own
risk.
2
Local hotels pay lifeguards several thousand dollars per year to staff potentially empty pools. Please ask our
office for more data on local pool operations and costs.
1
.
100
MARYLAND
AVENUE, 6TH FLOOR • RoCKVIL.LE,
MARYL.AND
20B50
FAX
240-777-7906 • TTY 240-777•7914 •
240-777-7989 •
COUNCIL.MEMSER.KATZ@MONTGOMERYCOUNTYMO.GOV
~
PRINTED ON ~ECYCLED PAPER
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND
MEMORANDUM
June 2, 2017
TO:
Roger Berliner, President, County Council
FROM:
Jen~ifer
A.
Hu~ector, Office.of
Managem~nt an4,,P~dget
Alexandre A.
l;~osa,
Drrector, Department ofFmanc~\Z·
SUBJECT:
FEIS for Council Expedited Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools-Lifeguards-
Amendments
Please find attached the fiscal and economic impact statements for the above-
referenced legislation.
JAH:mc
cc: Bonnie Kirkland, Assistant Chief Administrative Officer
Lily Qi, Assistant Chief Administrative Officer
Lisa Austin, Offices ofthe County Executive
Joy Nurmi, Special Assistant to the County Executive
Patrick Lacefield, Director,
Public
Information
Office
David Platt, Department of Finance
Clark Beil,
Health and Human Services
Kenneth Welch, Health and Human Services
Joshua Watters, Office of Management and Budget
Naeem Mia, Office of Management and Budget
(])
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Fiscal Impact Statement
Bill 16-17
Swimming Pools - Lifeguards - Amendments
1.
Legislative Summary
Expedited Bill 16-17 exempts public pools
at
hostels from the requirement to have a
lifeguard on duty, under specified circumstances. Instead, the bill requires that the hostel
post certain warning signs, and the pool area must have a functional and visible
emergency alert system.
"Hostel" includes hotels, motels, tourist courts, motor courts, tourist camps, and similar
establishments such as apartment hotels, where lodging or lodging and meals are
provided or offered to three or more transient visitors.
2. An estimate of changes in County revenues and expenditures regardless of whether the
revenues or expenditures are assumed in the recommended or approved budget. Includes
source of information, assumptions, and methodologies used.
No changes in revenues or expenditures are expected, as the bill's provisions would not
affect existing licensing and inspection processes.
3. Revenue and expenditure estimates covering at least the next 6 fiscal years.
Not applicable. See #2.
4. An actuarial analysis through the entire amortization period for each bill that would affect
retiree pension or group insurance costs.
Not applicable.
5. An estimate of expenditures related to County's information technology (IT) systems,
including Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems.
No additional expenditures related to County's information technology systems are
expected.
6. Later actions that may affect future revenue and expenditures
if
the bill authorizes future
spending.
Not applicable. Bill 16-17 does not authorize future spending.
7.
An
estimate of the staff time needed to implement the bill.
No additional staff time is needed to implement the bill's provisions.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
8. An explanation of how the addition of new staff responsibilities would affect other duties.
No new staff responsibilities are required to implement the bill's provisions.
9. An estimate of costs when an additional appropriation is needed.
Not applicable.
10. A description of any variable that could affect revenue and cost estimates.
Not applicable.
11. Ranges of revenue or expenditures that are uncertain or difficult to project
Not applicable.
12.
If
a bill is likely to have no fiscal impact, why that is the case.
The bill's provisions would not affect existing licensing and inspection processes.
13. Other fiscal impacts or comments.
Not applicable.
14. The following contributed to and concurred
with
this analysis:
Kenneth Welch, Environmental Health Manager, DHHS
Clark Beil, Senior Administrator. Licensure and Regulatory Services, DHHS
Joshua Watters, Senior Management and Budget Specialist,
0MB
Jenn(fer
A.
HU&~~Wbirector
Offic~
-0f
Management and Budget
®
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Economic Impact Statement
Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools
-
Lifeguards -Amendments
Background:
Expedited Bill 16-17 would exempt public pools at hostels from the requirement to have a
lifeguard on duty present when the pool is open for use; require exempted public pools to meet
certain criteria, including posting certain warning signs; and require exempted pools to have
an
emergency alert system. Chapter 54-1 of Montgomery County Code defines a "hostel"
as
any
building or portion thereof or
any
group of buildings where, for compensation, lodging or
lodging
and
meals are provided or offered to
3
or more transient visitors, including hotels,
motels, tourist comts, motor courts, tourist camps and similar establishments such as apartment
hotels.
Presently, in Montgomery County,
36
hotel pools fit the hostel criteria
and
may only be open for
swimming if
a
qualified lifeguard is present and on duty. Montgomery County
is
one of only
nvo
jurisdictions in Maryland that imposes this requirement. The objective of the legislation is
to maintain economic competitiveness in the tourism industry without m1duly jeopardizing the
safety of visitors. Similar legislation
has
recently passed in Anne Arundel and Prince George's
Counties and
a
related bill is currently pending in Baltimore County.
1.
The sources of information, assumptions, and methodologies used.
Lifeguard Effectiveness: A Report of the Working Group, Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC)
The total estin1ated annual life guard costs for the approximate 36 pools in the County that fit
the hostel criteria that are under
2,500
square feet are collectively
$600,000.
i
2. A description of any variable that could affect the economic impact estimates.
The Centers for Disease Control
and
Prevention helps community and local government
officials facing decisions about whether to begin, retain, or discontinue lifeguarding services
answer questions regarding the efficacy of lifeguards
in
preventing dro-vvning
and
other
aquatic mishaps, and whether the value of providing lifeguard protection outweighs the costs.
County specific studies detailing the benefits and costs at smaller hotel pools have not been
conducted. Broader scope studies note public safety education and onsite supervision by
lifeguards have helped keep dro,¾ning rates low for
50
years but do not address the need
for
lifeguards as a function of the size of the pools and their square footage. Variables that could
affect economic impact estimates include:
· the incidences of water-related injuries and drownings
at
the facilities over time;
· the number of water-related injuries
and
drownings at pools
in
the County ·w:ith and
without lifeguards;
· insurance liability premiums and the associated legal costs for maintaining
unsupervised pools;
1
from Coimcil member Katz's office and memo to the County Council dated May 9, 2017
1
of2
®
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Economic Impact Statement
Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools
-
Lifeguards
-
Amendments
· variability in lifeguard salaries and staffing complements.
3. The Bill's positive or negative effect,
if
any on employment, spending, savings,
investment, incomes, and property values in the County.
If all the hotels/hostels eliminate lifeguards as defined
in
Bill 16-17, there is a potential
economic benefit in cost savings for the hotels of approximately $16,666 annually per pool
location ($600,000 divided by 36). The broader impact
to
economic competitiveness of the
County's tourism industry because of increased availability of pool use for hotel guests is
difficult to assess without additional specificity of data. There is a corresponding economic
cost to the lifeguards who will no longer be employed at these locations with an equivalent
loss in wages and salary. The impact to employment, spending, savings, investment,
incomes,
and
property values beyond the scope of select lifeguard employment would be
negligible.
4.
If
a Bill is likely
to
have no economic impact, why is that the case?
See number 3.
5. The following contributed to
or concurred with this analysis:
David Platt, Dennis Hetman, and Rob Hagedoorn, Finance.
----~~-A~/--~-·-------
Alexandre
A
Espinosa, Director
Department of Finance
,f
,,::::;_,/."'
Date
2of2
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
\
TESTIMONY ON BEHALF OF COUNTY EXECUTIVE ISIAH LEGGETT ON
EXPEDITED BILL 16-17, SWIMMING POOLS - LIFEGUARDS -AMENDMENTS
June 20, 2017
Good afternoon Council President Berliner and Council Members. My name is Clark Beil, I am
the Senior Administrator for Licensing and Regulatory Services at the Department of Health and
Human Services, and I am here to testify on behalf of County Executive Isiah Leggett in support
of Expedited Bill 16-17 on behalf of the Executive Branch.
Expedited Bill 16-17 would exempt certain pools at hostels, defined to include hotels, from the
requirement to have a lifeguard on duty when the pool is open for use. The bill includes
requirements for safety and warning signs, as well as an emergency alert system that connects
directly to 9-1-1 and alerts hotel staff of the emergency. This emergency alert system must be
approved by the Department of Health and Human Services; if any of these safety protocols are
not in place or are not followed, the County will withhold the pool license and the pool will not
be allowed to open. In 2016, Anne Arundel County and Prince George's County passed similar
bills exempting hotel and motel pools from having a lifeguard on duty. The bill being considered
here today goes further than those bills to protect pool users by requiring the alarm system to be
in place at each hotel pool.
Other health and safety measures are not changed by this bill: if it is enacted, water quality will
continue to be monitored and county pool inspectors will continue to require hourly testing and
remediation within 15 minutes if chemical and pH levels fall out of range.
The safety and well-being of swimmers is of utmost importance to the County. Licensing and
Regulatory Services is responsible for licensing and inspecting swimming pools in the County,
including those located at hotels and motels. But Montgomery County is one of only two
jurisdictions in Maryland to impose this requirement. We recognize that requiring our hotel
pools to have a qualified lifeguard on duty presents a costly burden for our hospitality industry.
If hotel pools are closed due to this requirement, our hotels will be placed at a competitive
disadvantage.
For these reasons, the Montgomery County Executive Branch supports the adoption of Expedited
Bill 16-17.
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Maryland Hotel Lodging Association
20 Ridgely Ave., STE 309, Annapolis, MD 21401
Phone: 410-974-4472
Email: mhla@MDLodging.org
Web: www.MDLodging.org
v\
TO: Honorable Members of the Montgomery County Council
FROM: Amy Rohrer, Maryland Hotel Lodging Association
RE: Expedited Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools - Lifeguards -Amendments
POSITION: SUPPORT
As the statewide trade association representing hotels across the state and in Montgomery
County, we support Expedited Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools - Lifeguards -Amendments.
Maryland state regulations do not mandate having a lifeguard at semi-public hotel pools under
2,500 square feet. {COMAR 10.17.01.40) In the majority of our state, hotels determine their
own need for a lifeguard since regulations allow for guests to swim at their own risk when
certain safety requirements are met. The only existing exceptions are Baltimore County and
Montgomery County.
To comply with the lifeguard mandate, hotels typically operate their pools with limited hours.
It is challenging to predict usage and lifeguards often watch empty pools, or the pool is closed
when guests arrive wishing to swim. Eliminating the lifeguard requirement would enable hotels
to extend pool hours and increase guest satisfaction among those who seek out and expect this
amenity.
Our business is competitive and guests have a lot of choices for accommodations within the
D.C. Metro area. In EVERY surrounding jurisdiction - D.C.; Loudon and Fairfax Counties in
Virginia; Frederick, Howard and Prince George's Counties in Maryland - hotels are permitted to
determine their own need for a lifeguard. Eliminating this competitive disadvantage has the
potential to increase rooms booked in Montgomery County, which means increased hotel taxes
and other related visitor spending in the County.
Guest safety is a top priority for hotels, including those located in the 22 Maryland counties
(including Baltimore City) where lifeguards are not required at hotel pools. We comply with
state and local regulations addressing pool construction, accessibility, signage, water quality,
etc. Operators may experience reduced costs when it comes to staffing lifeguards, but it is
important to note this savings will be offset by increased training costs as we will train more of
our own staff in first aid, CPR, and as CPOs (Certified Pools Operators responsible for
monitoring and maintaining water quality). In lieu of a lifeguard, regulations require trained
staff on-site anytime the pool is open. This has an additional benefit to the county, as it
increases the number of citizens trained in these important skills.
MHLA
Page
11
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
We urge your support of Expedited Bill 16-17 and believe passage will be a win-win-win for
Montgomery County in terms of increased occupancy tax and visitor spending, our industry as it
relates to increased guest satisfaction and eliminating a competitive disadvantage, and for our
guests who expect the availability of a pool as an amenity.
Thank you for your consideration.
For further information, contact:
Amy Rohrer
President & CEO
Maryland Hotel Lodging Association
MHLA
Page
12
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Mihill, Amanda
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Amy Rohrer <amy@mdlodging.org>
Friday, June 23, 2017 12:43 PM
Mihill, Amanda
Re: Montgomery County Bill 16-17
Email re Lifeguard sleeping and other issues.pdf
Hi Amanda,
I have attempted to answer all of your questions related to Expedited Bill 16-17 in this email. I am still working
on blacking out all guest and employee names contained in the negative comments received from seven
different hotels in Montgomery County. I will send the file (nearly 70 pages) as soon as possible. They are
overwhelmingly related to 1) limited pool hours and/or 2) poor customer service/ inattentiveness by the
lifeguard.
A sampling of the guest comments is below:
The lifeguard at the pool was on his phone, did not look about to keep small children safe.
Montgomery County should not control hotel pools.
Great hotel, but due to county laws that force
hotels to contract our lifeguard services, the pool and hot-tub experience is ruined.
Stay in another
county.
The pool was the main reason we decided on this hotel. The
lifeguard sat in the shed most of the time
(both morning and evening lifeguards), and couldn't see the spa.
If
a lifeguard is necessary
-
which
I
don't agree that it is!
-
it isn't working.
Also, the
lifeguard kicked everyone out of the pool with 30
minutes before closing for a 15 minute break.
The kids had been looking forward to it all day and we
had planned our time out. But instead, we ended up having to leave (or wait 15 minutes to get back in
for 15 minutes). The
pool should stay open later
as well.
The pool and lifeguard policy are my only
dislike from the hotel.
Swimming pool close at 8pm! 0 my god!
we stay in many hotel in many place, and all of
those swimming close at 10pm,
if not11pm. Who come back to hotel at 8pm in DC?
Additionally, I have attached an email between a hotel and their pool company. It contains a picture of the
lifeguard sleeping while the pool house doors (with chemicals inside) are wide open and a guest is also
present.
For this particular hotel, the situation has been ongoing with more than one lifeguard and it is
reflective of the experience of many.
Our primary reason for wanting Expedited Bill 16-1 7 to pass is so that we can better serve our guests and not
lose them to surrounding counties that do not mandate lifeguards at hotel pools. Those hotels are able to keep
their pools open longer hours and avoid negative customer service experiences as a result of interaction with a
lifeguard who is not trained to our own customer service and various brand standards. The guest is not aware
that the lifeguard is not a hotel employee, nor should it matter. Poor reviews related to the inattentiveness and
customer service of lifeguards impact our overall hotel scores and negatively impact the guest experience. A
dissatisfied guest is highly unlikely to return and all it takes is one bad experience. We are not suggesting every
lifeguard displays poor customer service skills, but their interpersonal skills and professionalism vary
greatly. We see high turnover among lifeguards which creates an additional training challenge. We value our
1
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
partnerships with the pool companies and try to work with them to enhance customer service at every
opportunity, but the guest comments speak for themselves on this issue.
As you know, most Maryland counties have allowed hotel guests to swim at their own risk for many years and
it has not compromised guest safety in hotel pools across the state. When Baltimore City, Anne Arundel
County, and Prince George's County recently changed their regulations to allow this, they looked to other
Maryland counties for the safety records at hotel pools. While swimming is an activity that will always involve
some risk, those counties would not have passed their legislation if anything indicated a hotel pool with a
lifeguard is safer than one without it. Running a hotel means we must constantly balance meeting the needs of
our guests while protecting their safety inside the hotel at all times.
It
is hard to predict usage in hotel pools that aren't used frequently, which is often when it makes more sense to
give guests the option of knowingly swimming at their own risk. Guarding an empty pool leads to lifeguards
used to having time on their laptops, phones, or sleeping. This is reflected in the guest comments multiple times
and shows the behavior continues even when guests are present. A lifeguard who is not paying attention to the
pool may in fact lead to a false sense of security for those who are swimming.
Every hotel varies when considering the location of the pool and the guests who are using it. In jurisdictions
that do not mandate lifeguards, there are hotels that have continued to use them during peak periods of pool use,
during high occupancy, or when it is known that a group with many kids will be using the pool. Staffing
lifeguards is not just for safety but also for crowd control as kids tend to show off to each other and act
differently when they are in a large group. This is similar to increasing the police/security presence at a large
event. These decisions speak to our responsibility as hotel operators and the fact that we know what is best at
our specific properties.
The cost and sometimes the availability of lifeguards are the two things that make it prohibitive for hotels to
open their pools for longer hours. Availability is toughest during the summer, and there are times when
someone calls off without a replacement, which also leads to a closed pool.
Estimated annual lifeguard costs are below.
However,
I
want to be clear that eliminating the lifeguard
requirement is NOT about compromising guest safety in order for us to save money.
This data is from
Montgomery County hotels that are currently limiting their hours due to the lifeguard requirement, and the
hours can vary greatly from one hotel to the next. For hotels that continue to use a lifeguard, their cost would
likely remain as it is currently.
Year-round indoor pool: Average annual cost is $44,128 with a range from $25,000-$69,850
Outdoor seasonal pool: Average annual cost is $15,804 with a range from $10,000-$27,834
Thank you for the opportunity to provide this information. Please reach out if I can be of further assistance.
Amy W.
Rohrer,
CAE
President
&
CEO
Maryland Hotel Lodging Association
Mobile 443-822-4693
amy@MDLodging.org
www.MDLodging.org
Note our new address:
20 Ridgely Ave., Suite 309
Annapolis, MD 21401
2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Testimony
Statement by
Xitlaly Castillo-Dietz
General Manager, Hampton
Inn
&
Suites Gaithersburg on Expedited Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools -
Lifeguards - Amendments
Good afternoon,
My name is Xitlaly Castillo-Dietz; I am the General Manager for the Hampton Inn & Suites Hotel
located at 960 N Frederick, Gaithersburg, MD. 20879. I am here to bare testimony in favor of
Expedited Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools
-
Lifeguards
-
Amendments.
Personal Experience
I have worked in the hotel industry since 1994; during my career I have worked in Mexico and in the
United States. In the US, I have held posts in Virginia, DC and Maryland. The vast majority of
those hotel properties operate under rules similar to what
Expedited Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools
-
Lifeguards
-
Amendments would allow.
My number one goal everywhere I have worked has
always been to create happy customers who want to come back. This amendment would help us to
---~--Qee@rrcp-1iSFF~k,at=g@a1=-.~~~~---~=~=~~~~~=~~=~==~~=~=~==~=~~~
As you know, The Hampton Inn and Suites where I work and other hotels in Montgomery County
compete with properties in both Frederick MD north of us and plenty of other locations in and
around the District of Columbia to the south and east where hotel pools are allowed to operate
without a lifeguard present.
My current hotel offers clean rooms, a tasty breakfast buffet, and 24 hour convenience store, a
complete business center and fitness center. We also have a salt-water pool, but we currently cannot
allow our guests to swim at their leisure.
My staff and I receive complaints daily about the hours of operation of our beautiful salt-water pool.
In my opinion, the Montgomery County regulation (lifeguard requirement) is a big obstacle to
compete with other localities.
Our Hotel follows the Safety guidelines necessary to have a positive and safe pool experience. Our
Front Desk employees are CPR certified and we have a Pool Operator on site.
Conclusion
I am asking you
to
consider the business ramifications of having this ordinance; as we compete with
neighboring localities. How do we offer the best service to our guests? How do we stay competitive?
We already follow more than the basic requirements of Pool Safety and have trained our staff to
respond to emergencies. We want to be more competitive and to give our guests access to more
services.
Sincerely,
Xitlaly Castillo-Dietz
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Good Afternoon Council Members,
I am writing to you as members of Montgomery County Council to request that you please vote in favor, in its
entirety, for the Expedited Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools - Lifeguards - Amendments.
As a resident of Montgomery County and General Manager of the Bethesda Marriott on Pooks Hill Road I
strongly urge you to support this bill.
At Marriott Hotels the safety of our employees and guests comes first and we strongly believe that requesting
that our guests should be able to swim at their own risk will in no way compromise this. We will ensure that the
water quality is maintained to the highest Montgomery County and Marriott standards with oversight from a
certified pool operator who will be on site at all times when the pool is open. In addition, per Marriott brand
standards we have staff trained in CPR, first aid, AED and life safety 24 hours a day 365 days a year, which
includes having a manager on duty. Should there be any pool emergency or a situation requiring the pool to be
closed, we have a clearly marked telephone available at the pool which goes directly to our hotel operator, also
covered 24 hours a day. The hotel operator would then immediately contact the manager on duty to respond and
take the necessary actions for the safety of our guests.
Additionally, we will staff life guards as necessary when we expect heavy pool usage. This includes when we
have youth groups staying in the hotel while visiting the local area and DC. We of course will be sure to work
with those organizers to ensure that we have life guards on duty when they are utilizing the pool.
As a father of 5 active teenagers I have spent many nights travelling with my fan1ily.
It
has always been a
request of my kids that we stay at a hotel with a pool. One time when they were younger we were staying at a
hotel with a pool and after a day of activities we came back to the hotel at around 3pm and headed to the pool.
Much to my families dismay the pool was closed. Apparently they didn't have the pool open until 5pm that
evening when a lifeguard would be on duty. As you can imagine my 5 kids were very disappointed and it ruined
our trip. Following that experience I always make sure the hotel pool is open at all hours before making hotel
reservations. Restricting hotels in Montgomery County to have lifeguards puts us at a competitive disadvantage
to other surrounding counties as they are able to keep their pools open at all times without a lifeguard on duty.
Again,
I
strongly urge you to Support this bill and keep Montgomery hotels competitive with our n~ighboring
counties and provide superior service and a safe environment for guests. Thank you for your time and attention
to this extremely important matter.
David Child
Montgomery County Resident
12612 Exchange Court
N
01ih
Potomac, MD 20854
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
7/6/2017
5058987 incoming attachment 110176 20170619 E-Mail Message 2017-06-16 03-58PM.html
From:
Berliner's Office, Councilmember [Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov]
Sent:
Friday, June 16, 2017 3:58:00 PM
To:
Council President
Subject:
FW: Expedited Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools - Lifeguards - Amendments
From:
Daley, Bob [mailto:Bob.Daley@marriott.com]
Sent:
Friday, June 16, 2017 3:45 PM
To:
Berliner's Office, Councilmember <Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov>
Subject:
Expedited Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools - Lifeguards -Amendments
Good Afternoon Roger,
It was great to see you again Wednesday night. I am writing to you as a member of the Montgomery County
Council to request that you please vote in favor, in its entirety, for the Expedited Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools -
Lifeguards - Amendments.
As a resident of Montgomery County and General Manager of the Bethesda North Marriott Hotel and
Montgomery County Conference Center, I strongly urge you to support this bill.
At Marriott Hotels the safety of our employees and guests comes first and we strongly believe that requesting
that our guests should be able to swim at their own risk will in no way compromise this. We will ensure that the
water quality is maintained to the highest Montgomery County and Marriott standards with oversight from a
certified pool operator who will be on site at all times when the pool is open. In addition, per Marriott brand
standards we have staff trained in CPR, first aid, AED and life safety 24 hours a day 365 days a year, which
includes having a manager on duty. Should there be any pool emergency or a situation requiring the pool to be
closed, we have a clearly marked telephone available at the pool which goes directly to our hotel operator, also
covered 24 hours a day. The hotel operator would then immediately contact the manager on duty to respond and
take the necessary actions for the safety of our guests.
Additionally, we will staff life guards as necessary when we expect heavy pool usage. This includes when we
have youth groups staying in the hotel while visiting the local area and DC. We of course will be sure to work
with those organizers to ensure that we have life guards on duty when they are utilizing the pool.
A swimming pool is a valued amenity to our guests and with the large number of tour groups of all ages
visiting the Nation's Capitol, the ability to relax in a pool at the end of the day, is a huge draw. I strongly urge
you to Support this bill and keep Montgomery County hotels competitive with our neighboring counties and
provide superior service and a safe environment for guests. Thank you for your time and attention to this
extremely important matter.
Regards and have a great weekend.
Bob Daley
Montgomery County Resident
9901 Carmelita Drive
Potomac, MD 20854
@
file:I/IF:/LAW/BILLS/1716%20swimming%20pools/lQ/Print/5058987%20incoming%20attachment%2011 0176%2020170619%20E-Mail%?0Mi:,,::,::.in,.
0
,1,.
111
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
7/6/2017
5059029 incoming attachment 110220 20170620 E-Mail Message 2017-06-19 02-37PM.html
From:
Berliner's Office, Councilmember [Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov]
Sent:
Monday, June 19, 2017 2:37:20 PM
To:
Council President
Subject:
FW: hearing on Bill 16-17 tomorrow
From:
Doherty, Katie [mailto:Katie.Doherty@bfsaul.com]
Sent:
Monday, June 19, 2017 2:32 PM
To:
Berliner's Office, Councilmember <Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov>
Subject:
hearing on Bill 16-17 tomorrow
Importance:
High
Dear Honorable Council President Berliner,
I am writing in reference to bill 16-17 being heard tomorrow. Thank you so much for co-sponsoring the bill.
Maryland state regulations do not mandate having a lifeguard at semi-public pools under 2,500 sq. and less than 5 ft. in depth.
Baltimore County and Montgomery County are the only two counties in the state that do not allow hotel guests to swim at their
own risk.
Eliminating the lifeguard requirement would enable hotels to extend pool hours and increase guest satisfaction among those
who seek out this amenity, allowing occupancy, tax related revenue and visitor spending in the county to rise.
Passage of this bill would level the playing field between Montgomery County hotels and hotels in the surrounding area that
currently have a competitive advantage of determining their own need for a lifeguard.
As operators guest safety is among our highest priorities. We are required to maintain a safe pool environment and ensure all
rules and regulations are followed. Safety signage must be in place and hotel staff is required to be trained in first aid, CPR and
AED usage.
A certified pool operator (CPO) is required onsite when the pool is open and that person is responsible for monitoring and
maintaining water quality at all times.
I am also a resident of Montgomery County my home address is
4616 Bettswood Dr.
Olney, md 20832
Katie Doherty
I
General Manager
Holiday Inn Gaithersburg
2 Montgomery Village Avenue
Gaithersburg, Maryland
20878
Phone:
240.238.1101
Katie. Doherty@bfsaul.com
Visit Website
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Mihill, Amanda
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Daniel Maldonado <Daniel.Maldonado@whitelodging.com>
Friday, May 19, 2017 6:44 PM
Courny.Council@MontgomeryCountyMD.gov
Mich,, =,I Swanigan
Support for Expedited Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools - Lifeguards-Amendments
Dear esteemed council members,
It
has come to my attention that there has been a proposal to exempt lodging establishments from requiring a
lifeguard at their swimming pools as long as certain saftey standards are upheld. I would like to take this
opportunity to voice my support for this propsed ammendment. As the general manager of the Hilton Garden
Inn Silver Spring North I have seen first hand the negative affects the current regulations have had on our guest
experience and ultimately our ability to be competitive in a highly competitive market. With the current
regulations, we have been forced to limit the hours of operation of our swimming pool to a mere five hours a
day, greatly affecting the guest experiance and for all intent and purposes, forcing potential leisure guest to
book elsewhere.
I full heartedly express my support for the propsed changes and hope that the coucil members would agree that
a strong competetive toursim industry is a benefit not only to those working directly in the industry, but also to
all of those who feel the long reaching economic benefits of the added revenues and tax dollars the industry
contributes to help our communities thrive.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Daniel Maldonado
I
General Manager
Hilton Garden Inn Silver Spring North
2200 Broadbirch Dr. Silver Spring, MD 20904
P: 301-622-3333
IF:
301-622--3338
Daniel.Maldonado@Whitelodging.com
This communication contains information :from White Lodging Services Corporation and/or its affiliated
companies that may be proprietary, confidential or privileged. Except for personal use by the intended recipient,
or as expressly authorized by the sender, any person who receives this information is prohibited :from
disclosing, copying, distributing, and/or using it.
If
you have received this communication in error, please
immediately delete it and all copies, and promptly notify the sender. Nothing in this communication is intended
to operate as an electronic signature under applicable law.
This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered safely by Mimecast.
For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com
@)
1
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
7/6/2017
5059030 incoming attachment 110221 20170620 E-Mail Message 2017-06-19 03-16PM.html
From:
Berliner's Office, Councilmember [Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov]
Sent:
Monday, June 19, 2017 3:16:26 PM
To:
Council President
Subject:
FW: Montgomery County Hotel Lifeguard Bill
From:
Roth, Marty [mailto:marty.roth@marriott.com]
Sent:
Monday, June
19, 2017 2:58
PM
To: Berliner's Office, Councilmember <Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov>
Subject:
Montgomery County Hotel Lifeguard Bill
Good Afternoon Honorable Council President Berliner,
I am writing to you as a member of the Montgomery County Council to request that you please vote in favor, in its
entirety, for the Expedited Bill
16-17,
Swimming Pools - Lifeguards -Amendments.
As a resident of Montgomery County and General Manager of the Bethesda Suites Marriott on Democracy Boulevard, I
strongly urge you to support this bill.
At Marriott Hotels, the safety of our employees and guests comes first and we strongly believe that requesting that our
guests should be able to swim at their own risk will in no way compromise this. We will ensure that the water quality is
maintained to the highest Montgomery County and Marriott standards with oversight from a certified pool operator who
will be on site at all times when the pool is open. In addition, per Marriott brand standards we have staff trained in CPR,
first aid, AED and life safety
24
hours a day
365
days a year, which includes having a manager on duty. Should there be
any pool emergency or a situation requiring the pool to be closed, we have a clearly marked telephone available at the
pool which goes directly to our hotel operator, also covered
24
hours a day. The hotel operator would then immediately
contact the manager on duty to respond and take the necessary actions for the safety of our guests. Additionally, we will
staff life guards as necessary when we expect heavy pool usage.
Again, I strongly urge you to
support
this bill and keep Montgomery hotels competitive with our neighboring counties as
well as enabling hotels to extend pool hours and increase guest satisfaction among those who seek out this amenity,
allowing occupancy, tax related revenue and visitor spending in the county to rise. Thank you for your time and attention
to this extremely important matter.
Marty Roth
Montgomery County Resident
14810
Pettit Way
Potomac, MD
20854
9vt_arty
Marty Roth
General Manager
Bethesda Suites Marriott Hotel
file:///F :/LAW/BILLS/1716%20swimming%20pools/lQ/PrinV5059030%20incomino%20attachment%20110??1 O/n?n?f117ni:;?n°L ?ni::_~A~;1o,
'>n• •---- -- .,
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
7/6/2017
5059067 incoming attachment 110259 20170621 E-Mail Message 2017-06-20 01-25PM.html
From:
Berliner's Office, Councilmember [Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov]
Sent:
Tuesday, June 20, 2017 1:25:07 PM
To:
Council President
Subject:
FW: Hilton Garden Inn Bethesda
From:
Tamara Williams [mailto:Tamara.Viilliams@Hilton.com]
Sent:
Tuesday, June
20, 2017 1:10
PM
To: Berliner's Office, Council member <Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov>
Subject:
Hilton Garden Inn Bethesda
Dear Honorable Council President Berliner,
Thank you for co-sponsoring this legislative.
I am the General Manager at the Hilton Garden Inn Bethesda hotel. I am writing to inform you that my hotel is
in support of the Montgomery County Lifeguard Bill.
My pool meets the mandate requirements for this legislative. Montgomery County and Baltimore County are
the only two counties in the state that do not allow hotel guests to swim at their own risk.
The Hilton Garden Inn Bethesda has one indoor pool open daily to hotel guests only. Since, I began working at
this property in 2011, guests have consistently requested extended hours for our pool. They have limited time
in the city and want timeframes that work best for their family
and/or work schedule.
Currently, this is not possible as a result of the current lifeguard requirement. When explaining to guests about
this requirement they get extremely frustrated and just don't understand why other hotels they have visited in
the surrounding area can and we can't.
In this case, the guests either want compensation for the inconvenience or they just don't return.
By eliminating this lifeguard requirement would allow us to extend our hours, improve our guest satisfaction
and allow our occupancy tax revenue and visitor spending to rise.
As the General Manager of the Hilton Garden Inn Bethesda guests safety is our highest priority. Our
management company and the Hilton Brand requires that we maintain a safe pool environment and ensure all
rules and regulations are followed 100% of the time.
We currently have safety signage in place and the hotel staff is required to be trained on first aid, CPR and AED
usage. In addition, to the passing of the new legislative we would add to this a certified pool operator. This
person would always be onsite when the pool is open and be
responsible for monitoring and maintaining water quality at all times.
Thank you for this opportunity to make the service we provide to our guest even greater.
Tamara Williams
General Manager
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Mihill, Amanda
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Auteen Bahrami <abahrami@sunsetpoolsmgmt.com>
Thursday, May 18, 2017 4:16 PM
Cou nty.Cou nci l@montgomerycou ntymd .gov
Sunset Pool Concerns about Expedited Bill 16 - 17
To the Honorable Council,
There is an Expedited Bill that was introduced yesterday regarding the safety of Montgomery County residents and tourists that requires your
immediate attention. As an established pool management company that has been in business for over 20 years and employs hundreds of
lifeguards to protect the lives and safety of pool patrons for over 150 swimming pool facilities in Montgomery County, we are highly
concerned that Expedited Bill No. 16 - 17 will have a damaging effect that will last for years. This Bill is not only disregarding the reality of
all the drowning incidents that were prevented by lifeguards in hotels in Montgomery County, but it is also disregarding the negative impact
it would have on tourism which depends on a clean, secure, and healthy environment for the tourists. There would also be hundreds offull-
time year-round jobs lost at indoor pools in Montgomery County.
A safe and healthy environment is a universal standard no matter the State, County, or Country an individual lives in.
It
makes all the
difference when a person chooses where they would like to visit or live. The reason Montgomery County is so much more affluent, clean, and
enjoyable to live in when compared with the rest of the Counties in Maryland or other States, is because they have upheld a higher standard
of living for everyone who lives or visits there. Everyone cares about their health and safety more than the extra hour they may have been
able to spend in a hotel pool that closed at 11 :00pm instead of 12:00am. In fact, pools in PG and Anne Arundel Counties still have limited
hours even after they removed their lifeguards.
There are always comments and letters being written to hotel managers by their customers who compliment them about the superior quality
of their swimming pools compared to others that did not have a lifeguard on duty. Hotel customers also compliment the presence of
lifeguards because they play an important role in keeping the customers safe from each other when there are large parties of children or adults
under the influence of toxic substances who are breaking the rules and disturbing the other guests who are trying to relax at the pool. I have
attached some of these comments to show how discerning customers expect a higher standard of service when they visit a hotel and it is
lifeguards who provide the level of safety and cleanliness they expect to see at the pool. Anyone who has spent time with their family and
friends at a pool knows how difficult it is to keep track of everyone, which is why lifeguards make their stay at those hotels so much more
enjoyable, because of the unparalleled level of safety and cleanliness that they provide.
In just the past year, our company alone has rescued over IO individuals from indoor pools in Maryland. Of the IO rescues, 6 were adults
from Montgomery County who had to be rescued from drowning and in another jurisdiction there were 2 children that had to have CPR and
Rescue Breathing administered until paramedics arrived on the scene. Even though Baltimore City had passed their lifeguard amendments,
the hotel where the 2 children were saved with CPR and Rescue Breathing had opted to keep their lifeguard. The Memorandum by
Councilman Katz stated that there were no increases in pool-related injuries in nearby jurisdictions; however this would not have been the
case if the 2 children had died as a result of drowning a few months after the passage of their Bill. Even the doctors from the hospital
acknowledged that if there had not been a lifeguard at the scene exactly within the 30 seconds that the incident occurred, both of the children
would have been deceased or permanently brain-damaged.
The amendments introduced in this Bill would significantly reduce the most important layer of protection that a swimming pool has, which is
to have a professionally trained and certified lifeguard present at the swimming pool during all the operational hours of the facility. The
emergency alarm system that the Bill proposes in exchange for deregulation of lifeguards does not address the issue of a need for immediate
rescue procedures to be implemented in the case of an emergency, as was the case with the IO individuals who our lifeguards rescued from
indoor pools in Maryland in just the past year alone.
1
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
If
any of these individuals who were rescued, or their family members and friends are asked if this Bill should be passed, all of their answers
would resoundingly be "no, do not pass this bill." Those individuals are alive and continuing their daily work as residents of Montgomery
County thanks to the clear-vision and caring lawmakers such as yourselves who have upheld a higher standard of living in Montgomery
County so that it continues to be a safe, secure, and prosperous County that attracts similar minded individuals to live and visit there.
There are laws regulating the sanitary delivery of public tap water so that nobody gets sick when using it. Similarly, there are laws regulating
the sanitary use of swimming pool water, but with the current level of staffing of Montgomery Count Health Inspector officials, it would be
nearly impossible for the County to frequently ensure the sanitary practices of swimming pools open to the public. Swimming pools are
extremely unsanitary unless there is constant supervision of the water quality and disinfectant levels during all the operational hours of the
day. A building engineer who visits the pool once every other hour to measure the disinfectant and pH levels of the water does not ensure
sanitary water that is free of pathogens contained in the various forms of human discharge during swimming pool use.
As uncomfortable as it may sound, ifthere is no constant supervision of the swimming pool, a customer might vomit, bleed, pass stool, or
have any other number of bodily fluid discharges that infect the pool without detection. Most of these fluid discharges go unnoticed because
of their natural tendency to dissolve in water, so the pool users who unknowingly enter the pool after the incident would be swimming in
intensely contaminated water.
If
a meal at a restaurant gives someone a stomach virus, that person is not likely to return to that restaurant ever
again, and the same will go for hotels and their hotel chains. With the passage of this Bill, hotels will actually suffer a worse economic fate
when an incident occurs and they begin to lose a large percentage of their customer base due to the loss of trust between the hotel chain and
their customers.
Part of the reasoning put forth in support of the Bill states that since another jurisdiction in Maryland has adopted this amendment a year ago,
they have not reported any rise in pool-related injuries. This is not the case, because as was mentioned earlier, within a couple months of the
Bill being passed in Baltimore City, 2 children in one of their hotels were saved by one of our lifeguards. That hotel was also going to remove
the lifeguard from their facility after the passage of the Bill, but firmly decided not to after they saw the risk that it entails. There are literally
hundreds of incidents such as these that go unreported every year. An emergency alarm system would not have saved those children or the
adults who were alone when they had to be rescued, and if those incidents happened at hotels that opted not to have lifeguards, those
individuals would not be with us today.
Many of the hotel pools in jurisdictions that have opted out of having lifeguards have become so dirty and unsanitary that their own
customers would not even dare to use them after just one look at them. I have attached some pictures from their pools without their names
attached to protect their privacy, but one look at these pools yourself and you will see how this is a problem. Filthy pools have become an
even greater problem for those hotels since the hotel Managers and Engineers are being given extra lifeguarding tasks that cannot be
reasonably performed by them. Our company is constantly getting calls and requests from Managers and Engineers at these same hotels in
PG and Anne Arundel Counties complaining that they are being pressured into not having a lifeguard by the hotel owners when they would
actually prefer to keep them there.
Hotels choose to add a swimming pool amenity to attract customers. Some of these hotels notice that their swimming pools are not the main
attraction so they decide to close their pools and open something more suitable for their guests such as a ballroom, a meeting room, a gym, or
a restaurant. Swimming pools are usually closed for these reasons because hotels see a better way to increase their revenue; they are not
closed because they are a costly burden. Hotels chains continue to build hotels with swimming pools in them, knowing that they require
lifeguards.
For the past 50 years these rules and regulations have been in effect and have helped to save thousands of lives and created thousands of jobs
in Montgomery County.
It
makes no sense to change such a successful program with a distinguished track record of protecting lives. Thank
you very much for taking the time to review our concerns and I would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you and discuss these
proposed changes in detail.
2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Pictures of Hotel Swimming Pools in Maryland Jurisdictions after Lifeguards were Removed
are
attached
to
this email:
Figure
1
shown above is an example of a
pool
that has been allowed
to
get so dirty and infected
that
algae
blooms have taken hold
of the
water. The cloudiness
also indicates
that
the
level ofcontaminant
particles in
the water is extremely
high.
This is a
pool that has
gone weeks
or
months
without
proper
water sanitation
levels in
addition
to pool maintenance.
3
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Figure 2 shown
above is another
example of
an
algae
bloom like the
one seen
in
figure
1, however
what cannot
be
seen in
this picture is
the
stench of
body odor
and
algae that rises
with
the mist
from
the hot
water of
this
spa.
This spa is beyond disgusting for use
and
probably has
more harmful
pathogens
that can be
transmitted between
people than a stagnant pond of water.
Hotel Customer Comments That Were Shared With Our Company
Below you may find some comments that hotel managers shared
with
us in appreciation of the work our
company
does for them. There are
many comments such as these and many are also shared on comments sections of hotel search engines.
Comments
10/10 yvould
stay again
4
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Pros: -Clean pool with an on duty life guard -Shuttle service to and from the Metro and Reagan Airport -
Multiple elevators to handle the busy mornings -Hotel is close to a Whole Foods -Baggage holding
service Cons -At busier times it may take a while for the shuttle to pick you up -Wifi was too slow to
use at times (but free)
Comments
Nice Hotel
When we arrived they were very nice at the desk it only took like 2 minutes to check in, we then went to
the room and my grandson wanted to go to the pool, so we did , it was clean and clear and there was a
lifeguard on duty , which was nice because so many times at a hotel pool there is not one , she was so
nice.
"Great place, location and price"
POSITIVE:
The breakfast was ok, the afternoon happy hour was great and the kids loved the pool!
Comments
Good location to Metro, plus good restaurants within walking distance (family)
Breakfasts for the family had good variety, swimming pool attendant (required in VA) was very
cordial, the happy hours we made were a welcome relaxing period from the miles of walking, beds were
comfortable and we were able to store our luggage on the last day at the hotel and see the city without
having to worry about it.
Than you again,
Sincerely,
Auteen Bahrami
Sunset Pool
202-524-6244
abahrami@sunsetpoolsmgmt.com
5
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Dear Council President Berliner,
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak at the public hearing in regards to the Expedited Bill 16-17 on
June 20, 2017. I would like to address a few more issues, which I did not have a chance to speak about during the
hearing, due to time restrictions.
During Mr. David Child's (General Manager of Marriott Pooks Hill) testimony at the public hearing, he stated that
there is no need for a Lifeguard, and that hotel staff is equipped to handle any emergencies that may arise. Please
note that hotel staff that is certified is usually entrusted with this task, among many other duties as part of their
job description. It is not their sole responsibility to attend only to pool related emergencies, therefore when an
incident may happen; it is not warranted that they will be able to respond to it immediately.
I would also like to bring to your attention an incident that Mr. Child may not be aware of. On May 21 2014,
Marriott Pooks Hill had an incident caused by the hotel engineers that mixed hazardous pool chemicals when no
lifeguard was on site. They did so in order to service the pool, however ended up with an evacuated property,
engineers and hotel guests transported to the hospital, over several dozen fire trucks, and several closed streets
for an extended amount oftime. Reason? Toxic gas. All because they took on a task that they were simply not
equipped to handle.
Please note that Sunset Pool is currently managing Mr. Child's pool (Marriott Pooks Hill), and we can inform you
that the pool hours are not nearly as limited as he presented them to be; the pool is open 7 days a week from
6am to 9pm, giving Marriott Pooks Hill hotel guests and their families plenty of time to enjoy the pool. We are not
sure why he misrepresented the pool hours to be so limited, and claimed to have multiple complaints, when the
hours are just as they would be with no lifeguard on duty. The only reason why the hotel does choose to close the
pool at 9pm is the fact that pool location is adjacent to the hotel rooms, and they want to make sure that noise
levels are down.
Amy Rohrer, the representative of Maryland Hotel Lodging Association stated that hotels will continue to have a
lifeguard on staff during the hotel peak hours if they deem it necessary. This promise was also made to the council
members of Prince George's and Anne Arundel counties during the public hearings. Unfortunately, as soon as the
bill passed, all lifeguards were laid off.
Ms. Rohrer also indicated that potential customers may favor other counties over Montgomery, because of
limited pool hours, however counties that do not have the lifeguard requirement also operate on limited pool
hours and are bound by certain restrictions like having a pool operator and a certified First Aid responder on site
at all times. Therefore the restricted operation hours are really not a decisive factor in attracting potential
customers. Note that for every one person who is unhappy about limited hours, there will be another 100 who
will be grateful to have an extra set of eyes making sure that. their loved ones are safe. (Please see comments
from hotel guests and managers attached)
During the hearing a few council members inquired about the expenses that hotels have to bear in order to
comply with the lifeguard requirements.
I would like to provide this information for you in order to show that the claimed expenses are not nearly as
exorbitant as some of these hotels claim. I would also like to point out that the benefits heavily outweigh the cost.
The lifeguard regulations have been in effect for decades. Even after 9/11 and the recession of 2008 lifeguards
worked at these hotels, and were not a financial burden. So why now, STR's 2017 HOST Almanac announced that
U.S. hotel industry revenues exceeded $199 billion in 2016, which was an all-time high that lifeguards suddenly
became intolerable and uncompetitive financially?
st
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Any property could claim that hiring a lifeguard is financially hurting them; however they have failed to present
evidence of hardship in support of such claims. There is always a cost for operating a lodging business, and
managing the pool is only a small part of it, that is also tax deductible.
Sunset Pool is currently managing 24 hotel pools in Montgomery County. The average annual contract price for
these 24 pools is $32,160. This cost includes all chemicals, insurance expenses/liability, lifeguard and pool
operator services as well as multiple layers of supervision and management accountability. We are in business to
make sure that each and every locations remain safe at all times, and if anything is needed we are always there to
show up and address any issues that may arise.
I would like to finalize with the fact that because we are currently taking full responsibility for all hotel pool
operations, we drastically reduce the cost and liability for their operation in Montgomery County.
Going back to the incident mentioned in the third paragraph of this email, just consider the implications of not
having a lifeguard on duty at all, and how much more expensive it could get for the emergency responders to
show up for this kind of incidents.
As
for the current requirement for health department, expectation is to check
on the pools once a month, while the pool companies are checking the pools on an hourly basis. We meet and
exceed the current imposed regulations. If the repeal is passed, it would become necessary to engage more
health department employees in keeping watch and control over these locations. Note that it takes only a couple
of minutes for the pool water to become unsafe and endanger patrons and expose them to immediate and long
term harm. It is easier to prevent than to deal with long term consequences. I strongly believe that the council has
all the power and duty to impose high standards to all citizens and business alike to ensure the best quality of
service for each and every person.
Sincerely,
Ari Naderi
Sunset Pool, Inc.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
7/6/2017
5058943 incoming attachment 110131 20170616 E-Mail Message 2017-06-1612-28PM.html
From:
Berliner's Office, Councilmember [Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov]
Sent:
Friday, June 16, 2017 12:28:52 PM
To:
Council President
Subject:
FW: Bill 16-17
From:
Bob Kiani [mailto:bkiani@sunsetpoolsmgmt.com]
Sent:
Thursday, June
15, 2017 9:37 PM
To:
Elrich's Office, Councilmember <Councilmember.Elrich@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Floreen's Office,
Councilmember <Councilmember.Floreen@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Leventhal's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Leventhal@montgomNycountymd.gov>; Navarro's Office, Councilmember
<Counci1member.Navarro@montgomer
1
·countymd.gov>; Riemer's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Riemer@montgomery;.ountymd.gov>; Berliner's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Rice's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Hucker's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Katz's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov>
Subject:
Bill
16-17
Dear Honorable Councilman and Councilwoman of Montgomery County,
My name is Bob Kiani and I am the Vice President of Sunset Pool, Inc.
Sunset Pool has proudly served the residents and visitors of Montgomery County for the
past 20 years. During this time, our lifeguards have assisted patrons on numerous
occasions, varying from providing basic first aid to assisting in hundreds of active
drowning rescues. Just think about all the lives that were saved because of the lifeguard
that was on duty and prevented the inevitable.
As you may be aware, Baltimore County also considered changing the regulation
for Lifeguard requirements in hotel pools (Baltimore County Bill 22-17), but after
carefully reviewing the risks involved the bill was withdrawn. Both PG County and Anne
Arundel County passed similar legislation last year and are now considering the reversal
of this law, since there has been a good deal of complaints of unsafe swimming
conditions at hotel pools. Arlington County, Fairfax County and the City of Alexandria
require lifeguards at Hotel Pools.
Our company has also received a significant amount of service requests from hotel
managers and engineers that have no lifeguard on duty, requiring our
expertise to balance the pool water, hotel employees who are certified Pool Operators are
unable to manage the hotel pools with out a lifeguard on duty. Hotel pools are constantly
being shut down by the health department for multiple irregularities and non-
compliance.
I urge to vote "NO" to the bill 16-17, by doing so, you will prevent accidents before they
happen.
Thank you for your time and consideration
Bob Kiani
Sunset Pool Management
-
Vice President
filo ·
l//r=-11
Aw /RII I
@
1/2
!=;/171 fi¾?0swimmina%20oools/lQ/PrinV5058943%20incomino%20attachment%20110131 %2020170616%20E-Mail%20Message % . . .
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Incident Report
Data Courtesy of: Sunset Pool, Inc.
MD
Incidents
:t"
C
U"0
::::,
0
e
~
!O~
~
C
0
~;
0
"'
Hotel Pool Incidents
Other Pool Incidents
94
86
236
123
118
308
131
138
152
72
55
156
78
95
302
94
319
Total Reported Incidents
263
@)
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
MONTGOMERY COUNTY
DISTRESS/ACTIVE DROWNING/RESCUES* 2012-2016
==--=
',O
Hotel Pool Incidents
=
Other Pool Incidents
,15
40
35
-'-==-~--~c.---:c==--=--=-
30
:,,5
20
15
'JO
5
0
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
*
Distress/Active Drowning/Rescues Include:
Accidentally falling in
Alcohol/Medication/Substance abuse
Anxiety/panic disorder in water
Bumping into the wall while swimming laps
Children/Adult with inability to swim
Dehydrated swimmers
Diabetes, Hypoglycemia
Epilepsy/Seizures while swimming
Exhaustion/Fatigue while swimming
Failing to follow water safety rules (ex. diving into shallow end}
Heart attack/stroke in the water
Horseplay in the water/ holding someone's head in water
Hypothermia in the water
Muscle/Leg Cramps while swimming
Sting and allergic reaction in the water
Weak and panicking swimmers
\~
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
MONTGOMERY COUNTY VOMIT/FECAL INCIDENTS
2012-2016
Hotel Pool Incidents
=
Other Pool Incidents
160
140
~~-=-=-~
120
100
BO
60
40
:w
0
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
~\
"'-:::::'/
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
MONTGOMERY COUNTY TOTAL INCIDENTS
THROUGH 2017 (HOTEL AND OTHER POOLS)
( 2 0 1 7 PRE DIC Tl ON S BASED ON CURRENT STATS AS OF 6 / 1 7)
0
==
Total Drowning Incidents
=
Total Vomit/Fecal Incidents
350
300
2SO
200
~
========--=-~~
/
,/
~-===-__-:::::::.::::-=========::::::::::::::::::;::=:::::::::::::-~~,...:::.:::::::::-.:::::::::::=-~_:..;.::.:=::=-
____ _:
1',0
100
so
0
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
End of 2017
®
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
MONTGOMERY COUNTY HOTEL POOLS VS. OTHER
POOLS: TOTAL INCIDENTS 2012-2017
*(2017 PREDICTIONS BASED ON CURRENT STATS AS OF 6/17)
"""-=
Hotel Pools
250
=
Other Pools
200
/.~--c--~=~===-~cc="==="~-~-c~' -~- ._ ,_
lSO
~ ~ : : - -
c.---
coC'
~~~
.--:;---C::-~
~ -
~-:;::::----
100
':iO
0
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017*
~
'Z:..
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Cl)
-
o
--
-r-
-
0)
- -
••
·-
!ii....
(])
-
bJ)
·c
,-
01
3
00
!ii....
-~
C
:::l
C
co
--
a:
UJ
I'--
(])
0
!ii....
N
~
3
-
('--
--
u..
0
·-
(J)
I
Eo
EN
3
0
C
:c
-
-
CD
\-
0.
UJ
0
lD
--
--
I I I I I I I I
+
I
N
~
~
ro
S
~ ~ ~ ~
\Nil.OIi\ :!O 30'1
tj-
--
z
0)
- -
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Stephen Lavery
To:
Stephen Lavery
RE: Testimony A
Subject:
Testimony
Steve Lavery
High Sierra Pools, Inc.
Expedited Bill
16-17,
Swimming Pools - Lifeguards -
Amendments [June 20,
2017]
Thank you for allowing me to address The Council and discuss Bill
16-17.
My name is Steve Lavery, I am the President of High Sierra Pools, we have been working in tt1e
county for the last 25 years and currently manage 78 swimming pools in The County.
i
come forward today to oppose bill
16-17
on grounds that have been repeatedly supported by
nationally recognized safety organizations such as the CDC and American Red Cross.
,A.
repeatedly proven fact is that Lifeguards working at swimming pools prevent accidents and
save lives in water emergencies.
This proposed legislation eliminates the Lifeguard from the Hotel Swimming Pool. The
Lifeguard is the primary safety measure at the Hotel swimming pool.
By eliminating Lifeguards at pool, who is going to be at most risk?
Children .....
The CDC finds that accidental drowning is a leading cause of death amongst children.
And children of color (Hispanic children and African American children) drown 3 times more
than there Caucasian contemporaries.
Children drown far more in the shallow end of the pool than in the deep end of the pool.
So even though children are drowning in shallow water, the fact is untrained adults are still
failing to make the rescues in shallow water.
1
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
97% of CHILDREN drownings are associated with adult mistakes.
Today I brought my company's "Incident book".
The book includes records of significant incidents which occurred at pools in Maryland Virginia
and DC for
2015.
I will be happy to share it with Council members after the meeting to show the types of
incidents our Lifeguards respond to throughout the summer.
For
2015
our lifeguards responded to 340 significant incidents.
44 incidents required fire and rescue to also respond.
You simply will not see these records anywhere else but in the pool industry.
The Fi1·e Department and The Health Department only have a fraction of the story.
Both departments are simply unaware of the volume and important functions Lifeguards
serve.
I respectfully ask The Council to work together with the Swimming Pool lndustt·y and The
Swimming Pool Industry Association APSP when it comes to Water Safety legislation.
APSP is already preparing to a statistical summary of incident reports recorded by pool
management companies who are opet·ating in The County for the Council's review.
Montgomery County has a long history of leading the way when it comes to Swimming Pools
Safety.
I know we can do far better in Montgomery County than this legislation.
Thank you for your time.
2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
7/6/2017
5059441 incoming attachment 110641 20170630 E-Mail Message 2017-06-29 08-48AM.html
From:
Berliner's Office, Councilmember [Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov]
Sent:
Thursday, June 29, 2017 8:48:36 AM
To:
Council President
Subject:
FW: Oppose Bill 16-17 eliminating Lifeguards from Hotel Pools
From:
Stephen Lavery [mailto:steve@highsierrapools.com]
Sent:
Wednesday, June 28, 2017 8:41 PM
To:
Berliner's Office, Councilmember <Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov>
Cc:
Elrich's Office, Councilmember <Councilmember.Elrich@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Hucker's Office,
Councilmember <Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Leventhal's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Leventhal@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Navarro's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Rice's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Katz's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov>
Subject:
Oppose Bill 16-17 eliminating Lifeguards from Hotel Pools
Dear Montgomery County Council President Berliner:
Mr. Berliner, I remember your comments at the hearing a few days ago concerning your personal experience with visiting
Hotel pools without Lifeguards and that you "watch you kids like a hawk". I appreciate your sharing that personal
experience because I have heard those types of stories many times. The tragic statistical fact is that not all adults are
able to sustain a high enough level of vigilance to remove Child Drowning as a leading cause of deaths in children. While
we all think we would watch our kids, it simply doesn't happen. Personal experiences simply cannot be substituted for
statistical facts when governing over a large community. The tragic fact is if Lifeguards are eliminated from Hotels more
children will drown and be badly injured in Montgomery County.
I am deeply opposed to Bill 16-17 elimin ·:ting the Lifeguard requirement for Hotel Swimming Pools. The legislation will
have unintended consequences as well. -here is no legitimate difference between two same size pools; one is on the
property of a Hotel the other a Condomini"um Complex.
Montgomery County has a long history of believing Lifeguards have obvious safety benefits to the Montgomery County
Community. After 40 years we now have more statistical evidence showing those past Council members did the right
thing and required Lifeguards at all pools.
The Swimming Pool Industry is made up of small businesses working hard every day training Lifeguards and operating
Pools in the county safely. The Swimming Pool Industry has just recently organized a coalition to provide vital facts to The
Council members and vows to approach surrounding jurisdictions with these same facts. In the near future
Montgomery County will be proven right when surrounding jurisdictions receive the facts about water safety and
drownings and reverse recent decisions which were based solely on the opinions of The Hotel and lodging Industry
Association.
A Myth: The shallow end of the pool (less than 5 feet deep) is safer than the deep end of the pool.
The Fact: Children statistically drown far more in water less than 5 feet deep as opposed to water over 5 feet deep.
Children drown statistically far more than adults.
Please review the enclosed documents published by the CDC, Redwoods Group, and Red Cross and a summary of our
incident reports proving that Lifeguards are a vital link in the chain of survival for victims of swimming pool related
injuries.
Please also review High Sierra Montgomery County Incident Book Summary table enclosed as well. It is clear that
Lifeguards are responding to save lives in Montgomery County. Including Hotel pools.
fila.-///1=· /I AW/RII I
~/171 R%?n-=:wimminn¾?nnool-=:/IO/Print/!illS~441¾?Oinr.nmina¾2lliitt::ir.hment¾20110641 ¾20?01706~0¾?0F-M:ail¾?OMA-=:-=::anA¾
@)
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
7/6/2017
5059441 incoming attachment 110641 20170630 E-Mail Message 2017-06-29 08-48AM.html
Respectfully,
Steve
Lavery
Stephen Lavery
I
President
High Sierra Pools -
SAFETY IS OUR FIRST PRIORITY
Our New Address: 2704 Columbia Pike, Arlington, VA
22204
P: (703) 920-1750
I
ext.
105 F: (703) 920-1753
I
C: (202) 255-6768
www.highsierrapools.com
Connect with us on:
1JDesc :..r~Desc
133(
133(
This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received
this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure
or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden.
~
please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
filA·///F:/LAW/BILLS/1716¾?0swimminn¾?Onools/lO/Print/!'in!'iQ441¾?Oinr.nminn¾?Oo,1to,rhm,:,nt•/,?n1101'\,i 1 O/, ?fl?n17fl/:\':lnoL ?f\l=_kA.,,;!OL ?mA~rr<>n~o'-
,.,,,.,
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Stephen Lavery
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Stephen Lavery
Wednesday, June
28, 2017 8:37
PM
Stephen Lavery
RE: incident reports
Summary of High Sierra Pools, Inc. Incident Books 2012 - 2016: Total Table represents all pools in DC metro
area per year. Montgomery County Table Only represents all pools managed by HSP located in Mont
County.
Total
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
total
rescue in the water
fecal/vomit incident
minor incident
incident on the pool
deck
other
intoxicated patrons
total
67
19
99
60
3
3
251
42
11
53
24
14
144
97
24
109
68
27
5
330
128
17
75
56
16
1
293
110
2
80
444
73
416
66
274
84
24
3
12
285
1303
Montgomery county
ONLY
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Total
rescue in the water
fecal/vomit incident
minor incident
incident on the pool
deck
other
intoxicated patrons
total
4
1
4
8
2
19
3
7
23
10
3
3
16
3
2
27
4
3
8
3
4
4
10
18
14
55
34
0
4
18
18
43
125
37
incidents involved children under
11
years old
26
incidents occurred in shallow pools less than
5
feet deep
High Sierra managed
3
Hotel pools in the past
5
years and no Hotel Pools in the last
2
years in Mont County.
5
incidents occurred at Hotel pools managed
by
HSP
Stephen Laver·y
I
President
High Sierra Pools
-
SAFETY IS OUR FIRST PRIORITY
Our New Address: 2704 Columbia Pike,
Arlington,
VA
22204
P: (703) 920-1750
I
ext.
105
F:
(703) 920-1753
I
C:
(202) 255-6768
www.highsierrapools.com
1
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Stephen Lavery
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Richard Smekal; Stephen Lavery
Radoslaw Kaczor
RE: Financial study
Marriott
Bethesda Studv:
Facts
- hotel has 400 moms
- occupancy rate 82?/, (1,ation'.vide average)
- a'Jerage per 11ight rate 5170 ($200/night weekdays. S100/nigr, \c.eekencls)
- 6an1 to lOpn, daily= 112 weekly hours
cc'>
$100,0CO/year ser·,Jice;':ifeguard contr·act ccst
Breakdown #1:
$100.000/year·-= 5275/dav cost to hotel to oper·ate poof vJith ser';lce cor,tract (CPO,
Occupancy rate is 820\
-=>
323 mo
equals to 84cents per· room;
cl'/
are occu
=>
$275 da
cost of pool divicieci ::r.e 328 occupied roorns
0
morn costs 5170/night average. then the pool cont1·act cost over average per night
tCJOT'
revenue equals $0.84/$170
=
0.0049 (in percentage ratio it is
If
This calculation :1,clicates that the poo r:ontr·act cost repr·esents
a tiny
fraction of the roo
1
;1
rates charged to custoniers.
Breakdown #2:
$100,000/year pool service contr·act with lifeguard staff
-- assurning $12/hour wage fm lifeguard staff, 112 hours x 52 weeks x $12
=
$69,888
- add 12% payroll related taxes= $78,275
If lifeguat·d staff eliminated, $21,725 or even more, will still be incurr-ed for chemicals, pool supervision and oversight,
rnaintenance, insLll'a11ce, etc. - iten1s that are otherwise part of the lifeguard and service pool management contract;
Cost of Lifeguard wages is $78,275/year
=>
$214.50/day
$214.50/day over 328 occupied rooms equals to 65cents/day; This represents 0.38% of the average room price charged
to customer;
1
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
10 Leading Causes of Injury Deaths
by
Age Group Highlighting
Unintentional Injury Deaths, United States - 2010
Rank
1
2
3
Homicide
Other Spec.,
classifiable
82
4
Suicide
Suffocation
Suicide
.
Firearm
Suicide
Suffocation
Suicide
Poisoning
2,594
Suicide
Suffocation
1,839
Homicide
Firearm
2,061
Suicide
Suffocation
Suicide
Poisoning
Homicide
Firearm
5
1,824
1,910
Suicide
Poisoning
1,673
Suicide
Poisoning
1,965
1,382
Suicide
Suffocation
Adverse
Effects
11,078
Suicide
Suffocation
6
787
1,279
1,130
1,544
9,493
Suicide
Poisoning
&~~:::-· .,._.'.,~'
~-\t:,('i.;
;;,;.-'"<
7
6,599
8
9
10
Data Source:
National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). National Vital Statistics System.
Produced
by:
Office of Statistics and Programming, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control
,
CDC using WISQARST"'.
~
r~~
(~r_~
Centers
for Disease
Control
and
Prevention
National
Center for
Injury
Prevention and Control
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
7/6/2017
5058144 incoming attachment 109301 20170524 E-Mail Message 2017-05-23 02-15PM.html
From:
Berliner's Office, Councilmember [Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov]
Sent:
Tuesday, May 23, 2017 2:15:15 PM
To:
Council President
Subject:
FW: Please vote No to Bill 16-17
,----------------
--------------
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -----------
--
--------- ---
------
--------
---------------
------- ------------- ------------ ---
--
- - - - --- -------- -----
From:
Christine Jones [mai1to:mom2momfe@outlook.com]
Sent:
Tuesday, May 23, 2017 1:23 PM
To:
Berliner's Office, Council member <Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov>
Subject:
Please vote No to Bill 16-17
Dear Mr. Roger Berliner,
I heard news from a lifeguard who saved my daughter's life that he might be getting laid off by the end
of this month. I have been a regular customer at the Marriott in Bethesda for the past 6 years where I
have seen the same thing happening to other parents. The lifeguard who works there told me that the
County wants to let hotels run their pools without a lifeguard. He said the County thinks that the
drowning risk is low at hotels so they want to allow people to swim at their own risk.
My daughter was 7 years old when a lifeguard saved her life. She knew how to doggy paddle and
always listened to my instructions. That day when she was saved I was watching her from only 20 feet
away. She was playing in the shallow end when I turned to grab my phone for a couple seconds when
I heard the lifeguard's whistle. Wt".en I looked up I saw the lifeguard jumping in to grab my daughter
who had managed to doggy padd.1e to deeper water where she couldn't stand. I hadn't taken my eyes
off her for more than
10
seconds before it all happened.
I don't know any parents that can have their eyes glued to our children for every second of the day
and just
10
seconds meant the difference between life and death for my daughter that day. We owe
our daughter's life to that lifeguard and the County who made it possible. Lifeguards should be
required anywhere there is a swimming pool because it is too difficult to keep them safe without one.
Please vote against this bill.
Sincerely,
Christine Jones
Sent from Outlook
file:///F :/LAW/BILLS/1716%20swimming%20pools/lQ/Print/5058144 %20incoming%20attachment%20109301 %2020170524 %20E-M;:,il%?0M""""'""o;,
111
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
7/6/2017
5058232 incoming attachment 109393 20170525 E-Mail Message 2017-05-24 03-25PM.html
From:
Berliner's Office, Councilmember [Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov]
Sent:
Wednesday, May 24, 2017 3:25:49 PM
To:
Council President
Subject:
FW: Bill 16-17
From:
NICK STEPHANO [mailto:nickrstephano@gmail.com]
Sent:
Wednesday, May 24, 2017 2:04 PM
To:
Berliner's Office, Council member <Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Elrich's Office,
Councilmember <Councilmember.Elrich@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Floreen's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Floreen@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Hucker's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Katz's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Leventhal's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Leventhal@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Navarro's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Rice's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Riemer's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Riemer@montgomerycountymd.gov>
Subject:
Bill 16-17
Dear Councilman Rice,
My Name is Trish Kirby. I am a single mom of two. With all due respect, and to the extent it Bill 16-17 matters
to me personally and financially. I work as a lifeguard year around.
By voting to pass this bill to allow pools to operate without lifeguards, you will hurt me and many others in
similar situations. I truly fear that I may not be able to provide for my children who deserve so much better, if
this bill passes.
I trust that you share my concerns and will think twice before voting for this bill!
Respectfully,
Trish Kirby
file:///F:/LAW/BILLS/1716%20swimming%20pools/lQ/Print/5058232%20incoming%20attachment%20109393%2020170525%20E-Mail%20Message%...
1/1
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Dear Councilwomen and Councilmen of Montgomery County,
I would like to express my deep concerns regarding this bill. I am very worried about its contents for
numerous reasons, as outlined below:
1. The safety of guests using hotel pools without a lifeguard on duty;
I know the industry first hand, because I used to work as a lifeguard for over a year, during which time I
witnessed multiple cases of adult supervision negligence, which sometimes caused near drowning
rescues. I also worked as a regional manager for multiple hotel pools and I can attest to the fact that
guests are not paying attention to signage, to the posted rules, or even sometimes listen to a lifeguard.
Multiple times, they simply disregard recommendations, and even with a lifeguard on duty, it may be
difficult to keep the pool under control.
2. The water safety;
Water balance and safety is a very sensitive issue that is achieved by consistent control and
adjustments of many systems, mechanical and chemical alike. Engineers who become CPO certified
within a 3-day class simply do not possess the experience and the time to properly manage the pool.
The automated chemical feeder systems, which are labeled as absolute lifesavers, all too many times
demand even more care, precision and attention rather than the hourly maintenance performed by the
pool operators.
3. The loss of jobs that could be triggered by the passage of this bill.
Lifeguarding jobs provide great experience and education, and by repealing this law you would be
depriving Maryland residents from having access to jobs that save lives, and cutting down the income
many rely on.
I believe that hotels dramatically diminish the importance of constant supervision of the pool. For the
past 20 years the majority of the pools were managed by third parties, and the hotels simply do not
understand how much work is being put in into keeping the pools safe.
As outlined in the Bill Memorandum, Montgomery County is faced with being put in line along other
counties that have already repealed the Lifeguard Law. I urge you to lead by example, and put the
residents and visitors of Montgomery County First, to continue being one of the safest counties of our
nation.
I strongly urge you to vote NO on the passage of the 16-17 bill.
Best Regards,
Irina Lupu
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
7/6/2017
5058234 incoming attachment 109395 20170525 E-Mail Message 2017-05-24 03-26PM.html
From:
Berliner's Office, Councilmember [Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov]
Sent:
Wednesday, May 24, 2017 3:26:53 PM
To:
Council President
Subject:
FW: Vote No to Bill 16-17
From:
Scott Mcfadden [mailto:scottbmcfadden@yahoo.com]
Sent:
Wednesday, May 24, 2017 12:17 PM
To:
Berliner's Office, Councilmember <Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Elrich's Office,
Councilmember <Councilmember.Elrich@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Floreen's Office, Council member
<Council member.Floreen@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Hucker's Office, Cou ncilmember
<Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Katz's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Leventhal's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Leventhal@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Navarro's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Rice's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Riemer's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Riemer@montgomerycountymd.gov>
Subject:
Vote No to Bill 16-17
To Councilmembers:
Once in a while the lifeguards clean-up after a child who used the bathroom in the pool. I have
personally seen the diarrhea of a child mix and disappear into the pool within seconds. The lifeguard had to
evacuate the pool and close it for cleaning the entire day. I do not want my family to swim at hotels that have no
clue about what is mixed into their pool water. I was recently reading news that the number of these incidents
has doubled over the past 2 years: https://www.usatoday.com/story/J1ews/2017/05/18/pool-parasites-on-the-
rise/l
O
1833016/. Even if hotel owners want to ignore the fact that lifeguards save lives and keep their pools
clean just to save money, it would be irresponsible for the Council to ignore the fact that lifeguards are saving
our lives and keeping us safe at pools.
Sincerely,
Scott McFadden
®
file:///F :/LAW/BILLS/1716%20swimming%20pools/lQ/Print/5058234 %20incoming%20attachment%20109395%2020170525%20E-MaiI%20MAss::inA%
111
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
7/6/2017
5058226 incoming attachment 109387 20170525 E-Mail Message 2017-05-24 03-49PM.html
From:
Berliner's Office, Councilmember [Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov]
Sent:
Wednesday, May 24, 2017 3:49:51 PM
To:
Council President
Subject:
FW: Vote no to bill 16-17
From:
Boris Todorovic [mailto:todorovicboris@yahoo.com]
Sent:
Wednesday, May 24, 2017 3:26 PM
To:
Berliner's Office, Council member <Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Elrich's Office,
Councilmember <Councilmember.Elrich@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Floreen's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Floreen@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Hucker's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Katz's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Leventhal's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Leventhal@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Navarro's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Rice's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Riemer's Office, Council member
<Councilmember.Riemer@montgomerycountymd.gov>
Subject:
Vote no to bill 16-17
Dear Councilmembers,
I'm writing you in regard of the new law that you are looking to pass regarding lifeguards in indoor/outdoor hotel pool areas.
As this may seems like a good idea to you, as current engineer and former HR director for a few hotel properties in the area,
I think its extremely dangerous to proceed with this law. There are plenty ofreason why. I can tell you few.
As you know most of pool decks (indoor or outdoor) are very slippery, we have lots of guest using it, and few times we had
incident where our guest get injured, and the lifeguard was first on the scene to help out and call for emergency. This is big liability for
properties, even when lifeguard is present, I can just imagine how it would end if the lifeguard wasn't there.
- Chemical imbalance
In situation where we have lots of guest coming in and out of the pool, chemicals get out of the range which, again, is extremely
dangerous and again one more liability for us. Probably you are planning to have our staff get trained and take care of the pool,
but in reality this is completely impossible. We cannot have our staff present at the pool all the time. There must be someone at the
pool
all the time to watch and maintain safety of the guests and chemical balance.
- Drinking and other hazard
If there is no one present at the pool, it will be extremely tough to regulate what guest bring to the pool. Each property has their
own
rules, which brings up safety to a risk again. Especially on weekends, when the hotel is busy, we have different crowd at our pools
(kids and adults, schools with teenagers, older patrons who just like to stay at the pool and relax etc), and without lifeguard being there
and control the situation, there will be lots of confrontation between our guest.
- Service and pool company
From my own experience working with multiple pool companies, they fully train their staff when it comes to service and
lifeguarding.
Our hotel staff wont be able to recognize what is the problem if there is a mechanical failure in the pump room or anywhere else.
Having this law sign you are jeopardizing our people's safety.
Please Vote No to Bill 16-17.
Sincerely,
file://IF :/LAW/Bl LLS/1716%20swimming%20pools/lQ/Print/5058226%20incomina%20attachment%?01
OQ'.'!R70/n
?n?n 17ni:;?,;oI.
?m=-~A~a•L
'lm•-M---
01
• ,,.,
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
COMCOR- Code of Montgomery County Regulations
51.00.02.03 Water Quality
The sections of the Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR) 10.17.01 (2013),
Public Swimming Pools and Spas, governing water chemistry, disinfection, and circulation
systems are incorporated for the operating standards of this regulation unless superseded or
amended by the following specific standards:
A.
Filtration.
When any Public Swimming Pool is open, it is the joint responsibility of
the Owner, Pool Operator, and Pool Management Company to comply with the following:
1.
Water in the Public Swimming Pool must be of sufficient clarity so
that the main drain is clearly visible from the closest lifeguard chair or the furthest edge of the
Public Swimming Pool, if the Public Swimming Pool has no lifeguard chair;
2.
Floating or sunken debris, algae, dirt, filter media, or filter aids
must not be present in the Public Swimming Pool; and
3.
The circulation system must operate between the minimum
Required Flow Rate and the manufacturer's listed filter capacity, as indicated on an approved
flow meter.
B.
Chemical Treatment.
At all times when the Public Swimming Pool is open, it is the
responsibility of the Owner, Pool Operator, and Pool Management Company to comply with the
following:
1.
Therapy Pools):
1.
2.
maximum of 10.0 ppm; and,
3.
maximum of 8.0 ppm;
b.
Public Wading. Spray, and Therapy Pools:
1.
2.
pH a minimum of 7 .2 and a maximum of 7 .8;
Free chlorine a minimum of3.0 ppm and a
Total bromine a minimum of 3 .0 ppm and a
pH a minimum of7.2 and a maximum of7.8;
Free chlorine a minimum of 1.5 ppm and a
Chemical levels.
a.
Public Swimming Pool (Except Wading, Spa, Spray, and
American Legal Publishing Corp.
1
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
COMCOR - Code of Montgomery County Regulations
maximum of 10.0 ppm; and,
3.
maximum of 8.0 ppm;
c.
Public Spas:
1.
2.
maximum of 10.0 ppm;
3.
maximum of 8.0 ppm; and
d.
pool.
2.
Tests for pH, free chlorine, and total bromine residuals must be
performed and recorded at least once every hour when the pool is open. The initial tests must be
performed prior to opening the pool to patrons to insure compliance with Section III(B). Tests
for cyanuric acid must be performed and recorded at least once a week prior to opening the pool
to patrons and after any cyanuric acid treatment.
3.
Any chemicals used in the Public Swimming Pool water must: (a)
be non-toxic to persons in the concentrations found in the water and (b) be clearly labeled with
directions for use.
4.
A convenient method must be provided to measure the effective
concentration of the chemical in the water.
Cyanuric acid a maximum of 80 ppm in any stabilized
Total bromine a minimum of 4.0 ppm and a
pH a minimum of 7.2 and a maximum of 7.8;
Free chlorine a minimum of 4.0 ppm and a
Total bromine a minimum of 4.0 ppm and a
American Legal Publishing Corp.
2
w