HHS ITEM2
October 2, 2017
Worksession 2
MEMORANDUM
September 28, 2017
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Health and Human Services Committee
Amanda Mihill, Legislative Attorney~~~
Worksession 2:
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 Councilrnembers Floreen and Elrich and Council President
Berliner, was introduced on May 16, 2017. A public hearing was held on June 20 and a Health
and Human Services Committee worksession was held on July 10.
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.
First Committee Worksession
The Health and Human Services Committee held a worksession on Bill 16-17 on July 10.
The
Committee packet for that worksession contained additional background information not
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
repeated in this memoran dum and Councilmembers may wish to bring that packet
to
this
worksession.
At the July 10 worksession, Councilmembers reviewed background information and
requested the following additional information:
Comparison of local laws on this topic.
Additional statistics of pool incidents in Montgomery County and surrounding
jurisdictions. These statistics should include a comparison of pools with and without
lifeguards.
Information relevant to the question about whether drownings are more likely to happen in
pools with or without a lifeguard.
Will hotels maintain lifeguards even when they are not required to?
How do insurance requirements change (or do they change) if there are lifeguards present
or absent?
Information on residency of lifeguards.
Discussion
In response to the Committe e's request for information, Council staff reached out to
representatives from both the hotel industry and the pool operator/lifeguard industry as well as
performing independent research.
Comparison of local laws.
As the packet for the first worksession summarized, most other
Maryland jurisdictions do not require lifeguards for hotel pools under 2,500 square feet of surface
area (State law requires a semi-public pool that has a water surface area greater than 2,500 square
feet to have a lifeguard on duty during peak seasonal use for outdoor pools and year round for
indoor, heated pools.). As of the date of this packet, only Baltimore County and Montgomery
County require lifeguards for hotel pools. Ocean City, Maryland follows the state law (the City
does not have a town ordinance on this subject and neither does Worcester County). Similarly,
Howard County does not have a local law on this topic and therefore follows the state law. Laws
in Prince George's County and Anne Arundel County specifically exclude hotel and motel pools
from having a lifeguard requirement if the water surface area is less than 2,500 square feet. Laws
in the District of Columbia do not require a lifeguard for pools open only for people "lodging for
a fee at the facility" except in certain circumstances (including if the pool has a diving board, is 5
feet or deeper, or has an expected bather population of 50% or more children under 15 years old).
Statistics of pool incidents in Montgomery County and surrounding jurisdictions.
The July 10
packet noted that Sunset Pools, Inc. indicated 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, at that time, they had 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.
In
response to Council staff questions, the Maryland Hotel Lodging
Association (MHLA) noted that hotels require incident reports to be filled out for all issues
requiring first aid to a guest. MHLA conducted a study of hotels owned/operated by Baywood
hotels who operates 64 hotels with pools in 11 states, including 14 in Maryland (3 in Montgomery
County). The case study revealed that for all hotels with pools (with and without a lifeguard), there
2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
were no calls documenting reports of drownings or life-saving events requiring a 911 call.
Council staff surveyed certain surrounding jurisdictions about emergency calls for drownings or
near-drownings at hotel pools for approximately the past 12 years. From 2005 to present, the
County Fire and Rescue Service (MCFRS) was dispatched for reported drownings at hotels/motels
twice; however in only 1 of those incidents was a patient transported to a hospital (the patient had
a non-life threatening condition). From 2003 to present, the Anne Arundel County Fire and Rescue
Service was dispatched to a hotel or motel pool twice. For Ocean City, Maryland, there were 13
EMS dispatches for drownings/near drownings at hotel/motel pools from 2012 to present. The
information gleaned from these jurisdictions does not include whether the EMS calls originated
'
from hotels with or without pool lifeguards.
Lifeguard effectiveness.
Committee members requested information about whether drownings are
more likely to happen in pools with or without a lifeguard. Council staff did a significant amount
of research attempting to provide relevant information to the Committee on this topic. However,
Council staff could not find a significant amount of research on this question. A 2001 report of a
Centers for Disease Control Working Group and the National Center for Injury Prevention and
Control entitled "Lifeguard Effectiveness: A Report of the Working Group", concluded that
"trained, professional lifeguards have had a positive effect on drowning prevention in the United
States". This report provided several examples of reduced incidents after lifeguards were
employed. However, this report focused only on lifeguards at beaches, not at pools. There are
many risks associated with beaches, including surf, drop offs, and under currents, that are not
present at swimming pools. A 2010 article entitled "Lifeguards: A Forgotten Aspect of Drowning
Prevention" cites an "industry" document for the conclusion that approximately a third of
drowning deaths in the U.S. happen at lifeguarded pools. However, Council staff was unable to
find the "industry" document referenced in the article.
Other requested information.
In response to other Committee requests for information, Council
staff learned that:
Hotels, even when not required by law, staff lifeguards "when it is believed to have a
positive impact on guest safety or other needs related to the pool". Generally speaking, the
norm is to "swim at your own risk" unless a pool has a waterslide, lazy river, etc. Other
circumstances may lead a hotel to staff a lifeguard at all times or for select days and time,
including the location of the pool, crowd control, groups of children/youth using the pool.
Hotel insurance requirements are not impacted based on the presence of a lifeguard.
While MHLA stated that the industry opinion is that the majority of lifeguards working at
hotel pools are not County residents, according to Sunset Pools, about 90% of the
lifeguards employed in hotel pools (seasonal and year round) are County residents. The
remaining 10% are Jl visa holders that work only during the summer
in
outdoor pools.
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.
3
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
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 16-1 7
COMCOR 51.00.02.03
Follow up information from hotel industry
F:\LAW\BILLS\J 716 Swimming Pools\HHS Memo 2.Docx
Circle#
1
5
6
7
12
13
24
51
53
4
 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.
_L_
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 bracketsD
* * *
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 unciffected 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
Sec. 1. Sections 51-1 and 51-10 are amended as follows:
51-1. Definitions.
2
3
4
In this Chapter, the following words have the following meanings:
*
*
*
5
6
7
Hostel
has the same meaning as in Code §54-1.
*
*
*
51-10. Safety standards; lifeguards and spa guards.
*
*
*
8
9
IO
11
(b)
Lifeguards.
(1)
Except for public spas and as provided
in
paragrap h@, 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.
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
(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.
22
23
24
25
26
27
f:\law\bHls\1716 swimming pools\bill 2.doc:x
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
ExPEDllED BILL NO.
16-17
28
29
(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.
@
30
31
32
Hostels.
Paragraph
(hl
does not
filmly
to
!l
pool that has
~
water surface
area less than 2,500 square feet located on the grounds of a hostel for the
exclusive use of its registered guests if:
33
34
35
36
37
ill
ill
the hostel is properly licensed under Chapter 54;
the hostel posts warning
filW
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;
ill)
~
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
safety
filfill
is posted in
fl
permanent location adjacent to
~
hostel in compliance with the American National Standard
for Public Spas;
ilJ
ill)
the safety sjgn includes the user load of the pool:
~
chemical warning
_filgil
is posted at the entrance door to
~
45
46
chemical storage area and includes the text "Caution!
Chemical Storage Area":
47
48
49
(fil
~
chemical vat, feeder, pump, and line is labeled to identify
chlorine gas warning
the chemical in use;
(E}
~
mgn
reading "Danger--Chlorine
50
51
Gas" is posted at the entrance to
~
chlorine gas feed room
and storage area;
{ill
other warning, health advisory, and safety
~
are posted,
as required
.QY
Executive Regulation, if necessary to protect
the public health and safety; and
52
53
54
(j)
f:llaw\bUls\1716
swimming
pools\bill
2.doc:,c
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
ExPEDITED BILL NO.
16-17
55
56
(ID
!!
pool that does not have
!!
lifeguard on duty has
!!
conspicuous
_filgQ
posted adjacent to entrances
to
the pool
reading "Warning: No lifeguard on duty. SWIM AT YOUR
OWN RISK. Children under the age of
15
are not permitted
to use the pool without adult supervision"; and
57
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)
(ID
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
connects directly to
9-1-1;
and
notifies an employee of the hostel when activated.
Sec. 2. Expedited Effective Date.
The Council declares that this legislation 1s necessary for the immediate
protection of the public interest. This Act takes effect on the date that it becomes law.
Approved:
69
Roger Berliner, President, County Council
70
Approved:
Date
71
Isiah Leggett, County Executive
72
Date
This
is
a correct copy ofCouncil action.
73
Linda M. Lauer, Clerk of the Council
Date
0
f:\law\bnls\1716 swimming pools\biU 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
LEGISLATIVE REQUEST REPORT
Expedited Bill 16-17
Swimming Pools
-
Lifeguards -Amendments
DESCRIPTION:
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.
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:
GOALS AND
OBJECTIVES:
COORDINATION:
FISCAL IMP ACT:
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
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
MONTGOMERY COUNTY COUNCIL
ROCKVIL.L.E, MARYLAND
SIDNEY
A. KATZ
COUNCIL.MEMBE R· DISTRICT 3
MEMORAN DUM
TO:
County Council
FROM:
Council
member
Sidney
DATE: May 9, 2017
In
Katz~/~
RE:
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 jeopar~izing 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/bllls96202017/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 potentlally empty pools. Please
ask
our
office for more data on local pool operations and costs.
MARYLAND AVENUE, 6TH FL.OOR • RoCKVIL.L.E, MARYLAND 20B50
240•777-7906 •
TTY
2.40-777-7914 • FAX 240-777-7989 • COUNCILMEMBER .KATZ@MONTGOM ERYCOUNTYMD,G OV
~
PRINTED ON RECYCLED P4PER
1
I 00
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
ROCKVILLE, MARYLA"JD
MEMO RANDU M
June 2, 2017
TO:
FROM:
Roger Berliner, President, County Council
Jennifer A. H~ec tor, Office of Management an~udge t
Alexandre
A.
Esi}inosa, Director, Departmen t ofFman~ \v--·
FEIS for Council Expedited Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools-Lifeguards-
Amendme nts
SUBJECT:
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 of the County Executive
Joy
Nurmi, Special Assistant to the County Executive
Patrick
Lacefield, Director, Public
Infom1ation
Office
David Platt, Departmen t of Finance
Clark Beil, Health and H u:man Services
Kenneth Welch, Health and Human Services
Joshua Watters, Office of Managem ent and Budget
Naeem Mia, Office of Managem ent 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 expenditur es regardless of whether the
revenues or expenditures are assumed in the recommen ded 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 expenditur e 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
expenditur es related to County's informatio n technology
(IT)
systems,
including Enterprise Resource Planning
(ERP)
systems.
No additional expenditur es related to County's informatio n technology systems are
expected.
6. Later actions that may affect future revenue and expenditur es 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 implemen t the bill.
No additional staff time is needed to implement the bill's provisions.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
onsibilities would affect othe r duties.
8.
An
exp lana tion of h-Ow the addition
of
new staf f resp
the bill 's provisions.
No new staf f responsibilities are requ ired to imp lem ent
ed.
9.
An esti mat e of costs when an additional appropriation is need
Not applicable.
and
10. A desc ripti on of any variable that could affe ct revenue
Not appl icab le.
or difficult
11. Ran ges
of
revenue or expenditures that are uncertain
to project.
cost estimates.
Not
appl icab le.
the case.
12. If
a
bill
is
likely to have no fiscal impact, why that is
and inspection processes.
The
bill 's
provisions would not affect exis ting licensing
13. Oth er fiscal impacts or comments.
Not applicable.
analysis:
14. The follo win g contributed to and concurred with this
S
Ken neth Wel ch, Environmental Hea lth Manager, DHH
ory Services, DHH S
Clar k Beil, Senior Administrator, Licensure and Regulat
0M B
Joshua
Watters, Senior Management and Bud get Specialist,
/
..
'.
Jenntfet
A.
Hug~~WDirector
Dat e
Offic~/of
Man agem ent and Budget
®
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Econ omic Impa ct Statement
Bill 16-17, Swim ming Pools
-
Lifeguards
-
Amen dmen ts
Background:
remen t to have a
Expedite-d Bill 16-17 woul d exem pt publi c pools at hostels from the requi
publi c pools to meet
lifegu ard on duty prese nt when the pool is open for use; requi re exem pted
pools to have an
certai n criteria, inclu ding postin g certai n warn ing signs; and requi re exem pted
es
a
"host el"
as
any
emer gency alert syste m. Chap ter 54-1 of Mont gome ry Coun ty Code defin
ion, lodgi ng or
build ing or portio n there of or any group of build ings where , for comp ensat
ing hotels ,
lodgi ng and meals are provi ded or offere d to
3
or more transi ent visito rs, includ
such
as
apart ment
motel s, touris t court s, moto r courts, touris t camp s and similar estab lishm ents
hotels .
may only be open for
Prese ntly, in Mont gome ry County,
36
hotel pools fit the hostel criter ia and
ty is one of only
s\vim ming
if
a quali fied lifeguard is prese nt and on duty. Mont gome ry Coun
of the legisl ation is
two jw:isciictions in Mary land that impo ses this requirement. The objec tive
y jeopa rdizin g the
to main tain econo mic comp etitiv eness in the touris m industry witho ut undul
and Princ e Georg e's
safety of visitors. Simil ar legisl ation has recen tly passe d in Anne Arun del
Coun ties and a relate d bill is curre ntly pendi ng in Baltim ore Coun ty.
1.
The sources of information, assum ption s, and methodologies used.
se Contr ol
Lifeg uard Effectiveness: A Repo rt of the Work ing Grou p, Cente rs for Disea
and Preve ntion ( CDC )
the Coun ty that fit
The total estim ated annual life guard costs for the appro ximat e 36 pools in
1
the hoste l criter ia that are under 2,500 squar e feet are collec tively $600, 000.
estimates.
2. A description of any variable that could affect the econo mic impa ct
gover nmen t
The Cente rs for Disea se Control and Preve ntion helps comm unity and local
arding servic es
officials facing decis ions about wheth er to begin , retain, or disco ntinu e lifegu
and other
answ er quest ions regar ding the effica cy of lifegu ards in preve nting dro'\\<ning
ighs the costs.
aquat ic misha ps, and wheth er the value of provi ding lifegu ard prote ction outwe
have not been
Coun ty speci fic studie s detail ing the benef its and costs at small er hotel pools
super vision by
conducted. Broad er scope studie s note publi c safety educa tion and onsite
ss the need for
lifeguards have helpe d keep dro\" ning rates low for 50 years but do not addre
bles that could
lifegu ards as a funct ion of the size of the pools and their squar e footage. Varia
affec t econo mic impa ct estim ates includ e:
time;
· the incid ences of water -relat ed injuri es and drovvnings at the facilities over
~1th
and
· the numb er
of
water-related injuri es
and
drow nings at
pools
in
the
Coun ty
g
· insura nce liabil ity prem iums
and
the assoc iated legal costs for main tainin
unsup ervise d pools ;
1
without lifeguards;
from Council member Katz's office and memo to the C-OU.lltyCouncil dated May 9,
2017
1 of2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Economic Impa ct State men t
Bill
16-17,
Swim ming
Pools -Lif egua rds- Ame ndm ents
· variability in lifeg uard salaries and staffing comp leme nts.
ding, savings,
3;. The
Bill' s positive or nega tive effect,
if
any on emp loym ent, spen
inve stme nt, incomes, and prop erty values in the Coun ty.
is a potential
If
all the hotels/hostels elim inate lifeguards as defin ed in
Bill 16-17,
there
66 annually per pool
econ omic benefit in cost savin gs for the hotel s of appr oxim ately $16,6
competitiveness of
the
locat ion ($60 0,000 divid ed by 36). The broa der impa ct to econ omic
use for hotel guests is
Coun ty's touri sm indu stry beca use of increased availability of pool
corresponding econ omic
diffi cult to assess with out addit ional specificity
of
data. Ther e is
a
ions with an equiv alent
cost to the lifeg uards who will no longer be empl oyed
at
these locat
gs, investment,
loss in wage s and salary. The impa ct to empl oyme nt, spen ding, savin
empl oyme nt woul d be
incom es, and prop erty value s beyond the scope
of
selec t lifeg uard
negli gible .
case?
4.
If
a Bill is likely to have no economic impact, why is that the
Sec num ber 3.
5. The follo wing cont ribu ted to or concurred with this analysis:
Davi d Platt, Denn is Hetm an, and Rob Hage doom , Finan ce.
-
,_,
_'Z t--- ~i~ ~·
---~fl._
A
'Espinosa, Director
- - - -
e
Alex andr
Depa rtme nt of Fina nce
l/. L: ./." '
Date
2 of2
®
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
\
TESTIMON Y ON BEHALF OF COUNTY EXECUTIV E ISIAH LEGGETT ON
EXPEDITE D BILL 16-17, SWIMMING POOLS - LIFEGUAR DS - AMENDME NTS
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
Maryl and Hotel Lodging Association
20
Ridgely Ave., STE
309,
Annapolis, MD
21401
Phone:
410-974 -4472
Email: mhla@MDLodging.org
Web: www.MDLodging.org
TO: Honorable Membe rs of the Montg omery County Council
FROM: Amy Rohrer, Maryland Hotel Lodging Association
RE: Expedited Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools - Lifeguards -Amen dment s
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 majorit y 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
Montg omery County.
To comply with the lifeguard mandate, hotels typical ly operat e 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 require ment would enable hotels
to extend pool hours and increase guest satisfaction among those who seek out and expect this
amenity.
Our business is compe titive and guests have a lot of choices for accommodations within the
D.C. Metro area. In EVERY surrounding jurisdic tion - D.C.; Loudon and Fairfax Counties in
to
Virginia; Frederick, Howard and Prince George's Counties in Maryla nd - hotels are permit ted
determ ine their own need for a lifeguard. Eliminating this compe titive disadvantage has the
potenti al to increase rooms booked in Montg omery 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 Baltimo re City) where lifeguards are not required at hotel pools. We comply with
state and local regulations addressing pool construction, accessibility, signage, water quality,
etc. Operat ors may experience reduced costs when it comes to staffing lifeguards, but it is
import ant to note this savings will be offset by increased trainin g costs as we will train more of
our own staff in first aid, CPR, and as CPOs (Certified Pools Operators responsible for
monito ring and maintaining water quality). In lieu of a lifeguard, regulations require trained
staff on-site anytim e the pool is open. This has an additional benefi t to the county, as it
increases the numbe r of citizens trained in these import ant 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 16-1 7 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 not11 pm. 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 16-17 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 s~asonal 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
Testim ony
Statem ent by
Xitlaly Castill o-Dietz
-
Genera l Manag er, Hamp ton Inn
&
Suites Gaithe rsburg on Exped ited
Bill 16-17,
Swimm ing Pools
Lifegu ards - Amen dment s
Good afterno on,
My name
is
Xitlaly Castillo-Dietz; I am the Genera l Manag er for the Hampt on Inn
&
Suites Hotel
of
located at
960
N Frederick, Gaithe rsburg , MD.
20879.
I am here
to
bare testimo ny in favor
Exped ited Bill 16-17, Swimm ing Pools
-
Lifegu ards
-
Amend ments .
Person al Exper ience
the
I have worke d in the hotel indust ry since
1994;
during my career I have worke d in Mexico and in
of
United States. In the US, I have held posts in Virginia, DC and Ma1yl and. The vast majori ty
-
those hotel proper ties operat e under rules similar to what
Exped ited Bill 16-17, Swimm ing Pools
d has
Lifegu ards
-
Amen dment s would allow.
My numbe r one goal everyw here I have worke
to
always been to create happy custom ers who want to come back. This amend ment would help us
=~~ =-=- =~
.... ·-c:.-CG91.-1-tplish.~tl-ra.-t=g1.-c1&:!.~.-~--
--~= ==~ ==~ =~~ ~=~ ==~ === ~=.- c==
y
As you know, The Hamp ton Inn and Suites where I work and other hotels in Montg omery Count
and
compe te with proper ties in both Freder ick MD north of us and plenty of other locatio ns in
e
around the Distric t of Colum bia to the south and east where hotel pools are allowe d to operat
withou t a lifegua rd presen t.
a
My curren t hotel offers clean rooms, a tasty breakf ast buffet, and
24
hour conven ience store,
t
comple te busine ss center and fitness center. We also have a salt-w ater pool, but we curren tly canno
allow our guests to swim at their leisure.
My staff and I receive compla ints daily about the hours of operat ion of our beautiful salt-w ater pool.
to
In my opinio n, the Montg omery Count y regula tion (lifeguard require ment) is a big obstac le
compe te with other localities.
Our
Our Hotel follows the Safety guideli nes necess ary to have a positiv e and safe pool experience.
Front Desk employ ees are CPR certified and we have a Pool Opera tor on site.
Conclu sion
I am asking you
to
consid er the busine ss ramific ations of having this ordina nce; as we compe te with
neighb oring localities. How do we offer the best service
to
our guests? How do we stay competitive?
to
We alread y follow more than the basic require ments of Pool Safety and have trained our staff
respon d to emerge ncies. We want to be more compe titive and to give our guests access
to
more
services.
Sincerely,
Xitlaly Castill o-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, v;e 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 neighboring
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 North
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, Swimmin g 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 -Amendme nts
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 16-1 7, Swimming Pools -
Lifeguards - Amendme nts.
As a resident of Montgom ery 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 maintaine d 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:///F:/LAW/BILLS/1716%20swimming%20pools/lQ/Print/5058987%20incoming%20attachment%20110176%2020170619%20E-MaiI%20
Message%. . .
1/1
 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
file:///F:/LAW/BILLS/1716%20swimming%20pools/lQ/Print/5059029%20incoming%20attachment%20110220%2020170620%20E-Mail%20Messaae%...
1/2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Mihill, Amanda
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Daniel Maldonado
<
Daniel.Maldonado@whitelodging.com>
Frida'.-', 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, Council member <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
9vtarty
Marty Roth
General Manager
Bethesda Suites Marriott Hotel
file:///F:/LAW/BILLS/1716%20swimming%20pools/lQ/Print/5059030%20incoming%20attachment%20110221 %2020170620%20E-Mai1%20Message%...
1/2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
7/6/2017
5059067 incoming attachm ent 110259 20170621 E-Mail Messa ge 2017-0
6-20 01-25PM.html
From:
Berliner's Office, Councilmember [Councilmember.Berliner@montgome
rycountymd.gov]
Sent:
Tuesday, June 20, 2017 1:25:07 PM
To:
Council President
Subject:
FW: Hilton Gard en Inn Bethesda
From:
Tamara Williams [mailto:Tamara.\iiilliams@Hilton.com]
Sent:
Tuesday, June 20, 2017 1:10 PM
To:
Berliner's Office, Coun cilme mber <Councilmember.Berliner@montg
omerycountymd.gov>
Subject:
Hilton Garden Inn Bethesda
Dear Honorable Council President Berliner,
Thank you for co-sponsoring this legislative.
I am the General Mana ger at the Hilton Garden Inn Bethesda hotel. I am
writin g to inform you that my hotel is
in support of the Mont gome ry County Lifeguard Bill.
My pool meets the mand ate requirements for this legislative. Mont gome
ry 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 indoo r pool open daily to hotel
guests only. Since, I began work ing at
this prope rty in 2011, guests have consistently requested extended hours
for our pool. They have limite d time
in the city and want timeframes that work best for their family
and/o r work schedule.
Currently, this is not possible as a result of the current lifeguard requireme
nt. When explaining to guests abou t
this requirement they get extremely frustrated and just don't understan
d why other hotels they have visited in
the surrounding area can and we can't.
In this case, the guests eithe r want compensation for the inconvenience
or they just don't return.
By eliminating this lifeguard requirement woul d 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 safet
y 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 moni torin g and maintaining wate r quality at all times.
Thank you for this oppo rtuni ty to make the service we provide to our gues
t even greater.
Tamara Williams
General Manager
:///F'./'LAW/BILLS/1716%20swimming%20pools/lQ/Print/5059067%20inc
om
0
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Mihill, Amanda
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Auteen Bahrami <abahrami @sunsetpo olsmgmt.co m>
Thursday, May 18, 2017 4:16 PM
Cou nty.Cou nci l@montgom erycountym d.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 10 individuals from indoor pools in Maryland. Of the 10 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 10 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 ofthe
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 -Shuttl e service to and from the Metro and Reaga
n Airpor t -
Multipl e elevato rs to handle the busy mornin gs -Hotel is close to a Whole Foods -Bagga ge
holdin g
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)
Comm ents
Nice Hotel
When we arrived they were very nice at the desk it only took like 2 minute s to check in, we
then went to
the room and my grands on wanted to go to the pool, so we did , it was clean and clear and
there was a
lifegua rd on duty, which was nice becaus e so many times at a hotel pool there is not one,
she was so
nice.
"Great place, locatio n and price"
POSITIVE:
The breakf ast was ok, the afterno on happy hour was great and the kids loved the pool!
Comm ents
Good locatio n to Metro, plus good restau rants within walkin g distanc e (family)
Breakf asts for the family had good variety , swimm ing pool attend ant (requir ed in VA) was
very
cordial , the happy hours we made were a welcom e relaxin g period from the miles of walkin
g, beds were
comfo rtable and we were able to store our luggag e on the last day at the hotel and see the
city withou t
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 opportu nity to speak at the public hearing in regards to the Expedite
d 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 Marriot t Pooks Hill) testimo ny 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, therefo
re when an
incident may happen; it is not warrant ed that they will be able to respond to it immediately.
st
I would also like to bring to your attentio n an incident that Mr. Child may not be aware of. On
May 21 2014,
Marriot t Pooks Hill had an incident caused by the hotel engineers that mixed hazardous pool chemica
ls when no
lifeguard was on site. They did so in order to service the pool, however ended up with an evacuat
ed property,
engineers and hotel guests transported to the hospital, over several dozen fire trucks, and several
closed streets
for an extended amount of time. Reason? Toxic gas. All because they took on a task that they were
simply not
equipped to handle.
Please note that Sunset Pool is currentl y managing Mr. Child's pool (Marrio tt 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 Marriot t 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 complai
nts, 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 continu
e 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 require ment also operate
on limited pool
hours and are bound by certain restrictions like having a pool operato r and a certified First Aid
responder on site
at all times. Therefore the restricted operatio n hours are really not a decisive factor in attractin
g potentia l
customers. Note that for every one person who is unhappy about limited hours, there will be another
100 who
will be gratefu l 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 informa tion for you in order to show that the claimed expenses are
not nearly as
exorbita nt as some ofthese hotels claim. I would also like to point out that the benefits heavily
outweig h 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 Almana
c announced that
U.S. hotel industry revenues exceeded $199 billion in 2016, which was an all-time high that lifeguard
s suddenly
became intolera ble and uncomp etitive financially?
 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 Montgom ery 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 Montgom ery 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 requirem ent for health departme nt, 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 departme nt 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 2017-06-16 12-28PM.html
From:
Berliner's Office, Councilm ember [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:bki ani@sunse tpoolsmgm t.com]
Sent:
Thursday, June 15, 2017 9:37 PM
To:
Elrich's Office, Council member <Councilmember.Elrich@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Floreen's Office,
Councilmember <Councilmember.Floreen@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Leventhal's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Leventhal@montgomNycountymd.gov>; Navarro's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Navarro@montgomer,,countymd.gov>; Riemer's Office, Councilmember
<Councilmember.Riemer@montgomery.-,ountymd.gov>; Berliner's Office, Councilme mber
<Councilmember.Berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Rice's Office, Councilme mber
<Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Hucker's Office, Council member
<Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Katz's Office, Councilme mber
<Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov>
Subject:
Bill 16-17
Dear Honorab le Councilman and Councilwoman of Montgom ery County,
My name is Bob Kiani and I am the Vice President of Sunset Pool, Inc.
Sunset Pool has proudly served the resident s and visitors of Montgom ery County for the
past 20 years. During this time, our lifeguard s have assisted patrons on numerou s
occasions, varying from providin g basic first aid to assisting in hundreds of active
drownin g rescues. Just think about all the lives that were saved because of the lifeguard
that was on duty and prevente d the inevitab le.
As you may be aware, Baltimor e County also considered changin g the regulatio n
for Lifeguard requirem ents in hotel pools (Baltimo re County Bill 22-17), but after
carefully reviewin g the risks involved the bill was withdraw n. 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 complai nts of unsafe swimmin g
conditio ns at hotel pools. Arlington County, Fairfax County and the City of Alexand ria
require lifeguard s at Hotel Pools.
Our compan y has also received a significa nt amount of service requests
from
hotel
manage rs and enginee rs that have no lifeguard on duty, requiring our
expertis e to balance the pool water, hotel employe es who are certified Pool Operato rs are
unable to manage the hotel pools with out a lifeguard on duty. Hotel pools are constan tly
being shut down by the health departm ent for multiple irregular ities 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 Managem ent
-
Vice President
file:///F:/LAW/BILLS/1716%20swimming%20pools/lQ/Print/5058943%20incomina%20attachment%
0
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Incident Report
Data Courtesy of: Sunset Pool, Inc.
MD
::~~<.:,\1:'_.,."/;'
I~~~,.-~. .;:,
.:·:,
2016
?>•"\f_
.
~~·:~~
I
Hotel Pool Incidents
Other Pool Incidents
''
-
...
I
94
I
86
236
123
I
118
308
131
I
78
263
138
I
95
I
302
I
152
I
94
I
319
I
72
55
156
Total Reported Incidents
@)
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
MONTGOMERY COUNTY
DISTRESS/ACTIVE DROWNING/RESCUES* 2012-2016
=
'.,
O
Hotel Pool Incidents
=
Other
Pool Incidents
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
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
=
160
Hote
l
Poo
l Incidents
=
Othe
r
Pool
Incidents
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
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)
(20
1
7
PREDICTIONS
BASED
ON
CURRENT
STATS
AS
OF
6/17}
=
350
Tot
al
Drowning
Incid
ents
=
Total Vomit/Fecal
In
cidents
300
2S0
200
150
100
50
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)
=
250
Hote
l
Pools
=
Other Pools
200
150
100
50
0
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017*
~
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
(f)
o
--
-r-
(J)
- -
••
·-
!i....
(])
-
::::,
.
C
C
~
bJ)
·c
,-
C0
$
00
!i....
co
--
a:
UJ
I'-
!i....
C\I
~
$
u..
-
-
r-
·-
$
(f)
I
Eo
EN
C
0
(])
0
0
J:
I-
0
CD
_.
0..
UJ
lD
--
--
\ \ I \ \ \ I I
+
I
N
tj-
--
z
C0
--
~
~
00
S
~ ~ ~ ~
\J\l\l.01/\
:10 30'1'
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Stephen Lavery
To:
Subject:
Stephen Lavery
RE: Testimony A
Testimo ny
Steve Lavery
High Sierra Pools, Inc.
Expedite d Bill 16-17,
Swimmin g Pools - Lifeguards -
Amendm ents [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 Presiden t of High Sierra Pools, we have been working in the
county for the last 25 years and currently manage 78 swimmin g pools in The County.
I come forward today to oppose bill 16-17 on grnunds that have been repeated ly supporte d by
national ly recognized safety organiza tions such as the CDC and American Red Crnss.
A repeated ly proven fact is that Lifeguards working at swimmin g pools prevent accidents and
save lives in water emergen cies.
This propose d legislatio n eliminate s the Lifeguard from the Hotel Swimmin g Pool. The
Lifeguard is the primary safety measure at the Hotel swimmin g pool.
By eliminati ng Lifeguards at pool, who is going to be at most risk?
Children .....
The CDC finds that accident al 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 contemp oraries.
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 untraine d 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 Fire 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 Industry 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 operating 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,
Council member <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.
file:///F:/LAW/BILLS/1716%20swimming%20pools/lQ/Print/5059441%20incoming%20attachment%20110641 %2020170630%20E-Mai1%20Message%...
1/2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
7/6/2017
5059441 incoming attachment 110641 20170630 E-Mail Message 2017-06-29 08-4-BAM.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:
[;'::oesc .,~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 .
.I,,
please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
file:///F:/LAW/BILLS/1716%20swimming%20pools/lQ/Print/5059441%20incoming%20attachment%20110641 %2020170630%20E-Mail%20Messaae%...
2/2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Stephen Lavery
From:
Stephen Lavery
Wednesday, June 28, 2017 8:37 PM
Stephen Lavery
RE: incident reports
Sent:
To:
Subject:
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
24
84
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
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
intoxicated patrons
total
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 Lave1·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 rooms
- occupancy rate 82% \t,at:orwJic:le average:
- a·;erage per night rate
Sl
70 /$200/night weekdays, $100/nigh weekends)
- 6am to 10pm daily= 1.12 1:Veekly hou1·s => $100,0CO/year service/iifegua1·d cont1·act cost
Br·eakdown #1:
Sl00,000/year = S275/day cost to hotel to ope1-ate pool with ser-vice contract (CPO, LifegL;ard, Chemicals, lnsu1-ance.
etc.!
Occupancy rate is 82%
=>
328 rooms/day are occupied => $275 daily cost of pool divided over 328 occupied rooms
equals to 84cents per roon1;
If room costs $170/night average, then the pool contract cost over average per· night room r·evenue equals $0.84/$170 =
0 0049 (in percentage ratio it is 0.49%);
This calculation indicates that the pool contract cost represents
a tiny
fraction of the roo:Y! rates charged to customer·s.
Breakdown #2:
$100,000/year pool se1·vice cont1-act with lifeguard staff
- assuming $12/hour wage for lifeguard staff, 112 hours x 52 weeks x $12
=
$69,888
- add 12% payroll related taxes= $78,275
If lifeguard staff eliminated, $21,725 or even more, will still be incurred for chemicals
1
pool supervision and oversight,
maintenance, insurance, etc. - iten1s that are otherwise part of the lifeguard and ser·vice 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 custorner;
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
Homicide
Other Spec.,
classifiable
3
82
4
Suicide
.
Firearm
2,594
Suicide
Suffocation
1,910
Suicide
Poisoning
787
Suicide
Suffocation
1,839
Homicide
Firearm
1,673
Suicide
Poisoning
1,279
Suicide
Poisoning
2,061
Suicide
Suffocation
1,965
Suicide
Poisoning
1,382
Suicide
Suffocation
1,130
Adverse
Effects
1,544
~i~- ''
.;J;'.!!~
5
6
Suicide
Suffocation
9,493
Suicide
Poisoning
6,599
7
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 WISQARS
™.
-
~
QI•
Centers for
Disease
Control 11nd
Prevent
ion
National Center for Injury
Preve ntion and
Cont rol
 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 [mailto:mom2momfe@outlook.com]
Sent:
Tuesday, May 23, 2017 1:23 PM
To:
Berliner's Office, Councilmember <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. W!'.en I looked up I saw the lifeguard jumping in to grab my daughter
who had managed to doggy padd1e 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
fil1:!'///F· /I
AW/RII
I
~/171
fi%?0s:wimminn¾?Onnnls:/IO/Print/<;O<;R 144 O/,?Oinr-nminno/. ?n<ott<>,-hmonto/. ?n1 na-:in1
OL
?n?n17n<::".lA
01_
-,r,c:
u~;I0L '>n••~~~~-~01
• ,,
 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, Councilmember <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
<Council member.Leventhal@montgomerycountymd.gov>; Navarro's Office, Council member
<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%20swimmina%20oools/lO/Print
 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, 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:
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/ncws/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%20swimminq%20oools/lQ/Print/5058234%20incomina%20attachm
0
 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, Councilmember <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:
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 ifthere 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:///F:/LAW/BILLS/1716%20swimminq%20pools/lQ/Print/5058226%20incomina%20attachment%20
 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
1
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.
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
COMC OR- 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.
Tests for pH, free chlorine, and total bromine residuals must be
2.
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.
Any chemicals used in the Public Swimming Pool water must: (a)
3.
be non-toxic to persons in the concentrations found in the water and (b) be clearly labeled with
directions for use.
A convenient method must be provided to measure the effective
4.
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 of7.2 and a maximum of7.8;
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
 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
TO: Amanda Mihill and Members of the HHS Committee
FROM: Amy Rohrer, Maryland Hotel Lodging Association
RE: Response to questions asked by HHS Committee on Expedited Bill
16-17:
Swimming Pools-
Lifeguards - Amendments
I.
Will hotels maintain lifeguards even when they are not required to? Is there any
data to support this in other jurisdictions?
Hotel operators staff lifeguards when it is believed to have a positive impact on guest safety or other
needs related to the pool.
Generally speaking, the norm in our industry is for guests to swim at their
own risk unless a pool has a waterslide, lazy river, etc. There are other circumstances that may lead to a
decision to staff a lifeguard at all times or for select days/times. {i.e. location of the pool within a hotel,
groups of children/youth using the pool, crowd control, etc.)
As an example, the Maryland hotels listed below continue to staff lifeguards, even though regulations
do not require it.
Holiday Inn Express Baltimore at the Stadiums - lifeguard staffed due to proximity to
casino/ high volume of guests
Days Inn Inner Harbor - primary reason for a lifeguard is keeping out unregistered, local
guests invited by registered hotel guests {crowd control)
Holiday Inn Greenbelt - a lifeguard is in place since the only place where you can
see the pool is from the "Leased Out Restaurant" and the hotel does not have a
direct site to the pool
2. How do insurance requirements change (or do they change) if there are lifeguards
present or absent?
Hotel insurance requirements are not impacted based on the presence of a lifeguard.
Hotels are
required to have general liability insurance that covers property and bodily injury in the pool area. Pool
companies typically carry a policy that covers negligence by their agents or employees. {See attached
pool company contract further stipulating this arrangement.)
MHLA
Page 11
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
3. Information on characteristics of lifeguards. Are lifeguards typically County
residents? Foreign nationals?
We do not have access to the data needed to answer this question factually since pool companies hire
lifeguards and we contract with the pool companies. The opinion among our industry is that the
majority of lifeguards working at hotel pools are not county residents.
4.
Cost of lifeguards in relation to the overall cost to operate a hotel pool.
The average cost of lifeguards in relation to overall pool operating costs is 88%.
5. Statistics from pool operators regarding hotel pool incidents.
While this question has been directed to pool companies, we would like to note that hotels require
incident reports to be filled out for ALL issues requiring first aide {minor and major) to a guest. See the
attached contract between a hotel and Sunset Pools, which stipulates the pool company will "fill out
necessary incident and accidents reports, and provide copies to {the hotel)."
We respectfully request the opportunity to verify all reports of life-saving incidents provided
by
pool
companies against our own records.
We conducted a case study of hotels owned and/or operated by Baywood Hotels, who operates
64
hotels with pools in
11
states, including
3
in Montgomery County and a total of
14
in Maryland.
FOR ALL HOTELS WITH POOLS, BOTH WITH AND WITHOUT A LIFEGUARD, THERE ARE ZERO (0)
DOCUMENTED REPORTS OF DROWNINGS OR LIFE-SAVING EVENTS REQUIRING A CALL TO 911.
Summary:
o
4 HOTELS REQUIRING A LIFEGUARD,
located in the following counties:
MARYLAND: Montgomery and Baltimore
o
60 HOTELS NOT REQUIRING A LIFEGUARD,
located in the following states/counties:
MARYLAND: Anne Arundel, Baltimore City, Charles, Howard, Prince George's, St .
Mary's
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
VIRGINIA: Alexandria City, Fairfax, Loudon, Prince William
FLORIDA: Duval, Miami-Dade, Polk
LOUISIANA: Calcasieu Parish, East Baton Rouge Parish, Jefferson Parish
GEORGIA: Fulton
MHLA
Page
12@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
MASSACHUSE TTS: Essex
NEW YORK: Erie, Monroe, Onondaga, Seneca
PENNSYLVANIA: Blair, Franklin
TEXAS: Antonio, Bexar, Gray, Matagorda, Maverick, Uvalde
KANSAS:
Wyandotte
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the questions and concerns raised by the HHS
Committee on this issue.
For further information, contact:
Amy Rohrer
President
&
CEO
Maryland Hotel Lodging Association
MHLA
Page
13@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
HHS ITEM2
October 2, 2017
Worksession 2
MEMORANDUM
September 28, 2017
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Health and Human Services Committee
Amanda Mihill, Legislative Attorney~~~
Worksession 2:
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 Councilrnembers Floreen and Elrich and Council President
Berliner, was introduced on May 16, 2017. A public hearing was held on June 20 and a Health
and Human Services Committee worksession was held on July 10.
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.
First Committee Worksession
The Health and Human Services Committee held a worksession on Bill 16-17 on July 10.
The
Committee packet for that worksession contained additional background information not
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
repeated in this memoran dum and Councilmembers may wish to bring that packet
to
this
worksession.
At the July 10 worksession, Councilmembers reviewed background information and
requested the following additional information:
Comparison of local laws on this topic.
Additional statistics of pool incidents in Montgomery County and surrounding
jurisdictions. These statistics should include a comparison of pools with and without
lifeguards.
Information relevant to the question about whether drownings are more likely to happen in
pools with or without a lifeguard.
Will hotels maintain lifeguards even when they are not required to?
How do insurance requirements change (or do they change) if there are lifeguards present
or absent?
Information on residency of lifeguards.
Discussion
In response to the Committe e's request for information, Council staff reached out to
representatives from both the hotel industry and the pool operator/lifeguard industry as well as
performing independent research.
Comparison of local laws.
As the packet for the first worksession summarized, most other
Maryland jurisdictions do not require lifeguards for hotel pools under 2,500 square feet of surface
area (State law requires a semi-public pool that has a water surface area greater than 2,500 square
feet to have a lifeguard on duty during peak seasonal use for outdoor pools and year round for
indoor, heated pools.). As of the date of this packet, only Baltimore County and Montgomery
County require lifeguards for hotel pools. Ocean City, Maryland follows the state law (the City
does not have a town ordinance on this subject and neither does Worcester County). Similarly,
Howard County does not have a local law on this topic and therefore follows the state law. Laws
in Prince George's County and Anne Arundel County specifically exclude hotel and motel pools
from having a lifeguard requirement if the water surface area is less than 2,500 square feet. Laws
in the District of Columbia do not require a lifeguard for pools open only for people "lodging for
a fee at the facility" except in certain circumstances (including if the pool has a diving board, is 5
feet or deeper, or has an expected bather population of 50% or more children under 15 years old).
Statistics of pool incidents in Montgomery County and surrounding jurisdictions.
The July 10
packet noted that Sunset Pools, Inc. indicated 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, at that time, they had 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.
In
response to Council staff questions, the Maryland Hotel Lodging
Association (MHLA) noted that hotels require incident reports to be filled out for all issues
requiring first aid to a guest. MHLA conducted a study of hotels owned/operated by Baywood
hotels who operates 64 hotels with pools in 11 states, including 14 in Maryland (3 in Montgomery
County). The case study revealed that for all hotels with pools (with and without a lifeguard), there
2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
were no calls documenting reports of drownings or life-saving events requiring a 911 call.
Council staff surveyed certain surrounding jurisdictions about emergency calls for drownings or
near-drownings at hotel pools for approximately the past 12 years. From 2005 to present, the
County Fire and Rescue Service (MCFRS) was dispatched for reported drownings at hotels/motels
twice; however in only 1 of those incidents was a patient transported to a hospital (the patient had
a non-life threatening condition). From 2003 to present, the Anne Arundel County Fire and Rescue
Service was dispatched to a hotel or motel pool twice. For Ocean City, Maryland, there were 13
EMS dispatches for drownings/near drownings at hotel/motel pools from 2012 to present. The
information gleaned from these jurisdictions does not include whether the EMS calls originated
'
from hotels with or without pool lifeguards.
Lifeguard effectiveness.
Committee members requested information about whether drownings are
more likely to happen in pools with or without a lifeguard. Council staff did a significant amount
of research attempting to provide relevant information to the Committee on this topic. However,
Council staff could not find a significant amount of research on this question. A 2001 report of a
Centers for Disease Control Working Group and the National Center for Injury Prevention and
Control entitled "Lifeguard Effectiveness: A Report of the Working Group", concluded that
"trained, professional lifeguards have had a positive effect on drowning prevention in the United
States". This report provided several examples of reduced incidents after lifeguards were
employed. However, this report focused only on lifeguards at beaches, not at pools. There are
many risks associated with beaches, including surf, drop offs, and under currents, that are not
present at swimming pools. A 2010 article entitled "Lifeguards: A Forgotten Aspect of Drowning
Prevention" cites an "industry" document for the conclusion that approximately a third of
drowning deaths in the U.S. happen at lifeguarded pools. However, Council staff was unable to
find the "industry" document referenced in the article.
Other requested information.
In response to other Committee requests for information, Council
staff learned that:
Hotels, even when not required by law, staff lifeguards "when it is believed to have a
positive impact on guest safety or other needs related to the pool". Generally speaking, the
norm is to "swim at your own risk" unless a pool has a waterslide, lazy river, etc. Other
circumstances may lead a hotel to staff a lifeguard at all times or for select days and time,
including the location of the pool, crowd control, groups of children/youth using the pool.
Hotel insurance requirements are not impacted based on the presence of a lifeguard.
While MHLA stated that the industry opinion is that the majority of lifeguards working at
hotel pools are not County residents, according to Sunset Pools, about 90% of the
lifeguards employed in hotel pools (seasonal and year round) are County residents. The
remaining 10% are Jl visa holders that work only during the summer
in
outdoor pools.
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.
3
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
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 16-1 7
COMCOR 51.00.02.03
Follow up information from hotel industry
F:\LAW\BILLS\J 716 Swimming Pools\HHS Memo 2.Docx
Circle#
1
5
6
7
12
13
24
51
53
4
 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.
_L_
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 bracketsD
* * *
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 unciffected 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
Sec. 1. Sections 51-1 and 51-10 are amended as follows:
51-1. Definitions.
2
3
4
In this Chapter, the following words have the following meanings:
*
*
*
5
6
7
Hostel
has the same meaning as in Code §54-1.
*
*
*
51-10. Safety standards; lifeguards and spa guards.
*
*
*
8
9
IO
11
(b)
Lifeguards.
(1)
Except for public spas and as provided
in
paragrap h@, 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.
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
(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.
22
23
24
25
26
27
f:\law\bHls\1716 swimming pools\bill 2.doc:x
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
ExPEDllED BILL NO.
16-17
28
29
(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.
@
30
31
32
Hostels.
Paragraph
(hl
does not
filmly
to
!l
pool that has
~
water surface
area less than 2,500 square feet located on the grounds of a hostel for the
exclusive use of its registered guests if:
33
34
35
36
37
ill
ill
the hostel is properly licensed under Chapter 54;
the hostel posts warning
filW
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;
ill)
~
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
safety
filfill
is posted in
fl
permanent location adjacent to
~
hostel in compliance with the American National Standard
for Public Spas;
ilJ
ill)
the safety sjgn includes the user load of the pool:
~
chemical warning
_filgil
is posted at the entrance door to
~
45
46
chemical storage area and includes the text "Caution!
Chemical Storage Area":
47
48
49
(fil
~
chemical vat, feeder, pump, and line is labeled to identify
chlorine gas warning
the chemical in use;
(E}
~
mgn
reading "Danger--Chlorine
50
51
Gas" is posted at the entrance to
~
chlorine gas feed room
and storage area;
{ill
other warning, health advisory, and safety
~
are posted,
as required
.QY
Executive Regulation, if necessary to protect
the public health and safety; and
52
53
54
(j)
f:llaw\bUls\1716
swimming
pools\bill
2.doc:,c
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
ExPEDITED BILL NO.
16-17
55
56
(ID
!!
pool that does not have
!!
lifeguard on duty has
!!
conspicuous
_filgQ
posted adjacent to entrances
to
the pool
reading "Warning: No lifeguard on duty. SWIM AT YOUR
OWN RISK. Children under the age of
15
are not permitted
to use the pool without adult supervision"; and
57
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)
(ID
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
connects directly to
9-1-1;
and
notifies an employee of the hostel when activated.
Sec. 2. Expedited Effective Date.
The Council declares that this legislation 1s necessary for the immediate
protection of the public interest. This Act takes effect on the date that it becomes law.
Approved:
69
Roger Berliner, President, County Council
70
Approved:
Date
71
Isiah Leggett, County Executive
72
Date
This
is
a correct copy ofCouncil action.
73
Linda M. Lauer, Clerk of the Council
Date
0
f:\law\bnls\1716 swimming pools\biU 2.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
LEGISLATIVE REQUEST REPORT
Expedited Bill 16-17
Swimming Pools
-
Lifeguards -Amendments
DESCRIPTION:
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.
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:
GOALS AND
OBJECTIVES:
COORDINATION:
FISCAL IMP ACT:
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
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
MONTGOMERY COUNTY COUNCIL
ROCKVIL.L.E, MARYLAND
SIDNEY
A. KATZ
COUNCIL.MEMBE R· DISTRICT 3
MEMORAN DUM
TO:
County Council
FROM:
Council
member
Sidney
DATE: May 9, 2017
In
Katz~/~
RE:
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 jeopar~izing 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/bllls96202017/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 potentlally empty pools. Please
ask
our
office for more data on local pool operations and costs.
MARYLAND AVENUE, 6TH FL.OOR • RoCKVIL.L.E, MARYLAND 20B50
240•777-7906 •
TTY
2.40-777-7914 • FAX 240-777-7989 • COUNCILMEMBER .KATZ@MONTGOM ERYCOUNTYMD,G OV
~
PRINTED ON RECYCLED P4PER
1
I 00
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
ROCKVILLE, MARYLA"JD
MEMO RANDU M
June 2, 2017
TO:
FROM:
Roger Berliner, President, County Council
Jennifer A. H~ec tor, Office of Management an~udge t
Alexandre
A.
Esi}inosa, Director, Departmen t ofFman~ \v--·
FEIS for Council Expedited Bill 16-17, Swimming Pools-Lifeguards-
Amendme nts
SUBJECT:
Please find attached the fiscal
and
economic impact statements for the above-