BALTIMORE COUNTY COUNCIL

NOTES TO THE AGENDA

LEGISLATIVE SESSION 2016

Issued: December 8, 2016

Work Session: December 13, 2016

Legislative Day No. 22 : December 19, 2016

The accompanying notes are

compiled from unaudited

information provided by

the Administration and

other sources.

OFFICE OF THE COUNTY AUDITOR

BALTIMORE COUNTY COUNCIL

December 19, 2016

NOTES TO THE AGENDA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Mrs. Almond (By Req.)

Department of Health and Human Services

Detention Center Pilot Project Naloxone

The Administration is requesting a supplemental appropriation of state funds totaling $28,816 to the Detention Center Pilot Project Naloxone Gifts and Grants Fund program. The funds will be used to train, certify, and provide overdose response kits (containing two doses of Naloxone nasal spray) to approximately 367 inmates in the Baltimore County Detention Center (BCDC) if needed for use upon their release. See Exhibit A.

Fiscal Summary

Funding Source	Supplemental Appropriation	Current Appropriation	Total Appropriation
County	—	—	—
State ⁽¹⁾	$ 28,816	—	$ 28,816
Federal	—	—	—
Other	—	—	—
Total	$ 28,816	—	$ 28,816
⁽¹⁾Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Behavioral Health Administration funds. No County matching funds are required.

Analysis

The new Detention Center Pilot Project Naloxone will provide training specifically for incarcerated individuals in the BCDC on how to recognize and respond to an opioid-related overdose and to safely administer Naloxone, a prescription medication that reverses the effects of an opioid overdose. The Department advised that its addiction counselors who work in the BCDC will

Bill 81-16 (Supplemental Appropriation) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

provide the training as part of their regular group sessions. These inmates will receive training certificates and overdose response kits (containing two doses of Naloxone nasal spray) upon their release from the BCDC. The Department advised that individuals who have had a period of abstinence from drug use (such as incarceration) are more likely to overdose should they return to drug use.

The proposed $28,816 supplemental appropriation will be used to provide overdose response kits ($75 each) to incarcerated individuals upon their release ($27,990), and for miscellaneous program expenses (e.g., supplies, printing ($826)). The Department anticipates providing services to approximately 367 incarcerated individuals in FY 2017.

The Correspondence for the December 5, 2016 agenda included a sole-source procurement of prescription Narcan, the nasal spray form of Naloxone, under a 2-year contract with Truax Patient Services estimated to total $144,000. The Baltimore County Police and Fire Departments also stock this medication as first responders in an effort to reduce opioid deaths.

The grant period is FY 2017. No County matching funds are required for this grant.

With the affirmative vote of five members of the County Council, Bill 81-16 will take effect January 1, 2017.

Keith Dorsey Fiscal Note December 19, 2016

Bill 82-16 (Supplemental Appropriations) Council District(s) _All _

Mrs. Almond (By Req.)

Office of Budget and Finance

Capital Budget

The Administration is requesting four supplemental capital budget appropriations totaling $93,090,250 of County bond funds ($89,359,250) and anticipated State aid being forward-funded by the County ($3,731,000) for countywide roadway resurfacing ($10,000,000) and various school projects ($83,090,250). The four capital projects had been programmed to receive bond funding in FY 2018; the proposed supplemental appropriations will enable the Administration to expedite planned project work prior to FY 2018. The borrowing referendum approved by the voters on November 8, 2016 authorizes the issuance of these bonds. See Exhibit A.

Fiscal Summary

Capital Project	Supplemental Appropriation		Current Appropriation		Total Appropriation

Streets and Highways: Roadway Resurfacing	$ 10,000,000		$ 229,581,610	⁽²⁾	$ 239,581,610
Total	$ 10,000,000		$ 229,581,610		$ 239,581,610
Schools: SW Area New Const., Addns & Renovs NE Area New Const., Addns & Renovs Major Maintenance	$ 23,502,250 49,297,000 10,291,000	⁽¹⁾	$ 100,098,633 35,584,000 331,395,870	⁽²⁾	$ 123,600,883 84,881,000 341,686,870
Total	$ 83,090,250		$ 467,078,503		$ 550,168,753
Grand Total	$ 93,090,250		$ 696,660,113		$ 789,750,363
⁽¹⁾$6,560,000 in County bonds funds and $3,731,000 in anticipated State aid that is being forward-funded by the County. ⁽²⁾Current appropriations as reflected on the County financial system as of November 28, 2016, which may not necessarily reflect total appropriations since the inception of these on-going capital projects.

Bill 82-16 (Supplemental Appropriations) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

Analysis

The borrowing referendum approved by the voters on November 8, 2016 included $292,211,986 for various capital classifications. This funding was programmed in FY 2018 as part of the adopted FY 2017 – 2022 Capital Budget and Program. The purpose of these supplemental capital budget appropriations is to approve $89,359,250 of this bond funding and $3,731,000 in anticipated State aid, which will be forward-funded by the County, to expedite certain project work during FY 2017.

The distribution of the proposed supplemental appropriations is as follows:

$10,000,000 will be appropriated to the countywide Roadway Resurfacing project for continued roadway resurfacing work in the spring of 2017, with specific jobs to be identified through the Department of Public Works’ Annual Road Condition Survey. The Department advised that road surveys are performed in the spring from which tentative plans are developed and discussed.

$23,502,250 will be appropriated to the Southwest Area New Construction, Additions, and Renovations project. The Administration advised that this funding will be used to expedite construction of the new (replacement) Lansdowne elementary school.

$49,297,000 will be appropriated to the Northeast Area New Construction, Additions, and Renovations project. The Administration advised that this funding will be used to expedite construction of the new (replacement) Victory Villa elementary school and the new elementary school on the Joppa Road site.

$10,291,000 ($6,560,000 in bond funds and $3,731,000 in anticipated State aid to be forward-funded by the County) will be appropriated to the schools Major Maintenance (bulk) project. The Administration advised that this funding will be used to expedite renovations at Lansdowne, Woodlawn, Dulaney, and Patapsco high schools.

Upon approval of the proposed supplemental appropriations, $202,852,736 in County bond funding would remain programmed in FY 2018 for various capital projects throughout the County. An additional $315,227,789 and $265,500,000 in County bond funding is programmed in fiscal years 2020 and 2022, respectively, for various capital projects throughout the County.

With the affirmative vote of five members of the County Council, Bill 82-16 will take effect January 2, 2017.

Council Fiscal Note December 19, 2016

Bill 83-16 Council District(s) _All _

Mrs. Almond

Open Space

Bill 83-16 is a corrective bill that amends the Open Space statute, which was comprehensively revised in Bill 73-16 and passed by the County Council on November 7, 2016.

Specifically, as to the location of open space, Bill 73-16 stated that the applicant Ashall provide a design, layout and, if paying a fee, the applicable cost estimate for the amenity with the concept plan submission.@ This section of the Open Space statute was drafted in error and should have stated that the design, layout and, if paying a fee, the applicable cost estimate for the amenity be provided with the Adevelopment plan@ submission.

Bill 83-16 makes the correction from Aconcept plan@ submission to Adevelopment plan@ submission.

With the affirmative vote of five members of the County Council and signature by the County Executive, Bill 83-16 will take effect on January 2, 2017.

Council Fiscal Note December 19, 2016

Bill 84-16 Council District(s) _All _

Mrs. Almond

Transient Occupancy Tax

Bill 84-16 amends the section of the County Code pertaining to the Transient Occupancy Tax.

Current law permits the County to levy and impose a Transient Occupancy Tax, also known as the AHotel Tax,@ on the room rental paid by a transient for sleeping accommodations. The transient occupancy tax rate is 8% of the room rental paid by a transient.

Hotel rental taxes are currently authorized in all 23 counties and Baltimore City, with rates ranging from 3.0 percent to 9.5 percent. Perhaps stemming from the relationship between hotel occupancy and tourism and promotion, most jurisdictions dedicate a percentage of the hotel tax collected to tourism and promotion of the county. These include the neighboring jurisdictions of Anne Arundel County, Harford County, Frederick County, Howard County, and Baltimore City, as well as Montgomery County.

Baltimore County does not dedicate any percentage of the hotel tax collected to tourism and promotion. Bill 84-16 requires that 8 percent of the amount collected as the hotel tax be allocated each fiscal year to the operating budget of the Office of Tourism and Promotion.

Bill 84-16 will take effect 45 days after its enactment.

Council Fiscal Note December 19, 2016

Bill 86-16 Council District(s) _5 _

Mr. Marks

Downtown Towson Overlay District

The Downtown Towson (D.T.) District was created by Bill 49-16, effective August 15, 2016.

At one time, there were 10 separate designations/zones and overlay districts that applied to some part of the Towson urban center. Bill 49-16 repealed these separate zones and districts and adopted a new comprehensive review process in the form of an overlay district that is design-oriented.

Bill 86-16 modifies some of the design guidelines adopted by Bill 49-16 regarding environmental standards compliance and tree planting and open space requirements.

With the affirmative vote of five members of the County Council and signature by the County Executive, Bill 86-16 will take effect on January 2, 2017.

Council Fiscal Note December 19, 2016

Bill 87-16 Council District(s) _All _

Councilmembers Marks, Quirk, Almond & Jones

Convenience Stores

Bill 87-16 amends the zoning regulations relating to convenience stores, carry-out restaurants, and fuel service stations.

As defined in the Baltimore County Zoning Regulations, a convenience store may not exceed 5,000 square feet. Bill 87-16 changes this to 6,000 square feet.

A fuel service station is currently permitted by right or by special exception, depending on the zoning classification of the land. A fuel service station is permitted by right in certain shopping centers, or industrial parks, or a planned drive-in cluster, if no part of the lot is within 100 feet of a residentially-zoned property, and is integrated with one of the above uses. Bill 87-16 amends this distance limitation to prohibit fuel servicing spaces within 100 feet of certain zones, namely, D.R. (Density Residential), R.C. (Resource Conservation), or R.A.E. (Residential, Apartment, Elevator) zones or certain R.O. (Residential Office) zoned property.

Certain ancillary uses are permitted by right in conjunction with a fuel service station. One such use is a convenience store with a sales area of up to 1,500 square feet. Bill 87-16 changes this to allow a convenience store, or a combination of a convenience store and carry-out restaurant, with a gross floor area of up to 6,000 square feet, as an ancillary use.

The same amendments are proposed to the section that requires a minimum site area for a use in combination with a fuel service station.

Bill 87-16 will take effect 45 days after its enactment.

Council Fiscal Note December 19, 2016

Bill 88-16 Council District(s) _All _

Mr. Marks

Zoning Regulations – General Use Regulations in D.R. Zones

Bill 88-16 amends the Zoning Regulations pertaining to the uses permitted as of right in the D.R. (Density, Residential) Zones.

Specifically, the bill authorizes, as a matter of right snowball stands, permanent or temporary, in the D.R. 5.5 zone if situated on property adjacent to R.O. (Residential Office) zoned property, and with dual frontage along public roads, subject to any additional conditions and restrictions imposed and permits required by Baltimore County.

The bill further provides that it does not affect the validity or legality of a snowball stand or similar term, permanent or temporary, in business and approved by Baltimore County for such use prior to the effective date of this act.

Bill 88-16 will take effect 45 days after its enactment.

Council Fiscal Note December 19, 2016

Bill 89-16 Council District(s) _All _

Mr. Kach

Commercial Solar Facilities

Bill 89-16 proposes to regulate the location and the requirements for a commercial solar facility.

A commercial solar facility is not currently regulated by the Baltimore County Zoning Regulations, although several such facilities have been authorized, by administrative decision, to file for a special exception in certain rural zones as a public utility.

Bill 89-16 states the policy of the County that the presumed benefits of solar energy production must be balanced with the potential impact of solar energy-producing facilities upon the County=s land use policies, particularly in resource conservation and agricultural zones, as well as the impact of such facilities on surrounding residential communities.

A commercial solar facility is defined as a facility that includes a series of one or more solar collectors or solar energy systems that are placed in an area on a parcel of land for the purpose of generating photovoltaic power for commercial use. The term includes a solar power plant or solar photovoltaic farm.

Commercial use is defined as the transfer to the electrical power grid of energy produced by a commercial solar facility for sale to consumers by energy suppliers.

Because some solar facilities previously have been allowed to file as a public utility, Bill 89-16 makes it abundantly clear that a commercial solar facility may not be considered a public utility under the Baltimore County Code or the Baltimore County Zoning Regulations.

Exempted from the provisions of the bill are:

$ A solar facility located in a yard area, building, or structure that is accessory to a principal residential, agricultural, or commercial use;

Bill 89-16 (cont’d) December 19, 2016

$ A solar facility on federal, state or local government-owned or leased land that produces energy for government use; or

$ A solar facility that uses at least 75% of the energy generated for agricultural uses.

A commercial solar facility is permitted by special exception in the R.C.2, R.C.3, R.C.4, R.C.5, and R.C.6 zones of the County, subject to the following requirements:

$ The land on which a commercial solar facility is proposed may not be in the Agricultural Land Preservation Program and may not be encumbered by an agricultural preservation easement or an environmental preservation easement;

$ The land on which a commercial solar facility is proposed may not be located in a Baltimore County Historic District or on a property that is listed on the Baltimore County Final Historical Landmarks List;

$ The maximum size of a commercial solar facility is 20 acres or 20% of the total parcel on which a commercial solar facility is proposed to be located, whichever is less. The total parcel on which a facility is proposed to be located shall be a minimum of 10 acres in size;

$ Any structure shall have a minimum 50-foot setback from all property lines;

$ A structure may not exceed 20 feet in height;

$ A landscaping buffer shall be provided around the perimeter of a commercial solar facility, which shall include the screening of state and local scenic routes and scenic views in accordance with the Baltimore County Landscape Manual;

$ Security fencing shall be provided between the landscaping buffer and the commercial solar facility;

$ A solar collector or combination of solar collectors shall be designed and located to avoid glare or reflection onto adjacent properties and adjacent roadways and may not interfere with traffic or create a safety hazard; and

$ An applicant must comply with the requirements of Section 33-3-108 of the County Code regarding the filing of a plan of development with the Department of Environmental Protection and Sustainability.

A security bond must be filed with the County in the form and amount determined by the Administrative Officer. The bond may be used to ensure the repair of any unsafe or hazardous conditions or the removal of a commercial solar facility.

Bill 89-16 (cont’d) December 19, 2016

All parties with a lease or ownership interest in a commercial solar facility are responsible for the maintenance of the facility. A facility that has reached the end of its useful life or has been abandoned is required to be removed. The owner or operator must physically remove the installation no more than 150 days after the date of discontinued operations and notify the County by certified mail of the proposed date of discontinued operations and plans for removal. If the owner or operator fail to remove the facility within 150 days of abandonment, the County retains the right to enter and remove the facility.

The Code Official enforces the provisions of the Article.

With the affirmative vote of five members of the County Council and signature by the County Executive, Bill 89-16 will take effect on January 2, 2017 and apply retroactively to July 1, 2016.

Chief James Johnson Fiscal Note December 19, 2016

FM-1 (Contract) Council District(s) All _

Police Department

Biohazardous and Trauma Clean-up Services

The Administration is requesting approval of a contract with Athens Bio Solutions, LLC to provide biohazard and trauma clean-up services at locations (buildings and vehicles) within or near the boundaries of the County. The contract commenced August 1, 2016, continues through December 31, 2016, and may not exceed $25,000 unless approved by the Council. If approved, the contract will continue through July 31, 2017 and will automatically renew for four additional 1-year periods with the option to further extend the initial term or any renewal term an additional 90 days. The contract does not specify a maximum compensation for the initial 1-year term or for the entire 5-year and 3-month term of the contract. Compensation may not exceed the amount appropriated for these services during the entire contract term. The Department advised that the compensation amount is not reasonably estimable at this time due to the unpredictable nature of these services. See Exhibit A.

Fiscal Summary

Funding Source	Initial Term		Total Compensation
County ⁽¹⁾	$ *		$ *
State	—		—
Federal	—		—
Other	—		—
Total	$ *	⁽²⁾	$ *	⁽³⁾
⁽¹⁾ General Fund Operating Budget. ⁽²⁾ The Department is unable to provide an estimated compensation for the initial 1-year term. The contract does not specify a maximum compensation for the initial 1-year term. ⁽³⁾ The Department is unable to provide an estimated compensation for the entire 5-year and 3-month term, including the renewal and extension periods. The contract does not specify a maximum compensation for the entire contract term. Compensation may not exceed the amount appropriated for these services during the entire contract term.

FM-1 (Contract) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

Analysis

The contractor will furnish all labor, supervision, vehicles, materials, tools and equipment necessary to provide biohazardous and trauma clean-up services at various locations (interior and exterior of buildings and vehicles) within or near the boundaries of the County on a time and materials basis. The contractor must be available 24 hours-per-day, 7 days-per-week, and must respond to a clean-up site within 2 hours of being contacted.

Work will be performed at hourly rates of $175 during regular working hours and $192.50 during overtime hours. Disposal of contaminated materials will be billed at $205 per container and materials cost include a 10% mark-up. The Department advised that it previously provided these services but several recent incidents prompted the need for a skilled contractor.

The contract commenced August 1, 2016, continues through December 31, 2016, and may not exceed $25,000 unless approved by the Council. If approved, the contract will continue through July 31, 2017 and will automatically renew for four additional 1-year periods with the option to further extend the initial term or any renewal term an additional 90 days on the same terms and conditions, unless the County provides notice of non-renewal. Compensation may not exceed the amount appropriated for these services during the entire contract term. The Department advised that since these services were previously provided in-house and are unpredictable in nature, it is unable to provide an estimated compensation for the initial 1-year term or for the entire 5-year term. The Department advised that as of December 5, 2016, $6,613 has been encumbered under this contract.

Prior to the commencement of each renewal period, the County may entertain a request for an escalation in unit prices in accordance with the Consumer Price Index – All Urban Consumers – United States Average – All Items (CPI-U), as published by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics at the time of the request, or up to a maximum 5% increase on the current pricing, whichever is lower. The County may terminate the agreement by providing 30 days prior written notice.

The contract was awarded through a competitive procurement process based on low bid from two bids received.

FM-1 (Contract) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

County Charter, Section 715, requires that “any contract must be approved by the County Council before it is executed if the contract is…for services for a term in excess of two years or involving the expenditure of more than $25,000 per year….”

Rob Stradling Fiscal Note December 19, 2016

FM-2 (Contract Amendment) Council District(s) All _

Office of Information Technology

Software, Maintenance and Support – Content Management Systems

The Administration is requesting a fourth amendment to a contract with Systems Alliance, Inc. to continue to provide software licenses, upgrades, maintenance, and support related to the Site Executive – Web Content Management Software for the County’s websites. The amendment adds four 1-year renewal periods, commencing September 9, 2017, to the current 15-year term and increases the maximum compensation by $427,943, from $591,359 to $1,019,302, for the entire 19-year term of the contract, including the additional four 1-year renewal periods. The contract commenced September 9, 2002. See Exhibit A.

Fiscal Summary

Funding Source	Contract Amendment	Current Maximum Compensation	Amended Maximum Compensation
County ⁽¹⁾	$ 427,943	$ 591,359	$ 1,019,302
State	—	—	—
Federal	—	—	—
Other	—	—	—
Total	$ 427,943	$ 591,359	$ 1,019,302	⁽²⁾
⁽¹⁾ General Fund Operating Budget. ⁽²⁾Maximum compensation for the entire 19-year term, including the additional four 1-year renewal periods.

Analysis

Under the proposed amendment, the contractor will continue to provide software licenses, upgrades, maintenance, and support for the County’s Site Executive software, which is a content management system (CMS). The CMS allows the publishing, editing, and management of all County government websites and intranet.

FM-2 (Contract Amendment) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

The Office advised that the proposed amendment is necessary because the current contract expires on September 8, 2017, and $563,202 has been expended/encumbered under the contract as of December 2, 2016. The Office also advised that the contractor has been providing these services to the County since 2002 and moving to a new CMS would require a significant investment of time and money

On September 9, 2002, the County entered into the original contract not to exceed $24,100 with Systems Alliance, Inc. to provide licensing of the Site Executive CMS software. On July 24, 2003, the agreement was amended to increase the maximum compensation to $54,100 to provide for two additional Site Executive licenses. On July 28, 2004, the agreement was amended for the second time to increase the maximum compensation to $57,600 to provide for one additional Site Executive software module. On August 6, 2007, the Council approved a third amendment to increase the maximum compensation to $591,359 and to extend the term through September 8, 2017; the amendment allowed the Office to consolidate Site Executive licenses purchases and professional installation and annual maintenance services under one agreement.

The proposed fourth amendment adds four 1-year renewal periods (from September 9, 2017 to September 8, 2021) to the current 15-year term and increases the maximum compensation by $427,943, from $591,359 to $1,019,302, for the entire 19-year term including the renewal periods, unless the County provides notice of non-renewal. All other terms and conditions remain the same. The County may terminate the agreement by providing 30 days prior written notice.

The original agreement and the first two amendments were not subject to Council approval since they were considered commodity purchases. The Office requested that the proposed contract amendment be designated as a 902(f) proprietary contract secured in the best interest of the County. County Charter, Section 902(f), states that “when…[competitive] bidding is not appropriate, a contract shall be awarded only by competitive negotiations, unless such negotiations are not feasible. When neither competitive bidding nor competitive negotiations are feasible, contracts may be awarded by noncompetitive negotiations.”

On September 19, 2016, the Council approved a 7-year and 4-month contract with Systems Alliance, Inc. and 23 other contractors with estimated compensation totaling $25 million for all contractors combined to provide consulting and technical services and/or goods on an on-call, as-needed basis. The Office advised that as of December 1, 2016, there have been no expenditures to Systems Alliance, Inc.

FM-2 (Contract Amendment) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

Rob Stradling Fiscal Note December 19, 2016

FM-3 (Contract Amendment) Council District(s) All _

Office of Information Technology

Design & Engineering Services – Inter-County Broadband Network

The Administration is requesting an amendment to a contract with Advantage Engineers LLC to continue to provide design and engineering services for the Inter-County Broadband Network (ICBN) fiber optic infrastructure project. The amendment increases the maximum compensation of the contract by $750,000, from $500,000 to $1,250,000, for the entire 5-year and 1-month term of the contract, including the renewal and extension periods. The contract commenced July 7, 2014. See Exhibit A.

Fiscal Summary

Funding Source	Contract Amendment	Current Maximum Compensation	Amended Maximum Compensation
County ⁽¹⁾	$ 750,000	$ 500,000	$ 1,250,000
State	—	—	—
Federal	—	—	—
Other	—	—	—
Total	$ 750,000	$ 500,000	$ 1,250,000	⁽²⁾
⁽¹⁾General Fund Operating Budget. ⁽²⁾Maximum compensation for the entire 5-year and 1-month term, including the renewal and extension periods.

Analysis

In 2010, the State of Maryland was awarded a $115 million federal Broadband Technology Opportunities Program grant to develop a secure fiber optic system to connect jurisdictions (including public safety, health, education and job creation agencies) and other “community

FM-3 (Contract Amendment) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

anchor” institutions (such as hospitals). As part of this Program, Baltimore County has been participating in the Inter-County Broadband Network (ICBN).

The ICBN is comprised of nine central Maryland counties and cities (City of Annapolis, Baltimore City, and Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Carroll, Harford, Howard, Montgomery, and Prince George’s Counties) and led by Howard County, which has served as the key sub-recipient of the state’s grant award. Accordingly, Howard County managed the “back bone” installation of fiber optic infrastructure. The County is responsible for connecting various County owned and/or operated sites to the “backbone.”

The Office advised that the proposed amendment is necessary because the original maximum compensation amount was based on a presumption that the annual funding allocated for construction may diminish over the 5-year contract term. Since the funding allocated has remained constant, the Office has deemed the revised maximum compensation amount to be more approximate. Under the proposed amendment, the contractor will continue to provide design and engineering services for the ICBN fiber optic infrastructure project as the County expands the broadband fiber optic network into County owned and/or operated sites (e.g., schools, libraries, police precincts, fire stations, and government buildings). Hourly labor rates range from $52.00 (administrative/secretary) to $184.04 (project principal).

On July 7, 2014, the Council approved the original 5-year and 1-month contract not to exceed $500,000. The proposed amendment increases the maximum compensation of the contract by $750,000, to $1,250,000, for the entire 5-year and 1-month term, including the renewal and extension periods. All other terms and conditions remain the same. The County may terminate the agreement by providing 30 days prior written notice. As of December 1, 2016, $492,272 has been encumbered/expended under this contract.

The Office previously advised that Advantage Engineers LLC designed the foundation for the broadband fiber optic network in Baltimore County under a Howard County contract; however,

FM-3 (Contract Amendment) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

because Howard County’s contract is funded strictly with federal grant funds, the County could not piggyback the agreement. Therefore, the original contract was awarded on a non-competitive basis to ensure consistency and continuity of service for the County’s ICBN fiber optic infrastructure. The Office had requested that the original contract be designated as a 902(f) proprietary contract secured in the best interest of the County. County Charter, Section 902(f), states that “when…[competitive] bidding is not appropriate, a contract shall be awarded only by competitive negotiations, unless such negotiations are not feasible. When neither competitive bidding nor competitive negotiations are feasible, contracts may be awarded by noncompetitive negotiations.”

Rob Stradling Fiscal Note December 19, 2016

FM-4 (Contract Amendment) Council District(s) All _

Office of Information Technology

Support – Detention Center Phone System

The Administration is requesting an amendment to a contract with Unify, Inc. (formerly Siemens Enterprise Communications, Inc.) to continue to provide software and maintenance services for the Baltimore County Detention Center’s phone system. The amendment adds two 1-year renewal periods, commencing January 29, 2017, while the County completes a system upgrade to extend 911 services to the Detention Center. The amendment does not increase the contract’s maximum compensation of $776,000 for the entire 12-year term, including the renewal periods. See Exhibit A.

Fiscal Summary

The contract’s maximum compensation amount of $776,000 remains unchanged. As of December 7, 2016, contract expenditures totaled approximately $438,000. Expenditures for the additional two 1-year renewals are estimated to total $125,000.

Analysis

Under the proposed amendment, the contractor will continue to provide software and maintenance support services for the Baltimore County Detention Center’s phone system as the County completes upgrades to the 911 Unify system. The Office advised that the upgrades will extend 911 services to the Detention Center and allow both systems to be covered under one agreement. The Office also advised that it is imperative that the Detention Center phone system be maintained and operational during the upgrade and transition.

On January 16, 2007, the Council approved the original 10-year contract not to exceed $776,000. The proposed amendment adds two 1-year renewal periods commencing January 29, 2017. All

FM-4 (Contract Amendment) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

other terms and conditions remain the same. The County may terminate the agreement by providing 30 days prior written notice. The Office advised that as of December 7, 2016, approximately $438,000 has been expended under this contract. Expenditures for the additional two 1-year renewals are estimated to total $125,000.

The original contract was awarded on a sole-source basis due to the proprietary nature of the phone system (products and services, including maintenance and upgrades).

The Office further advised that Unify, Inc. also currently provides phone system support and call recording system support at the County’s Primary 911 Center under two contracts, respectively, awarded in March 2011, and phone system support at the County’s Backup 911 Center under a contract awarded in October 2010. Each of these contracts was awarded on a sole-source basis due to the proprietary nature of the phone systems. The Council was notified of the non-competitively awarded contracts as correspondence items on October 18, 2010 and May 26, 2011, respectively. As of December 2, 2016, expenditures/encumbrances under the three contracts combined totaled $10,948,921.

Keith Dorsey Fiscal Note December 19, 2016

FM-5 (Contract) Council District(s) All _

Office of Budget and Finance

PACE Program Manager

The Administration is requesting approval of a contract with PACE Financial Servicing LLC (PFS) to develop, promote, and administer a Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) loan program for owners of commercial properties located in Baltimore County. The contract commences upon Council approval and continues through December 31, 2021. PFS will administer the PACE program at no cost to the County. The Office of Budget and Finance (OBF) could not provide an estimate of the total amount of fees to be earned by PFS during the 5-year contract term. Administrative costs incurred by the County (estimated by OBF to be minimal) will be reimbursed through surcharges placed on the borrowers’ property tax bills. See Exhibit A.

Fiscal Summary

Funding Source	Total Compensation		Notes
County ⁽¹⁾	*		⁽¹⁾PFS will administer the PACE program at no cost to the County. OBF could not provide an estimate of the total amount of fees to be earned by PFS during the 5-year contract term. ⁽²⁾ Administrative costs incurred by the County (estimated by OBF to be minimal) will be reimbursed through surcharges placed on the borrowers’ property tax bills. The County will not finance, fund, or incur any liability for loans.
State	—
Federal	—
Other	—
Total	*	^{(1) (2)}

Analysis

On October 3, 2016, the Council approved Bill 63-16 which established a Clean Energy Loan Program for commercial property owners and authorized the Administration to enter into an agreement with a private company to administer the program, subject to Council approval. The purpose of the Clean Energy Loan Program is to facilitate loan financing for clean energy

FM-5 (Contract) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

improvements to commercial properties. The program allows commercial property owners to finance energy improvements through private lenders; in return, the property owners repay the lenders through long-term loan surcharges on their real property tax bills. Clean energy improvements include: solar energy equipment; geothermal energy devices; wind energy systems; water conservation devices not required by law; construction/renovation/retrofitting of commercial properties to reduce energy consumption (e.g., high efficiency lighting, HVAC upgrades); and other improvements approved by the County or the program administrator.

PFS will develop, promote, and administer the PACE loan program for owners of commercial, industrial, agricultural, hospitality, retail, and multifamily properties located in Baltimore County. PFS will perform the following tasks:

Assist the County with developing the PACE program guidelines;
Receive, review, and approve/deny applications submitted by commercial property owners;
Monitor and coordinate all components of the PACE program;
Prepare and submit repayment amounts for inclusion as surcharges on borrowers’ real property tax bills by June 1 of each year;
Maintain a call center with resource information for contractors, property owners, and capital providers;
Assess and ensure proper licensure of all contractors interested in participating in the PACE program;
Receive payment of the surcharges (less the County’s administrative costs) from the County and disburse the funds to the lenders; and
Prepare and deliver annual reports to the County.

The County’s responsibilities include:

Selecting a PACE Program coordinator who will assist in surcharge assessment and collection and be responsible for contacting PFS with any PACE program-related issues;
Adding surcharges to the real property tax bills by July 1 of the year immediately following the execution of the Clean Energy Financing Agreement between a lender and commercial property owner;
Segregating collected surcharges in a separate financial account and paying collected surcharges (less the County’s administrative fees) to PFS on a monthly basis; and

FM-5 (Contract) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

Instituting tax lien collection procedures for property owners who fail to pay the surcharges within the appropriate timeframes.

PFS may charge commercial property owners the following fees for program participation (the fee structure will be reassessed at the conclusion of the first year):

A one-time application fee of $150. The County may request that PFS waive this fee in certain instances.
A 1.05% closing/program administration fee, calculated as a percentage of the amount financed through PACE, which may be capitalized into the surcharge placed on the borrower’s property tax bill.
A servicing fee totaling 16 basis points per year through the assessment period, with a minimum annual fee of $350 and a maximum annual fee of $1,600.

According to PFS’s proposal, PFS will develop marketing, education, training, and outreach programs to encourage program participation among contractors and property owners. PFS will also work with the Department of Economic and Workforce Development and the Office of Budget and Finance, Property Management Division to perform initial outreach to commercial property owners via workshops and forums with trade and membership organizations. PFS will also provide targeted outreach to nonprofit organizations.

According to PFS’s proposal, PFS “estimates that there are at least 6,500 eligible properties in the office, retail, and warehouse classifications without…considering nonprofit and multifamily buildings…[and that] the County should experience a minimum of $2 [million] in PACE transactions in its first year and a minimum of $4 [million] in subsequent consecutive years.” OBF advised that approximately 2-3 commercial property owners per year will utilize the County’s PACE program.

The contract commences upon Council approval and continues through December 31, 2021. PFS will administer the PACE program at no cost to the County. OBF could not provide an estimate of the total amount of fees to be earned by PFS during the 5-year contract term. Administrative costs incurred by the County (estimated by OBF to be minimal) will be reimbursed through surcharges placed on the borrowers’ property tax bills. The County will not finance, fund, or incur any liability for loans. Either party may terminate the agreement by providing 90 days prior written notice.

FM-5 (Contract) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

The County awarded the contract on a non-competitive basis due to the fact that PFS currently manages the statewide PACE program (MD-PACE) as well as PACE programs for seven Maryland counties. OBF advised that capital providers and energy service contractors registered though the MD-PACE program are permitted to provide PACE services in any participating jurisdiction; utilizing the existing state program would expedite the ability for registered contractors to begin work in Baltimore County. OBF further advised that entering into an agreement with PFS would be advantageous due to PFS’s experience, familiarity with the Maryland commercial property market, involvement in surrounding counties, and current involvement in the MD-PACE program. OBF requested that the contract be designated as a 902(f) contract secured in the best interest of the County. County Charter, Section 902(f), states that “when…[competitive] bidding is not appropriate, a contract shall be awarded only by competitive negotiations, unless such negotiations are not feasible. When neither competitive bidding nor competitive negotiations are feasible, contracts may be awarded by noncompetitive negotiations.”

Amy Grossi Fiscal Note December 19, 2016

FM-6 (Contract) Council District(s)_5_

Department of Permits, Approvals and Inspections

Acquisition of Parcel – 120 E. Burke Avenue

The Administration is requesting approval of a contract to acquire property totaling approximately 2.36 acres for $1,100,000 to be used for passive recreational open space. C.M. and J.L. Radebaugh Company, LLC currently owns the property at 120 E. Burke Avenue. The portion of the property to be acquired is located between Burke Avenue and Aigburth Road, east of Maryland Avenue, and is zoned DR-10.5 (Density Residential – 10.5 units per acre). See Exhibit A.

Fiscal Summary

Funding Source	Purchase Price	Notes
County	—	⁽¹⁾Program Open Space funds.
State ⁽¹⁾	$ 1,100,000
Federal	—
Other	—
Total	$ 1,100,000

Analysis

H. Muller & Associates, LLC and Everett, Benfield LLC, consultant appraisers, completed appraisals for the property on March 10, 2015, each recommending a value of $1,100,000. The Department advised that these two appraisals were obtained pursuant to Program Open Space policy for review by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR); the total purchase price will be reimbursed with Program Open Space funds. At the direction of the County, the appraisals were completed under the hypothetical condition that the property is unimproved with legal access via a neighboring property and under the extraordinary assumption that the property can physically and legally accommodate residential development.

FM-6 (Contract) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

The approximate 2.36-acre property to be acquired is a portion of a larger 3.76-acre parcel and is improved with six dated greenhouse structures that are of limited value and will be demolished. The Department advised that the County intends to convert the property into passive open space that will be accessible to the public.

The County has secured $175,000 in State funding to assist with the demolition of the greenhouses. The Department could not provide an estimated cost for the demolition or for grading and seeding on the property. As of November 9, 2016, $11,732 has been expended/encumbered for this project, excluding the cost of this acquisition.

County Charter, Section 715, requires Council approval of real property acquisitions where the purchase price exceeds $5,000.

Council Fiscal Note December 19, 2016

MB-1 (Res. 113-16) Council District(s)_5_

Mr. Marks

Planned Unit Development – Towson Station

Resolution 113-16 approves the review of a proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) in the 5^th Councilmanic District.

In December 2013, the Council approved a Contract of Sale between CVP-TF, LLC and Baltimore County, Maryland, for the sale of the Towson Fire Academy, County-owned property located at the southwest corner of York Road and Bosley Avenue in Towson.

The total sale price was $8,300,000. A condition of the contract prior to closing is the approval of a PUD for retail and fuel service uses generally consistent with the conceptual site plan and renderings submitted with the buyer=s proposal. The County and the buyer agreed that only the Royal Farm fuel service station and convenience store use must be shown on the PUD plan and that changes may be made to the plan and that the PUD shall be subject to any required design enhancements.

Applicant CVP-TF, LLC submitted an application for review and approval of a 5.80+ acre property, located at 800 York Road in the 5^th Councilmanic District, to be developed as a general development PUD known as Towson Station.

The property is currently zoned BM-CT (Business, Major – Commercial, Town-Center Core), and it is located within the Urban Rural Demarcation Line (URDL). The applicant proposes a subdivision into an approximately 0.38+ acre lot (to be retained by Baltimore County) and an approximately 4.65+ acre lot (the ADevelopment Parcel@), to be developed with an upscale commercial center containing a fuel service station with no more than 12 pumps, retail/restaurant uses, and a convenience store/carry-out restaurant.

The resolution modifies the uses permitted to allow the Development Parcel to be used for these uses.

MB-1 (Res. 113-16) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

The community benefit provided is a contribution of (1) $44,000 to NeighborSpace of Baltimore County, Inc., $40,000 of which is to be used for improvements to the West Towson Trail, as identified in Resolution 43-12, and $4,000 for tree plantings throughout the West Towson community, and (2) $6,000 for two solar-powered speed display signs, one on Stevenson Lane west of York Road and one on Stevenson Lane east of York Road.

The resolution further requires that the project shall be reviewed by the Baltimore County Design Review Panel and that the existing forest habitat buffer between the eastern property line of the project and the Immaculate Conception School’s playing fields shall be preserved.

Resolution 113-16 will be forwarded to the Department of Planning and the Department of Permits, Approvals and Inspections.

Council Fiscal Note December 19, 2016

MB-2 (Res. 135-16) Council District(s)_All_

All Councilmembers

Neighborhood Traffic Management Program

Resolution 135-16 approves the latest revision of the County=s Neighborhood Traffic Management Program.

The Program was first adopted in 2002 after the Council requested that the Planning Board and the Department of Public Works prepare a program, the purpose of which is to improve neighborhood livability by reducing the speeds and impact of vehicular traffic on residential streets.

The Department updated the Program in 2007 pursuant to a Council request.

In April of 2016, the Council requested the Planning Board and the Department of Public Works to review and update the 2007 program with particular emphasis upon the criteria for which roads or streets may qualify for inclusion in the program, and on the question of whether neighborhoods in close proximity to the URDL should be considered for inclusion in the program (Resolution 45-16).

In July 2016, the Department revised the 2007 report in a manner responsive to Resolution 45-16 and presented the report to the Planning Board, which approved the report and submitted it to the County Council on October 26, 2016.

Resolution 135-16 approves the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program, as prepared by the Department of Public Works in July 2016 and adopted by the Planning Board on October 6, 2016. It further requires the Department of Public Works to file an annual report with the County Executive and County Council detailing the status of the implementation of the 2016 Neighborhood Traffic Management Program.

Council Fiscal Note December 19, 2016

MB-3 (Res. 136-16) Council District(s)_All_

Councilmembers Almond & Marks

Support of the Continuation of Statewide Ban – Hydraulic Fracturing

AHydraulic Fracturing@ is a well stimulation technique in which rock is fractured by a pressurized liquid. The process involves the high‑pressure injection of Afracking fluid@ (primarily water, containing sand or other proppants suspended with the aid of thickening agents) into a wellbore to create cracks in the deep‑rock formations through which natural gas, petroleum, and brine will flow more freely. When the hydraulic pressure is removed from the well, small grains of hydraulic fracturing proppants (either sand or aluminum oxide) hold the fractures open. The technique has been utilized for over 60 years, but has evolved into controversy due to the use of high volumes of harmful chemicals resulting in pollutants, the ruination of previously pristine rural communities, and induced seismicity causing minor earthquakes.

The State of Maryland has prohibited the issuance of a permit for the hydraulic fracturing of a well for the exploration or production of natural gas in the state until October 1, 2017.

Resolution 136-16 supports the continuation of a statewide ban on hydraulic fracturing in Maryland.

Resolution 136-16 will take effect on the date of its passage by the County Council.

Tags: Agenda, Baltimore County, Baltimore County Council, county council, district 3, Legislation, Legislative Process, Maryland, Pending Legislation, Public Meeting, Timonium, Towson, wade kach, Zoning

Wade Kach

BALTIMORE COUNTY COUNCIL

OFFICE OF THE COUNTY AUDITOR

PAGE

LEGISLATIVE SESSION

BILLS – FINAL READING

FISCAL MATTERS

MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS

Mrs. Almond (By Req.)

Department of Health and Human Services

Detention Center Pilot Project Naloxone

Fiscal Summary

Funding

County

State (1)

Federal

Other

Total

Analysis

Mrs. Almond (By Req.)

Office of Budget and Finance

Capital Budget

Analysis

Mrs. Almond

Open Space

Mrs. Almond

Transient Occupancy Tax

Mr. Marks

Downtown Towson Overlay District

Councilmembers Marks, Quirk, Almond & Jones

Convenience Stores

Mr. Marks

Zoning Regulations – General Use Regulations in D.R. Zones

Mr. Kach

Commercial Solar Facilities

FM-1 (Contract) Council District(s) All _

Biohazardous and Trauma Clean-up Services

Fiscal Summary

FM-1 (Contract) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

Analysis

FM-1 (Contract) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

FM-2 (Contract Amendment) Council District(s) All _

Office of Information Technology

Software, Maintenance and Support – Content Management Systems

Fiscal Summary

Funding

Source

Contract Amendment

Current

Maximum Compensation

Amended Maximum Compensation

County (1)

State

—

—

Federal

—

—

Other

Total

Analysis

FM-2 (Contract Amendment) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

FM-2 (Contract Amendment) (cont’d) December 19, 2016

FM-3 (Contract Amendment) Council District(s) All _

Office of Information Technology

Design & Engineering Services – Inter-County Broadband Network

Fiscal Summary

Funding

Source

Contract Amendment

Current Maximum Compensation

Amended Maximum Compensation

County (1)

State

—

—

Federal

Other

Total

Analysis

State ⁽¹⁾

County ⁽¹⁾

County ⁽¹⁾

County ⁽¹⁾