BALTIMORE COUNTY COUNCIL
NOTES TO THE AGENDA
LEGISLATIVE SESSION 2015
Issued: May 7, 2015
Work Session: May 12, 2015
Legislative Day No. 10 : May 21, 2015
The accompanying notes are
compiled from unaudited
information provided by
the Administration and
other sources.
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY AUDITOR
BALTIMORE COUNTY COUNCIL
May 21, 2015
NOTES TO THE AGENDA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LEGISLATIVE SESSION
Witnesses …………………………………………………………..ii
BILLS – FINAL READING
Bill 31-15 …………………………………………………………… 1
Bill 35-15 …………………………………………………………… 3
Bill 36-15 …………………………………………………………… 4
Bill 37-15 …………………………………………………………… 5
Bill 38-15 …………………………………………………………… 6
FISCAL MATTERS
FM-1 …………………………………………………………………. 8
FM-2 ……………………………………………………………….. 11
FM-3 ……………………………………………………………….. 16
FM-4 ……………………………………………………………….. 19
FM-5 ……………………………………………………………….. 24
MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
MB-2 (Res. 37-15) …………………………………………….. 27
APPENDIX
Correspondence (1) (a) ………………………………………. 30
i
BALTIMORE COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA
LEGISLATIVE SESSION 2015, LEGISLATIVE DAY NO. 10
MAY 21, 2015 10:00 A.M.
CEB = CURRENT EXPENSE BUDGET
BY REQ. = AT REQUEST OF COUNTY EXECUTIVE
Page
CALL OF BILLS FOR FINAL READING AND VOTE
ANDREA VAN ARSDALE, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
1 Bill 31-15 – Mrs. Bevins(By Req.) – CEB – Baltimore County Elevation Project – MEMA
COUNCIL
3 Bill 35-15 – Mr. Quirk – Zoning Regulations – Scrap Metal Processing Facility
4 Bill 36-15 – Mrs. Almond – Signs – Identification, Wall-Mounted
5 Bill 37-15 – Councilmembers Almond & Jones – Health Care and Surgery Center and Related Uses
6 Bill 38-15 – Mr. Jones – Hucksters and Peddlers
APPROVAL OF FISCAL MATTERS/CONTRACTS
ED ADAMS, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
8 1. Contract – Schwatka Farm Service – Mowing services – DPW
ROBERT STRADLING, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
11 2. Contracts-(2) – Design, installation and maintenance – Access door security systems/video surveillance systems – OIT
16 3. Contract – The Justice Management Institute – Business process analysis – Justice system cases – OIT
19 4. Contract – Southeastern Security Consultants, Inc. – Background checks – Volunteer Applicants – Rec & Parks – OIT
AMY GROSSI , REAL ESTATE COMPLIANCE
24 5. Contract of Sale – Kevin Gilliam – Acquisition of parcel – 3232 Rolling Road – Windsor Mill 21244 – Real Estate Compliance
MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
COUNCIL
30 1. Correspondence – (a)(1) – Non-Competitive Awards (April 1, 2015)
27 2. Res. 37-15 – Mr. Marks – Towson Business Core Design Principles
- Res. 38-15 – Mr. Crandell – Property Tax Exemption – BLIND – Thomas H. Powell
ii
Page 1
Liz Glenn/ Fiscal Note May 21, 2015
Andrea Van Arsdale
Bill 31-15 (Supplemental Appropriation) Council District(s) _6 & 7_
Mrs. Bevins (By Req.)
Department of Planning
Baltimore County Elevation Project – MEMA
The Administration is requesting a supplemental appropriation totaling $592,923, derived from
federal funds ($444,692) and matching funds from the homeowners of five County residences
($148,231), to the Baltimore County Elevation Project – MEMA Gifts and Grants Fund program.
The funds will be used to elevate five Baltimore County residential structures to mitigate the risk
of flooding.
Fiscal Summary
Funding
Source
Supplemental
Appropriation
Current
Appropriation
Total
Appropriation
County — — —
State — — —
Federal (1) $ 444,692 — $ 444,692
Other (2) 148,231 — 148,231
Total $ 592,923 — $ 592,923
(1) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds passed
through the Maryland Emergency Management Agency (MEMA).
(2) Required non-federal match of 25% being met through the homeowners of the five County residences to
be elevated.
Analysis
The purpose of the Baltimore County Elevation Project – MEMA program is to address flood
prevention needs for residences at risk for future flooding. The funds will be used to address
flood prevention needs for the following five County residences:
Page 2
Bill 31-15 (Supplemental Appropriation) (cont’d) May 21, 2015
Property Location Council District
3520 Glenwood Road 6
1440 Burke Road 6
939 Bowleys Quarters Road 6
838 Seneca Park Road 6
1336 E. Riverside Avenue 7
Specifically, the funds will be used to elevate the five properties to 2 feet above base flood
elevation to prevent/mitigate future losses due to flooding. The elevated structures will be built
on a suitable foundation that will reduce the chances of further flood damage. The projects will
involve grading, designing, and constructing an appropriate foundation, and any required
carpentry work (e.g., floors, landings, stairs).
The Department of Planning advised that the state notified all residences located on a flood plain
regarding the availability of the funds; the homeowners then had to apply and the funding was
awarded on a first-come, first-served basis. In order to qualify, the residence must be located on
a flood plain and the project cost must be less than $175,000. The individual homeowners
selected the contractors to perform the elevation projects. Structural assessments have
determined that the structures are safe for elevating.
MEMA will administer the grant, and the County will provide project management, oversight, and
inspection.
The grant period is 3 years through February 6, 2018. The total project cost is $592,923. The
grant provides FEMA funds totaling 75% of the project cost, or $444,692. The grant requires a
25% non-federal match, or $148,231, which will be met by the five homeowners.
With the affirmative vote of five members of the County Council, Bill 31-15 will take effect June 3,
2015.
Page 3
Council Fiscal Note May 21, 2015
Bill 35-15 Council District(s) _All_
Mr. Quirk
Zoning Regulations – Scrap Metal processing Facility
Bill 35-15 proposes to permit a scrap metal processing facility in the County’s M.H.
(Manufacturing, Heavy) Zones, as a matter of right, subject to certain conditions.
The bill defines a scrap metal processing facility as an establishment that is engaged primarily in
the purchase, typically by weight, of ferrous or non-ferrous scrap for processing by the use of a
shredder affixed to the property, powered by electricity with a minimum capacity of 3,000 kva
distributed by a public utility, the output of which is shipped as raw material to be used for melting
purposes by steel mills, foundries, smelters, refiners, and similar users.
The following conditions apply:
The facility must be located on a property of at least 7 contiguous acres; retail sales are
not permitted; and scrap vehicles shall be processed within 48 hours of receipt, unless a
delay is caused by equipment breakage, electrical interruption, or manufacturer-required
preventive maintenance.
With the affirmative vote of five members of the County Council and signature by the County
Executive, Bill 35-15 will take effect on June 1, 2015.
Page 4
Council Fiscal Note May 21, 2015
Bill 36-15 Council District(s) _All_
Mrs. Almond
Signs – Identification, Wall-Mounted
Bill 36-15 proposes to amend the sign regulations to permit an identification sign on the campus
of a private college.
An identification sign is a sign that displays the name or purpose of a place or structure.
Bill 36-15 will permit one wall-mounted identification sign as an accessory use to a stadium located
on the campus of a private college. The maximum permitted sign area is 300 sq. ft.; there is no
height limitation. The sign must be installed on a wall of the stadium. Changeable copy is not
permitted, but the sign may be illuminated.
With the affirmative vote of five members of the County Council and signature by the County
Executive, Bill 36-15 will take effect on June 3, 2015.
Page 5
Council Fiscal Note May 21, 2015
Bill 37-15 Council District(s) _All_
Councilmembers Almond & Jones
Health Care and Surgery Center and Related Uses
Bill 37-15 proposes to permit a health care and surgery center in the OR-2 (Office Building –
Residential) and B.M. (Business, Major) Zones of the County as a matter of right.
A health care and surgery center is defined as one or more buildings at which comprehensive
health care services are provided through persons or entities licensed under either the Health
General or Health Occupations Article of the Annotated Code of Maryland.
A center is subject to the following requirements:
- Ambulatory surgery and radiology services shall be provided;
- At least 75% of the medical and surgical specialities or subspecialities recognized by the
American Board of Medical Specialities shall be provided;
- Health care services shall be provided 7 days per week and 365 days per year;
- The center shall have at least four operating rooms; and
- The gross floor area of the center, which includes all buildings, shall be at least 150,000
- ft., with a minimum of 10,000 sq. ft. of radiology space, but no more than 400,000 sq.
- in total.
Bill 37-15 also provides that:
- Several accessory uses are also permitted in the OR-2 Zone: a wellness, health and fitness
center, a florist, and an optician or optometrist establishment.
- A drugstore, or an optician or optometrist establishment in an OR-2 Zone is not subject to
the 1,500 sq. ft. floor area limitation.
- There is no amenity open space requirement for a health care and surgery center in an
OR-2 Zone, and the performance standards for office buildings apply to the center.
- The minimum number of off-street parking spaces required for a center is four for each
1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area.
- A health care and surgery center is not subject to Basic Services mapping standards.
With the affirmative vote of five members of the County Council and signature by the County
Executive, Bill 37-15 will take effect on June 1, 2015.
Page 6
Council Fiscal Note May 21, 2015
Bill 38-15 Council District(s) _All_
Mr. Jones
Hucksters and Peddlers
Bill 38-15 changes a certain part of the laws relating to door-to-door soliciting.
Baltimore County has regulated hucksters and peddlers since 1937. The regulatory statute has
not changed significantly over the years.
To summarize the statute: in order to sell goods or services on the street, or door-to-door, a person
must obtain a license from the Clerk of the Court. Farmers selling their own products are exempt.
The person must display the license. He may not maintain a sidewalk stand, but must
continuously move. A person may not sell near school property, or on County-owned property,
without the approval of the Administrative Officer. Criminal penalties and fines attach to any
violation of the statute.
In 2010, the Council placed the following additional restrictions on door-to-door sales in residential
areas (Bill 84-10).
- If a person has displayed a “no soliciting” sign, or a sign containing similar words, on his
residential property, a vendor may not sell or offer to sell anything to the occupant of that
property.
- The above prohibition applies to all residences in a neighborhood or community if a “no
soliciting” sign, or similar sign, is displayed at each vehicle entrance to the neighborhood
or community.
- A vendor may not sell or offer to sell anything to the occupant of any residential property
before 9 a.m. or after 5 p.m., or sunset on any day, whichever is earlier, sunset being
defined as the time identified by the national weather service for that day in the Baltimore
Metropolitan area.
Page 7
Bill 38-15 (cont’d) May 21, 2015
Therefore, in residential communities, soliciting is prohibited at all times in a community that is
posted. Soliciting is prohibited at all times at any individual residence that is posted. And soliciting
is prohibited in all residential communities, whether posted or not, before 9 a.m. or after 5 p.m.,
or sunset, whichever is earlier.
Bill 38-15 proposes to delete the reference to 5 p.m., thus prohibiting soliciting in residential
communities after sunset, at whatever time that may occur.
The 2010 legislation was prompted by complaints about soliciting after dark. The sponsor feels
that Bill 84-10 dealt with that issue by empowering communities and individual homeowners to
prohibit soliciting at any time of day by posting a sign to that effect. For those individuals or
communities who do not wish to post a specific prohibition, the prohibition on soliciting after sunset
was included in the statute. However, the 5 p.m. reference in the current law simply confuses the
issue by permitting soliciting in unposted communities at differing times, depending upon the
season of the year. The 5 p.m. reference is deleted in favor of a blanket prohibition on soliciting
after sunset.
Additionally, Bill 38-15 proposes to exempt from the law all school-age children who are engaged
in fund-raising activities.
This bill will take effect 45 days after its enactment.
Page 8
Ed Adams Fiscal Note May 21, 2015
FM-1 (Contract) Council District(s) 3, 4 & 6_
Department of Public Works
Mowing Services
The Administration is requesting approval of a contract with Schwatka Farm Service to provide
mowing services at the County’s landfills on an as-needed basis. The contract commenced June
18, 2014, continues until July 17, 2015, and may not exceed $25,000 unless approved by the
Council. If approved, the contract will continue through February 28, 2016 and will automatically
renew for three additional 1-year periods. The contract does not specify a maximum
compensation for the initial approximate 1-year and 8½-month term. Compensation may not
exceed $222,414 for the entire approximate 4-year and 8½-month term, including the renewal
periods.
Fiscal Summary
Funding
Source
Maximum
Compensation Notes
County (1) $ 222,414 (1) General Fund Operating Budget.
(2) Maximum compensation for the entire approximate 4-year
and 8½-month term, including the State — renewal periods.
Federal —
Other —
Total $ 222,414 (2)
Analysis
The contractor will provide all labor, materials, supervision, equipment, fuel/oil, incidentals, and
mobilization for mowing services at the Hernwood, Parkton, Texas, and Eastern Sanitary landfills
on an as-needed basis. The contractor will provide two to six mows at each location during the
mowing season (April through November).
Page 9
FM-1 (Contract) (cont’d) May 21, 2015
The costs of mowing services per landfill site are as follows:
Landfill
Cost per
Mowing
Texas $ 749
Parkton 1,210
Hernwood 3,019
Eastern Sanitary 3,622
The Department advised that County workers will continue to mow the grass at the Parkton and
Eastern Sanitary landfills and will use the contractor as a back-up resource.
The contract commenced June 18, 2014, continues until July 17, 2015, and may not exceed
$25,000 unless approved by the Council. If approved, the contract will continue through February
28, 2016 and will automatically renew for three additional 1-year periods on the same terms and
conditions, unless the County provides notice of non-renewal. The contract does not specify a
maximum compensation for the initial approximate 1-year and 8½-month term. Compensation
may not exceed $222,414 for the entire approximate 4-year and 8½-month term, including the
renewal periods.
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, 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.
On October 7, 2013, the Council approved a 5-year and 3-month contract not to exceed $269,277
with Vantage Management Systems, Inc. to provide mowing services at the County’s landfills.
The contract was awarded through a competitive procurement process based on the lowest
responsive bid from three bids received. The Department advised that the County terminated the
contract in June 2014 due to non-performance; expenditures under the Vantage Management
contract totaled $4,233. The Department also advised that in order to continue providing services,
it entered into a contract with Schwatka Farm Service, who was the second lowest bidder. As of
April 29, 2015, expenditures under the proposed contract with Schwatka Farm Service total
Page 10
FM-1 (Contract) (cont’d) May 21, 2015
$12,652. Schwatka Farm Service previously provided these services under a contract not to
exceed $234,397 that expired July 6, 2013.
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….”
Page 11
Rob Stradling Fiscal Note May 21, 2015
FM-2 (2 Contracts) Council District(s) All_
Office of Information Technology
Access Door Security Systems/Video Surveillance Systems
The Administration is requesting approval of two contracts to provide design, installation, and
maintenance services for card access door security systems and video surveillance systems at
County buildings. The two contractors are Easter’s Lock & Access, Inc. d/b/a Homeland Security
Group, Inc. (primary contractor) and Stanley Convergent Security Solutions, Inc. (secondary
contractor). The contracts commenced March 24, 2015, continue until May 21, 2015, and may
not exceed $25,000 unless approved by the Council. If approved, the contracts will continue
through March 23, 2016 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 contracts
do not specify a maximum compensation for the initial 1-year term. Compensation for both
contractors combined may not exceed $9.0 million ($4.5 million each) for the entire 5-year and 3-
month term, including the renewal and extension periods. See Exhibits A and B.
Fiscal Summary
Funding
Source
Combined
Maximum
Compensation Notes
County (1) $ 9,000,000 (1) General Fund Operating Budget.
(2) Maximum compensation for both contractors combined ($4.5
million each) for the entire 5-year and 3-month term,
including the renewal and extension periods. The contracts
do not specify a maximum compensation for the initial 1-year
term.
State —
Federal —
Other —
Total $ 9,000,000 (2)
Page 12
FM-2 (2 Contracts) (cont’d) May 21, 2015
Analysis
The contractors will provide design, installation, and maintenance services for card access door
security and video surveillance systems at County-owned buildings. The contractors will provide
all necessary hardware and software for the security systems including door access, cameras,
network video recorder (NVR) cabling, and any other peripheral required. Easter’s Lock &
Access, Inc. will serve as the primary contractor, and Stanley Convergent Security Solutions, Inc.
will serve as the secondary contractor. The Office advised that a secondary contractor is needed
due to the volume of work and to provide specific expertise. Hourly rates range from $65 to $85
for Easter’s Lock & Access, Inc. and from $65 to $105 for Stanley Convergent Security Solutions,
Inc., depending on the worker’s skill level and time status (regular or overtime). Equipment will
be billed at a 30% and 22% mark-up, respectively.
The contracts commenced March 24, 2015, continue until May 21, 2015, and may not exceed
$25,000 unless approved by the Council. If approved, the contracts will continue through March
23, 2016 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. The contracts do not specify a
maximum compensation for the initial 1-year term. Compensation for both contractors combined
may not exceed $9.0 million ($4.5 million each) for the entire 5-year and 3-month term, including
the renewal and extension periods. The Office advised that as of May 6, 2015, no expenditures
have been incurred under either 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 agreements by providing
30 days prior written notice.
The contracts were awarded through a competitive procurement process based on technical
qualifications, experience, and cost from four bids received.
On July 1, 2013, the Council approved a 2-year and 3-month contract with Skyline Network
Engineering, LLC not to exceed $1.8 million to provide similar services for remote video and
Page 13
FM-2 (2 Contracts) (cont’d) May 21, 2015
building security systems. The contract expires May 23, 2015. The Office advised that
expenditures as of May 6, 2015 total $807,939. Easter’s Lock & Access Systems, Inc. is used as
a subcontractor under the contract.
On August 4, 2008, the Council approved a 10-year contract with Stanley Convergent Security
Solutions, Inc. not to exceed $2,336,863 for maintenance and repair services for the security
system at the Baltimore County Detention Center. As of April 28, 2015, $1,018,234 has been
expended under this contract.
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….”
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Rob Stradling Fiscal Note May 21, 2015
FM-3 (Contract) Council District(s) All_
Office of Information Technology
Business Process Analysis – Justice System Cases
The Administration is requesting approval of a contract with The Justice Management Institute to
perform a business process analysis of the justice system for all case types (i.e., civil, criminal,
family, juvenile delinquency, and juvenile dependency) within the Circuit Court of Baltimore
County with the goal of process improvement in several areas of the system. The contract
commenced March 13, 2015, continues until May 29, 2015, and may not exceed $25,000 unless
approved by the Council. If approved, the contract will continue through October 30, 2015 with
the option to extend the term an additional 90 days. Compensation may not exceed $92,087 for
the entire approximate 10½-month term, including the extension period. See Exhibit A.
Fiscal Summary
Funding
Source
Maximum
Compensation Notes
County (1) $ 92,087 (1) General Fund Operating Budget.
(2) Maximum compensation for the entire approximate 10½-
month term, including the State — extension period.
Federal —
Other —
Total $ 92,087 (2)
Analysis
The Justice Management Institute will perform a business process analysis of the justice system
for all case types (i.e., civil, criminal, family, juvenile delinquency, and juvenile dependency) within
the Baltimore County Circuit Court. The goal of the analysis is to improve the following: scheduling
and managing caseloads; improving staff coordination efficiencies; and enhancing the efficiencies
of case file management. The contractor will identify opportunities for improving operational
Page 17
FM-3 (Contract) (cont’d) May 21, 2015
efficiency in both case management and case file management; access staffing levels of the
court’s primary agencies and potentially make recommendations to improve workload
management through resource sharing or reallocation; recommend methods of scheduling cases
in a more consistent manner throughout the day and week to lessen the impact of peak workload
times on staff capacity; recommend methods of lessening postponements; and recommend
methods of standardizing any implemented changes.
The analysis includes the Circuit Court and the Clerk of the Court, and the impact of their
operations on the Sheriff’s Office and the State’s Attorney’s Office.
The contract commenced March 13, 2015, continues until May 29, 2015, and may not exceed
$25,000 unless approved by the Council. If approved, the contract will continue through October
30, 2015 with the option to extend the term an additional 90 days on the same terms and
conditions, unless the County provides notice of non-renewal. Compensation may not exceed
$92,087 for the entire approximate 10½-month term, including the extension period. The County
may terminate the contract by providing 30 days prior written notice. The Office advised that
services incurred by the contractor through May 29, 2015 will not exceed $24,118.
The County awarded the contract on a non-competitive basis since The Justice Management
Institute has been engaged by the Maryland Administrative Office of the Courts to develop the
Case Flow Management System (CFMS) curriculum, and is the designated provider of training of
the CFMS for every Circuit and District Court in Maryland. The Office advised that the contractor’s
intimate knowledge of both the CFMS and understanding of all case types provides the County
with access to information otherwise not available within a time-line that meets the County’s
needs. The Office is requesting that the 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.”
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….”
Page 18
Page 19
Rob Stradling Fiscal Note May 21, 2015
FM-4 (Contract) Council District(s) All_
Office of Information Technology
Background Checks – Volunteer Applicants
The Administration is requesting approval of a contract with Southeastern Security Consultants,
Inc. to conduct background checks of applicants volunteering at sanctioned recreation council
programs and events. The contract commences upon Council approval, continues through
January 30, 2016, 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 approximate 8½-month term. Maximum
compensation may not exceed $1,840,000 for the entire approximate 4-year and 11½-month
term, including the renewal and extension periods. See Exhibit A.
Fiscal Summary
Funding
Source
Maximum
Compensation Notes
County (1) $ 1,840,000 (1) General Fund Operating Budget.
(2) Maximum compensation for the entire approximate 4-
year and 11½-month month term, including the
extension period.
State —
Federal —
Other —
Total $ 1,840,000 (2)
Analysis
On May 4, 2014, the County Council passed Bill 20-14, requiring background records checks for
certain volunteers at sanctioned recreation council programs and events. In particular, the bill
requires the Director of the Department of Recreation and Parks to establish a background check
policy and process by July 1, 2015. As part of this policy and process, the bill requires that any
volunteer who interacts with children in any program or event sanctioned by a certified recreation
Page 20
FM-4 (Contract) (cont’d) May 21, 2015
council be screened with a background records check as a condition of participation in the
program or event. It also states that the policy may identify the specific offenses for which a
charge or conviction would disqualify a volunteer from participating in programs or events
sanctioned by the recreation councils, and indicate whether the disqualification is permanent or
for a specific period of time.
Southeastern Security Consultants, Inc. will conduct background checks for all applicants
volunteering to provide services to the County’s youth programs under the Recreation and Nature
Councils, including national records searches and physical searches of state and local court
records. The contractor will develop and implement a web-based software program through which
applicants will provide information necessary to initiate a background check, and will provide the
staff to oversee the background checks for all applicants.
The County has identified the following criteria that would disqualify a person from volunteering:
inclusion on the national sex registry; or being guilty within the last 5 years of first degree felony
assault, possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute, or indecent exposure. The
Department advised that all volunteer applicants’ information will be confidentially maintained.
The names of those applicants who pass the background check will be sent to the Department of
Recreation and Parks within two to three business days and published on the County website.
The names of those applicants who fail the background check will not be shared with the
Department, and the contractor will notify the applicant directly. All volunteers will be screened
on an annual basis.
The Department of Recreation and Parks estimates that 20,000 to 24,000 volunteers, including
coaches, assistant coaches, and anyone who would have direct contact with children, support
various recreation and nature programs each year. The contractor will be paid $14 per
background check.
The contract commences upon Council approval, continues through January 30, 2016, 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. The contract does not specify a maximum compensation
for the initial approximate 8½ -month term. Maximum compensation may not exceed $1,840,000
for the entire approximate 4-year and 11½-month term, including the renewal and extension
periods. The County may terminate the agreement by providing 30 days prior written notice.
Page 21
FM-4 (Contract) (cont’d) May 21, 2015
The contract was awarded as a piggyback of an existing competitively bid Orange County,
California contract awarded on January 30, 2015.
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….”
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Amy Grossi Fiscal Note May 21, 2015
FM-5 (Contract) Council District(s) __4__
Department of Permits, Approvals and Inspections
Acquisition of Parcel – 3232 Rolling Road
The Administration is requesting approval of a contract to acquire property totaling 0.076 acre for
$17,500 to be used for the widening of Rolling Road in Windsor Mill. Kevin Gilliam currently owns
the property, which is located at 3232 Rolling Road. The property is zoned DR-5.5 (Density
Residential – 5.5 dwelling units/acre) and will be used for highway widening and various easement
areas. See Exhibit A.
Fiscal Summary
Funding
Source
Purchase
Price Notes
County (1) $ 17,500 (1) Capital Projects Fund.
State —
Federal —
Other —
Total $ 17,500
Analysis
- David Nantz, staff appraiser, completed an appraisal of the property in August 2014,
recommending a value of $13,408. After review and analysis, David B. Johns, review appraiser,
concurred with the appraisal, recommending the respective amount as just compensation for the
acquisition. The Department of Permits, Approvals and Inspections – Real Estate Compliance
Division advised that the property owner rejected the County’s offer of $13,408, and upon further
negotiation, the amount of $17,500 was deemed acceptable to the County.
Page 25
FM-5 (Contract) (cont’d) May 21, 2015
The 0.076-acre property to be acquired is part of a 0.41-acre property consisting of two parcels,
of which one is residentially improved with a detached frame dwelling, and the other is
unimproved. The purchase price of $17,500 includes $725 for the adverse impact on the
landscaping, $495 for the loss of a portion of the macadam driveway, and $2,750 for
consequential damages as a result of the highway widening area, which will require the property
owner to apply for zoning variances in order to acquire a building permit.
The Department advised that 129 acquisitions are needed for this project, 83 of which require
Council approval. As of May 4, 2015, the Council has approved 36 property acquisitions and two
condemnations for this project. The Department also advised that a total of 64 properties still
need to be acquired for this project, of which 45 will require Council approval, not including this
acquisition.
The widening of Rolling Road consists of two phases: Phase I is from Orchard Avenue to Windsor
Mill Road; Phase II is from Orchard Avenue to Liberty Road and Windsor Boulevard to the south
side of Windsor Mill Road. Estimated project costs total $13 million, including $10 million for
construction ($5 million each for Phases I and II). As of April 28, 2015, $3,491,703 has been
expended/encumbered for this project, excluding the cost of this acquisition. The Department
advised that an anticipated construction date is not currently available.
County Charter, Section 715, requires Council approval of real property acquisitions where the
purchase price exceeds $5,000.
Page 26
Page 27
Council Fiscal Note May 21, 2015
MB-2 (Res. 37-15) Council District(s) 5_
Mr. Marks
Towson Business Core Design Principles
Resolution 37-15 proposes to amend the Towson Business Core Design Principles.
In July, 2011, the Council created an alternative review process for development plans in the
Towson business core (Bill 38-11). The Towson business core includes the area depicted on the
attached map (see Exhibit A). The purpose of the bill was to encourage redevelopment in this
area.
Under the alternative process, a development plan is filed as a limited exemption and reviewed
by the Design Review Panel which may approve, deny, or modify the plan. The Panel’s decision
is binding.
The Panel must apply the design principles that the Council approved in Resolution 64-11,
concurrently with the adoption of Bill 38-11.
Resolution 37-15 proposes to amend the Towson Business Core Design Principles that apply to
building placement, building height, streetscape dimensions, and window treatments, generally
by way of easing these restrictions.
Resolution 37-15 will take effect from the date of its passage by the County Council.
Page 29
BALTIMORE COUNTY COUNCIL
NOTES TO THE AGENDA
APPENDIX A
Page 30