HomeMy WebLinkAbout230711aJohn F. Barr, President
Jeffrey A. Cline, Vice President
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
July 11, 2023
OPEN SESSION AGENDA
9:00 AM INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CALL TO ORDER, President John F. Barr
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: June 27, 2023
9:05 AM COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS AND COMMENTS
9:15 AM STAFF COMMENTS
9:20 AM CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
9:30 AM 2023 AUGUSTOBERFEST
Jill Colbert, Chairwoman, Augustoberfest; Cody Hill, Marketing and Communications
Chair, Augustoberfest
9:45 AM EXPRESS APPROVAL – CITY OF HAGERSTOWN ANNEXATION FOR BLAINE
PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND ALL OF THE LANDS OF
EDWARD A. BLAINE REVOCABLE TRUST OF 1991
Jill Baker, Director, Planning and Zoning; William C. Wantz, Esquire
10:15 AM FY25 FAMILY LAW FUND – APPROVAL TO SUBMIT APPLICATION AND
ACCEPT AWARDED FUNDING
Kristin Grossnickle, Court Administrator, Circuit Court for Washington County;
Nicole Phillips, Grant Manager, Grant Management
10:25 AM INVESTMENT POLICY STATEMENT UPDATE
Michelle Gordon, Acting County Administrator; Patrick Wing, Marquette Associates
10:30 AM CONSTRUCTION BID AWARD – DOGSTREET ROAD CULVERT
REPLACEMENT
Scott Hobbs, Director, Engineering
10:35 AM BID AWARD (PUR-1619) CONOCOCHEAGUE WIN-911 UPGRADE
Rick Curry, Director, Purchasing; Mark Bradshaw, Director, Environmental
Management
CONTRACT AWARD (PUR-1606) MARTIN LUTHER KING (MLK) NATURAL
GAS AND MECHANICAL UPGRADES
Rick Curry, Director, Purchasing; Andrew Eshleman, Director, Public Works
Derek Harvey
Wayne K. Keefer
Randall E. Wagner
Page 2 of 2
OPEN Session Agenda
July 11, 2023
Individuals requiring special accommodations are requested to contact the Office of the County Commissioners, 240.313.2200
Voice/TDD, to make arrangements no later than ten (10) working days prior to the meeting.
10:45 AM CONTRACT AWARD (PUR-1607) – MARTIN LUTHER KING (MLK)
ELECTRICAL UPGRADES
Brandi Naugle, Buyer, Purchasing; Andrew Eshleman, Director, Public Works
REJECTION OF BID (PUR-1626) – PURCHASE OR LEASE AND SUPPLYING OF
GOLF CARTS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY’S BLACK ROCK GOLF COURSE
Brandi Naugle, Buyer, Purchasing; Andrew Eshleman, Director, Public Works
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATIVE PURCHASE PRICE INCREASE
(INTG-20-0030) UNIFORM RENTAL SERVICE FOR VARIOUS COUNTY
DEPARTMENTS
Brandi Naugle, Buyer, Purchasing
10:55 AM WATER LINE FUNDING MEMORANDUM (MOU) WITH THE TOWN OF
HANCOCK AND BRUCETON FARM SERVICES, INC.
Michelle Gordon, Acting County Administrator; Kirk Downey, County Attorney
11:05 AM POTENTIONAL DISSOLUTION OF THE EMERGENCY SERVICES ADVISORY
COUNCIL (ESAC)
Michelle Gordon, Acting County Administrator
11:15 AM MOU WITH CITY OF HAGERSTOWN REGARDING OUTSTANDING
EMERGENCY COMMUNICATION DISPATCHER COSTS
Michelle Gordon, Acting County Administrator
11:25 AM CLOSED SESSION - (To discuss the appointment, employment, assignment, promotion,
discipline, demotion, compensation, removal, resignation, or performance evaluation of appointees, employees,
or officials over whom this public body has jurisdiction; or any other personnel matter that affects one or more
specific individuals; To consider the acquisition of real property for a public purpose and matters directly
related thereto; To consider a matter that concerns the proposal for a business or industrial organization to
locate, expand, or remain in the State; To consult with counsel to obtain legal advice on a legal matter; To
consult with staff, consultants, or other individuals about pending or potential litigation; To conduct collective
bargaining negotiations or consider matters that related to the negotiations; and To discuss cybersecurity, if
the public body determines that public discussion would constitute a risk to: (i) security assessments or
deployments relating to information resources technology; (ii) network security information; or (iii)
deployments or implementation of security personnel, critical infrastructure, or security devices)
12:20 PM RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION
ADJOURNMENT
THE COMMISSIONERS TO TOUR BEACON HOUSE AT
20 WEST WASHINGTON STREET, SUITE B100, HAGERSTOWN, MARYLAND 21740
IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE MEETING.
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: 2023 Augustoberfest
PRESENTATION DATE: July 11, 2023
PRESENTATION BY: Jill Colbert, Augustoberfest Chairwoman, Cody Hill, Augustoberfest
Marketing and Communications Chair
RECOMMENDED MOTION: N/A
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: N/A
DISCUSSION: We want to thank them for their support last year, update them on the event this year
including our grant request that will have been submitted by the meeting, and to invite them to the event
this year.
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Express Approval – City of Hagerstown Annexation for Blaine Properties Limited
Partnership & All of the Lands of Edward A. Blaine Revocable Trust of 1991
PRESENTATION DATE: July 11, 2023
PRESENTATION BY: Jill Baker, Director, Department of Planning and Zoning; William C.
Wantz, Esquire
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to grant/deny express approval for the development
of subject parcels for the stated annexation.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The basis for seeking Washington County Commissioners express
approval of this annexation comes from the Local Government Article of Maryland’s Annotated
Code §4-416(b) which states:
“Without the express approval of the county commissioners or county council of the county in
which the municipality is located, for 5 years after an annexation by a municipality, the
municipality may not allow development of the annexed land for land uses substantially different
than the authorized use, or at a substantially higher density, not exceeding 50%, than could be
granted for the proposed development, in accordance with the zoning classification of the county
applicable at the time of the annexation.”
DISCUSSION: The subject parcels, consisting of 28.35 acres, have petitioned the City of
Hagerstown for annexation within municipal boundaries with a proposed zoning of Residential –
Medium Density (RMED). Currently, under County zoning, the parcels are zoned Residential,
Transitional (RT).
The County RT zoning is primarily a residential zoning that allows for low density residential
uses (single family and two-family dwellings), schools, and childcare centers. The Town RMED
zoning regulations also permit residential uses but at a higher density than that of the County.
The City RMED zoning permits, by right, triplexes, quadplexes and townhouse uses whereas the
County RT zoning does not. When an average of the two zoning districts are compared the
County density equates to approximately 4.02 dwelling units per acre whereas the city zoning
density equates to about 12.02 units per acre. This difference far exceeds the legislative
definition of 50% and therefore prohibits new development from occurring on the property that
is substantially different for a period of five (5) years unless express approval is granted by the
Board of County Commissioners. Granting express approval of the proposed zoning district
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
would waive the 5-year period and allow development of a substantially different manner to
move forward immediately.
A public hearing was held on May 23, 2023 by the Mayor and Council to take comment on the
annexation petition. Two people spoke at the hearing and cited concerns about new growth and
impacts from additional development including impacts on roads, schools, water and sewer.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not granting express approval could delay development on the subject
property and thereby inhibit new tax revenue.
CONCURRENCES:
ALTERNATIVES:
ATTACHMENTS: Town Annexation Plan; Zoning Exhibit; County Express Approval Letter
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: Zoning Exhibit
1
City of Hagerstown, Maryland
Annexation Case No. A-2023-02
Property Owners: Blaine Properties LP and the Edward A. Blaine Revocable Trust
of 1991
Applicant: Burkentine Real Estate Group
Location of Property: McDade Road (Tax Map 36 Parcel 12 and 430)
Annexation Plan
Pursuant to the Annotated Code of Maryland, Local Government Article, Section 4-415,
herewith is a proposed outline for extension of services and public facilities into the areas
proposed to be annexed.
It is also noted that any future amendments to the Annexation Plan may not be construed in
any way as an amendment to the resolution, nor may they serve in any manner to cause a re-
initiation of the annexation procedure then in process.
I. Land Use Patterns of Areas Proposed to be Annexed
A. The area of annexation is approximately +/- 28.347 acres.
B. The proposed zoning is RMED (Residential-Medium Density). The parcel located to the
east of the Property is a Planned Unit Development that is zoned RMED and exists as a
medium density community. The intended purpose of the Property is to provide a
townhome community consisting of 174 units, which is consistent with the adjacent city
neighborhood. The property is designated as Medium Density on the City’s Future Land
Use Map which identifies RMOD (Residential-Moderate Density), RMED (Residential-
Medium Density), or RO (Residential-Office) as compatible zoning districts. The RMED
zoning classification proposed for this site allows uses permitted in the County’s
current zoning of RT (Residential Transitional), plus townhomes which are not
permitted in RT without an overlay zone.
C. It is within the City’s Medium Range Growth Area, an area intended for new or
expanded water and wastewater service based on development potential, as defined in
the City’s 2018 Comprehensive Plan, visionHagerstown 2035.
2
D. It is within the County’s Urban Growth Boundary and the State’s designated Priority
Funding Area.
II. Availability of Land Needed for Public Facilities
A. The uses of the annexation area will be residential in nature and the tract is within the
Washington County Public Schools (WCPS) system’s school attendance boundaries for
Jonathan Hager Elementary School, Western Heights Middle School, and North
Hagerstown High School. Per the December 2022 enrollment report from WCPS,
Jonathan Hager Elementary School was over capacity by 48 students, Western Heights
Middle School was under by 95 students, and North Hagerstown High School was over
by 5 students. Per the WCPS FY 2023 Facilities Master Plan and the County’s FY 2023
Capital Improvement budget, there are plans for a replacement elementary school in
the system with local funding planned for FY 2025-2027. The WCPS planner
anticipates that the proposed development would severely impact the existing schools
ability to accommodate the additional students. Development of the annexation area
will generate revenues for the County which could be earmarked for school capacity
enhancement funding from excise tax on all building permits and from real property tax
payments on all new homes.
B. The uses of the annexation area will be residential in nature and residents resulting
from development of the land would be served by the Washington County Free Library.
The central library in Downtown Hagerstown was expanded in 2011-2013 to better
serve our community.
III. Schedule and Method of Financing the Extension of Each Municipal Service
Currently Performed Within the City of Hagerstown into the Area Proposed
to be Annexed
A. The area of annexation is currently not served by City Water or Wastewater. The
property will be served by City Water upon annexation. The property would be served
with wastewater either by the County along McDade Road or as an amendment to the
Joint Sewer Service Agreement (JSSA) Area through Hager’s Crossing. Further
assessment of the appropriate approach would need to be made by the Utilities
Departments. Sufficient capacity exists to serve the property.
B. Extension of sanitary sewer, water and storm drain lines, streets, curbs, gutters and all
other public improvements, not currently existing, which may be required by the City to
3
be installed constructed and maintained as part of the development or re-development
of the area of annexation, shall be that the expense of the then owner(s) or
developer(s) of the area of annexation requesting same, and shall be at no cost to the
City.
C. The Electric Distribution System is external to the Hagerstown Light Department
electric utility operating territory. Electric utility service is provided by the Potomac
Edison Company of First Energy.
D. The area of annexation contains a vacant house and farmland. The property will be
served by existing emergency medical services provided by Meritus Medical Center,
Community Rescue Service, Inc., and the City of Hagerstown Fire Department.
E. The area proposed for annexation fronts McDade Road and Swann Road. No change to
current ownership or service is proposed. Any public roads constructed in the future
within the area of annexation will be completed at the direction of the City Engineer at
the developer’s expense and constructed per the City’s Public Ways Construction
Standards by the developer.
F. Parks and recreation facility expansion are not proposed for this annexation. The
property is nearby to Jonathan Hager Elementary School which includes a playground
open to the public.
G. Police protection will be provided by the Hagerstown Police Department. Fire
protection will be provided by the Hagerstown Fire Department.
H. Maintenance (i.e. snow removal, mowing of right-of-ways, litter removal) of McDade
Road and Swann Road is performed by Washington County. Any public roads
constructed in the future within the area of annexation will be maintained by the City
Public Works Department.
I. All future persons within the area proposed to be annexed shall obtain or be entitled to
existing benefits of the City of Hagerstown. They shall also be required to pay for all
applicable utility services, charges, assessments, taxes, and other costs and expenses
which are required of the residents of the City of Hagerstown, unless alternative
arrangements are provided for the Annexation Resolution.
EXHIBIT #3
Washington
vi76
M A R Y L A N D
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING &ZONING
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING LAND PRESERVATION FOREST CONSERVATION GIS
May 18, 2023
The Honorable Tekesha Martinez, Mayor
City of Hagerstown, City Hall
1 E. Franklin Street
Hagerstown, MD 21740
Re: Annexation Resolution No. A-2023-02
Dear Mayor Martinez,
Thank you for providing the Board of County Commissioners of Washington County with information
pertaining to the annexation of land located along McDade Road (Tax map 36 Parcels 12, 315, 319 & 430)
including land owned by Blaine Properties LP and the Edward A. Blaine Revocable Trust of 1991. We have
reviewed the annexation information and have the following comments to offer.
1. It is understood that the City of Hagerstown does not regulate school impacts from development
under their adopted Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. However, the impacts from this
development and others occurring within City limits cannot be ignored since they impact the
school district as a whole. We would encourage the City to revisit their current policies regarding
school adequacy determinations and work with the County to develop reasonable mitigation
plans for new residential development.
2. As you are aware, the Local Government Article of the Annotated Code of Maryland §4-416(b)
states that the proposed zoning to be applied to the newly annexed parcels cannot be
substantially different from the existing County zoning. The subject parcels of this annexation
currently have a County zoning of Residential, Transitional (RT). The annexation plan states that
the City intends to apply Residential — Medium Density (RMED) zoning to the properties upon the
effective date of the annexation.
Both the County RT zoning and the City RMED zoning are primarily residential zoning districts that
principally permit single family and two family/duplex uses. However, the City RMED zoning also
allows for higher density residential uses including triplexes, quadplexes, and townhouses. Both
County and Town zoning regulations also permit a variety of public administration services and
limited commercial uses.
When comparing the density of the two zoning districts, we averaged the minimum lot sizes per
unit in each of the two ordinances to compare overall permissible residential density. Our
100 West Washington Street, Suite 2600 Hagerstown, MD 21740 240.313.2430 240.313.2431 j TDO: 7-1-1
WWW.WASHCO-MD.NET
calculations show that the County RT zone has an average density of 4.02 dwelling units per acre
while the City RMED zone has an average density of 12.02 dwelling units per acre. This equates
to increase in potential density by approximately 199%. Based upon our review of the two districts
there does not appear to be a significant difference in uses, however, there is a significant increase
in residential density above the 50% prescribed by State law.
Therefore, in accordance with §4-416 of the Land Use Article the municipality may not allow
development substantially different or of a substantially higher density (over 50%) of the annexed
land for a period of five (5) years following the annexation. Should the developer wish to proceed
with a project that would be substantially higher in density prior to the five-year waiting period
elapsing, they may petition the Board of County Commissioners to grant express approval of their
project. The developer may contact my office for further instructions on how to apply for the
express approval process through the County.
If you have any questions regarding these comments, please feel free to contact us.
Sincerely,
Jill ?aker, AICP
Director
Cc: Kathy Maher, Director, Department of Planning and Code Enforcement, City of Hagerstown
Joseph Rogers, Regional Planner, Western MD Regional Office, Maryland Department of
Planning
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: FY25 Family Law Fund – Approval to Submit Application and Accept Awarded
Funding
PRESENTATION DATE: July 11, 2023
PRESENTATION BY : Kristin Grossnickle, Court Administrator, Circuit Court for Washington
County and Nicole Phillips, Grant Manager, Office of Grant Management
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the submission of the FY25 Family Law Fund
application in the amount of $396,986 and accept awarded funding.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: This grant program provides funds from the Department of Juvenile and
Family Service’s Grant program of the Maryland Judiciary (DJFS), each year to Washington
County Circuit Court to deliver appropriate services available for low income families who appear
before the court to resolve family legal matters. Each court within the State of Maryland is required
by Maryland Rules 16-307 , to have a family support services division to implement the goals and
objectives as set forth by the DJFS.
DISCUSSION: Through the Department of Family Service Grant program the following services
are funded in the Washington County Circuit Court: salary and fringe benefits of the Family
Support Services Coordinator and Permanency Planning Liaison, Family Law Advice Clinic, and
as funding allows, Family Services Programs such as parent education classes, custody
evaluations, children’s attorney, mental health/substance abuse evaluations, parenting
coordinators, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)/Mediation, and supervised visitation. The
Office of Grant Management has reviewed the grant funding guidelines. This grant is annually
recurring. The funder caps pay increases at 3.5%, if there are any pay increases in FY25 in excess
of 3.5% the Circuit Court would need to allocate funds within its approved budget for this expense.
FISCAL IMPACT: Provides $396,986 for the Washington County Circuit Court’s Family Court
Program.
CONCURRENCES: Susan Buchanan, Director, Office of Grant Management
ALTERNATIVES: Deny approval for submission of this request
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Investment Policy Statement Update
PRESENTATION DATE: 07/11/2023
PRESENTATION BY: Michelle Gordon, Acting County Administrator; Patrick Wing,
Marquette Associates
RECOMMENDATION: To approve updates/changes to the Investment Policy Statement
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Investment Policy Statement, IPS, sets forth guidelines and
objectives for the Pension, OPEB, and LOSAP funds. It was last updated by the investment
committee and the BOCC in September 2020. The outlook for fixed income has improved since
2020 due to rising interest rates; therefore, the asset allocation mix can be adjusted to a more
conservative mix. This adjustment will reduce the effect of market volatility on plan assets and
remains consistent with plan assumed rates of return.
DISCUSSION: The IPS serves several purposes, some of which are included below:
• Define and generally assign the responsibilities of all involved parties.
• Establish a clear understanding of the investment goals and objectives of the Funds.
• Establish the relevant investment horizon for which the Funds’ assets will be managed.
• Establish a target asset allocation and re-balancing procedures for the Funds.
• Offer guidance and limitations to all third-party investment funds/managers (“Investment
Managers”) regarding the investment of assets.
• Establish a basis for evaluating the Funds’ investment results.
These guidelines formulate the objectives and establish the parameters used in governing funds in
the Employee Retirement Trust Fund (Pension), Retiree Health Plan Trust (Other Post
Employment Benefits or OPEB), and the Length of Service Awards Program Fund (LOSAP). The
Investment Committee has met several times over the last year with the County’s investment
advisor, Patrick Wing of Marquette Associates, to review plan performance, and plan susceptibility
to economic and market conditions.
The Investment Committee would like to propose changes to the asset allocation mix that will
maximize returns at an appropriate level of risk. Although, equities and other “growth engine”
assets generate higher real returns over the long term, equities tend to perform poorly amid an
environment of price instability (inflation/deflation). As interest rates have risen, core fixed
income yields and returns have also risen, improving the outlook for investment-grade fixed
income assets.
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Recommended asset allocation changes to all three (3) plans includes allocation decreases in equity
and high yield assets and allocation increases in core fixed income assets. These changes will help
smooth out plan assets and reduce market volatility as experienced in recent fiscal years.
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: Kelcee Mace, Interim Chief Financial Officer
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Investment Policy Statement
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: None
Asset Class Current %Proposed %Current %Proposed %Current %Proposed %
U.S. Equities 35.0%35.0%38.0%35.0%38.0%35.0%
Non-U.S. Equities 20.0%20.0%22.0%20.0%22.0%20.0%
Options / Defensive Equity 12.0%7.0%15.0%7.0%15.0%7.0%
Private Credit / High Yield 7.0%5.0%5.0%5.0%10.0%5.0%
Core Fixed Income 16.0%23.0%13.0%23.0%13.0%23.0%
Cash 2.0%2.0%2.0%2.0%2.0%2.0%
Core Private Real Estate 4.0%4.0%5.0%4.0%0.0%4.0%
Core Private /Global Infrastructure 4.0%4.0%0.0%4.0%0.0%4.0%
Total Allocation 100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%
Pension OPEB LOSAP
Washington County, Maryland
Investment Policy Statement
Washington Countyl
DIVISION OF
BUDGET & FINANCE
ACCOUNTING I PURCHASING I GRANT MANAGEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
BACKGROUND..................................................................................................................................................................
2
SCOPE..................................................................................................................................................................................
2
PURPOSE.............................................................................................................................................................................
3
DISTINCTION OF RESPONSIBILITIES........................................................................................................................
3
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS..................................................................
3
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE.......................................................................................
3
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE INVESTMENT SERVICES CONSULTANT.................................................................
4
RESPONSIBILITIES OF ANY INVESTMENT MANAGER(S).....................................................................................
4
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CUSTODIAN..................................................................................................................
5
STANDARDOF CARE....................................................................................................................................................... 5
PRUDENCE......................................................................................................................................................................
5
ETHICS.............................................................................................................................................................................
5
DELEGATION OF INVESTMENT AUTHORITY.........................................................................................................
6
INVESTMENT OJECTIVES.............................................................................................................................................
6
RETURNOBJECTIVES...................................................................................................................................................
6
RISKTOLERANCE.........................................................................................................................................................
6
INVESTMENTPOLICY.....................................................................................................................................................
7
ASSETALLOCATION....................................................................................................................................................
7
REBALANCING AND EVALUATING THE ASSET ALLOCATION...........................................................................
7
DIVERSIFICATION........................................................................................................................................................
7
PROXYVOTING.............................................................................................................................................................7
INVESTMENT MANAGER SELECTION CRITERIA..................................................................................................
7
INVESTMENT GUIDELINES...........................................................................................................................................
7
MUTUAL AND OTHER COMMINGLED FUNDS........................................................................................................
8
EQUITIES........................................................................................................................................................................
8
FIXEDINCOME..............................................................................................................................................................
8
REALESTATE.................................................................................................................................................................
9
PRIVATE INFRASTRUCTURE......................................................................................................................................9
OPTIONS/DEFENSIVE EQUITY..................................................................................................................................10
PRIVATE CREDIT/HIGH YIELD.................................................................................................................................
10
PROHIBITED INVESTMENTS.....................................................................................................................................
11
REVIEWPROCEDURES.................................................................................................................................................
11
REVIEW OF INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES.................................................................................................................
11
REVIEW OF INVESTMENT PERFORMANCE...........................................................................................................
I 1
REVIEW OF INVESTMENT SERVICES CONSULTANT AND OTHER SERVICE PROVIDERS ...........................
11
SIGNATURES....................................................... :............................................................................................................
12
ATTACHMENTSI, II, III................................................................................................................................................ 13
BACKGROUND
Washington County, Maryland (the "County") sponsors the Employees' Retirement Plan of Washington
County, the Washington County, Maryland Volunteer Length of Service Award Program Plan, and the
County Commissioners of Washington County Other Post -Employment Benefits Plan (collectively, the
"Plans"). The County has established the Employees' Retirement Trust Fund of Washington County, the
Washington County, Maryland Volunteer Length of Service Award Program Trust Fund, and the County
Commissioners of Washington County Other Post -Employment Benefits Trust Fund (collectively, the
"Funds"). The Funds are intended to provide for funding of benefits for those who meet the applicable
requirements set forth in the respective Plans.
SCOPE
This Investment Policy Statement (the "IPS") sets forth the investment policies (in the form of guidelines)
and objectives of the Funds. The County has arrived at this IPS through careful study of the returns and
risks associated with various investment strategies in relation to the current and projected liabilities of the
Plans and the Funds, after consulting with such outside investment professionals as the County deemed
appropriate. While this IPS has been chosen as the most appropriate policy for achieving the financial
objectives of the Funds (at the time of adoption), this IPS is intended only to provide guidance to the County
and the Investment Committee in performing their respective duties under the Plans. It is recognized that
this IPS does not and cannot set forth all guidelines that the County and the Investment Committee may
deem appropriate to consider when making investment decisions for the Funds. Accordingly, the terms of
this IPS are merely general guidelines for application by the County and the Investment Committee where
appropriate. It is expressly noted that the terms of this IPS are not binding on the County and the
Investment Committee and the County and the Investment Committee may snake decisions that are
inconsistent with the terms of this IPS if they determine it is prudent and in the best interest of the Plans'
participants to do so.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, this IPS is not intended, and shall not be deemed, to expand the duties of
the Plans' fiduciaries or to create duties that do not exist under applicable law or the documents governing
the Plan. If any term of this IPS conflicts with applicable law or those documents, applicable law and
the governing Plan documents shall control.
Notwithstanding the preceding, it is intended that the policies within this IPS be binding on the Investment
Services Consultant and Investment Managers, and that, among other responsibilities, the Investment
Services Consultant certify to the Investment Committee at each meeting of the Investment Fiduciaries that
the requirements of this IPS have been satisfied in both form and substance.
For purposes of this IPS, "Investment Fiduciary(ies)" means mean any individual or group of individuals
that exercise authority or control over the management, disposition or administration of the Funds which
includes but is not limited to: the County (acting through its Investment Committee and the County
Commissioners), the Investment Services Consultant, the Investment Manager and the Custodian.
No employee of the County (in his or her individual capacity) shall be considered a fiduciary of the Plan
or Fund. Instead, to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, any employee acting for the County
in connection with County's role under this IPS shall be deemed to be acting merely as a representative of
the County and not in his or her individual capacity.
Ian;1031
Purpose of the IPS
This IPS has been adopted by the Funds in order to:
• Define and generally assign the responsibilities of all involved parties.
• Establish a clear understanding of the investment goals and objectives of the Funds.
• Establish the relevant investment horizon for which the Funds' assets will be managed.
• Establish a target asset allocation and re -balancing procedures for the Funds.
• Offer guidance and limitations to all third -party investment finds/managers ("Investment
Managers") regarding the investment of assets.
• Establish a basis for evaluating the Funds' investment results.
In developing this IPS, considerations included liquidity requirements, the need to diversify assets, and
the financial impact (including the possibility of significant loss) of a range of asset allocations (among
other factors considered by the County). This IPS will be updated from time to time as determined by the
County in its discretion. Further, changing market conditions, economic trends or business needs may
necessitate modification of this IPS. For this purpose, any such modifications shall be deemed to be made
part of this IPS as of the date deemed appropriate by the County (or its designee), notwithstanding the
incorporation of such modifications into this IPS at a later date. In that regard, this IPS may be amended,
if appropriate, at any time and such amendments may be made retroactively effective if necessary (e.g.,
to reflect a modification previously made that is later incorporated into this IPS).
In general, the purpose of this IPS is to outline a philosophy which will guide the investment management
of Funds' assets toward the desired results. It is intended to be sufficiently specific, yet flexible enough
to be practical and to ensure that sufficient prudence and care are exercised in the investment program.
This IPS is intended to serve as a reference tool, an operating code, and a communication link between
and among the County Commissioners, the Investment Committee, the Investment Services Consultant
and the Investment Managers. As appropriate, the Investment Fiduciaries will consult with the Funds'
actuary(ies) to align investment decisions with the County's funding obligations under the respective Plans.
DISTINCTION OF RESPONSIBILITIES
Responsibilities of the Board of County Commissioners
• Approve this IPS.
Responsibilities of the Investment Committee
The Investment Committee shall consist of the County Administrator, the Director of Human Resources,
the Chief Financial Officer as Chairperson, the Director of Finance, one County Commissioner appointed
who will be appointed by the Board of County Commissioners to serve a four-year term. The Investment
Committee (with the assistance of the Investment Services Consultant) shall assist in the development of
policies and guidelines regarding the Funds' investments. These policies and guidelines shall include (but
are not restricted to) establishment of:
• Investment Objectives, Investment Policy, Investment Guidelines, and Review Procedures.
• Standards for measuring, monitoring, evaluating and comparing investment performance of the
Funds.
• Procedures for authorization, reporting, control, review and general governance to ensure that the
Funds' investment policies and guidelines are reviewed on a regular basis.
The Investment Committee shall examine this IPS periodically (and not less frequently than annually) and
monitor implementation of the IPS with a frequency deemed appropriate by the Investment Committee.
The Chairperson of the Investment Committee shall have the authority to sign and execute any third -party
investment manager agreements necessary to invest the Funds' assets in a manner consistent with this IPS.
A minimum of two members of the Investment Committee, including the Chairperson, shall be designated
as authorized signers, on any such agreements.
Neither the Investment Committee nor the individual members of the Investment Committee shall be
responsible for the investment and other decisions made by service providers, fiduciaries or others acting
in connection with the Plan or Fund. Rather, the Investment Committee members serve in a representative
capacity on behalf of the County and shall (to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law) have no
liability whatsoever for their service as such.
Responsibilities of the Investment Services Consultant
The County has retained an Investment Services Consultant to assist in fulfilling its investment goals and
objectives in accordance with this IPS. The Investment Services Consultant shall have the following
responsibilities:
• Comply with applicable laws, regulations and rulings.
• Comply with the terms of this ITS.
• Select Investment Managers (mutual funds and other common investment vehicles) with discretion
to purchase, sell, or hold specific securities that will be used to meet the Funds' investment
objectives.
• After the initial selection of an Investment Manager, regularly measure, monitor and evaluate the
performance of the Funds and Investment Managers against the established goals and objectives.
• Rebalance the Funds' assets, as appropriate, to bring the asset allocation in -line with the approved
target ranges.
• Measure and evaluate the Funds' investment performance results.
• Review this IPS on a regular basis and recommend modifications as appropriate.
• Adhere to the applicable Investment Services Consultant Contract and perform all duties required
of the Investment Services Consultant under such contract.
Responsibilities of any Investment Manager(s)
The Funds' assets will be invested by Investment Managers; such Investment Managers have the following
responsibilities:
• Comply with all applicable laws, regulations and rulings.
• Be currently registered and maintain registration as an investment advisor under the Investment
Advisors Act of 1940 (the "Act"), a bank (as defined in the Act), or an insurance company qualified
to perform investment management services under the laws of more than one state unless otherwise
approved on an exception basis.
• Manage the portion of the Funds' assets under their control in accordance with this IPS and any
applicable management agreement or prospectus.
• Acknowledge in writing their fiduciary responsibility (if applicable) and fully comply with all
portions of the ITS applicable to the Investment Manager, and as modified in the future.
• Exercise full investment discretion within the policies and standards as established as to buy, hold,
and sell decisions for the Funds' assets under management.
• On at least a quarterly basis, reconcile the account's positions with the Funds' designated custodian.
• Provide reports and data sheets to the Investment Services Consultant, if applicable, on at least a
quarterly basis detailing the Funds' investment performance and positioning.
• Promptly inform the Investment Services Consultant regarding significant matters pertaining to the
investment of the Funds' assets, including, but not limited to changes in ownership, organizational
structure, investment strategy, portfolio design, or configuration of the investment team.
• Unless the Funds' have retained a proxy voting service, exercise the proxy voting rights related to
securities held in its portfolio in a manner consistent with the economic best interests of the Funds.
• If applicable, notify the Investment Committee and the Investment Services Consultant if at any
time the Investment Manager feels that the guidelines in this IPS restrict the Investment Manager's
performance, or that the objectives cannot be met.
Responsibilities of the Custodian
The Fund has retained a third -party custodian to hold the Funds' assets; such custodian shall manage,
control, collect, and use the assets of the Funds in accordance with the terms of the separate Custodial
Agreement(s) or Trust Agreement(s) (as applicable) and this IPS.
_. -011 : 1 1 1 _ s :. _.
Prudence
Guidelines respecting prudence have been developed in light of investment objectives related to the
Plans' obligations to its participants and beneficiaries. Actuarial, economic, investment, and socio-
political events and trends (among others) are factors that affect meeting those obligations. Accordingly,
these guidelines are, as a part of this IPS, intended to present broad and balanced considerations to guide
all parties concerned, seeking appropriate allocation, investment, safekeeping, monitoring and evaluation
of the Funds.
The Funds' Investment Fiduciaries shall discharge their responsibilities and assets shall be invested in a
manner consistent with this IPS, and generally accepted fiduciary standards. All transactions undertaken
on behalf of the Funds shall be solely in the interest of the Plans' participants and their beneficiaries and
for the exclusive purpose of providing benefits under the Plans and defraying the reasonable expenses of
administration of the Plans.
Investments shall be made with the care, skill, prudence and diligence under the circumstances then
prevailing that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiar with such matters would use in the
conduct of an enterprise of a like character and with like aims.
Ethics and Conflicts of Interest
Individuals involved in the investment process shall comply with the applicable provisions of the
Washington County, Maryland )thew Ordinance then in effect. In addition, individuals involved in the
investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that could conflict with the proper
execution and management of the investment program, or that could impair their ability to make impartial
decisions. Individuals shall disclose any material interests in financial institutions with which they
conduct business. They shall further disclose any personal financial/investment positions that could be
related to the performance of the investment portfolio. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing,
this would include any material benefit from any asset held by or under the Funds. Such disclosure shall be
made in writing or, if knowledge of the conflict arises in the course of a discussion at a meeting of the
Investment Fiduciaries, orally during the course of such meeting (and in writing following the meeting).
Upon giving notice, the person or persons with an actual or potential conflict shall refrain and withdraw
from all discussions and participation in decisions pertaining to those matters where a conflict of interest
exists or is perceived to exist, except to the extent circumstances or applicable legal guidance indicates
recusal and/or non-involvement is unnecessary.
Delegation of Investment Authority
Authority to manage the Funds' assets is granted to the Investment Services Consultant, who, in turn,
will select Investment Managers (mutual funds and other common investment vehicles) with discretion to
purchase, sell, or hold specific securities that will be used to meet the Funds' investment objectives. The
Investment Services Consultant and any Investment Manager(s) shall act in accordance with established
written procedures and internal controls for the operation of the investment program consistent with this
IPS. No person may engage in an investment transaction except as provided under the terms of this IPS
and the Investment Services Consultant Contract and the Investment Manager Agreement(s), as
appropriate. The Investment Services Consultant and the Investment Manager(s) shall be responsible for
all transactions undertaken and shall establish a system of controls to regulate the activities of subordinate
officials, as appropriate.
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES
Return Obiectiives
Investment objectives are long-term in nature. All parties recognize securities markets are unlikely to
provide a consistently favorable climate, on a shorter -term basis. Given this, long-term objectives are:
• Earn a total rate of return, net of investment fees, that achieves at least the Plans' actuarially
assumed rate of return.
• Total annualized net investment return from all investments of the Funds and each asset class of
the Funds is expected to meet or exceed the annualized return of the designated benchmark over
a market cycle.
Investment performance objectives for the Funds are, as stated above, long-term in nature. Concern
respecting market value or investment return volatility and other measures reflecting investment
uncertainty, will be addressed through asset (class) allocations, investment management processes or
"styles", portfolio diversification requirements, and other investment management guidelines and/or
limitations.
Risk Tolerance
The County recognizes that some risk is necessary to produce long-term investment results sufficient to
meet the goals and objectives of this IPS. However, the Investment Managers are to make reasonable
efforts to control risk, and they will be evaluated regularly by the Investment Services Consultant to
ensure that the risk taken is commensurate with the given investment style and objectives. With that
background in mind, the Funds' risk tolerance is outlined below:
• Accept prudent levels of short and long-term volatility consistent with the near -term cash flow
needs, and long-term liability structure of the Funds.
• Tolerate appropriate levels of downside risk relative to the Funds' target rate of return. In doing
so, the Investment Services Consultant will attempt to minimize the probability of
underperforming the Funds' target rate of return over the long-term and to minimize the shortfall
in the event such underperformanee occurs.
• Accept certain variances in the asset allocation structure of the Funds relative to the broader
financial markets and peer groups.
• Tolerate certain levels of short-term underperformanee by the Funds' Investment Managers.
INVESTMENT POLICY
Investment Policy delineates controls and the associated monitoring intended to enhance the likelihood
of meeting Investment Objectives.
Asset Allocation
Asset class allocation decisions are intended to identify an appropriate investment approach for achieving
the Funds' Investment Objectives while limiting investment risk through diversification (and other
factors deemed relevant by the Investment Fiduciaries). The asset class targets delineated in Attachments
I -III provide a framework through which the Funds' investments may be adjusted to meet economic
and/or investment market conditions while continuing to be invested within the broader allocation
framework deemed appropriate to the Funds' long-term Investment Objectives. The progression from
current asset class targets to the ones delineated in Attachments I -III is intended to be a thoughtful and
deliberate process. It is important to note that private market investments will not occur until the
Investment Manager(s) fully or partially call committed capital. The asset class targets will be adjusted,
with the private market investments' respective targets being increased on an approximately pro-rata
basis upon the drawdown of each asset class's respective capital commitment, while targets for the source
allocation will be decreased on an approximately pro-rata basis.
Rebalancine and Evaluatine the Asset Allocation
The asset allocation ranges represent a long-term perspective. As such, rapid unanticipated market shifts
or changes in economic conditions may cause the asset mix to fall outside IPS ranges. When these
divergences occur, the Investment Services Consultant will rebalance the assets within the specified
ranges when and if the Investment Services Consultant believes it is prudent to do so. The Investment
Services Consultant will provide assumptions on the capital markets over the long-term and optimize the
asset allocation to best meet the target risk and return objectives of the Funds.
Diversification
Investments must be broadly diversified to minimize the risk of substantial loss unless under the
circumstances it is clearly not prudent to do so. Significant diversification can be accomplished through
asset allocation, portfolio structure, and the selection of different Investment Managers (among other
things). This ITS includes certain constraints intended to optimize investment diversification.
Proxy Voting
The Investment Services Consultant is not responsible for voting proxies, except for mutual fund proxies,
in which case the Investment Services Consultant will vote proxies received in accordance with
Investment Services Consultant's proxy voting policy as set forth in its ADV Part 2A.
INVESTMENT MANAGER SELECTION CRITERIA
The Investment Services Consultant may select, monitor and replace appropriate Investment Managers to
invest the assets of the Funds, provided that any such selection is done prudently and for the exclusive benefit
of the Plans' participants and beneficiaries. If the Investment Services Consultant determines that an Investment
Manager should be selected or replaced, the below criteria will be used as a guide (among other factors the
Investment Services Consultant deems prudent) to evaluate potential alternatives:
• Overall firm strength and investment professional tenure.
• Well -articulated and consistent application of investment philosophy and process.
• Portfolio characteristics and sector weightings relative to style benchmark.
• Consistent long-term performance relative to style benchmark and industry style universe.
• Portfolio's long -tern risk/reward profile compared to style benchmark and industry style universe.
• Investment management fees compared to industry average.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this IPS to the contrary, and subject to any limitations on the
Investment Service Consultant's ability to unilaterally remove or replace an investment option due to any
restrictive provisions applicable to the Fund's current investment options, an investment option may be
placed under formal performance review or be immediately terminated at any time and for any reason.
INVESTMENT GUIDELINES
Mutual and Other Commingled Funds
Given the nature of mutual and other commingled funds, it is recognized that there may be deviations
between the objectives, intent or specific requirement of this IPS and the stated objectives, intent or
content of any mutual or other commingled fund. However, reasonable efforts shall be made, to the extent
practical, prudent and appropriate, to select mutual or other commingled funds that have investment
objectives and policies that are consistent with this IPS.
Equities
Investment Manager(s) are expected to purchase marketable equity securities listed on national securities
exchanges. The structure of equity investments may be in the form of exchange -traded funds (ETFs),
mutual funds, separately managed accounts and/or pooled trusts (and such other forms deemed appropriate
by the Investment Manager(s)).
Investment Managers are given latitude in security selection subject to the following:
• Permissible equity investments include, but are not limited to, common equity, convertible
securities, publicly traded REITs and American Depositary Receipts.
• Sector, industry, regional and individual security diversification should be maintained.
• No Investment Manager shall invest on a market value basis more than (the greater of): a) five (5)
percent of their assigned portfolio in the security (-ies) of a single corporation or group of directly
affiliated corporations or, b) 1.5 times the weighting of a security(-ies) within an Investment
Manager's equity benchmark.
• No Investment Manager may use assigned funds to make or maintain an investment equaling or
exceeding ten (10) percent ownership of the outstanding equity security(-ies) of a single
corporation, or group of directly affiliated corporations.
• Stock options may be utilized by an Investment Manager(s) managing U.S. equity securities in
"covered" or hedging postures but not in "naked" or speculative postures;
• Hedging to protect against currency impact upon a security position is permissible. Nevertheless,
the purchase of speculative or "naked" currency contracts (i.e., currency trading or related risk
taking), undertaken without a demonstrable exposed investment position to be hedged in a specific
currency, is prohibited.
Fixed Income
Suitable fixed income investments include, but are not limited to, U.S. Treasury and Federal agency
securities, municipal securities, marketable debt securities of U.S. corporations, domestic and Yankee
certificates of deposit, banker's acceptances, commercial paper, or other generally utilized money market
or cash equivalent investments, including money market mutual funds meeting the quality standards
delineated below. The structure of the investments may be in the form of direct purchases, ETFs, mutual
funds, separately managed accounts and/or pooled trusts (and such other forms deemed appropriate by the
Investment Manager(s)).
The effective duration of fixed income securities, said average including any investments considered to be
reserve or cash equivalent assets specific to any fixed income portfolio, shall be no more than 25 percent
greater nor fifty (50) percent less than the effective duration of the policy benchmark.
Investment Managers are given latitude in security selection subject to the following:
No issuer, other than the U.S. Government or Federal agencies, may represent more than five (5)
percent of the total market value of the fixed income portfolio managed by any Investment
Manager(s).
There is no limit upon investment in U.S. Treasury securities as a percentage of fixed income
investments, except that any single issue thereof may constitute no more than twenty five (25)
percent of any Investment Manager(s)' fixed income investments at market value and any single
Treasury zero coupon issue ten (10) percent at market value. Federal Agency securities are hereby
limited to twenty-five (25) percent per agency, and to ten (10) percent, at market value, per any
single Federal Agency issue.
Cash and equivalents are the only permissible form of investment that is to be used for operating
capital necessary for daily operations and reserves. Investments in cash and equivalents shall be in
U.S. dollars in either:
o Money market mutual funds in compliance with SEC rule 2a-7 or,
o FDIC -insured Deposit Accounts or,
o Cash sweep vehicles or Rule 2a-7 money market mutual funds held within SIPC-protected
brokerage accounts.
Real Estate
Real estate assets may be held in publicly traded Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) and servicing
companies.
Real estate assets may be also held in private real estate investments, which will be implemented through
open-end commingled fund vehicles.
Pooled real estate investment funds will diversify their exposures by property type and location in an
attempt to limit exposure to any single property type or to any single geographic area. It is expected that at
various points in time, the portfolio may be more heavily exposed to a single property type or location by
virtue of opportunities in the market that are expected to generate excess return above long-term
expectations. The diversification of the real estate portfolio will be compared to the composition of its peer
benchmark the NCREIF ODCE Index. Limited use of leverage is permissible within pooled real estate
investment funds to enhance investment returns and to mirror the NCREIF ODCE Index.
Wivate-Infrastructure
Infrastructure assets may be held in publicly traded Global Listed Infrastructure companies. Assets may
also be held in private funds.
Infrastructure is broadly defined as the essential assets a society requires to facilitate the orderly operation
of its economy and can be broken out into three broad categories: transportation, utility, and social.
Typically, they are long-lived assets with low growth, similar volatility to real estate, and have an income
stream tied to GDP/inflation that exceeds that of bonds. The Fund's private infrastructure allocation will
consist predominately of core infrastructure strategies/assets. Such assets are generally characterized as
having a mature age, steady cash flows, long-term, regulated contracts, low growth opportunities,
monopolistic or semi -monopolistic competitive positioning, and a total return profile consisting
predominately of cash yield.
Private infrastructure investments will be implemented through open-end commingled fund vehicles. The
underlying infrastructure assets held by the commingled vehicles shall be adequately diversified by
geography and broad infrastructure sector.
With the understanding that private infrastructure managers employ leverage to enhance returns, leverage
within the private infrastructure allocation of the Fund shall be limited to 75%. Leverage may be utilized at
the commingled fund or asset -level. Leverage for individual asset may exceed 75%.
The investment risks associated with illiquid assets will be mitigated through the following requirements:
1. Institutional Quality: All investments must be institutional investment quality. Institutional quality is
defined as an investment that would be considered acceptable by other prudent institutional investors (e.g.,
insurance companies, commercial banks, public employee retirement systems, corporate employee benefit
plans, endowments and other tax-exempt institutions). 2. Diversification: No more than ten (10%) of the
total portfolio will be invested at any time with any single partnership, entity, or organization.
Options/Defensive Equity
Investments that utilize options -writing strategies, provided that the strategy is clearly defined and
articulated fully, in accordance with the relevant guidelines of this IPS, are permitted. Such investments
will be implemented either through mutual funds or open-end commingled fund vehicles.
Any such strategy must be transparent and fully collateralized by high -quality short -to -intermediate fixed
income securities for selling put options or the underlying equity and/or futures contracts for selling call
options. These strategies are intended to capture the historical premium, or spread, between implied
volatility and realized volatility within asset markets.
Private Credit/High Yield
The purpose of the private credi %high y ield allocation is to generate returns greater than core fixed income
over the long term. Assets may be held in publicly traded high yield securities and in private debt
investments, investments __"" be , ade thretigh ftinds, which may be open end or closed end.
Private credit is an illiquid, lending -oriented strategy focused on private loans to performing companies. It
includes primarily debt investments, where an investor expects to receive principal and interest, with the
majority of returns being generated from cash flow yield. Private credit is typically structured with floating
rate loans but can also include fixed rate loans. The average maturity of a loan is generally five years;
however, loans tend to be repaid prior to maturity, so the average life of the loans is generally three years.
Most loans are senior secured loans.
Investments will predominantly consist of direct lending, which are directly originated, nontraded,
performing loans made to primarily middle market companies. Direct lending investments primarily are
comprised of senior secured debt, which can be secured by general corporate collateral or by a company's
specific collateral. Direct lending investments often utilize leverage (typically in the range of 0.5 to 2.5
times) at the fund level. Direct lending investments also have broadly diversified sector exposure and
include a combination of sponsored (private equity backed companies) and non -sponsored borrowers.
Private credit closed end fund terms are typically 5 to 8 years, with investment periods between 2 and 3
years. The potential for fund term extensions of up to three years is typically structured into most Private
credit closed end funds.
10
A smaller, tactical allocation (e.g., mezzanine) within the private credit pool may be used to complement
direct lending and to take advantage of the current investment environment.
Prohibited Investments
Securities having the following characteristics, unless stated otherwise in an investment management
agreement, are not authorized and shall not be purchased: letter stock and other unregistered securities,
commodities or commodity contracts where the Funds are a counterparty, short sales, and margin
transactions. Further, derivatives, options, futures, or any other investment for the sole purpose of direct
portfolio leveraging are prohibited. Direct ownership of real estate, natural resource properties such as oil,
gas or timber and the purchase of collectibles is also prohibited.
Notwithstanding anything in the Investment Guidelines to the contrary, only an investment permitted by
applicable law may be considered and, then, only if such investment is determined to be prudent and in the
best interests of Plan participants and beneficiaries.
REVIEW PROCEDURE, S
Review of Investment Objectives
The Investment Services Consultant shall periodically review and report to the Investment Committee, not less
frequently than annually, the appropriateness of this IPS for achieving the Funds' stated objectives. It is not
expected that this IPS will change frequently. In particular, short-term changes in the financial markets
generally should not require an adjustment in this IPS.
Review of Investment Performance
The Investment Services Consultant shall report on a quarterly basis to the Investment Committee to review
the investment performance of the Funds. In addition, the Investment Services Consultant will be responsible
for keeping the Investment Committee advised of any material change in investment strategy, Investment
Managers, and other pertinent information potentially affecting performance of the Funds.
The Investment Services Consultant shall compare the investment results on a quarterly basis to appropriate
peer universe benchmarks, as well as market indices in both equity and fixed income markets.
Review of Investment Services Consultant and Other Service Providers
The Investment Committee shall periodically, and not less frequently than annually, review the performance
of the Investment Services Consultant and other service providers to the Funds.
SIGNATURES
The effective date of this Investment Policy Statement is , 20_
Adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland on
20
ATTEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
12
ATTACHMENT I - Employees' Retirement Trust Fund of Washington County
Asset Class Minimum, % Target, % Maximum, % Benchmark
Equities
45.0
55.0
65.0
Domestic
25.0
35.0
45.0
Russell3000
International
10.0
20.0
30.0
MSCI ACWI ex U.S. IMI
(net)
Options /
0.0
712.0
1525.0
CBOE Covered Combo
Defensive Equity
Real Estate
0.0
4.0
10.0
NCREIF ODCE
I ivate
CPI+2.5%9'Global
Infrastructure
0.0
4.0
10.0
iff"Stfuetuf
Private Credit /
Bloomberg Barclays High
High Yield
0.0
5�.0
lOS.O
Yield
Fixed Income
815.0
47825.0
35-28.0
Investment Grade
136.0
4-623.0
3326.0
Bloomberg Ba elays
—
—
—
Aggregate
Cash
0.0
2.0
10.0
BofAML 90-Day T-Bill
In the event an investment manager invests in more than one asset class, for example, a balanced manager
or global equity manager, the manager's benchmark allocation to each asset class will be attributed to that
particular asset class. For example, if a global equity manager's benchmark is allocated ten percent of the
total fund and its benchmark is invested sixty percent in international equities, sixty percent of the global
equity manager's allocations will be attributed to international equities and therefore, six percent of the
total fund allocated to international equities.
Private market investments will not occur until the Investment Manager(s) fully or partially call committed
capital. The asset class targets will be adjusted, with the private market investments' respective targets
being increased on an approximately pro-rata basis upon the drawdown of each asset class's respective
capital commitment, while targets for the source allocation will be decreased on an approximately pro-rata
basis.
13
ATTACHMENT II - County Commissioners of Washington County Other Post -
Employment Benefits Trust Fund
Asset Class Minimum, % Target, % Maximum, % Benchmark
Equities
4550.0
5605.0
7065.0
Domestic
259.0
359.0
459.0
Russell3000
International
102.0
220.0
32
MSCI ACWI ex U.S. IMI0.0
(net)
Options/Defensive
0-.0
4-57.0
1-25.0
CBOE Covered Combo
Equity
—
—
—
Real Estate
0.0
45.0
10.0
NCREIF ODCE
FTSE Global Core
Infrastructure
0_0
4.0
10.0
Infrastructure 50/50 (net)
Private Credit /
Bloomberg Barelays-High
High Yield
0.0
5.0
l—
Yield
Fixed Income
15.0
2515.0
-235.0
Bloomberg Barclays
Investment Grade
13.0
-123.0
233.0
—
—
—
Aggregate
Cash
0.0
2.0
10.0
BofAML 90-Day T-Bill
In the event an investment manager invests in more than one asset class, for example, a balanced manager
or global equity manager, the manager's benchmark allocation to each asset class will be attributed to that
particular asset class. For example, if a global equity manager's benchmark is allocated ten percent of the
total fund and its benchmark is invested sixty percent in international equities, sixty percent of the global
equity manager's allocations will be attributed to international equities and therefore, six percent of the
total fund allocated to international equities.
Private market investments will not occur until the Investment Manager(s) fully or partially call committed
capital. The asset class targets will be adjusted, with the private market investments' respective targets
being increased on an approximately pro-rata basis upon the drawdown of each asset class's respective
capital commitment, while targets for the source allocation will be decreased on an approximately pro-rata
basis.
14
ATTACHMENT III - Washington County, Maryland Volunteer Length of Service Award
Program Trust Fund
Asset Class Minimum. % Target, % Maximum, % Benchmark
Equities 4550.0 6055.0 -065.0
Domestic 258.0 385.0 485.0 Russell3000
International 102.0 220.0 320.0 MSCI ACWI ex U.S. IMI
(net)
Options/Defensive 09.0 7U.0 215.0 CBOE Covered Combo
Equity — — —
Real Estate
0_0
4_0
10.0
NCREIF ODCE
Infrastructure
0_0
4_0
10.0
FTSE Global Core
Infrastructure 50/50 (net)
Private Credit /
Bloomberg delays -High
High Yield
0.0
510.0
150.0
Yield
Fixed Income
15.0
2475.0
325.0
Investment Grade
13.0
-1�23.0
233.0
Bloomberg Barelags
—
—
—
Aggregate
Cash
0.0
2.0
10.0
BofAML 90-Day T-Bill
In the event an investment manager invests in more than one asset class, for example, a balanced manager
or global equity manager, the manager's benchmark allocation to each asset class will be attributed to that
particular asset class. For example, if a global equity manager's benchmark is allocated ten percent of the
total fund and its benchmark is invested sixty percent in international equities, sixty percent of the global
equity manager's allocations will be attributed to international equities and therefore, six percent of the
total fund allocated to international equities.
Private market investments will not occur until the Investment Manager(s) fully or partially call committed
capital. The asset class targets will be adjusted, with the private market investments' respective targets
being increased on an approximately pro-rata basis upon the drawdown of each asset class's respective
capital commitment, while targets for the source allocation will be decreased on an approximately pro-rata
basis.
15
' Washington County Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
` Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Construction Bid Award - Dogstreet Road Culvert Replacement
PRESENTATION DATE: July 11, 2023
PRESENTATION BY: Scott Hobbs, Director, Division of Engineering
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the bid for the Dogstreet Road Culvert
Replacement contract to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, Huntzberry Brothers, Inc.
of Smithsburg in the amount of $943,494.00.
REPORT -IN -BRIEF: The project was advertised in The Herald Mail, on the County's website,
and on the State of Maryland's website, e-Maryland Marketplace Advantage. Four (4) bids were
received on Wednesday, June 21, 2023 as listed below and detailed on the bid tabulation.
Contractor: Total Bid:
Huntzberry Brothers, Inc. $943,494.00
DSM Contracting, LLC. $999,900.00
C. William Hetzer, Inc. $1,130,362.30
Concrete General, Inc. $15747,353.00
The bids have been evaluated and the low bid is in order. The engineer's estimate is $950,000.
DISCUSSION: The project involves the replacement of a multiple barrel pipe culvert with a
precast reinforced concrete box culvert. Construction will also involve placement of cast -in -
place concrete end walls, asphalt paving, and traffic barrier installation. The project is a 250
consecutive calendar day contract with an anticipated notice to proceed in August 2023 and a
completion date in April 2024. The bid documents include liquidated damages in the amount of
$500.00 per calendar day for work beyond the completion date. There is a road closure / detour
associated with this work. Public notices will be made and road work signs posted prior to the
start of work.
FISCAL IMPACT: This is a budgeted Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) project (BRG049).
Total expenses are estimated at $1,018,494; including $943,494 for the proposed bid award,
$50,000 for inspection/testing/utilities/right-of-way and $25,000 for construction contingency.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: This is the most cost effective and practical alternative. The structure is in
poor condition and in need of replacement.
ATTACHMENTS: Bid Tabulation, Aerial Maps
AUDIOVISUAL TO BE USED: Aerial Maps
Washington County Division of Engineering
Bid Tabulation
Doqstreet Road Culvert Replacement, Contract No. BR-DS-220-14
Bids Received: Wednesday, June 21, 2023, 11:00 AM
Page 1 of 2
FHuntzberryBrothers, Inc.
1536 Chewsville Road
mithsburg, MD 21783
Unit No.
Description
Unit
Quantity
Price
Item Total
101
Clearing and Grubbing
LS
LS
$65,500.00
$65,500.00
102
Mobilization
LS
LS
$9,000.00
$9,000.00
103
Maintenance of Traffic
LS
LS
$12,488.00
$12,488.00
104
Temporary Traffic Signs
SF
317
$33.00
$10,461.00
105
Temporary Concrete Traffic Barriers for MOT
LF
48
$62.00
$2,976.00
106
Type III Barricade for MOT
EA
2
$760.00
$1,520.00
107
Construction Stakeout
LS
LS
$18,500.00
$18,500.00
108
Contingent: Temporary Orange Construction Fence
LF
300
$4.00
$1,200.00
109
Drums for Maintenance of Traffic
EA
10
$135.00
$1,350.00
201
Stream Excavation
CY
700
$30.00
$21,000.00
202
Structure Excavation
CY
800
$30.00
$24,000.00
203
Contingent: Class III Excavation
CY
300
$50.00
$15,000.00
204
Common Borrow
CY
300
$30.00
$9,000.00
205
Selected Backfill
CY
200
$63.00
$12,600.00
206
Removal of Existing Pavement
SY
650
$15.00
$9,750.00
301
Stabilized Construction Entrance
EA
1
$2,775.00
$2,775.00
302
Stream Diversion
LS
LS
$75,500.00
$75,500.00
303
Filter Log - 12 Inch Diameter
LF
160
$7.00
$1,120.00
304
IClassl Riprap
SY
130
$80.00
$10,400.00
305
Sump Pit
EA
1
$2,750.00
$2,750.00
306
Filter Bag
EA
2
$600.00
$1,200.00
401
Removal of Existing Structure
LS
LS
$19,250.00
$19,250.00
402
Reinforced Concrete Box Culverts - (2 EACH) 18FT x 5FT
LS
LS
$332,600.00
$332,600.00
403
Cast in Place Concrete Mix No. 3 for Endwall Footings
CY
60
$800.00
$48,000.00
404
Cast in Place Concrete Mix No. 6 for Endwall Wingwall Stem
CY
35
$2,950.00
$103,250.00
405
Traffic Barrier W Beam at Structure
LS
LS
$44,500.00
$44,500.00
406
Stone Wall Repointing
LF
75
$265.00
$19,875.00
501
6 Inch Graded Aggregate Base
SY
510
$17.00
$8,670.00
502
Hot Mix Asphalt Superpave Surface 9.5mm (PG64-22)
Ton
80
$135.00
$10,800.00
503
Hot Mix Asphalt Superpave Base 19mm (PG64-22)
Ton
140
$125.00
$17,500.00
504
Saw Cutting
LF
55
$4.00
$220.00
505
Crusher Run Aggregate
CY
5
$55.00
$275.00
506
5 Inch White Paint Pavement Markings
LF
250
$5.00
$1,250.00
507
5 Inch Yellow Paint Pavement Markings
LF
250
$5.00
$1,250.00
601
Remove and Dispose Existing Traffic Barrier
LF
128
$8.00
$1,024.00
602
Traffic Barrier W-Beam
LF
50
$50.00
$2,500.00
603
Traffic Barrier End Treatment (Type C)
EA
2
$3,750.00
$7,500.00
604
Traffic Barrier End Treatment (Type L)
EA
2
$2,250.00
$4,500.00
701
Placing Furnished Topsoil, 4 Inch Depth
SY
750
$8.00
$6,000.00
702
Temporary Seeding
SY
500
$1.00
$500.00
703
Turfgrass Establishment
SY
750
$1.55
$1,162.50
704
Type A Soil Stabilization Matting
SY
250
$2.55
$637.50
705
Black Walnut Tree (Minimum 1" Caliper)
EA
4
$200.00
$800.00
706
Box Elder Tree (Minimum 1" Caliper)
EA
4
$200.00
$800.00
707
Redbud Tree (Minimum T Height)
EA
4
$425.00
$1,700.00
801
Permanent Traffic Signs
SF
12
$70.00
$840.00
SUBTOTAL
1
$943,494.00
Washington County Division of Engineering
Bid Tabulation
Dogstreet Road Culvert Replacement, Contract No. BR-DS-220-14
Bids Received: Wednesday, June 21, 2023, 11:00 AM
Page 2 of 2
DSM Contracting, LLC.
1417 Shoemaker Road
Baltimore, MD 21209
C. William Hetzer, Inc.
9401 Sharpsburg Pike
Hagerstown, MD 21741-0506
Concrete General, Inc.
8000 Beechcraft Avenue
Gaithersburg, MD 20879
Unit Price
Item Total
Unit Price
Item Total
Unit Price
Item Total
$6,360.00
$6,360.00
$88,110.00
$88,110.00
$30,000.00
$30,000.00
$54,372.00
$54,372.00
$153,880.00
$153,880.00
$394,000.00
$394,000.00
$3,180.00
$3,180.00
$36,140.00
$36,140.00
$25,000.00
$25,000.00
$25.70
$8,146.90
$40.50
$12,838.50
$22.00
$6,974.00
$74.10
$3,556.80
$44.50
$2,136.00
$85.00
$4,080.00
$300.00
$600.00
$365.00
$730.00
$330.00
$660.00
$18,000.00
$18,000.00
$19,580.00
$19,580.00
$25,000.00
$25,000.00
$6.00
$1,800.00
$3.65
$1,095.00
$6.20
$1,860.00
$108.00
$1,080.00
$105.00
$1,050.00
$90.00
$900.00
$64.50
$45,150.00
$46.50
$32,550.00
$70.00
$49,000.00
$76.00
$60,800.00
$33.50
$26,800.00
$90.00
$72,000.00
$41.20
$12,360.00
$45.00
$13,500.00
$20.00
$6,000.00
$68.20
$20,460.00
$40.00
$12,000.00
$30.00
$9,000.00
$84.00
$16,800.00
$85.00
$17,000.00
$80.00
$16,000.00
$13.10
$8,515.00
$7.00
$4,550.00
$10.00
$6,500.00
$3,000.00
$3,000.00
$1,470.00
$1,470.00
$4,000.00
$4,000.00
$54,350.40
$54,350.40
$141,330.00
$141,330.00
$149,000.00
$149,000.00
$36.00
$5,760.00
$12.75
$2,040.00
$18.00
$2,880.00
$139.80
$18,174.00
$65.00
$8,450.00
$104.00
$13,520.00
$1,800.00
$1,800.00
$740.00
$740.00
$3,500.00
$3,500.00
$900.00
$1,800.00
$700.00
$1,400.00
$730.00
$1,460.00
$27,624.00
$27,624.00
$28,340.00
$28,340.00
$18,400.00
$18,400.00
$370,757.40
$370,757.40
$255,950.00
$255,950.00
$603,000.00
$603,000.00
$1,170.00
$70,200.00
$1,210.00
$72,600.00
$1,150.00
$69,000.00
$2,140.30
$74,910.50
$2,160.00
$75,600.00
$3,000.00
$105,000.00
$30,000.00
$30,000.00
$35,990.00
$35,990.00
$43,500.00
$43,500.00
$102.60
$7,695.00
$185.00
$13,875.00
$165.00
$12,375.00
$20.40
$10,404.00
$9.90
$5,049.00
$17.00
$8,670.00
$120.00
$9,600.00
$130.00
$10,400.00
$169.00
$13,520.00
$120.00
$16,800.00
$130.00
$18,200.00
$153.00
$21,420.00
$12.00
$660.00
$15.50
$852.50
$10.00
$550.00
$120.00
$600.00
$165.00
$825.00
$66.00
$330.00
$12.00
$3,000.00
$2.95
$737.50
$2.00
$500.00
$12.00
$3,000.00
$2.95
$737.50
$2.00
$500.00
$18.00
$2,304.00
$8.60
$1,100.80
$7.00
$896.00
$24.00
$1,200.00
$99.00
$4,950.00
$49.00
$2,450.00
$1,800.00
$3,600.00
$7,330.00
$14,660.00
$3,630.00
$7,260.00
$1,800.00
$3,600.00
$2,320.00
$4,640.00
$2,090.00
$4,180.00
$15.00
$11,250.00
$3.55
$2,662.50
$10.00
$7,500.00
$1.80
$900.00
$1.00
$500.00
$1.00
$500.00
$1.80
$1,350.00
$1.55
$1,162.50
$2.00
$1,500.00
$6.00
$1,500.00
$1.85
$462.50
$6.00
$1,500.00
$258.00
$1,032.00
$245.00
$980.00
$250.00
$1,000.00
$258.00
$1,032.00
$245.00
$980.00
$250.00
$1,000.00
$150.00
$600.00
$305.00
$1,220.00
$250.00
$1,000.00
$18.00
$216.00
$41.50
$498.00
$39.00
$468.00
$999,900.00
$1,130,362.30
$1,747,353.00
w
o LL�
4 0
�co
l,\f�
.� o
Ln
_ m
— Q In
a)
J (D
v, m o
cn
i
Alr�-
x
�
ti
Y
at'
.
Dogstreet Road Culvert Replacement Detour Route
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Bid Award (PUR-1619) Conococheague Win-911 Upgrade
PRESENTATION DATE: July 11, 2023
PRESENTATION BY: Rick Curry, CPPO, Director, Purchasing Department; Mark Bradshaw, P.E.,
Director, Environmental Management
RECOMMENDATION: Move to award the Conococheague Win 911 Upgrade to the responsible
bidder with the responsive bid, Micro-Tech Designs, Inc., of Hampstead, MD in the amount of $52,550.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: On June 14, 2023, the County received a total of one (1) bid for the Supervisory
Control and Data Acquisition System (SCADA). The Invitation to Bid (ITB) notice was published in
the local newspaper, listed on the State of Maryland’s “eMarylandMarketplaceAdvantage” website
and on the County’s website. Twenty-seven (27) persons/companies registered/downloaded the bid
document on-line.
The SCADA system is a combination of hardware and software that enables the automation of industry
processes by capturing the operational technology (OT) real-time data. SCADA connects the sensors
that monitor equipment like motors, pumps, and valves to an onsite or remote server. The system
collets real-time and historical information and then provides operational personnel with a wide range
of modes in which this information can be displayed and accessed. The project includes but not limited
to: upgrading current PC’s and software from Windows 7 to Windows 11, provide three new work
stations, a new server. Install upgraded software and configure workgroup, plant logic and
modifications. Industry standard one year warranty shall apply.
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted in the department’s Capital Improvement Project (CIP)
budget 42010-TRP026.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Bid Tabulation Matrix.
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
PUR-1619
Conococheague WIN 911 Upgrade
Micro-Tech Designs, Inc.
Hampstead, MD
No. Item Description Total Price
1 Task 1 – Upgrade all PC and Software to Windows 11
Platform @ $32,270.00
2 Task 2 – Plant Logic and Modifications @ $20,280.00
52,550.00
Remarks / Exceptions:
TOTAL LUMP SUM: (Task 1 & Task 2)
1 Bids Opened: June 14, 2023
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Contract Award (PUR-1606) – Martin Luther King (MLK) Natural Gas and
Mechanical Upgrades
PRESENTATION DATE: July 11, 2023
PRESENTATION BY: Rick F. Curry, CPPO, Director, Purchasing Department; Andrew
Eshleman, P.E., Director, Division of Public Works
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the contract for the MLK Natural Gas and
Mechanical Upgrades project to the responsible, responsive bidder, Mick’s Plumbing and Heating,
Inc., of Thurmont, MD who submitted the lowest total lump sum bid in the amount of $93,300.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The work to be performed by the Contractor under this project generally
includes but is not limited to: Remove the existing hot water fuel oil boiler burner and replace with
a natural gas hot water burner. The existing natural gas service fed from the alley will be removed
and a new larger service line installed from North Avenue. Provide other miscellaneous work as
indicated on the plans or required to complete the work. Furnish all supervision, labor, materials,
tools, equipment and service necessary and incidental to install all plumbing work and related
systems shown on the drawings, indicated in the Specification or necessary to provide a finished
installation. The finished installation shall be in perfect working condition and be ready for
continuous and satisfactory operation. The project is to be substantially completed within forty-
five (45) consecutive calendar days of the Notice to Proceed. The County can assess liquidated
damages in the sum of two hundred fifty ($250) dollars for each consecutive day that the project
is not completed.
The bid was advertised in the local newspaper, listed on the State of Maryland’s “eMaryland
Marketplace Advantage” website and on the County’s web site. Six (6) companies were
represented at the pre-bid teleconference. Forty-six (46) persons/companies
registered/downloaded the bid document on-line. Two (2) bids were submitted as indicated on the
attached bid tabulation matrix.
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted in the Division’s Capital Improvement Project (CIP)
account 10910-BLD078.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
ATTACHMENTS: Bid Matrix Tabulation
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
PUR-1606
MLK NATURAL GAS AND MECHANICAL UPGRADES
Bids Due: June 14, 2023
Denver-Elek, Inc.
Essex, MD
Mick’s Plumbing & Heating, Inc.
Thurmont, MD Item
No. Description:
1
Total Lump Sum Bid for
MLK Natural Gas &
Mechanical Upgrades
$117,897.00 $93,300.00
Remarks / Exceptions:
Mick’s Plumbing & Heating, Inc. Lead time on the new burner assembly is 7-9 weeks after submittal approval.
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Contract Award (PUR-1607) – Martin Luther King (MLK) Electrical Upgrades
PRESENTATION DATE: July 11, 2023
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Naugle, CPPB, Buyer, Purchasing Department; Andrew
Eshleman, P.E., Director, Division of Public Works
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the contract for the MLK Electrical Upgrades
project to the responsible, responsive bidder, Star Excavating and Electrical, LLC., of Clear
Spring, MD who submitted the lowest total lump sum bid in the amount of $204,372.60.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The work to be performed by the Contractor under this project generally
includes but is not limited to: The installation of a new 120/208v 1600A electrical service and a
new 1600A main distribution panel. The contract shall plan for continuity of service and selected
demolition of the old service. The County will be responsible for installing the new electrical closet
and associated mechanical and finish items. The Contractor shall install all electrical receptacles,
lights, fire alarm equipment, and associated wiring. Provide other miscellaneous work as indicated
on the plans or required to complete the work. The project is to be substantially completed within
forty-five (45) consecutive calendar days of the Notice to Proceed. The County can assess
liquidated damages in the sum of two hundred fifty ($250) dollars for each consecutive day that
the project is not completed.
The bid was advertised in the local newspaper, listed on the State of Maryland’s “eMaryland
Marketplace Advantage” website and on the County’s web site. Four (4) companies were
represented at the pre-bid teleconference. Twenty-One (21) persons/companies
registered/downloaded the bid document on-line. Three (3) bids were submitted as indicated on
the attached bid tabulation matrix.
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted in the Division’s Capital Improvement Project (CIP)
account 30-10910-BLD078 CNST.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Bid Matrix Tabulation
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
PUR-1607
MLK Electrical Service Upgrade
Bids Due: June 14, 2023
The Eastern Sales and
Engineering Co.
Baltimore, MD
Ebenezer Electric,
Woodbridge, VA
Star Excavating and
Electrical, LLC
Clear Spring, MD Item
No. Description:
1 Total Lump Sum for MLK Electrical Service Upgrade $299,000.00 $290,000.00 $204,372.60
Remarks/Exceptions:
Star Excavating and Electrical, LLC –
Star Excavating and Electrical propose to install a new 1600-amp service at the MLK Building. All labor and materials included. All
work will be done as spected per bid pack, using square D gear. Underground rock is excluded, any rock we hit will be broke out and
removed on a time and material basis. Price of material is only good for thirty days due to suppliers only holding material for this length
of time.
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Rejection of Bid (PUR-1626) Purchase or Lease and Supplying of Golf Carts for
Washington County’s Black Rock Golf Course
PRESENTATION DATE: July 11, 2023
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Naugle, CPPB, Buyer; Andrew Eshleman, P.E., Director,
Division of Public Works
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to take action that is in the best interest of the County to
reject the bid without prejudice for the Purchase or Lease and Supplying of Golf Carts for
Washington County’s Black Rock Golf Course due to the requirements of the bid specifications
not being met and we are requesting permission to re-advertise to solicit pricing for the Purchase
or Lease and Supplying of Golf Carts for Washington County’s Black Rock Golf Course.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Invitation to Bid (ITB) was advertised in the local newspaper, on the
County’s website, and on the State of Maryland’s website, “e-Maryland Marketplace Advantage.”
Fifteen (15) persons/companies registered/downloaded the bid document online, one (1) bid was
received on Wednesday, June 21, 2023, as indicated on the attached bid tabulation matrix.
DISCUSSION:
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Intergovernmental Cooperative Purchase Price Increase (INTG – 20-0030) Uniform
Rental Service for Various County Departments
PRESENTATION DATE: July 11, 2023
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Naugle, CPPB, Buyer, Purchasing Department
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize a price increase based on the utilization of
Intergovernmental Cooperative Purchase/Uniform Rental Services contract with Omnia/US
Communities, via Prince William County Schools Virginia (Contract Number: R-BB-190002)
that was awarded to Cintas of Cincinnati, OH. Pricing is to increase as presented in the attached
spreadsheet, which the price increase varies between 3.7% - 8.33%.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Omnia/U.S. Communities’ contract is for a five (5) year period. The
contract was awarded December 13, 2018, through October 31, 2023, with the option to renew
for two (2) additional two (2) year periods, upon mutual written consent of the parties. Proposed
prices shall remain firm for the initial term of the contract.
The Code of Public Laws of Washington County, Maryland (the Public Local Laws) §1-106.3
provides that the Board of County Commissioners may procure goods and services through a
contract entered into by another governmental entity, in accordance with the terms of the
contract, regardless of whether the County was a party to the original contract. The government
of Prince William County Schools took the lead in soliciting the resulting agreement. If the
Board of County Commissioners determines that participation by Washington County would
result in cost benefits or administrative efficiencies, it could approve the purchase of this service
in accordance with the Public Local Laws referenced above by resolving that participation would
result in cost benefits or in administrative efficiencies.
The County will benefit with direct cost savings in the purchase of these services because of the
economies of scale this large buying group leveraged. I am confident that any bid received as a
result of an independent County solicitation would exceed the spend savings that U.S.
Communities provides through this agreement. Additionally, the County will realize savings
through administrative efficiencies as a result of not preparing, soliciting, and evaluating a bid,
and potentially defending any resulting award. This savings/cost avoidance would, I believe, be
significant.
DISCUSSION: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
FISCAL IMPACT: Funding is available in the various department’s budget: Parks & Facilities,
Building Maintenance, Highway Department, Solid Waste Department, Department of Transit, Black
Rock Golf Course, Airport, and the Department of Water Quality.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: New Pricing Matrix
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION FORMER PRICE New Price Difference % Diff
BA2000S NAVY/ NAVY/ WHITE*0.5 $0.53 $0.03 6.00%
BD2000S NAVY/ NAVY/ WHITE*2 $2.10 $0.10 5.00%
X10184 3X5 ACTIVE SCRAPER 3.5 $3.68 $0.18 5.14%
X10184 3X5 ACTIVE SCRAPER 6 $6.30 $0.30 5.00%
X10189 3X5 XTRAC MAT ONYX 5.9 $6.20 $0.30 5.08%
X10192 4X6 XTRAC MAT ONYX 6.74 $7.08 $0.34 5.04%
X10202 3X10 XTRAC MAT ONYX 7.59 $7.97 $0.38 5.00%
X105 PRIOR SVC CHARGE 6 $6.30 $0.30 5.00%
X1802 3X5 SPRING STEP 2.41 $2.53 $0.12 4.98%
X1810 3X5 DURALITE MAT 2.25 $2.36 $0.11 4.88%
X205 WOMENS SHIRT PKT 0.17 $0.18 $0.01 5.88%
X2160 SM SHOP TWL-RED 0.08 $0.08 $0.00 na
X2160 SM SHOP TWL-RED 0.09 $0.09 $0.00 na
X2160 SM SHOP TWL-RED 0.12 $0.13 $0.01 8.33%
X2160 SM SHOP TWL-RED 0.45 $0.47 $0.02 4.44%
X2191 FENDER COVER 0.8 $0.84 $0.04 5.00%
X2477 3X5 SCRAPER MAT 2.25 $2.36 $0.11 4.89%
X2570 24" DUST MOP 0.84 $0.88 $0.04 4.76%
X259 PERFORMANCE POLO N/C COLLAR 0.23 $0.24 $0.01 4.35%
X2590 36" DUST MOP 1.05 $1.10 $0.05 4.76%
X2604 48" DUST MOP 1.25 $1.31 $0.06 4.80%
X2610 60" DUST MOP 1.55 $1.63 $0.08 5.16%
X268 T SHIRT PRO KNIT 0.19 $0.20 $0.01 5.26%
X270 CARGO PANT 0.33 $0.35 $0.02 6.06%
X27013 SIG AIR DSP ALU 0 $0.00 $0.00 na
X27013 SIG AIR DSP ALU 0 $0.00 $0.00 na
X27019 SIG AIR CVR BLUE 0 $0.00 $0.00 na
X27019 SIG AIR CVR BLUE 0 $0.00 $0.00 na
X27026 SIG AIR SVC 3.8 $3.99 $0.19 5.00%
X27026 SIG AIR SVC 7.12 $7.48 $0.36 5.06%
X27027 SIG AIR RFL CLEAN 0 $0.00 $0.00 na
X27028 SIG AIR RFL MANGO 0 $0.00 $0.00 na
X271 WOMENS SHIRT NO PKT 0.17 $0.18 $0.01 5.88%
X275 HI PERFORMANCE POLO 0.34 $0.36 $0.02 5.88%
X280 FR CARHARTT JEAN 0.37 $0.39 $0.02 5.41%
X294 CARHARTT FR WORK SH 0.42 $0.44 $0.02 4.76%
X294 CARHARTT FR WORK SH 49 $51.45 $2.45 5.00%
X330 COTTON WORK SHIRT 0.25 $0.26 $0.01 4.00%
X330 COTTON WORK SHIRT 18 $18.90 $0.90 5.00%
X340 COTTON WORK PANTS 0.34 $0.36 $0.02 5.88%
X366 HIGH IMAGE JKT 0.35 $0.37 $0.02 5.71%
X371 FR CARHARTT WORK PNT 0.49 $0.51 $0.02 4.08%
X374 CINTAS OXFORD 0.19 $0.20 $0.01 5.26%
X374 CINTAS OXFORD 22 $23.10 $1.10 5.00%
X376 CARHARTT ACTIVE JKT 1.25 $1.31 $0.06 4.80%
X381 CARHARTT 5 PKT JN 0.37 $0.39 $0.02 5.41%
X381 CARHARTT 5 PKT JN 27 $28.35 $1.35 5.00%
X382 CARHARTT CARP JN 0.37 $0.39 $0.02 5.41%
X383 CARHARTT PANT 0.42 $0.44 $0.02 4.76%
X383 CARHARTT PANT 30 $31.50 $1.50 5.00%
X384 CARHARTT SHIRT 0.33 $0.35 $0.02 6.06%
X386 CARHARTT JEAN STRETCH DENIM 0.37 $0.39 $0.02 5.41%
X386 CARHARTT JEAN STRETCH DENIM 29.99 $31.49 $1.50 5.00%
X388 SUSAN CARGO PANTS/WM 0.33 $0.35 $0.02 6.06%
X389 CATHY/CARGO PANTS/WM 0.33 $0.35 $0.02 6.06%
X390 WOMENS PANT SUSAN 0.19 $0.20 $0.01 5.26%
X391 CARHARTT FR CVRL 0.88 $0.92 $0.04 4.55%
X393 JEAN CARHARTT WOMENS 0.37 $0.39 $0.02 5.41%
X394 CINTAS DENIM JEAN 0.37 $0.39 $0.02 5.41%
X395 WOMENS PANT CATHY 0.19 $0.20 $0.01 5.26%
X59330 SHIRT W/REFLECT TRIM 0.64 $0.67 $0.03 4.69%
X59925 LAB COAT/POPLIN 0.25 $0.26 $0.01 4.00%
X59935 UF SHIRT REFL TRIM 0.45 $0.47 $0.02 4.44%
X59935 UF SHIRT REFL TRIM 37 $38.85 $1.85 4.08%
X59945 EVIS COMFORT PANT 0.49 $0.51 $0.02 4.08%
X59970 PRM LND JKT 0.55 $0.58 $0.03 5.45%
X59970 PRM LND JKT 51 $53.55 $2.55 5.00%
X65386 WK-SHRT/HI-VIS/ANSI2 0.65 $0.68 $0.03 4.62%
X65386 WK-SHRT/HI-VIS/ANSI2 80 $84.00 $4.00 5.00%
X66275 POLO WMNS POLY SS 0.34 $0.36 $0.02 5.88%
X66275 POLO WMNS POLY SS 28 $29.40 $1.40 5.00%
X677 PERMA LINED JKT 0.4 $0.42 $0.02 5.00%
X6913 24OZ SYNTH WET MOP 1.5 $1.58 $0.08 5.33%
X7462 FNDR COVER W/BARCODE 0.8 $0.84 $0.04 5.00%
X75293 POLY PERFORMANCE TEE 0.17 $0.18 $0.01 5.88%
X7540 GREY MICROFIBER WIPE 0.16 $0.17 $0.01 6.25%
X7705 ULTRACLEAN BASE CHG 30 $31.50 $1.50 5.00%
X7706 ULTRACLEAN SQ/FT CHG 0.186 $0.20 $0.01 7.53%
X8065 SIZE EXCHANGE CHARGE 15 $15.75 $0.75 5.00%
X82302 FR CTN/BLEND CVRL 0.81 $0.85 $0.04 4.94%
X84020 3X10 BLUE MAT 3.1 $3.26 $0.16 5.16%
X84020 3X10 BLUE MAT 4.6 $4.83 $0.23 5.00%
X84030 3X10 GRAY MAT 3.1 $3.26 $0.16 5.16%
X84030 3X10 GRAY MAT 4.6 $4.83 $0.23 5.00%
X84030 3X10 GRAY MAT 45 $47.25 $2.25 5.00%
X84035 3X10 BLACK MAT 3.1 $3.26 $0.16 5.16%
X84035 3X10 BLACK MAT 45 $47.25 $2.25 5.00%
X84301 3X5 LOGO MAT 2.4 $2.52 $0.12 5.00%
X84320 3X5 BLUE MAT 2 $2.10 $0.10 5.00%
X84320 3X5 BLUE MAT 3 $3.15 $0.15 5.00%
X84330 3X5 GRAY MAT 2 $2.10 $0.10 5.00%
X84330 3X5 GRAY MAT 3 $3.15 $0.15 5.00%
X84330 3X5 GRAY MAT 4 $4.20 $0.20 5.00%
X84401 4X6 LOGO MAT 6.14 $6.45 $0.31 5.05%
X84420 4X6 BLUE MAT 2.6 $2.73 $0.13 5.00%
X84420 4X6 BLUE MAT 3.9 $4.10 $0.20 5.13%
X84430 4X6 GRAY MAT 2.6 $2.73 $0.13 5.00%
X84430 4X6 GRAY MAT 6.5 $6.83 $0.33 5.08%
X865 PLEATED PANT 0.27 $0.28 $0.01 3.70%
X865 PLEATED PANT 22 $23.10 $1.10 5.00%
X910 COTTON COVERALLS 0.43 $0.45 $0.02 4.65%
X910 COTTON COVERALLS 50 $52.50 $2.50 5.00%
X912 COVERALL 0.25 $0.26 $0.01 4.00%
X912 COVERALL 30 $31.50 $1.50 5.00%
X914 INSULATED COVERALL 0.75 $0.79 $0.04 5.33%
X935 COMFORT SHIRT 0.17 $0.18 $0.01 5.88%
X935 COMFORT SHIRT 15 $15.75 $0.75 5.00%
X945 COMFORT PANT 0.19 $0.20 $0.01 5.26%
X9586 PREM SIZE EXCH CHRGE 15 $15.75 $0.75 5.00%
X970 HIP LENGTH JKT 0.4 $0.42 $0.02 5.00%
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Water line Funding Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Town of
Hancock and Bruceton Farm Services Inc.
PRESENTATION DATE: July 11, 2023
PRESENTATION BY: Michelle Gordon, Acting County Administrator; Kirk Downey, County
Attorney
RECOMMENDED MOTION: To approve and ratify the Water line Funding MOU with the
Town of Hancock and Bruceton Farm Services Inc (BFS) in a private-public partnership for one-
third (1/3) the cost of the construction of an eight-inch (8”) water line in an amount up to and not
to exceed $139,278.34 and to authorize the payment of $139,278.34 to BFS from the CIP
Reserves fund.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: County staff and the BOCC met with the Town of Hancock and BFS in
2022 regarding their request for financial support for an economic development and revitalization
project. Unexpected fire suppression requirements from the State Fire Marshal (SFM) necessitated
the construction of an eight-inch (8”) water line to ensure adequate water supply to several business
development projects underway on Main Street in Hancock, Maryland.
DISCUSSION: Business Development, Planning and Zoning, Engineering, and DBED staff met
with the Town of Hancock and BFS in 2022 regarding a request for financial support from the
Town of Hancock and Bruceton Farm Services Inc (BFS). During the site plan review process for
several business development projects underway on Main Street in Hancock, the State Fire
Marshal (SFM) identified the need for increased water capacity to meet fire suppression
requirements at those project site locations. For longevity, cost savings, and proper water pressure
needs, the construction of an eight-inch (8”) water line extension was determined to be the best
long-term solution to provide adequate water supply and fire suppression to those sites. The Town
of Hancock determined that the anticipated volumes were within the allowable capacity of the
Town’s current fresh water and wastewater systems. The Town requested funding from the
County to support the project based on the potential benefit to Washington County that will result
from increased attraction of business due to the new water line and the positive economic
development consequences that will result from the establishment of the proposed businesses.
The water line extension is estimated to cost $417,835.00. The Town and BFS asked the County
to fund one-third (1/3) of the project cost in this private-public partnership. The Town, BFS, and
the County concurred to fund an equal portion of the final project cost in an amount up to and not
to exceed $139,278.34. BFS is responsible for any cost over the original estimate of $417,835.00.
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
The project is nearing completion and BFS is seeking reimbursement for its capital expenditures.
At this time, it is appropriate to approve and ratify the agreement and MOU to provide for the
County’s one-third funding of the capital improvements of the project, up to and not exceeding
$139,278.34, and to confirm the source of funding for said improvements (CIP Reserves).
The Town shall have ownership and responsibility for any aspect of the operation, maintenance,
and repair of the extension from the point of connections with the Town’s existing water line to
each water meter. BFS shall have ownership and responsibility for the operation, maintenance,
and repair of any water line from its property to the point of connection with the water meter. The
County shall not have any ownership interest or responsibility for any aspect of the operation,
maintenance. or repair of the water line in its entirety.
FISCAL IMPACT: $139,278.34 funding from CIP Reserves
CONCURRENCES: Kelcee Mace, Interim Chief Financial Officer
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum of Understanding By, Between, and Among Bruceton
Farms, Inc; The Town of Hancock, Maryland, and the Board of County Commissioners of
Washington County, Maryland
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: None
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BY, BETWEEN, AND AMONG
BRUCETON FARM SERVICE, INC.;
THE TOWN OF HANCOCK, MARYLAND;
Z1
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
This Memorandum of Understanding (MOIL is entered into this 91h day of February,
2023, by, between, and among Bruceton Farm Service, Inc. (BFS); The Town of Hancock,
Maryland (Town); and the Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
(County). BFS, the Town, and the County are collectively referred to as the "Parties." Each
individually is referred to as a "Party."
RECITALS
A. BFS has undertaken a redevelopment project for a truck stop at 436 East Main
Street, Hancock, Maryland (Project). The Project includes the construction of a service
station, a convenience store, restaurants, parking areas, and supporting infrastructure.
B. BFS has encountered an unanticipated additional cost arising from the need
for construction of a waterline extension to provide an appropriate water supply for the
Project's domestic water and fire suppression systems. The location of the waterline
extension is shown as a solid red line labeled "PROPOSED NEW LINE" on the attached
Exhibit A titled "Town of Hancock, Existing Water Main System" (Extension).
C. Proposed construction and installation of the Extension consists of an eight -
inch (8") waterline from Rayloc Road along the shoulder of Ford Drive to the Project, and
includes, without limitation, a bridge crossing, utility trenching, and additional permitting.
D. Triad Engineering, Inc., has prepared a construction cost estimate of
$417,835.00 for the Extension as stated in the attached Exhibit B (Estimate). The Estimate
includes labor, equipment, and installation pricing.
E. The Parties have agreed to collaborate in a private -public partnership whereby
the Estimate will be divided among and paid evenly by the Parties.
F. Upon completion of the Extension's construction, BFS shall have sole
ownership of and responsibility or liability for the continued operation, maintenance, and
repair of the Extension and its supporting services to the Project over its property to the point
of connection with the water meter. The Town shall have ownership and responsibility for
any aspect of the operation, maintenance, and repair of the Extension from the water meter
to the point of connection with the Town's existing water line. The County shall not have any
Page 1 of 3
ownership interest in or responsibility or liability for any aspect of the operation,
maintenance, and repair of the Extension, the Project, or the Towri s water line.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises in this MOU, the
Parties agree as follows:
1. Recitals. The Recitals are a substantive part of this MOU.
2. Apportioned Payment of Construction Cost: The Parties agree that they will
contribute to the Estimate in equally apportioned amounts as follows: in an amount up to
$139,278.33 by BFS (BFS Contribution); in an amount up to $139,278.33 by the Town (Town
Contribution); and in an amount up to and not to exceed $139,278.34 by the County (County
Contribution). If the final actual construction cost is less than the Estimate, each Party
agrees to contribute one-third (1/3) of the final actual construction cost.
3. Cost Exceeding Estimate: The Parties agree that, if the Extension's
construction cost exceeds the Estimate, BFS shall be responsible for any excess construction
cost without contribution from the County or the Town.
4. Use of Funds: BFS agrees to use the Town Contribution and the County
Contribution in conjunction with the BFS Contribution solely for construction and
installation of the Extension.
b. Effective Date: This MOU is effective on the date set forth above (Effective
Date).
6. Modification: This MOU may be modified only in a writing signed by all
Parties.
7. County and Town Contributions: The County and the Town will pay the
County Contribution and the Town Contribution, respectively, to BFS upon completion of the
Extension's construction and receipt of satisfactory documentation of the final actual
construction cost.
8. No Third -Party Beneficiaries: This MOU is made solely and specifically for the
benefit of the Parties and their respective permitted successors and assigns. No other person
or entity has or will have any right, interest, or claim under this MOU as a third -party
beneficiary or otherwise.
9. Entire Agreement: This MOU constitutes the entire understanding and
agreement of the Parties as to those matters contained in this MOU. No other oral or written
understanding exists between or among the Parties, except that which may be set forth in a
later written modification.
10. Governing Law: This MOU is governed by the laws of the State of Maryland.
Page 2 of 3
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each Partys duly authorized representative has signed
this MOU with the intent to legally bind each said respective Party to the terms and
conditions hereof as of the Effective Date.
Attest:
LJ—
P'n d Name: KLvv
Title
Attest:
BRUCETON FARM SERVICE, INC.
By: 6Z V
Howard Goo ce President
THE TOWN OF HANCOCK
65" 9�� By: �E
Bather Keefer, CIVrk Mayor
Attest:
BOARD OF COUNTY
OF WASHINGTON CI
John F_ Ban, President
Page 3 of 3
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Potential dissolution of the Emergency Services Advisory Council (ESAC)
PRESENTATION DATE: July 11, 2023
PRESENTATION BY: Michelle Gordon, Acting County Administrator
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to dissolve the Emergency Services Advisory Council.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Discussion regarding the continued need for the ESAC committee.
DISCUSSION: The ESAC committee was formed to provide recommendations regarding the provision
of emergency services in Washington County. This committee serves in an advisory capacity. The
committee has no decision-making authority. Eleven (11) members serve on this committee with one (1)
of those members being a county employee, the Director of Emergency Services. Meetings are held
monthly and are open to the public.
The most recent revision to the ESAC By-Laws occurred on October 11, 2016. Article I: Authority of the
ESAC By-Laws, identifies that authority to establish this committee was given by the Board of County
Commissioners. Therefore, that authorization may be rescinded by the Board.
Given the evolving nature of fire and emergency medical service delivery, the need for this advisory
committee has diminished and its continuing operation has become obsolescent and unnecessary.
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: WCVFRA and the Division of Emergency Services County Attorney (as to legal
sufficiency)
ALTERNATIVES: None
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: None
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: MOU with City of Hagerstown regarding outstanding emergency communication dispatcher
costs
PRESENTATION DATE: July 11, 2023
PRESENTATION BY: Michelle Gordon, Acting County Administrator
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the MOU with the City of Hagerstown
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Hagerstown to
resolve the dispute regarding outstanding invoices to the City for wages & benefits related to former City
employees employed by the County 911 Communication Center.
DISCUSSION: In 2010 the City and County combined their separate emergency communication centers
into a consolidated emergency communications center (Center) for dispatch of fire, emergency medical
and law enforcement personnel and equipment in Washington County. From FY2010 to FY2020, the City
of Hagerstown paid an annual fee of $405,630 for wages and benefits related to the City employees who
left City employment to become County employees at the Center. The total amount of arrears is as follows:
The City proposes that the County waive the unpaid interest of $194,702.40. The City proposes that the
base amount owed for FY21 through FY23 of $1,216,890 shall constitute the County’s contribution to the
Hagerstown Sportsplex (former Municipal Stadium site) and that no money shall change hands for that
transaction. The City proposes that the base fee of $405,630 be reduced over 3 fiscal years until it reaches
zero (0) future payments as follows: FY24 base fee $304,500; FY25 $203,000; FY26 $102,500; FY27 and
future years are zero (0).
FISCAL IMPACT: “Write off” of the outstanding invoices from FY21 and FY22 as “in-kind”
contributions for specified projects will mean that fund balance will be reduced by $520,964.55 in FY23
(Balance due of $1,005,692.40 less prior allowance for doubtful accounts of $484,727.85 equals
$520,964.55.) “Write off” of the outstanding invoice from FY23 as “in-kind” contributions for specified
projects means that revenue received in FY23 will reduce by $405,630. Agreement of this MOU will reduce
Invoice Date Base Interest Balance Due
FY21-184290 5/3/2021 405,630.00 133,857.90 539,487.90
FY22-190537 5/2/2022 405,630.00 60,844.50 466,474.50
FY23-198057 5/15/2023 405,630.00 - 405,630.00
1,216,890.00 194,702.40 1,411,592.40
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
revenue in FY24 by $101,130, in FY25 by $202,630, in FY26 by $303,130, and in future years by $405,630
each year.
CONCURRENCES: None
ALTERNATIVES: None
ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum of Understanding
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: None
Page 1 of 4
M E M O R A N D U M O F U N D E R S TA N D I N G
This Memorandum of Understanding (“Agreement”) is entered into this
______ day of ___________________, 2023, by and between the Mayor and City
Council of Hagerstown, Maryland, a Maryland municipal corporation, hereinafter
called “City,” and the Board of County Commissioners of Washington County,
Maryland, a body corporate and politic and a political subdivision of the State of
Maryland, hereinafter called “County.”
Recitals
For many years, the City and the County maintained, staffed, and operated
separate and distinct emergency communication centers for the dispatch of law
enforcement personnel. (The City dispatched Hagerstown Police Department
calls, and the County dispatched Sheriff Department calls.)
In 2010, the City and the County combined their separate emergency
communication centers into a consolidated emergency communications center
(“Center”) for the dispatch of fire, emergency medical, and law enforcement
personnel throughout Washington County.
The consolidation was meant to achieve cost savings for both the City and
the County through administrative and operational efficiencies and to avoid
duplication of efforts. These cost savings have been material and ongoing.
Consolidated dispatch efforts also foster greater communication and
cooperation amongst law enforcement agencies when responding to a single
incident.
The City paid to the County $405,630.00 annually from FY2010 to and
including FY2020. The parties originally agreed upon this amount. It is believed to
have represented 85% of the wages, salaries, and benefits of the City’s employees
who left City employment to be employed by the County at the consolidated
emergency communications center.
A dispute has arisen amongst the parties concerning the parties’ ongoing
Page 2 of 4
responsibilities for the staffing, maintenance, and operation of the consolidated
emergency communications center.
The parties wish to resolve this dispute on the terms set forth below.
Terms
For and in consideration of the mutual promises herein contained and
intending to be legally bound, the City and the County agree as follows:
1. The foregoing Recitals are incorporated herein.
2. The County agrees to staff, maintain, and operate an emergency
communications center. The Center will provide dispatch services
for fire, emergency medical, and law enforcement throughout the
County, including but not limited to the Hagerstown Police
Department.
3. The parties agree the $1,216,890.00 arrearage identified by the
County shall constitute the County’s contribution to the Hagerstown
Sportsplex, which is to be constructed on the grounds of the former
Municipal Stadium and, as such, no moneys shall change hands in
satisfaction of that arrearage.
4. The City will pay to the County the following amounts to fully
satisfy its obligations and contributions towards staffing,
maintaining, and operating of the consolidated emergency
communications center, as follows:
a. On July 1, 2023, the amount of $304,500;
b. On July 1, 2024, the amount of $203,000; and
c. On July 1, 2025, the amount of $102,500.
5. Upon payment of the amounts set forth in Paragraph 4, above,
without proration, reduction, or setoff, the City’s obligation to
contribute monetarily to the staffing, maintenance, or operation of
the consolidated emergency communications center shall be deemed
Page 3 of 4
satisfied and extinguished. Following payment by the City of the
amounts set forth in Paragraph 4 above, the County will staff,
maintain, operate the emergency communications center at its sole
cost and expense.
6. This Agreement shall be governed by, construed under, and
enforced pursuant to the laws of the State of Maryland, irrespective
of its place of execution.
7. This Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement between the
parties, and any prior understanding or representations of any kind
preceding the date of this Agreement shall not be binding upon
either party except to the extent incorporated into this Agreement.
This Agreement shall not be subject to amendment except by a
writing signed by both parties to this Agreement.
8. The rights of each party under this Agreement may not be assigned
or transferred to any other person, corporation, or entity without the
other party’s prior, express, and written consent.
The parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their properly
authorized representatives as of the date set forth above.
ATTEST: M AYO R AND CO U NCI L
O F THE C ITY OF
HA GER STO WN,
M ARYLA ND
_____________________________ By: __________________________
Donna Spickler, City Clerk Tekesha Martinez, Mayor
Page 4 of 4
Approved as to legal sufficiency
for execution by the City:
_____________________________
Jason Morton
City Attorney
ATTEST: BO AR D OF C OU NTY
C OMM I SSI ONERS OF
WA SHINGTON CO U NTY,
M ARYLA ND
_____________________________ By: __________________________
Dawn L. Marcus, Clerk John F. Barr, President
Approved as to legal sufficiency
for execution by the County:
_____________________________
Kirk C. Downey
County Attorney