HomeMy WebLinkAbout250603a-1John F. Barr, President
Jeffrey A. Cline, Vice President
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
June 3, 2025
OPEN SESSION AGENDA
8:00 AM INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CALL TO ORDER, President John F. Barr
8:00 AM CITIZEN PARTICIPATION - (Citizen participation is scheduled for a minimum of
30 minutes and each citizens’ comment will be limited to 3 minutes. This time limit
will be strictly enforced by the President. Please see the County’s website at
WASHCO-MD.NET for complete Meeting Conduct and Meeting Sequence Rules.)
8:30 AM RECESS
9:00 AM INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CALL TO ORDER, President John F. Barr
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 8, 2025
May 13, 2025
9:05 AM COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS AND COMMENTS
9:20 AM STAFF COMMENTS
9:25 AM 1.POST LEGISLATIVE REVIEW SESSION
Bruce Bereano, Lobbyist, Washington County
9:45 AM 2.FY25 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS TO THE WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD
OF EDUCATION’S GENERAL FUND BUDGET
Jeffrey Proulx, Chief Operating Officer, Washington County Public Schools; Eric
Sisler, Executive Director of Finance, Washington County Public Schools
9:50 AM 3.AMENDMENTS TO THE ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES ORDINANCE
(APFO) AND THE BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE (BETO) CONTINUED
FROM MAY 6, 2025
Jill Baker, Director, Planning and Zoning
10:20 AM 4. FOP AND NCEU COLLECTIVE BARGAINING MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING APPROVAL
Sheriff Brian Albert, Washington County Sheriff’s Office; Col. Pete Lazich, Washington
County Sheriff’s Office; Andrew Bright, Attorney, Washington County Sheriff’s Office; Eric
Paltell, Council for BOCC; Chip Rose, Director, Human Resources; Dominick Turano, Deputy
Director, Human Resources; Zachary Kieffer, County Attorney
Derek Harvey
Randy Leatherman
Randall E. Wagner
Page 2 of 4
OPEN Session Agenda
June 3, 2025
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.
10:25 AM 5. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATIVE PURCHASE (INTG-25-0191) –
PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT (PPE) FOR DIVISION OF
EMERGENCY SERVICES
Brandi Kenter, Director, Purchasing; Eric Jacobs, Operations Manager, Emergency
Services; David Hays, Director, Emergency Services
6. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATIVE PURCHASE (INTG-25-0192) –
PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT (PPE) FOR DIVISION OF
EMERGENCY SERVICES
Brandi Kenter, Director, Purchasing; Eric Jacobs, Operations Manager, Emergency
Services; David Hays, Director, Emergency Services
7. SOLE SOURCE PROCUREMENT (PUR-1752) FIRE HOUSE SOFTWARE
AGREEMENT FOR DIVISION OF EMERGENCY SERVICES
Brandi Kenter, Director, Purchasing; David Hays, Director, Emergency Services
8. BID AWARD (PUR-1740) - LEACHATE HAULING FROM COUNTY
LANDFILL
Brandi Kentner, Director, Purchasing; David Mason, Deputy Director, Solid Waste
9. BID AWARD (PUR-1742) – ELECTRONICS RECYCLING
Brandi Kentner, Director, Purchasing; David Mason, Deputy Director, Solid Waste
10. RENEWAL/EXTENSION – SOLE SOURCE PROCUREMENT AWARD (PUR-
1654) - MUNIS SOFTWARE (UTILITY BILLING) SUPPORT
Brandi Kentner, Director, Purchasing; Angie Poffenberger, Deputy Director –
Software Support and Training, Budget and Finance
10:45 AM 11. BID AWARD (PUR-1735) SECTION A (NORTH) RETENTION POND
MOWING FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF STORMWATER AND WATERSHED
SERVICES
Carin Bakner, Buyer, Purchasing; John Swauger, Stormwater Management Quality,
Water Quality
10:50 AM 12. BID AWARD (PUR-1730) – DIGITAL AIR PARK SIGN AT HAGERSTOWN
REGIONAL AIRPORT
Carin Bakner, Buyer, Purchasing; Andrew Eshleman, Director, Public Works
10:55 AM 13. ASHCRAFT-RICE RURAL LEGACY PROGRAM (RLP) EASEMENT
Chris Boggs, Rural Preservation Administrator, Planning and Zoning
11:00 AM 14. BOND RURAL LEGACY PROGRAM (RLP) EASEMENT
Chris Boggs, Rural Preservation Administrator, Planning and Zoning
Page 3 of 4
OPEN Session Agenda
June 3, 2025
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.
11:05 AM 15. POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY, COMMUNITY, AND TRANSPARENCY
(PACT) GRANT
Lt. Daniel Monn, CALEA Accreditation Manager, Washington County Sheriff’s Office;
Carsten Ahrens, Senior Grant Manager, Grant Management
11:10 AM 16. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT
GRANT FOR FY26
Lt. James Grimm, Washington County Sheriff’s Office; Carsten Ahrens, Senior Grant
Manager, Grant Management
11:15 AM 17. MARYLAND 9-1-1 BOARD – APPROVAL TO SUBMIT APPLICATION AND
ACCEPT AWARDED FUNDING (PRIORITY DISPATCH SYSTEM)
Alan Matheny, Director, Emergency Management and Communications; Richard
Lesh, Grant Manager, Grant Management
11:20 AM 18. MARYLAND 9-1-1 BOARD – APPROVAL TO SUBMIT APPLICATION AND
ACCEPT AWARDED FUNDING (SECURITY ENHANCEMENTS)
Alan Matheny, Director, Emergency Management and Communications; Richard
Lesh, Grant Manager, Grant Management
11:25 AM 19. AGRICULTURE – JUNE IS NATIONAL DAIRY MONTH
Danielle Weaver, Director, Public Relations and Marketing; Katie Yoder, Multimedia
Specialist, Public Relations and Marketing; Kelsey Keadle, Business Specialist –
Agriculture, Business and Economic Development
11:30 AM 20. APPROVAL OF ZONING MAP AMENDMENT RZ-25-001
Aaron Weiss, Assistant County Attorney, County Attorney’s Office
11:35 AM 21. APPROVAL OF TRI-PARTY MOU FOR THE NEW DOWNSVILLE
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FACILITY
Rosalinda Pascual, Deputy County Attorney
11:40 AM 22. EMS STAFFING TRANSITION DISCUSSION, VOLUNTEER FIRE
COMPANY OF HALFWAY
R. David Hays, Director, Emergency Services; David Chisholm, Deputy Director –
Field Operations, Emergency Services; James Sprecher, Jr., President, WCVFRA;
Justin Gearhart, President, Volunteer Fire Company of Halfway; James Drawbaugh,
Chief, Volunteer Fire Company of Halfway
11:50 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 (1). Personnel matters are confidential,
precluding discussion in open session.
Page 4 of 4
OPEN Session Agenda
June 3, 2025
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.
• Discussion of reclassification of vacant position in IT
To consult with counsel to obtain legal advice on a legal matter (7). Open session discussion would
breach attorney/client privilege.
• Update from County Attorney on County-involved legal matters.)
12:30 PM RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION
RECESS
6:00 PM 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE HEARING – Public Safety Training
Center, 18350 Public Safety Place, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Citizens’ comments regarding the items on this Agenda or any other item of County business may
be directed to the contactcommissioners@washco-md.net.
You may also contact each Commissioner individually at:
John F. Barr, President: jbarr@washco-md.net or (240) 313-2205;
Jeffrey A. Cline, Vice President: jcline@washco-md.net or (240) 313-2208;
Derek Harvey, Commissioner: dharvey@washco-md.net or (240) 313-2206
Randy Leatherman, Commissioner: rleatherman@washco-md.net or (240) 313-2209;
Randall E. Wagner, Commissioner: rwagner@washco-md.net or (240) 313-2207.
Additionally, you may contact Michelle Gordon, County Administrator at
mgordon@washco-md.net or (240) 313-2202.
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Post Legislative Review Session
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Bruce C. Bereano, Lobbyist, Washington County
RECOMMENDED MOTION: N/A
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Final Update on 2025 Legislative Session
DISCUSSION: Summary of 2025 Legislative Session
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Legislative Tracking Report
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: FY25 Budget Adjustments to the Washington County Board of Education’s
General Fund Budget
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Mr. Jeffrey Proulx, Chief Operating Officer, WCPS
Mr. Eric Sisler, Executive Director of Finance, WCPS
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the requested adjustments to
the Board of Education’s FY2025 General Fund Budget.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Annotated Code of Maryland requires local school systems to
periodically re-forecast their financial needs and make necessary changes to their budgets. To that
end, the Washington County Board of Education approved the attached list of changes to its
FY2025 General Fund Budget at its May 20, 2025, meeting.
DISCUSSION: The changes that the Board of Education approved on May 20, 2025, cross major
categories. Therefore, these requested adjustments must also be approved by the Board of County
Commissioners. The Board of Education has asked its Finance staff to review the requested budget
adjustments with the Commissioners and answer any questions that they may have.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. These proposed modifications merely adjust various categories of the
budget to reflect updated information on revenue and spending trends.
CONCURRENCES: The Board of Education’s Finance Committee reviewed the proposed
adjustments at their meeting on May 14, 2025, and recommended them for approval by the full
Board. The Board of Education approved these changes at their May 20, 2025, meeting.
ALTERNATIVES: None
ATTACHMENTS:
• FY2025 general fund budget adjustments
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: None
Category Value The primary reason for variance is:
Administration $194,071 Higher indirect cost recovery from Federal grants. Savings from printer rentals and
maintenance.
Mid‐Level Administration $149,818 Salary savings
Instructional Textbooks and
Supplies $282,000 Instructional materials savings
Other Instructional Costs $650,095 Savings from transfers for private PreK providers and HCC dual enrollment costs
Special Education $313,014 Savings from Non‐Public Placements
Student Services $12,674 Salary savings
Maintenance of Plant $527,431 Reduce maintenance materials and equipment
Total Expense
Reductions/Additional Revenue $2,129,104
Revenue $391,663 State PreK revenue reduction
Instructional Salaries $632,292 Higher substitute costs and lower turnover rates
Student Health Services $239,683 Contracted Nursing Services higher than originally budgeted
Student Transportation
Services $303,183 Higher substitute and vehicle parts & repair costs
Operation of Plant $194,693 Inflation in utilities expense
Fixed Charges $217,486 Increased benefits costs associated with higher substitute costs
Food Services $70,000 Needed for adjustments to student accounts
Capital Outlay $80,105 Due to new auditing guidance, use of committed fund balance needs shown as a current
expense ‐ expense associated with Tech High Renovation
Total Expense
Increases/Reduced Revenue $2,129,104
Net Effect on Fund Balance $0
Washington County Public Schools
Requested FY2025 Budget Adjustments
5/7/2025 May FY25 Category Transfers ‐ Final
SUBJECT: Amendments to the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO) and the
Building Excise Tax Ordinance (BETO) continued from May 6, 2025
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Jill Baker, AICP, Director, Department of Planning and Zoning
RECOMMENDATION: The Commissioners vote on whether to approve or deny the request
or provide further direction to staff.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The proposed amendments for these ordinances are being contemplated
due to a lack of consistency, efficiency and coordination with local municipalities specifically
regarding school mitigation efforts. The focus on school mitigation is due to significant capital
costs associated with maintenance and repair of existing schools and construction of new
schools that historically have been funded predominately by the Board of County
Commissioners.
Because the two ordinances are currently linked together regarding school mitigation, it becomes
confusing as to what fees are due because of APFO requirements and what are due because of
BETO requirements. These amendments seek to break that link between the two documents and
let them stand on their own in adherence to their individual purpose.
DISCUSSION: The purpose of the APFO is to ensure that public facilities and services needed
to support new development shall be available concurrently with the impacts of such
development. The intent being that development may proceed at a reasonable rate while
providing time for the County to budget and plan for the capital costs that will be associated
with the impacts of development. APFO’s can only be adopted and enforced by the elected
body of individual jurisdictions. For example, the County adopted APFO does not apply to
lands within incorporated municipalities.
The BETO was adopted in 2015 as a mechanism to generate revenue from new building
construction throughout the County to help offset impacts on local infrastructure. The BETO
applies to all lands in the County including within municipalities.
FISCAL IMPACT: Increasing the excise tax while repealing APFO AMC should result in
similar, but possibly higher, revenues for impacts of development on local infrastructure.
CONCURRENCES:
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
ALTERNATIVES: Leave Ordinances as they are or discuss some other modifications not
presented by Staff.
ATTACHMENTS: Amended APFO in track changes
Amended BETO in track changes.
ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES
ORDINANCE
Adopted this 16th day of October, 1990.
This Ordinance is effective as of December 1, 1990.
Revision 1 - August 13, 1991
Revision 2 - August 31, 1993
Revision 3 - August 29, 1995
Revision 4 - November 26, 2002
Revision 5 – December 16, 2003
(Effective January 1, 2004)
Revision 6 – May 25, 2004
Revision 7 – November 1, 2005
Revision 8 – June 18, 2013
Revision 9 – October 22, 2013
Revision 10 - 2025
2
ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES ORDINANCE
ARTICLE I - PURPOSE
1.1 SHORT TITLE
This Ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the Adequate Public Facilities
Ordinance of Washington County, Maryland.
1.2 PURPOSE
It is the purpose of the Board of County Commissioners of Washington County
that public facilities and services needed to support new development shall be available
concurrently with the impacts of such new developments. In meeting this purpose, public
facility and service availability shall be deemed sufficient if the public facilities and
services for new development are phased, or the new development is phased, so that the
public facilities and those related services which are deemed necessary by the loc al
government to operate the facilities necessitated by that new development, are available
concurrently with the impacts of the new development.
ARTICLE II - DEFINITIONS
2.1 GENERAL
(a) For the purpose of this Ordinance, the following terms, phrases, words and
their derivations shall have the meanings given herein. Words in the present tense
include the future, the singular number includes the plural, and the plural includes the
singular. The word “shall” is mandatory and the word “may” is permissive. The words
“used for” shall include “arranged for,” “designed for,” “intended for”, “maintained for,”
“constructed for”, or “occupied for”. The word “individual” shall mean natural person,
joint venture, joint stock company, partnership, limited partnership, limited liability
partnership, limited liability limited partnership, association, club, company,
corporation, limited liability company, real estate investment trust, business trust or
similar legal entity or the manager, lessee, agent, servant, officer or employee of any of
them. The word “land” shall include water surface and land under water. The t erm
“Ordinance” shall refer to this Ordinance and all subsequent additions or amendments
thereto.
3
(b) A Developer shall not avoid the intent of this Ordinance by submitting
piecemeal applications for preliminary plats or site plans. However, a Developer may
seek approval of only a portion of the subdivision or development, provided that the
impact from all previously approved preliminaries or site plans from that development
shall be considered during the adequate public facilities review of each subsequent
portion of the development.
2.2 ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES
For the purpose of this Ordinance, the term “Adequate Public Facilities” shall be
defined as those facilities relating to roads, sewerage disposal systems, schools, water
supply and distribution systems, and interim fire protection systems meeting established
minimum standards.
2.3 DEFINITIONS
2.3.01 Affordable (aka Workforce) Housing
In accordance with the Housing and Community Development Article of the
Maryland Annotated Code §4-1801, affordable housing means residential
dwelling units where housing costs (rent or mortgage payments) do not exceed
30% of a household's income and being affordable to households earning 60% or
less of the area median income.
2.3.1 Agricultural Purposes
A parcel of land that has been determined by the Maryland Department of
Assessments and Taxation as having an “Agricultural Use Assessment” or a parcel of
land that is primarily involved in a bona fide and continuing agricultural activity, such
as, the raising of farm products for use or sale, including animal or poultry husbandry,
and the growing of crops such as grain, vegetables, fruit, grass for pasture or sod, trees,
shrubs, flowers and similar products of the soil.
2.3.1.1 Background Enrollment Growth
The average annual impact of equated student enrollment changes during the
preceding three (3) years in the school attendance areas serving the proposed
development as determined in Section 5.4 with appropriate adjustments made in the
4
determination by the Board of Education to eliminate student enrollment changes
caused solely by school redistricting.
2.3.2 Board of County Commissioners (Board)
The legislative body of Washington County, Maryland.
2.3.3 Board of Education (BOE)
The elected Board of Education of Washington County.
2.3.4 Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan of the County.
2.3.5 County
Washington County, Maryland.
2.3.6 County Engineer
The duly designated Chief Engineer of Washington County, Maryland.
2.3.7 County Health Department
The Washington County Health Department.
2.3.8 Developer
Any individual commencing proceedings under this Ordinance to effectaffect a
subdivision or development of land for himself or for another.
2.3.9 Extraordinary Hardship
Extraordinary hardship is a condition that exists when strict compliance with this
Ordinance would result in an unusually and extraordinarily severe financial economic
impact on the owner or Developer.
5
2.3.10 Immediate Family Member
Immediate family member shall mean father, mother, step-father, step-mother,
son, daughter, brother, sister, stepson, stepdaughter, grandchild.
2.3.11 Improvements
Improvements shall mean storm sewers, sanitary sewers, water supply lines,
roads, curbs, gutters, gas lines, electricity lines, water lines, septic tanks, wells, walks, and
other accessory works and appurtenances, dwellings, farm buildings, and other principal
or accessory structures.
2.3.12 Lot
A parcel of real property marked by the Developer as a numbered, lettered or
otherwise identified tract to be utilized as a unit of land intended for building
development or a lot or parcel described by metes and bounds, the description of which
has been recorded among the land records of Washington County.
2.3.12.1 Minor subdivision
A minor subdivision is the division of a lot, tract or parcel into seven (7) or fewer
lots for the immediate or future transfer of property ownership.
2.3.13 New Development
New development consists of new subdivisions and site plans for new
construction received for approval by the Washington County Planning Commission
after the effective date of this Ordinance as set forth in Article XII. New development also
consists of construction activity requiring a building and/or zoning permit but does not
consist of construction activity for agricultural purposes provided that, after said
development, the parcel does not lose the “Agricultural Use Assessment” classification
as determined by the Department of Assessments and Taxation.10
2.3.14 Original Tract of Land.
A parcel of real estate unsubdivided as of the date of adoption of this Ordinance.
2.3.15 Planning Commission (Commission).
The Washington County Planning Commission.
6
2.3.16 Plat
A map, plan, chart or drawing indicating the subdivision or resubdivision of land
filed or intended to be filed for the record.
2.3.16.1 Remaining Lands
The residual portion or tract of land which remains after lots or parcels have been
subdivided from the original tract of land.11
2.3.17 Residential Development
The term “residential development” as used in this Ordinance means any lot,
building or portion thereof used exclusively for dwelling units, including concomitant
uses, and other uses of a residential nature for the individuals residing in said dwelling
units.
2.3.18 Right-of-Way
A land area designated, dedicated, or reserved for use as a highway, street, alley,
interior walk, or for a drainage channel, or other public use.
10 Section 2.3.13 amended 8/31/93
11 Section 2.3.16.1 added 8/31/93
7
2.3.19 Road
A public right-of-way, intended for vehicular traffic, including freeways,
expressways, arterials, parkways, thoroughfares, collector streets, local streets, cul-
de-sacs, marginal access streets, avenues, boulevards, lanes and other public ways, and
as now or hereafter or otherwise designated.
2.3.20 Simplified Plat
The term “simplified plat” as used in this Ordinance is a map, plan, chart or
drawing indicating the proposed subdivision or resubdivision of land filed or intended
to be filed with the Planning Commission and where the intent of the subdivider is
neither to develop the land nor to divide land containing existing development.
2.3.21 Site Plan
A drawing that shows all of the existing conditions of a specified area (the site)
and all of the improvements and changes proposed to be made on the site. A site plan is
the drawing required by the Zoning Ordinance for all new development and certain
additions and must contain all applicable information as specified in the Zoning
Ordinance.
2.3.21.1 State Rated Capacity
As used in this Ordinance, State Rated Capacity shall refer to the capacity of each
school as determined by the state of Maryland. Portable classrooms shall not be used in
computing the school capacity for the purposes of this Ordinance.
2.3.22 Subdivision Ordinance
The Washington County, Maryland Subdivision Ordinance, and all subsequent
additions or amendments thereto.
8
2.3.23 Zoning Ordinance
The Zoning Ordinance of Washington County, Maryland, and all subsequent
additions or amendments thereto.
9
ARTICLE V - SCHOOLS
5.1 ADEQUACY
All residential newnew residential development shall be served by public schools
that:
(a) Are currently adequate; or
(b) Have construction of additional capacity funded and scheduled for
completion within the same school attendance area in the current or the next year of the
approved Washington County Capital Improvement Program (CIP) following final plat
or site plan approval. Adequate is defined in Section 5.4.1(a) or (b) below. The additional
capacity funded and scheduled shall be exclusive of any capacity created pursuant to a
developer-funded mitigation program; or
(c) Have been identified by the Board of Education (BOE) as part of an approved
redistricting plan scheduled to occur in the same school year or the school year following
final plat or site plan approval that will render the public schools adequate.
5.1.1 CAPACITY CREATED BY MITIGATION PROGRAM
Construction of capacity that is funded and to be created by a mitigation program
may not be used in a determination of adequacy for any Developer other than the
Developers who are parties to the mitigation program.
5.2 EXEMPTIONS
Article V of this Ordinance does not apply to:
(a) New development to be developed exclusively for non-residential uses;
33 Article V repealed and reenacted 12/16/03
34 Article V amended 11/1/05.
35 Article V amended 10/22/13 (APF-13-002)
10
(b) New development to be developed and managed according to the applicable
regulations and guidelines of the Federal Fair Housing Act and the Housing for Older
Persons Act;
(c) Public or private elementary and secondary schools, and public safety
facilities; or
(c) Minor Subdivisions.38
5.3 DATA ON WHICH ADEQUACY SHALL BE DETERMINED.
The BOE shall provide actual enrollment data to the Board of County
Commissioners for the last school day of September, December, March and June and the
State Rated Capacity for each elementary and secondary school.
5.4 DETERMINATION OF ADEQUACY
5.4.1 The Planning Commission shall determine whether public school facilities
are adequate for the proposed new development upon recommendation by the Planning
Department after evaluating enrollment information provided by the BOE. The Planning
Commission shall determine that a school is adequate if the school has the capacity as
follows:
(a) Elementary schools are adequate if the school has available capacity to
accommodate student enrollment, including approved new development without
exceeding 90% of the State Rated Capacity (SRC).
(b)(a) Elementary, Mmiddle schools and high schools are adequate if the school
has available capacity to accommodate student enrollment, including approved new
development without exceeding the State Rated Capacity (SRC).
(c)(b) Available capacity for individual schools shall be determined in accordance
with Section 5.5, below.
38 See Section 2.3.12.1 Minor Subdivision. A minor subdivision is the division of a lot, tract
or parcel into seven (7) or fewer lots for the immediate or future transfer of property ownership.
11
(d)(c) Final approval will not be granted for developments in the review process
until schools obtain adequate status through the determination made according to the
procedures described in Sections 5.5 and 5.85.6 below.
5.5 MEASURING FOR AVAILABLE CAPACITY
(a) Adequacy of every elementary, middle and high school serving the proposed
development shall be tentatively measured at the time of preliminary consultation and
preliminary plat review, and shall be finally measured and determined as of the date of
final plat or site plan submission, or the first date upon which all necessary
documentation and materials have been submitted, whichever occurs last, based upon
data as published by the BOE.
(b) If approval has not been received from the Planning Commission within
twelve (12) months of the date of plan submission, the most recent quarterly school
enrollment data must be utilized by the Commission for APFO review unless a delay
occurs not attributable to the applicant.
(c) For determining adequacy, enrollment shall mean the total of the BOE official
enrollment figures, background enrollment, pupils generated from the proposed
development, and pupils generated from other previously- approved developments,
including developments in municipalities.
(d) On a biennial schedule, student yield from approved development may be
subtracted from the equation to determine adequacy in an amount equal to the number
yielded by the dwelling units constructed.
(e) Pupil generation rates shall be determined by the Board of County
Commissioners with advice from and consultation with the BOE and shall reflect the
characteristics of the school attendance area within which the proposed development is
located.
5.6 OPTIONS FOR MITIGATION OF INADEQUATE SCHOOL CAPACITY
(a) If a school is not adequate as defined in Section 5.4.1 but does not exceed 120% of
State Rated Capacity,: a developer may choose to make an Alternate Mitigation
Contribution (AMC) as defined and described in Section 5.8. A developer may not
choose to make an Alternate Mitigation Contribution (AMC) if the existing enrollment in
any school affected by the new development exceeds 120%.
12
i. The Developer and/or Home Builder shall be subject to an annual permit
limitation of not more than 25 dwelling unit permits per calendar year. Permits
for multi-family apartment and condo units shall be limited to a permit for one
structure to contain up to 35 dwelling units per calendar year. Notes shall be
placed on record plats referring to the restrictions delineated in this section.
Permit allocations are assigned based on the master plan development not by
phases or other subsets. Permit allocations may not be transferred to other
developments. Permit applications that cannot be permitted due to the annual
limitation shall be deferred to the subsequent year, subject to the same review
and mitigation requirements. Unused allocations of permits may not be carried
over into a new calendar year.
Emergency or Public Benefit Projects: Development proposals that directly
address public health, safety or welfare as delineated in Section 9.3A, may be
exempt from the permit limitation or permitted outside of the annual cap as
determined and approved by the Board.
ii. If a school is not adequate as defined in section 5.4.1 and an adjoining school
district at the same level is at least twenty (20%) percent below State Rated
Capacity, then the Developer may request the BOE to determine the viability of
redistricting to accommodate the new development. If the BOE determines that
redistricting is a viable alternative, and the BOE approves a specific redistricting
plan that would result in all the schools serving the proposed development
meeting the standards established in Section 5.4.1, then the school shall be
considered adequate.
(a)
(b) If a school is not adequate as defined in section 5.4.1 and an adjoining school
district at the same level is at least twenty (20) percent below State Rated Capacity, then
the applicant may request the BOE to determine the viability of redistricting to
accommodate the new development. If the BOE determines that redistricting is a viable
alternative, and the BOE approves a specific redistricting plan that would result in all the
schools serving the proposed development meeting the standards established in Section
5.4.1, then the school shall be considered adequate.
(b) If a school is not adequate as defined in Section 5.4.1 and the development proposal
exceeds 120% of the SRC, the Developer shall be required to mitigate the impact of the
proposed development by providing one or more of the following mitigation measures to
13
receive final plat approval. The Board of County Commissioners, at their sole discretion,
may approve a mitigation proposal under this section. Failure to obtain an approved
mitigation plan within two (2) years from the date of final plan submittal shall result in
denial of the final plat and/or site plan.
i. Facility Improvements. A Developer may propose construction of capital facility
improvements to the inadequate school(s) affected by the development when it
has been determined that said contribution(s) will provide impactful relief of
overcapacity issues in a school within a five-year period starting from the date of
final plat approval. Temporary or portable classrooms shall not be included as
part of any mitigation plan under this subsection. If approved as a mitigation
plan, the Developer will be required to sign a Memorandum of Agreement with
the County affirming their responsibility and commitment to complete the
construction project. The Board may, at their sole discretion, require a bond to be
posted to ensure that the project will be completed.
Any Developer proposal to create improvements to meet adequacy shall be
submitted to the Department of Planning and Zoning to review with the BOE for
guidance and recommendations on the proposed improvements. Plans shall be
reviewed for consistency with any BOE adopted mitigation policy then in effect
and the most current Education Facilities Master Plan. Mitigation plans along
with staff recommendations will be forwarded to the Board for discussion and
deliberation by the Department of Planning and Zoning.
ii. Redistricting. If a school is not adequate as defined in section 5.4.1 and an
adjoining school district at the same level is at least twenty (20%) percent below
State Rated Capacity, then the Developer may request the BOE to determine the
viability of redistricting to accommodate the new development. If the BOE
determines that redistricting is a viable alternative, and the BOE approves a
specific redistricting plan that would result in all the schools serving the
proposed development meeting the standards established in Section 5.4.1, then
the school shall be considered adequate.
iii. Financial contributions. Monetary contributions to a public facility
improvement fund earmarked for public school construction may be proposed
when it has been determined that said contribution(s) will provide impactful
relief of overcapacity issues in a school within a five-year period starting from the
14
date of final plat approval. Use of this mitigation option will require the
Developer to provide a detailed analysis of the monetary contribution being
proposed. The analysis shall include:
1. A monetary figure based on the proposed cost per dwelling unit.
2. A narrative explaining the rationale and/or formulas that resulted in the
cost per dwelling unit.
3. A narrative explaining how the monetary contribution will provide
impactful relief in the affected school district(s) within five years of final
plat approval.
Financial contributions must be paid prior to final plat approval. Any sums paid
as part of the mitigation plan are not refundable.
iv. Other mitigation strategies. The Developer may propose an alternative
method of mitigation that must provide impactful relief for overcapacity issues
in a school within a five-year period starting from the date of final plat approval.
Use of this mitigation option must be accompanied by a detailed narrative and/or
financial analysis that support their desire to use an alternative mitigation plan.
(c) If a school is not adequate as defined in Section 5.4.1 and the developer has
not chosen the AMC described in Section 5.6 (a) or the BOE has not approved a specific
redistricting plan that would result in the school meeting the standards established in
Section 5.4.1, then the final subdivision or site plan approval shall be denied, except as
provided for in Section 9.3A of this Ordinance.
(d) Any Developer proposal to create improvements to meet adequacy shall be
submitted to the Board of Education for recommendations and reviewed under any BOE
adopted mitigation policy then in effect and be subject to the standards and review
processes of the Interagency Committee on School Construction (IAC) of the Maryland
Board of Public Works.
15
(e) Background enrollment growth40 will be extrapolated over the number of
years for which approval is requested. Included in the calculations shall be any additional
approved but unplatted major preliminary plan developments in the affected area which
might impact the historical growth trend to make it inaccurate or obsolete.
(f) The Planning Commission may require phasing or an annual maximum
buildout rate to plan for future adequacy.
5.7 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMIT APPROVAL
5.7.1 The Board of County Commissioners shall have the authority to limit the
number of building permits in any school attendance area. The decision to limit building
permits shall be based on the recommendation of the Planning Commission upon
receipt of a recommendation from the BOE taking into consideration of the adequacy of the school
attendance area and enrollment capacity in immediately adjacent school attendance areas.
5.7.2 The Board of County Commissioners shall have the authority to cap the
number of residential building lots approved for development on an annual basis.
5.8 ALTERNATE MITIGATION CONTRIBUTION (AMC)
(a) When any school affected by the new development exceeds adequate capacity
as defined in Section 5.4.1 but does not exceed 120% of its State Rated Capacity, a
developer may choose to make an Alternate Mitigation Contribution as described and
calculated below.
(b) The formula to calculate the Alternate Mitigation Contribution (AMC) is
(A/B×C)×D×E=AMC, where “A” is the average cost of a school seat; “B” is the expected
lifespan of a school or seat; “C” is the average pupil generation rate attributable to the
type of dwelling units proposed as set by resolution and referenced in Section 5.5(e); “D”
is the years a student spends in the school system (e.g., 13 years); and “E” is the number
of dwelling units, per type (i.e., single family, apartment, and/or town home), proposed
in the new development.
40 Defined in §2.3.1.1 as follows:
The average annual impact of equated student enrollment changes during the preceding three (3) years
in the school attendance areas serving the proposed development as determined in Section 5.4 with appropriate
adjustments made in the determination by the Board of Education to eliminate student enrollment changes
caused solely by school redistricting.
16
(c) The formula in Section 5.8(b) above shall be applied for each type of dwelling
unit comprising the new development. The sum of all calculations for each type of
dwelling unit will be the total AMC due for the proposed development.
(d) When the Alternate Mitigation Contribution is required in order to achieve
final plat or site plan approval, the County will notify the applicant of the amount due at
the time that it is determined the final plat or site plan is complete and ready for an
unconditional approval. The AMC shall be paid in full to the County prior to affixation
of the signature evidencing the Planning Commission’s approval of the site plan or final
subdivision plat.
(e) The actual factor values to be used in the formula specified in Section 5.8(b)
above shall be established by resolution of the Board. The factor values shall be reviewed
by the Board at its discretion, but at least by the end of every second year of each term of
office.
(f) Any sums paid as an AMC are not refundable.
ARTICLE IX - EXCEPTIONS, AGENCY PARTICIPATION
9.3 A In its sole discretion, the Board of County Commissioners or its designee
may approve a mitigation program that allows a development to proceed in a school
district otherwise designated as inadequate for development under the following
conditions:
(a) The Board of County Commissioners determines that approving this
development benefits the community by:
(i) encouraging certain types of development that offer advantages to
the community, including but not limited to the following:
(1) development in designated revitalization areas;
(2) renovation of abandoned or under-utilized structures;
(3) affordable or workforce housing as defined in 2.3.01 or
community revitalization projects; or
(4) developments with preliminary plat approval prior to July 1,
2005.
BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE
FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
Adopted June 17, 2003
Effective July 1, 2003
Revision 1 (Amended)-Adopted June 22, 2004
Effective as of July 1, 2004.
Revision 2 - Adopted and effective October 12, 2004
Revision 3 - adopted July 12, 2005
Effective as of July 12, 2005.
Revision 4 - adopted May 2, 2006.
Effective as of May 2, 2006, except as otherwise provided herein.
Revision 5 - Repealed and reenacted, with amendments, on June 17,
2008 Effective July 1, 2008
Revision 6 - Repealed and reenacted, with amendments, on June 23,
2009 Effective June 26, 2009
Revision 7 (Amended)-Adopted March 1, 2011
Effective March 1, 2011
Revision 8 (Amended) - Adopted September 13, 2011
Effective September 13, 2011
Revision 9 (Amended) - Adopted August 28, 2012
Effective August 28, 2012
Revision 10 (Amended) - Adopted March 26, 2013
Effective March 26, 2013
Revision 11 (Amended) - Adopted August 4, 2015
Effective August 4, 2015
BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
Revision 12 (Amended)-Adopted September 10, 2019
Effective September 10, 2019
Revision 13 (Amended) - Adopted June 28, 2022
Effective June 28, 2022
Revision 14 (Amended) – Adopted
Effective
BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
1
1. Establishment of tax.
1.01 In accordance with Section 2-701 of the Code of the Public Local Laws
of Washington County, as amended from time to time, there is a building excise tax
on all building construction in Washington County.
2. Definitions.
2.01 The words and phrases used in this Ordinance shall have their usual
meaning, unless otherwise defined in this section.
2.02 Addition construction means construction that requires a building
permit and that increases the gross square footage of an existing nonresidential
nonretail structure or nonresidential retail structure, or the habitable gross square
footage of an existing residential structure.
2.03 Applicant means the individual, partnership, corporation, limited
liability company, or other legal entity whose signature or name appears on the
building permit application.
2.04 Basement means that portion of a building that is partly or completely
below grade and has a ceiling height of at least seven feet.
2.05 Board or Board of County Commissioners or County Commissioners means
the Board of County Commissioners for Washington County, Maryland.
2.06 Building means any permanent structure used or intended for
supporting or sheltering any use or occupancy. Building does not include an accessory
structure or a temporary structure, as defined in the Washington County building
code.
2.07 Common area means the interior or exterior circulation paths, rooms,
spaces or elements that are not for public use and are made available for the shared
use of two or more people in a multifamily residential structure, including lobbies
and laundry facilities.
2.08 Construction means construction or alteration of a building or part of a
building that requires a building permit.
2.09 Director of Finance means the Director of Budget and Finance for
Washington County or the Director's designee.
BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
2
2.10 Director of Plan Review and PermittingPermits and Inspections means the
Director of the Division of Plan Review and PermittingPermits and Inspections for
Washington County or the Director's designee.
2.11 Farm construction means construction intended to be actively used for
farm use but does not include residential construction thereon.
2.12 Farm or agricultural use means the raising of farm products for use or
sale, including animal or poultry husbandry, animal husbandry facilities, aquaculture,
and the growing of crops such as grain, vegetables, fruit, grass for pasture or sod,
trees, shrubs, flowers, and similar products of the soil.
2.13 Gross square footage means the entire interior area of a structure, finished
or unfinished.
2.14 Habitable gross square footage means the entire interior area of living space
in a residential structure, finished or unfinished, including but not limited to
bathrooms, toilet rooms, closets, halls, basements, and storage or utility spaces, but
not including porches, garages, unfinished attics, and crawl spaces. Habitable gross
square footage does not include the common areas of multifamily residential
structures having three or more dwelling units.
2.15 Mixed-use structure means a structure or part of a structure, but not a
separated occupancy, having any combination of residential use, nonresidential
nonretail use, or nonresidential retail use.
2.16 Nonresidential means the use of a structure for purposes other than living
or permanent habitation.
2.17 Nonresidential nonretail means the use of a structure for assembly,
business, factory, storage, utility, education, institutional, transient accommodations
or habitation, or hazardous uses.
2.18 Nonresidential retail means the use of a structure open to the public for the
display and sale of merchandise, and involves stocks of goods, wares, or merchandise
incidental to such purposes, including but not limited to restaurants, stores, members-
only discount stores, and other commercial sales enterprises not solely engaged in the
wholesale distribution of merchandise.
2.19 Principal use means the foremost purpose for the use, its raison d'etre. A
principal use may be accompanied by one or more accessory uses that are incidental to or
supportive of the principal use. The ratio of the gross square footage of the
structure
BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
3
devoted to any principal and accessory uses is not a factor in determining the principal
use of the structure.
2.20 Redevelopment area means the "Hagerstown Redevelopment Area,"
consisting of all that land zoned Downtown Mixed-Use District or within a
Hagerstown Conversion District overlay zone as set forth in the Hagerstown Zoning
Ordinance as of June 26, 2009, and those areas in other municipal corporations as
may be designated by the Board of County Commissioners by resolution upon
request.
2.21 Residential means the use of a structure for living or permanent
habitation, or a structure having one (1) or more dwelling units, including but not
limited to boarding houses, but not including institutional uses or transient
accommodations such as hotels, country inns, bed and breakfast inns, and the like,
which shall be considered nonresidential nonretail uses.
2.22 Separated occupancy means a discrete part of a structure having a
principal use that is distinct from other uses in the same structure, including but not
limited to a store in a mall or an office in a multi-unit office building.
2.23 Structure means a building or part of a building.
3. Residential Construction.
3.01 Base building excise tax. The base amount of the building excise tax for
residential construction is $12.00 per square foot of habitable gross square footage.
3.02 Addition construction. The amount of the building excise tax for
residential addition construction is one-half of the amount per square foot set forth in
§3.01.
3.023.03 Credits from previous Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance
(APFO) regulations. Residential units that have paid an Alternate Mitigation
Contribution (AMC) in accordance with preceding APFO requirements to gain final plat
approvals shall receive credit for the first $1.00 per square foot of building excise tax.
The Department of Planning and Zoning shall provide a report to the Department of
Permits and Inspections delineating units that may receive this credit.
3.033.04 Calculation of amount. The amount of building excise tax to be paid
by an applicant shall be determined by the Director of Plan Review and
PermittingPermits and Inspections.
4. Nonresidential Construction
BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
4
4.01 Nonresidential nonretail construction. The building excise tax for
nonresidential nonretail construction is $1 1.50 per square foot of the gross square
footage.
4.02 Nonresidential retail construction. The building excise tax for
nonresidential retail construction is $1 1.50 per square foot of the first 15,000 square
feet of gross square footage and $3 per square foot of any gross square footage over
15,000 square feet.
4.03 Addition construction. The amount of the tax due under this section
shall be determined according to the increase in the gross square footage of the
structure at the same rate per square foot set forth in §§4.01 and 4.02, as the
circumstance may require.
4.04 Mixed-use structures. The building excise tax for mixed-use
construction is the tax imposed under this Ordinance for the principal use of the
structure as determined by the Director of Plan Review and PermittingPermits and
Inspections.
4.05 Separated occupancies. The building excise tax for separated
occupancy construction is the tax imposed under this Ordinance for the principal use
of the separated occupancy.
5. Payment of tax.
5.01 Building excise tax paid before issuance of building permit. An
applicant for a building permit shall pay the building excise tax before the building
permit for the respective structure is issued.
5.02 Refunds. The Director of Finance shall refund to the applicant the
building excise tax paid if the building permit is cancelled or expires so long as work
has not commenced. If, upon appeal by an applicant pursuant to §10.03 who has paid
the building excise tax, the County Administrator determines that the Director of
Plan Review and PermittingPermits and Inspections has erred in calculating the
building excise tax, the Director of Finance shall refund to the applicant the difference
between the amount of building excise tax paid by the applicant and the correct
amount as determined by the County Administrator.
6. Exemptions.
6.01 Farm construction. Farm construction is not subject to the building excise
tax so long as the construction continues to be actively used for farm use. Should the
BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
5
construction be used for some purpose other than active farm use, then the building
excise tax shall be remitted to the Director of Finance at the then existing amount of
the building excise tax.
6.02 Government construction. No building excise tax shall be imposed on
construction by the Board of County Commissioners, any municipality, the
Washington County Board of Education, Hagerstown Community College, the State
of Maryland, or the federal government.
6.03 Replacement construction.* No building excise tax shall be imposed on
construction that replaces an existing structure as long as there is no:
(a) Increase in the habitable gross square footage of a residential structure;
(b) Change in the use of a structure from a nonresidential nonretail use
to a nonresidential retail use; or
(c) Increase in the gross square footage of a nonresidential structure.
6.04 Residential accessory structures. No building excise tax shall be
imposed on residential accessory structures that are not habitable.
6.05 Schools. No building excise tax shall be imposed on construction of
public or private elementary or secondary schools or higher education institutions
issued a certificate of approval by the Maryland Higher Education Commission
pursuant to Md. Code Ann., Educ. §11-202.
6.06 Redevelopment area. No building excise tax shall be imposed on
construction in a redevelopment area as defined in §2.20 of this Ordinance.
6.07 Enterprise zones. No building excise tax shall be imposed upon non-
residential construction within enterprise zones in the County.
6.08 Religious corporations. No building excise tax shall be imposed upon
structures:
(a) Owned by corporations organized and operated exclusively for
religious purposes within the meaning of 26 U.S.C. 501, and
(b) Used primarily for religious purposes.
• * The building excise tax on any increase in habitable gross square footage or gross square footage created by the
construction shall be computed in accordance with §§ 3, 4, and 7 of this Ordinance.
BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
6
6.09 Fire, Rescue, or Ambulance Companies. No building excise tax shall
be imposed upon structures:
(a) Owned by corporations authorized to provide fire protection or
firefighting service, rescue, or ambulance service as described in
Section 10-401 of the Code of Public Local Laws for Washington
County, Maryland; and used primarily for the delivery of fire, rescue,
or ambulance service.
6.10 Residential construction occurring within the Hancock and Cascade
Elementary School attendance districts shall be exempt from excise tax for a period of ten
(10) years from the effective date of this amendment (Revision 14). This exemption also
applies to construction of residential additions outlined in 3.03.
7. Change in use.
7.01 General. Upon receipt of a building permit application for a change in
use that requires a zoning certification, the building excise tax shall be imposed based
on the use applied for in the building permit application, subject to any credit allowed
by §7.07.
7.02 Conversion from nonresidential to residential. When an existing structure
is subject to construction pursuant to a building permit that converts its use from a
non-residential use to residential use, the building excise tax is 70% of the amount set
forth in§ 3.01 on all existing gross square footage. Any addition construction will be
taxed at the amount set forth in §3.02. Conversion construction under this §7.02 is not
entitled to the credit set forth in §7.05.
7.03 Conversion from residential to non-residential nonretail. When an existing
structure is subject to construction pursuant to a building permit that converts its use
from residential use to nonresidential nonretail use, the building excise tax is as set
forth in §4.01 on all existing habitable gross square footage. Any addition
construction will be taxed at the amount set forth in §4.03.
7.04 Conversion from residential to non-residential retail. When an existing
structure is subject to construction pursuant to a building permit that converts its use
from residential use to nonresidential retail use, the building excise tax is as set forth
in §4.02 on all existing gross square footage. Any addition construction will be taxed
at the amount set forth in §4.03.
7.05 Credit. A credit shall be granted for any building excise tax due under this
BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
7
§7 for any excise tax previously paid upon prior construction of the structure since July
12, 2005. No refund shall be granted if the credit for any building excise tax previously
paid exceeds the building excise tax imposed under this §7.
8. Special excise tax fund.
8.01 Establishment of fund. The Director of Finance shall establish a special
non-lapsing fund to be known as the special excise tax fund. All revenues from the
building excise tax shall be deposited in the special excise tax fund. Interest earned by
money in the special excise tax fund shall accrue to the special excise tax fund.
8.02 Use of special excise tax fund – non-residential construction. Revenues
deposited in the special fund that are generated by the building excise tax imposed
on nonresidential construction may only be used for:
(a) Primary, secondary, or higher education capital expenditures;
(b) Public safety capital expenditures;
(c) Public infrastructure projects; and
(d) Debt reduction related to capital improvements expenditures.
8.03 Use of special excise tax fund - residential construction. The revenues
from the building excise tax imposed on residential construction may only be used as
follows:
(a) 70% for schools;
(b) 2325% for roads;
(c) 2% for public libraries; and
(d)(c) 5% for general county government capital improvement
expenditures except roads.parks and recreational facilities, public
safety, water and sewer infrastructure, and agricultural land
preservation.
8.04 The revenues from the building excise tax imposed on residential
construction used for public libraries, water and sewer infrastructure, and parks and
recreationgeneral county government improvement expenditures may only be used
for the capital costs of public works, improvements, and facilities.
8.05 The revenues from the building excise tax imposed on residential
BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
8
construction used for schools may only be used for the capital costs required to
accommodate new construction or development in the County.
8.06 At the end of a fiscal year, any unspent or unencumbered balance in the
special fund shall remain in the fund, available for use in future fiscal years for
purposes specified in this subsection and does not revert to the general fund of
Washington County.
8.07 Capital costs include the costs of land acquisition for public works,
improvements, facilities, and schools.
9. Municipalities.
9.01 Building excise tax applicable. This building excise tax shall apply to
all construction in Washington County, including construction within the boundaries
of a municipal corporation.
9.02 Collection of tax by a municipal corporation without an adequate public
facilities ordinance. This § 9.02 applies to a municipal corporation within
Washington County that has not adopted an adequate public facilities
ordinance with school adequacy tests substantially similar to or more stringent
than the adequate public facilities ordinance adopted by the County
Commissioners.
(a) All municipal corporations located within Washington County
described in§ 9.02 of this paragraph shall assist the County Commissioners in
the collection of the building excise tax within the municipal corporation by:
(i) Collecting the tax prior to the issuance of a building
permit and remitting the tax monthly to the Director of
Finance, but in no case more than 30 days after the end of
the month during which it was collected, and shall deliver
therewith a full and accurate accounting of the collections
in a format specified by the County; or
(ii) Requiring the tax to be paid to the Director of Finance
prior to the issuance of a building permit.
(b) The failure of a municipality to comply with the requirements of
§9.02(a)(i) shall disqualify that municipality from retaining any funds for
administrative costs provided for in §9.0403 of this Ordinance for the period of
non-compliance.
BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
9
9.03 Collection of tax by a municipal corporation with an adequate public facilities
ordinance. This§ 9.03 applies to a municipal corporation within Washington County that
has adopted an adequate public facilities ordinance with school adequacy tests
substantially similar to or more stringent than the adequate public facilities ordinance
adopted by the County Commissioners.
(a)(c) For residential construction, the municipal corporation:
(i) Shall assist the County Commissioners in the collection of
that portion of the building excise tax that is dedicated to
schools and public librariesgeneral county government
capital expenditures as provided under §8.03 of this
Ordinance, by collecting and remitting that amount of the
tax to the County Director of Finance; and
(ii) May retain the remaining portion of the building excise tax.
(b)(d) For non-residential construction, the municipal corporation:
(i) Shall assist the County Commissioners in the collection
of 7275% of the building excise tax on non-residential
construction as provided under § 8.02 of this Ordinance, by
collecting and remitting that amount of the tax to the County
Director of Finance; and
(ii) May retain the remaining portion of the building excise tax.
(c)(e) The municipal corporation is not required to retain any
portion of the building excise tax as provided under §9.0302.
(d)(f) Any portion of the building excise tax not retained by a
municipal corporation under §§9.03(a)(ii) or 9.03(b)(ii)9.02(c).(ii) or
9.02(d)(ii) shall be remitted to the County Director of Finance monthly, but in
no case more than 30 days after the end of the month during which it was
collected, and shall deliver therewith a full and accurate accounting of the
collections in a format specified by the County. The failure of a municipality
to comply with the requirements of §9.03(d)9.02(f) shall disqualify that
municipality from retaining any funds for administrative costs provided for in
§9.04 03 of this Ordinance for the period of non-compliance.
(e)(g) The director of finance of a municipal corporation retaining
any revenue from the building excise tax under §§9.03(a)(ii) or
9.03(b)(ii)9.02(c)(ii) or 9.02(d)(ii) shall deposit the revenues into a non-
BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
10
lapsing special fund.
(f)(h) The revenues from the municipal corporation's special fund
indicated in §9.03(e)9.02(g) may only be used for the capital costs of public
works, capital improvements, and facilities required to accommodate new
construction for development of:
(i) Roads;
(ii) New construction or development of parks and
recreational facilities;
(iii) New construction or development of water and
sewer infrastructure; and
(iv) New construction or development of public safety facilities.
(g)(i) At the end of a fiscal year, any unspent or unencumbered balance
in the municipal corporation's special fund shall remain in the fund, available
for use in future fiscal years for purposes specified in §9.03(£)9.02(h) of this
section, and does not revert to the general fund of the municipal corporation.
9.049.03 Administrative fees for collection.
(a) A municipal corporation that collects and remits the excise tax to
the County Commissioners may deduct from the revenues collected a fee of
two percent (2%) of the revenues remitted to the County Commissioners
under this section, not including any portion retained pursuant to §9.0302,
for administrative costs.
(b) If the municipal corporation can demonstrate to the satisfaction of
the Board of County Commissioners that the direct administrative costs of
collecting the building excise tax exceed the two percent (2%) rate authorized
in the §9.0403(a), the Board, in its sole discretion, after receiving the
recommendation of the Director of Finance, may authorize the municipal
corporation to withhold all or any portion of the direct administrative costs
claimed for collecting the building excise tax remitted to the County
Commissioners or may direct that the municipal corporation be reimbursed
with the costs.
BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
11
10. Appeals
10.01 Administrative appeals. An applicant aggrieved by a decision regarding
the calculation of the amount of building excise tax, the granting or denial of an
exemption, or otherwise interpreting or applying this building excise tax, may
appeal the decision to the County Administrator within 30 days of the date of the
written decision of the Director of Plan Review and PermittingPermits and
Inspections, provided that either:
(a) Processing of the building permit is delayed pending the decision
(b) of the County Administrator; or
(c) The applicant pays the building excise tax prior to filing the appeal.
10.02 Burden of proof. The burden of proof shall be on the appellant to
demonstrate that the decision of the Director of Plan Review and
PermittingPermits and Inspections is erroneous.
10.03 Procedures. Appeals must be filed in writing with the County
Administrator, with a copy of the appeal to the Office of the County Attorney,
stating the grounds of the appeal. Appeals from any decision of the Director of
Plan Review and PermittingPermits and Inspections under this Ordinance shall
be de nova. The County Administrator shall hold such hearings as are necessary
and may request additional information from the Appellant. The decision of the
County Administrator shall be in writing and shall be rendered within a
reasonable time.
10.04 Judicial review.
(a) Any party aggrieved by a decision of the County Administrator
may file for judicial review of the decision in accordance with Maryland Rules 7-
201, et seq., provided that such appeal is filed within thirty (30) days of the
date of the written decision of the County Administrator. This and all
subsequent appeals shall be on the record of the decision of the County
Administrator and may not be heard de nova.
(b) The decision of the Circuit Court may be appealed to the Court
of Special Appeals or, upon certiorari, to the Court of Appeals in accordance with
the Maryland Rules.
(c) The County Commissioners may file a responsive pleading and be a
party to or file for judicial review in the Circuit Court or take an appeal to the
BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
12
(d) Court of Special Appeals or, upon certiorari, to the Court of
Appeals, of any decision made under this Ordinance.
10.05 Reports to the Board of County Commissioners. The County Administrator
shall immediately report to the Board of County Commissioners on appeals from
decisions of the Director of Plan Review and PermittingPermits and Inspections
including the issues raised, the decision, the decision on any further appeal, and any
changes made to County policies and procedures as a result of the appeal.
11. Enforcement.
11.01 Misdemeanor. It is unlawful for any person or entity to enlarge, alter or
change any use of property or to erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move,
improve, make, put together, or convert any building in the County, or attempt to do
so, or cause the same to be done, without first paying any building excise tax
imposed by this Ordinance. Any person or entity who shall so violate this Ordinance
shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof, shall be fined up to
five hundred dollars ($500.00) or imprisoned for up to thirty (30) days, or be both
fined and imprisoned. Each day that the violation continues shall be deemed a
separate offense.
11.02 Action to enforce. In the event the building excise tax is not paid as
required, the Office of the County Attorney or its designee may institute an action to
recover the building excise tax and enjoin the use of the property until the building
excise tax is paid. The person who fails so to pay shall be responsible for the costs of
such suit, including reasonable attorney's fees.
11.03 Lien and enforcement same as County real property taxes. If not paid as
required by this Ordinance, the building excise tax shall automatically constitute a lien
against the property being developed and shall be levied, collected, and enforced in
the same manner as are County real property taxes, and shall have the same priority
and bear the same interest and penalties as County real property taxes for lien
purposes.
12. Annual reports.
12.01 Reports by the municipal corporations.
(a) On or before September 30 of each year, each municipal corporation
that retains revenues under §9.03 of this Ordinance shall report annually to the
Board of County Commissioners:
BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
13
(i) The amount of revenues the municipal corporation
received and the number of single-family and multifamily
residential units that generated these revenues;
(ii) The amount of revenues remitted to the Board of County
Commissioners and the amount retained by the
municipal corporation; and
(iii) A detailed accounting of how the revenues that were
retained by the municipal corporation were distributed
among the acceptable uses specified in§ 9.03(£) of this
Ordinance and the specific projects for which the
revenues were used.
(b) The report prepared by each municipal corporation shall be based
on the fiscal year ending on June 30 of the year the report is submitted.
12.02 Reports by the Director of Finance. The Director of Finance shall
prepare and submit an annual report on or before November 30 of each year to the
Board of County Commissioners that shall include the following information for the
prior fiscal year:
(a) The total amount of building excise taxes collected;
(b) The amount of funds appropriated from the special excise tax fund;
(c) The amount of funds expended from the special excise tax fund;
(d) The amount of funds from County sources appropriated for each of
the categories set forth in § 8 of this Ordinance; and
(e) The funds remaining in the special excise tax fund.
12.03 Reports by the Board of County Commissioners. On or before
December 31 of each year, the Board of County Commissioners shall:
(a) Report to the members of the Washington County legislative
delegation:
(i) The amount of revenues by school district that the Board of
County Commissioners received from nonresidential
building types, residential units, and the number and types
of units that generated these revenues; and
BUILDING EXCISE TAX ORDINANCE FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
14
(ii) The manner in which the revenues were distributed
among the acceptable uses specified in § 8 of this
Ordinance and the specific projects for which the
revenues were used.
(b) Submit to members of the Washington County legislative delegation
the report prepared by each municipal corporation under § 12.01 of this
Ordinance.
(c) The reports prepared by the Board of County Commissioners shall
be based on the fiscal year ending on June 30 of the year the reports are
submitted.
13. Agricultural land preservation
13.01 Each fiscal year, the Board of County Commissioners shall encumber
at least $1,000,000 of local funds for agricultural land preservation.
11125 Bemisderfer Road | Greencastle, PA 17225 | 301.791.9222 | jdivelbiss@divelbisslaw.com
11125 Bemisderfer Road | Greencastle, PA 17225 | 301.791.9222 | jdivelbiss@divelbisslaw.com
May 20, 2025
Washington Co. Dept. of Planning and Zoning
Attn: Jill Baker, Director
747 Northern Avenue
Hagerstown, MD 21742
jbaker@washco-md.net
Re: APF-25-001 – Proposed Changes to Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance
(the “APFO”) and Building Excise Tax Ordinance (the “BETO”)
Dear Jill:
Please accept the within letter as additional public comment on the proposed amendments
to the APFO and BETO on behalf of numerous residential and commercial developers in
Washington County.
IN GENERAL
Any modifications to the APFO or BETO should only have a prospective effect on new
projects and not be applicable to projects currently active in either the approval process or
development/construction phase.
Currently, the APFO applies to all “New Development” which is defined in § 2.3.13 as “new
subdivisions and site plans for new construction received for approval by the Washington
County Planning Commission after the effective date of this Ordinance as set forth in
Article XII” which identifies an effective date of December 1, 1990.
Similarly, the new excise tax rates would be immediately applicable to building permit
applications for new homes or commercial projects no matter how long they’ve been in the
approval or development process.
APFO
§ 5.4: Determination of Adequacy
No objection to adjusting the adequacy determination for elementary schools from “Local
Rated Capacity” i.e. 90% of State Rated Capacity to the more consistent 100% State Rated
Capacity to align with the adequacy thresholds for middle and high schools.
Based upon the most recent WCPS Official Enrollment data from March 2025 and the
2024-2025 WCPS “Facilities Fact Sheet” both of which are summarized in the chart
attached hereto below, this change from 90% to 100% of State Rated Capacity as the
threshold for “adequacy” under the APFO, would reduce the number of “inadequate”
elementary schools from seventeen (17) to eight (8) and be more equitable in application.
§ 5.5: Measuring for Available Capacity
Request: 1. Make final determination of adequacy at the time of
preliminary rather than final plat review / approval.
2. Consider additional data points when measuring for
available capacity.
As currently provided in § 5.5 of the APFO, adequacy of the schools impacted by a
development project is “tentatively measured at the time of preliminary consultation and
preliminary plat review and … finally measured and determined as of the date of final plat
or site plan submission.” (emphasis added)
In most cases, because the preliminary plat contains all the requisite plans and engineering
needed to commence and complete the construction of a project’s infrastructure (e.g. water,
sewer, roads, SWM, etc.), development work begins immediately following approval of the
preliminary plat. The final plat is not submitted for approval until development is
completed and finished lots are ready to be sold.
Therefore, it is possible for a project to receive a determination of school adequacy at the
preliminary plat stage, expend significant costs to complete all or a substantial portion of
the project’s development work, and not be able to proceed with a final plat if one or more of
the impacted schools has recently been determined to be over capacity. To prevent this
scenario from occurring, § 5.5 of the APFO should be revised to provide for final
determination of adequacy at the time of preliminary rather than final plat review /
approval.
Additionally, when measuring for available capacity, the County should consider a number
of additional data points not currently identified in § 5.5 including the following:
- Whether the school facility determined to be “inadequate” has the ability to
accommodate additional students with the use of classrooms in relocatable buildings
which, while not ideal, is a practice commonly used by WCPS to accommodate
temporary enrollment fluctuations and need for additional school capacity; and
- Whether there are special circumstances which justify an adjustment to the Official
Enrollment figures provided by WCPS and which could result in an inaccurate
determination of “inadequacy.” For example, are there half-day students (e.g. Pre-K,
Barbara Ingram, Hagerstown Community College, etc.) counted in the Official
Enrollment for a school facility?
§ 5.6: Options for Mitigation of Inadequate School Capacity
Request: Rather than replace the Alternate Mitigation Contribution
(AMC) with a mandatory cap of twenty-five (25) dwelling units
per year (35 units for multi-family projects), allow either option
to be elected by the project developer.
The inconsistent implementation of the APFO across jurisdictions in Washington County
and the rationale for increasing the more generally applicable Building Excise Tax, is
understood.
However, by removing the Alternate Mitigation Contribution (AMC) and replacing it with a
mandatory cap of twenty-five (25) dwelling units per year (35 units for multi-family
projects) the proposed APFO amendments will have several unintended consequences.
First, such a mandatory cap will have a general chilling effect on larger-scale residential
developments needing more than twenty-five (25) units per year to sustain project viability.
As discussed at length in the Housing Element of the County’s draft Comprehensive Plan
2040, “residential permit activity for all dwelling types declined heavily after 2009” (Ch. 6,
p. 16) which, when combined with population growth and other demographic factors, has
combined to create a significant need for additional housing in Washington County.
Imposing a mandatory twenty-five (25) unit per year will be a major impediment to
reaching that goal.
Second, because the APFO will still not be applicable in the City of Hagerstown or other
jurisdictions choosing not to adopt or enforce their own version of the APFO, larger-scale
residential development will likely concentrate in those areas to avoid the twenty-five (25)
units per year cap.
If the AMC were retained in the APFO and permitted as an alternative option to a twenty-
five (25) unit per year cap, then perhaps the above consequences could be avoided.
Moreover, because the proposed revisions to the BETO already contemplate a credit against
the Excise Tax for amounts previously paid via AMC, it would not be difficult to modify the
language to also allow a credit against the Excise Tax for current AMC payments and not
just prior.
BETO
No objection to increasing the BETO amount for residential development. However,
increasing from $1.00 to $1.50 per sq. ft. of gross area for non-residential, non-retail
construction will have an onerous effect on the warehouse / distribution sector which has no
impact on schools and relatively low impact on roads, water and sewer infrastructure. As
such, the higher rate is not only inequitable, but unnecessary and potentially damaging to a
development sector that has been generating significant employment and tax base for the
County.
As always, appreciate your time and consideration and welcome the opportunity to discuss
in greater detail if desired.
Very truly yours,
JD LAW COMPANY, INC.
Jason M. Divelbiss
Attorney at Law
Email: jdivelbiss@divelbisslaw.com
Elementary School Construction
Date1
State Rated
Capacity2
March ’25
Enrollment
% of State
Rated Capacity
Bester 2014 628 520 83%
Boonsboro 1950 499 520 104%
Cascade 1924 278 135 49%
Clear Spring 1954 386 396 103%
Eastern 1992 572 439 77%
Emma K. Doub 1967 297 381 128%
Fountaindale 1949 365 429 118%
Fountain Rock3 1970 271 321 118%
Greenbrier 1949 274 264 96%
Hancock 1977 295 190 64%
Hickory4 1975 268 346 129%
Jonathan Hager 2016 471 487 103%
Lincolnshire 1954 545 509 93%
Maugansville 2008 755 731 97%
Old Forge 1970 366 353 96%
Pangborn 2008 745 741 99%
Paramount 1994 408 397 97%
Pleasant Valley 1960 225 180 80%
Potomac Heights 1970 294 352 120%
Rockland Woods 2008 751 679 90%
Ruth Ann Monroe 2011 692 609 88%
Salem Avenue 1951 722 701 97%
Sharpsburg 2020 471 363 77%
Smithsburg 1953 431 363 84%
Williamsport 1959 568 531 93%
Elementary Schools
at or above 90% SRC
17
Elementary Schools
at or above 100% SRC
8
Elementary Schools
at or above 120% SRC
3
1 2024-2025 WCPS “Facilities Fact Sheet”
2 2024-2025 WCPS “Facilities Fact Sheet”
3 Scheduled to be replaced in 2028 with new Downsville Pike ES
4 Scheduled to be replaced in 2028 with new Downsville Pike ES
Middle School Construction
Date5
State Rated
Capacity6
March ’25
Enrollment
% of State Rated
Capacity
Boonsboro 1976 870 655 75%
Clear Spring 1979 605 304 50%
E. Russell Hicks 1967 841 854 102%
Northern 1980 913 845 93%
Smithsburg 1976 839 562 67%
Springfield 1977 1096 804 73%
Western Heights 1976 998 858 86%
Middle Schools at or
above 100% SRC
1
Middle Schools at or
above 120% SRC
0
7 8
South Hagerstown 1956 1240 1518 122%
5 2024-2025 WCPS “Facilities Fact Sheet”
6 2024-2025 WCPS “Facilities Fact Sheet”
7 2024-2025 WCPS “Facilities Fact Sheet”
8 2024-2025 WCPS “Facilities Fact Sheet”
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 15 16
Si
t
e
S
i
z
e
-
A
c
r
e
s
Gr
o
s
s
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
a
g
e
Or
i
g
i
n
a
l
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
D
a
t
e
Ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
R
e
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n
D
a
t
e
s
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
C
l
a
s
s
r
o
o
m
s
i
n
Re
l
o
c
a
t
a
b
l
e
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
St
a
t
e
-
R
a
t
e
d
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
Lo
c
a
l
-
R
a
t
e
d
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
20
2
4
/
2
0
2
5
T
o
t
a
l
P
r
e
-
K
-
1
2
En
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
(
O
f
f
i
c
i
a
l
S
e
p
t
.
3
0
,
2
0
2
4
)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
o
f
St
a
t
e
-
R
a
t
e
d
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
Ti
t
l
e
O
n
e
S
c
h
o
o
l
*P
o
s
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
a
n
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
**
O
p
e
n
/
C
l
o
s
e
d
C
l
a
s
s
r
o
o
m
s
As
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
Pu
b
l
i
c
W
a
t
e
r
Pu
b
l
i
c
S
e
w
e
r
Elementary
Bester Elementary 12.80 72,951 2014 628 565 490 78%Title I No C Y Y
Boonsboro Elementary 11.01 62,716 1950 1991 4 499 449 514 103%Maybe C Y Y
Cascade Elementary 9.72 54,646 1924 1965, 1969 278 250 137 49% No C/1 Y Y
Clear Spring Elementary 9.00 43,393 1954 2000 1 386 347 398 103%No C Y Y
Eastern Elementary 20.11 58,280 1992 2 572 515 439 77%Title I Maybe C Y Y
Emma K. Doub Elementary 10.00 35,476 1967 1995, 2000 4 297 267 389 131%Title I Maybe C/2 Y Y
Fountain Rock Elementary 16.62 35,318 1970 2009 2 271 244 319 118%Maybe O N N
Fountaindale Elementary 13.10 53,406 1949 1954, 1968 4 365 329 413 113%Maybe C Y Y
Greenbrier Elementary 9.05 36,835 1971 3 274 247 259 95%No O N N
Hancock Elementary 16.95 37,441 1977 1 295 266 193 65%Maybe O Y Y
Hickory Elementary 10.23 39,571 1975 2 268 241 326 122%Title I Maybe O Y Y
Jonathan Hager Elementary 16.52 65,433 2016 471 424 498 106%Title I Yes C Y Y
Lincolnshire Elementary 13.65 64,791 1954 1964, 1997 3 545 491 503 92%Title I Maybe C Y Y
Maugansville Elementary 28.51 91,586 2008 755 680 698 92%Yes C Y Y
Old Forge Elementary 15.00 40,777 1970 1995 2 366 329 354 97%No P N N
Pangborn Elementary 18.43 88,116 2008 3 745 671 749 101%Title I Yes C Y Y
Paramount Elementary 10.25 47,923 1994 2 408 367 397 97%No C Y Y
Pleasant Valley Elementary 11.70 28,550 1960 1990 1 225 203 186 83%Maybe C/1 Y Y
Potomac Heights Elementary 9.69 37,347 1970 3 294 265 351 119%Maybe O Y Y
Rockland Woods Elementary 13.60 85,277 2008 751 676 655 87%Yes C Y Y
Ruth Ann Monroe Primary 19.68 80,816 2011 692 623 579 84%Title I Yes C Y Y
Salem Avenue Elementary 13.24 79,084 1951 1995, 2005, 2006 4 722 650 713 99%Title I No C Y Y
Sharpsburg Elementary 11.60 60,054 2020 471 424 362 77%No C Y Y
Smithsburg Elementary 11.13 48,587 1953 1997 2 431 388 362 84%Maybe C Y Y
Williamsport Elementary 20.00 64,112 1959 1965, 2003 1 568 511 533 94%Maybe C Y Y
Sub-totals 351.59 1,412,486 11,577 10,422 10,817
Middle Schools
Boonsboro Middle 22.15 105,590 1976 870 870 673 77%Maybe P Y Y
Clear Spring Middle 34.17 66,122 1979 605 605 301 50%No P Y Y
E. Russell Hicks Middle 33.44 103,131 1967 4 841 841 841 100%Yes C Y Y
Northern Middle 16.62 102,782 1980 913 913 841 92%No C/2 Y Y
Smithsburg Middle 30.00 108,975 1976 839 839 554 66%No P Y Y
Springfield Middle 40.00 134,755 1977 1,096 1,096 808 74%Maybe P Y Y
Western Heights Middle 24.96 127,315 1976 2013 4 998 998 883 88%Yes C/2 Y Y
Sub-totals 201.34 748,670 6,162 6,162 4,901
Senior High Schools
Barbara Ingram School For The Arts and
Vincent Rauth Groh Academic Center 0.27 81,495 2009 2020 553 553 347 63%No C Y Y
Boonsboro High 59.55 142,319 1958 1975, 1997, 2021 3 1,098 1,098 754 69%No C Y Y
Boyd J. Michael III Tech High***18.11 116,756 1972 1996, 2006, 2022 642 642 592 92%Maybe C Y Y
Clear Spring High 60.00 101,662 1974 1989, 1998 656 656 424 65%Maybe P Y Y
Hancock Middle-Senior High 51.07 96,809 1956 1968, 1995, 2000 591 591 215 36%Maybe C Y Y
North Hagerstown High 68.76 168,750 1956 1992 5 1,423 1,423 1,465 103%Maybe C Y Y
Smithsburg High 39.25 129,460 1965 1994, 1996, 2006 1 897 897 679 76%No C Y Y
South Hagerstown High 63.29 167,084 1956 1989, 1999, 2001, 2022 17 1,240 1,240 1,559 126%Maybe C Y Y
Williamsport High 53.67 153,846 1970 1995, 2015 5 1,094 1,094 934 85%Maybe C Y Y
Sub-totals 413.97 1,158,181 8,194 8,194 6,969
Instructional Centers
Antietam Academy (ILC)12.00 45,000 2010 200 200 N/A N/A Yes C Y Y
Children's Village****3.10 11,747 1987 N/A N/A N/A N/A Y Y
Fairview Outdoor School 92.00 21,080 1979 120 120 N/A N/A Y Y
Funkstown Elementary****11.96 24,197 1967 180 162 N/A N/A Maybe C/2 Y Y
Marshall Street Center (w/JDC)2.00 49,945 1976 150 150 85 N/A Y Y
Public Service Academy (WCTH)2.02 17,062 1957 1994, 2009, 2014 N/A N/A N/A N/A No P Y Y
Sub-totals 123.08 169,031 650 632 85
Administrative
Administration Center (820 Commonwealth)11.12 32,543 1966 1965, 1969, 1990, 2014 N/A N/A N/A Y Y
Center For Educational Services 44.88 143,500 1967 2014 N/A N/A N/A Y Y
Sub-totals 56.00 176,043
Totals 1,145.98 3,664,411 83 26,583 25,410 22,772
* "Yes" indicates the possibility of adding four classrooms without any additions to the core infrastructure or negative impact on student achievement or student safety.
Schools listed as "Maybe" for additions will require additional costs to accommodate upgrades needed to the facility due to age, site limitations, need of public utilities, and core
space limitations.
**Closed/Open Schools = C is closed, C/1 is closed with open corridors, C/2 is closed with an open media center, P is partially open, and O is open.
*** Boyd J. Michael III Technical High School's enrollment is shown. For State reporting these students are counted at their home high school.
**** Funkstown Elementary does not currently house students.
Washington County Public Schools
2024-2025 Facilities Fact Sheet - Working Draft
Updated December 18, 2024
Washington County Public School
Facilities and Property
Buildings Enrollment - Capacity Other Factors
School State Rated
Capacity
Local Rated
Capacity
Enrollment
Bester 628 565 520
Boonsboro 499 449 520
Cascade 278 250 135
Clear Spring 386 347 396
Eastern 572 515 439
Emma K. Doub 297 267 381
Fountaindale 365 329 429
Fountain Rock 271 244 321
Greenbrier 274 247 264
Hancock 295 266 190
Hickory 268 241 346
Jonathan Hager 471 424 487
Lincolnshire 545 491 509
Maugansville 755 680 731
Old Forge 366 329 353
Pangborn 745 671 741
Paramount 408 367 397
Pleasant Valley 225 203 180
Potomac Heights 294 265 352
Rockland Woods 751 676 679
Ruth Ann Monroe 692 623 609
Salem Avenue 722 650 701
Sharpsburg 471 424 363
Smithsburg 431 388 363
Williamsport 568 511 531 10,937 Sub-Total Elementary Schools
Boonsboro 870 655
Clear Spring 605 304
E. Russell Hicks 841 854
Northern 913 845
Smithsburg 839 562
Springfield 1,096 804
Western Heights 998 858 4,882 Sub-Total Middle Schools
Barbara Ingram 553 341
Boonsboro 1,098 761
Boyd J. Michael, III
Technical 642 581
Clear Spring 656 427
Hancock Middle/High 591 207
North Hagerstown 1,423 1,452
Smithsburg 897 671
South Hagerstown 1,240 1,518
Williamsport 1,094 920 6,878 Sub-Total High Schools
Marshall Street Ed. Ctr.90 54
Job Development Center 60 38 92 Sub-Total Other Schools
TOTAL 22,789
M
I
D
D
L
E
H
I
G
H
O
T
H
as required by Section 5.3 and 5.5 (c) of the current Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO)
for the determination of the available capacity at school facilites.
E
L
E
M
E
N
T
A
R
Y
BOARD OF EDUCATION OF WASHINGTON COUNTY
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
March 2025
OFFICIAL ENROLLMENT
2024-2025
F
0 2.5 51.25 Miles
Suburban Development Growth
in the Greater Hagerstown Area
from 1950 to present
Map Projection:
Name: NAD 1983 StatePlane Maryland FIPS 1900 Feet
PCS: NAD 1983 StatePlane Maryland FIPS 1900 Feet
Data Sources:
City of Hagerstown, 2025
Washington County, 2024
Prepared By: Joanna Wu, Planner, 04/10/2025
M:\gis\PLANNING\GIS-Master Projects\Updated Projects\Suburban Development Growth
Decade
City of
Hagerstown
Suburban
Fringe
Total New
Residents
Hagerstown
Percent Total
1931-1940 1,630 409 2,039 80%
1941-1950 3,769 2,156 5,925 63%
1951-1960 400 13,266 13666 3%
1960-1970 -798 8,446 7648 0%
1971-1980 -1,722 8,316 6594 0%
1981-1990 1,305 2,942 4,247 31%
1991-2000 1,242 5,573 6,815 18%
2001-2010 2,975 6,695 9,670 31%
2011-2020 3,865 5,689 9,554 40%
TOTAL 12,666 53492 66,158 19%
Population Change in Hagerstown Metro Area
Suburban Fringe - Beaver Creek, Cedar Lawn, Chewsville, Fountainhead,
Funkstown, Halfway, Leitersburg, Maugansville, Williamsport
Washington County Subdivisions Boundary
Parcels
2000s to present
1980s & 1990s
1970s
1950s & 1960s
Hagerstown Corporate Boundary
Other Town Boundaries
Legend
Washington County, MarylandAnalysis of Changes to APFO & BETO
Summary of Changes
•Remove the Alternate Mitigation Contribution (AMC) option from the APFO. It will be replaced with language
that limits the number of building permits for major subdivisions to 25 units per calendar year if the school
adequacy is between 100 and 119%.
o Permits counts are based on overall development plan not per phase.
o Multi-family and condos are limited to one structure that can contain up to 35 units.
o Emergency or Public Benefit projects may go above the cap if approved by the BoCC.
o Redistricting is still an option
•Projects that are in schools with capacity that exceeds 120% are still required to have a specific mitigation
plan approved by the BoCC for their development (this hasn’t changed)
o Language has been added to help guide a developer to create a mitigation plan. Options include facility
improvements (portable classrooms may not be considered facility improvements), redistricting,
financial contributions and other strategies they may propose to help with adequacy.
•Threshold for capacity at an elementary school will go from 90% to 100% of State Rated Capacity.
Changes Proposed to the APFO:
Summary of Changes
•Increase tax for residential from $1 to $2 per sq. ft. of habitable gross area.
o Residential additions will still be 50% of full tax (increase from $0.50 to $1.00)
o All developments that have already paid an AMC will be credited $1.00 per sq. ft. of excise
tax. The remaining $1 will still apply.
o Residential construction occurring in either the Hancock or Cascade Elementary School
districts are exempt from excise tax for 10 years from the effective date of this amendment.
•Increase tax for non-residential from $1.00 to $1.50 per sq. ft. of gross square footage.
•Minor changes in the percentages of funds used to support infrastructure needs will change:
o Still 70% for schools
o Increase roads from 23% to 25%
o Remove special set aside of 2% for libraries and add into other general government capital.
Changes Proposed to the BETO:
Current Regulations
Current Mitigation Options & Costs:
Projects located outside of an incorporated municipality:
APFO AMC:
Single Family - $3,345 ($1.67 per sq. ft. – 2,000 sq. ft. home)
Townhouse - $2,192 ($1.22 per sq. ft. – 1,800 sq. ft. unit)
Multi-family - $2,307 ($1.59 per sq. ft. – 3 bed 1,454 unit)
Excise Tax:
$1.00 per sq. ft. of habitable gross square footage (includes unfinished basement)
Projects located inside of an incorporated municipality:
APFO:
Clear Spring, Sharpsburg & Hagerstown: $0.00 – No mitigation required.
All other municipalities: Mitigation is at the discretion of the Planning Commission and Mayor
& Council
Excise Tax:
$1.00 per sq. ft. of habitable gross square footage (includes unfinished basement)
Proposed Regulations
Proposed Mitigation Options & Costs:
Projects located outside of an incorporated municipality:
APFO after removal of the AMC:
•If the capacity of a school serving the project exceeds 100% but does not exceed 120% of State
Rated Capacity (SRC), an annual limit of 25 permits per calendar year will be enforced.
•If the capacity of a school serving the project exceeds 120% of SRC, the developer will be
permitted to seek an individualized mitigation plan with approval from the BoCC.
Excise Tax:
$2.00 per sq. ft. of habitable gross square footage (includes unfinished basement)
Projects located inside of an incorporated municipality:
APFO:
Clear Spring, Sharpsburg & Hagerstown: $0.00 – No mitigation required.
All other municipalities: Mitigation is at the discretion of the Planning Commission & Mayor & Council
Excise Tax:
$2.00 per sq. ft. of habitable gross square footage (includes unfinished basement)
Example 1: Lots of Record
Example 1: New Construction on an Existing Lot of Record (LOR)
This example applies to construction of a new single-family residential home that is located
on a LOR that either pre-dates the APFO AMC or was created by exemption of the APFO.
Result: APFO mitigation would stay neutral, and Excise Tax would increase 100%. Excise
Tax would increase from $2,000 to $4,000 for a single-family dwelling creating a combined
increase of $2,000 (or 100%)
Excise Tax (current): $1.00 per sq. ft. of habitable gross sq. ft. –including
unfinished basements ($2,000)
APFO mitigation (current): $0.00
APFO mitigation (proposed): $0.00
Excise Tax (proposed): $2.00 per sq. ft. ($4,000)
Example 2: New LOR & New Unit Outside
Municipality
Result: APFO mitigation would be reduced 100% and Excise Tax would increase 100%
creating a combined decrease of $1,345 (or 25%) for a single-family dwelling.
Example 2: Creation of a new Lot of Record (LOR) and construction of a new residential
unit outside of an incorporated municipality
This example only applies to the creation of a new residential lot and the construction of a
2,000 sq. ft. single-family home outside of an incorporated municipality.
Excise Tax (current): $1.00 per sq. ft. of habitable gross sq. ft. – including unfinished
basements ($2,000)
Excise Tax (proposed): $2.00 per sq. ft. ($4,000)
APFO mitigation (current): $3,345 per unit
APFO mitigation (proposed): $0.00
Result: APFO mitigation would remain neutral, and Excise Tax would increase 100%
creating a combined increase of $2,000 (or 100%) for a single-family dwelling.
Example 3: Creation of a new Lot of Record (LOR) and construction of a new residential
unit inside of an incorporated municipality
This example only applies to the creation of a new residential lot & the construction of a 2,000 sq. ft.
dwelling inside of an incorporated municipality. This example also assumes that either the municipality
has no APFO or is not requiring mitigation.
Excise Tax (current): $1.00 per sq. ft. of habitable gross sq. ft. – including unfinished
basements ($2,000)
Excise Tax (proposed): $2.00 per sq. ft. ($4,000)
APFO mitigation (current): $0.00
APFO mitigation (proposed): $0.00
Example 2: New LOR & New Unit Inside
Municipality
Comparison Chart
APFO Excise Tax Difference
Current Proposed Current Proposed
Existing LOR $0.00 $0.00 $2,000 $4,000 + $2,000
New Residential
outside Municipality
$3,345 $0.00 $2,000 $4,000 - $1,345
New Residential inside
Municipality
$0.00 $0.00 $2,000 $4,000 + $2,000
Impacts on Housing Cost
Samples of advertised new res. construction – abt. 2,000 sq. ft. single family home (2025)
Elmwood Farm – Pearl Plan 2,390 sq. ft. (ave. 0.3 ac) $452,990
Virginia Commons – Penwell Plan 2,148 sq. ft. (ave. 0.2 ac) $454,900
Paradise Heights Sect. B - Weston Plan 2,066 sq. ft. (ave. 0.4 ac) $575,900
Mt. Tabor Builders – Salem Church Rd. (1.03 ac) 1,953 sq. ft. $699,900
Est. mortgage $450,000 home – Avg mortgage rate 6.88%; 3%
down; 30 years – Est. Monthly mortgage payment: $3,425 mo.
Est. mortgage $700,000 home – Avg mortgage rate 6.88%; 3%
down; 30 years – Est. Monthly mortgage payment: $5,120 mo.
Impacts on Housing Costs
Est. mortgage $450,000 home –
Avg mortgage rate 6.88%; 3%
down; 30 years
Est. mortgage $700,000 home
– Avg mortgage rate 6.88%;
3% down; 30 years
Current Housing Costs Proposed changes Current Housing Costs Proposed Changes
Ex. 1 & 3 – 100%
increase in Excise Tax
($2,000 increase)
$450,000
Monthly payment
$3,425
$452,000
Monthly payment
$3,440
$700,000
Monthly Payment
$5,120
$702,000
Monthly Payment
$5,134
Ex. 2 – 100% decrease
in APFO & 100%
increase in Excise Tax
($1,345 decrease)
$450,000
Monthly payment
$3,425
$448,655
Monthly Payment
$3,417
$700,000
Monthly Payment
$5,120
$698,655
Monthly Payment
$5,111
$15 change in monthly payment equals about $5,400 over the life of a 30-yr loan
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: FOP and NCEU Collective Bargaining Memoranda of Understanding Approval
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Sheriff Brian Albert, Washington County Sheriff’s Office; Col. Pete
Lazich, Washington County Sheriff’s Office; Andrew Bright, Attorney, Washington County Sheriff’s
Office; Eric Paltell, Council for BOCC; Chip Rose, Director, Human Resources; Dominick Turano,
Deputy Director, Human Resources; Zachary Kieffer, County Attorney
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Move to Approve Memorandum of Understanding between Board
of County Commissioners, Sheriff of Washington County and The Fraternal Order of Police Lodge
150.
2) Motion to Approve Memorandum of Understanding between Board of County
Commissioners, Sheriff of Washington County and The National Correctional Employees Union
Local 146
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: County representatives engaged in collective bargaining with
representatives of the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 150. The result is the attached Memorandum
of Understanding.
County representatives engaged in collective bargaining with representatives of the National
Correctional Employees Union Local 146. The result is the attached Memorandum of Understanding.
DISCUSSION: FOP voted to ratify the MOU which provides for a 2-year agreement between the
parties, beginning on July 1, 2025.
NCEU voted to ratify the MOU which provides for a 2-year agreement between the parties, beginning
on July 1, 2025.
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Clean Copies of Memoranda of Understanding
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: None.
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
AGREEMENT
between
THE FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE,
LODGE 150, THE SHERIFF OF
WASHINGTON COUNTY
and
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
Effective from
July 1, 2025 – June 30, 2027
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREAMBLE ................................................................................................................................................. 1
RECOGNITION ........................................................................................................................................... 1
UNION SECURITY ..................................................................................................................................... 1
WAGES ........................................................................................................................................................ 1
BENEFITS .................................................................................................................................................... 7
GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE ....................................................................................................................... 7
NO STRIKE/NO LOCKOUT ....................................................................................................................... 9
SAVINGS CLAUSE ..................................................................................................................................... 9
DURATION ................................................................................................................................................ 10
1
PREAMBLE
This Collective Bargaining Agreement is entered into by the Board of County Commissioners
of Washington County, Maryland and the Sheriff of Washington County, Maryland
(hereinafter referred to as "Employer" or “County”), and the Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge 150
(hereinafter referred to as "Union"), and has as its purpose the promotion of harmonious
relations between the County and the Union; the establishment of an equitable and
peaceful procedure for the resolution of differences; and includes the agreement of the
parties on wages and benefits as defined by Md. Code, Courts & Judicial Proceedings §2-335(a).
RECOGNITION
The Board of County Commissioners of Washington County Maryland and the Sheriff of
Washington County, Maryland recognize the Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge 150, to the extent
permitted by law, as the exclusive collective bargaining representative for all full-time sworn
deputy sheriffs, at the rank of sergeant or below employed by the Washington County Maryland,
in matters relating to rates of wages and benefits as defined by Md. Code, Courts & Judicial
Proceedings §2-335(a). Employees who are full time sworn deputy sheriffs at the rank of sergeant
or below are sometimes referred to as “Employees” in this Agreement.
UNION SECURITY
A. All Employees subject to the provisions of this Agreement, who qualify pursuant to Md. Code,
Courts & Judicial Proceedings Art. § 2-335(g), and are either current members of the Union,
or who elect to become members during the terms of this Agreement, shall maintain their
membership, subject to an Employee’s right to discontinue membership in accordance with
Section B below and applicable federal, state, and/or local law.
B. The Employer agrees to the adoption of a Union “check-off” system whereby Union dues as
established by the Union will be withheld from each eligible Employee’s pay at source in equal
amounts from each pay. Such withholdings for Union dues are to be transmitted by check to
the Union not later than the twentieth (20th) day of each month. The Union shall notify the
Employer thirty (30) calendar days prior to any change in such dues. The Employee must give
the County written authorization for dues check-off. Any payroll deduction authorization shall
be revocable at will in writing by the Employee, and upon written notice of any such
revocation, the County’s obligation to deduct dues shall cease beginning with the next pay
cycle following the County’s receipt of such revocation.
WAGES
A. Wage Increase
For Fiscal Year 2026, full-time Sworn Deputy Sheriffs shall receive a 6% cost of living
adjustment, effective July 1, 2025.
2
For Fiscal Year 2027, full-time Sworn Deputy Sheriffs shall receive a cost-of-living adjustment
(“COLA”) equal to that, if any, received by employees on the Washington County
Commissioners (“WCC”) pay scale at the same time that employees on the WCC pay scale
receive their cost-of-living increase. Employees covered by this Agreement shall not receive
any wage adjustment or pay scale adjustment implemented to decompress the scale made for
employees on the WCC pay scale in Fiscal Year 27.
B. Step Increase
For Fiscal Year 2026, full-time Sworn Deputy Sheriffs who are eligible for a 2.5% step
increase shall receive a step increase at the time step increases are normally paid.
In Fiscal Year 2027, Employees who are eligible for a step increase shall receive a step increase
only if employees on the WCC pay scale receive a step increase. In the event that employees
on the WCC pay scale receive a step increase, Employees covered by this Agreement shall
receive an equivalent step increase at the same time that employees on the WCC pay scale
receive their step increase.
C. Wage Scale for Bargaining Unit Members
For Fiscal Year 2026, wages shall be paid in accordance with the pay scale as adjusted to
reflect pay scale adjustments and attached as Exhibit A.
D. Salary Program
The salary program for Employees shall include, at a minimum:
1. Entry-level salary for the agency, which may be modified by the Washington County
Commissioners each year in conjunction with other grade adjustments. The entry-level
salary and all salaries can be found on the Human Resources Web site.
2. Salary differential within ranks will reflect time of service within the rank.
3. Salary differential between ranks will reflect differences in rank in accordance with the
County classification plan.
E. Shift Differential
1. Definitions
43-Hour Workgroup – Employees who are assigned to work a 43-hour work week
schedule.
40-Hour Workgroup – Employees who are assigned to work a 40-hour work week
schedule.
Regular Shift – A work period that is not defined as Evening Shift or Night Shift. Regular
3
Shift does not allow the Employee to receive a shift differential.
Evening Shift – A work period that occurs during designated hours that enable the
Employee to receive a 5% shift differential. Employees who are assigned to the 43-Hour
Workgroup and work any of the hours between 1530 and 2400 receive the Evening Shift
pay differential for those qualifying hours. Employees who are assigned to the 40-Hour
Workgroup who work any of the hours between 1600 and 2400 receive the Evening Shift
pay differential for those qualifying hours. For the purposes of this section, Evening Shift
may be referred to as a Qualifying Shift.
Night Shift – A work period that occurs during designated hours that enable the Employee
to receive a 7% shift differential. Employees who are assigned to the 43-Hour Workgroup
and work any of the hours between 2330-0800 receive the Night Shift pay differential for
those qualifying hours. Employees who are assigned to the 40-Hour Workgroup and work
any of the hours between 2400 and 0800 receive the Night Shift pay differential for those
qualifying hours. For the purposes of this section, Night Shift may be referred to as a
Qualifying Shift.
2. Conditions
Employees will receive the shift differential when they are assigned by their supervisor to
a Qualifying Shift. Callouts are not considered a Qualifying Shift and Employees shall not
receive the shift differential compensation for Callouts.
3. Exceptions for Shift Differential
If an Employee is offered by the Sheriff or his designee, and accepts, compensatory time
in lieu of overtime payment for hours worked that would have qualified for shift
differential, no shift differential will be paid.
F. Compensatory Time Policy
1. Definitions
43-Hour Workgroup – Employees who are assigned to and work a 43-hour work week
schedule.
40-Hour Workgroup – Employees who are assigned to and work a 40-hour work week
schedule.
2. Conditions
a. Compensatory time may be granted at the discretion of the Sheriff in accordance with
the Fair Labor Standards Act.
b. Employees will only be able to transfer 80 hours of compensatory time to a new
calendar year beginning on the first day in January. Compensatory time exceeding 80
hours at the start of the new calendar year, specifically the first day of January, will be
4
forfeited by the Employee.
c. Employees will be able to accrue a maximum of 96 hours of compensatory time at any
time. If an Employee reaches the maximum of 96 hours, their request for any additional
compensatory time shall be denied and the Employee may resubmit a request for
overtime.
d. Employees who are classified in the 40-Hour Workgroup may receive compensatory
time at 1.5 hours per hour worked over 40 hours per week.
e. Employees who are classified in the 43-Hour Workgroup may receive compensatory
time at 1.5 hours per hour worked over 43 hours per week.
f. The Sheriff may modify or discontinue the ability of Employees to accrue
compensatory time due to operational needs on a temporary basis.
G. Overtime Policy
1. Definitions
Overtime Pay – Extra compensation required by the Fair Labor Standards Act when
Employees work beyond, or in addition to, their normal workweek. Overtime is paid at a
rate of one and one-half times the Employee’s regular rate of pay.
Premium Pay – Compensation equal to one and one-half times an Employee’s base rate of
pay, exclusive of shift differential. Premium Pay shall be paid regardless of the number of
hours worked in a workweek.
Compensatory time in lieu of Overtime (“Comp Time”) – subject to section F of this
Agreement, an Employee may elect to receive Comp Time in lieu of any overtime hours.
Comp time will be distributed at 1.5 time the actual overtime hours. For example: 1 hour
of Overtime taken as Comp time equals 1.5 hours of Comp Time. However, Overtime
worked as a result of a contractual assignment is not eligible to be taken as Comp Time by
the Employee.
43-Hour Workgroup – Employees who are eligible for Overtime at 1.5 times their regular
rate for all hours worked over 43 hours per week.
40-Hour Workgroup – Employees who are eligible for Overtime at 1.5 times their regular
rate of pay for all hours worked over 40 hours per week.
Call Back Pay – Employees will receive Premium Pay for being Called Back to work. An
Employee Called Back to work shall be paid a minimum of two hours of pay for each Call
Back.
Staff Meetings Meeting Pay – All personnel will receive Premium Pay for time spent
attending staff meetings if they were not regularly scheduled for work during the time of
5
the meeting.
Holiday Pay – Washington County will publish a Holiday Schedule before each calendar
year starts. An Employee who works on a County recognized holiday will receive
Premium Pay for all hours worked on the date of the holiday. However, when the County
observes a holiday on a date different from the actual holiday, Premium Pay will be
awarded to Employees who work on the observed holiday instead of the actual holiday (i.e,
when Christmas occurs on Sunday but is observed on Monday, Employees are only
awarded Premium Pay for hours worked on Monday).
2. Court Appearances
Employees will receive Premium Pay for attending court if they were summoned in relation
to their duties as an employee of the Sheriff’s Office and they were not regularly scheduled
for work during the time of the court appearance.
Employees required to appear in court during off duty hours in relation to their duties as
an employee of the Sheriff’s Office will receive a minimum of (2) hours of Premium Pay.
This will be applied for through the filing of an “Overtime Slip” with a copy of the
Summons/Subpoena attached.
Employees in good standing at the time of their retirement will be compensated at their
base hourly rate of pay, at the time of their retirement, for up to one year after retirement
for court appearances which are deemed necessary by the State’s Attorney’s Office.
H. On Call Compensation
1. Employees not assigned to the Criminal Investigation Unit will be compensated for
being scheduled on a monthly basis to mandated on-call coverage while off-duty.
2. To qualify for the mandated on-call coverage compensation, Employees must meet the
requirement of working a minimum of four (4) mandated on-call coverage assignments
in the qualifying month.
3. To qualify for mandated on-call coverage compensation, Employees must adhere to
Rule 64.00 of the Sheriff’s Office Rules of Conduct while on mandated on-call status.
4. To qualify for the mandated on-call coverage compensation, an Employee assigned
temporarily to one of the specified units must meet the requirements listed in section 2
and 3.
5. Employees are expected to monitor and schedule paid leave in the form of
compensatory time or subject themselves to forfeiting any mandated on-call
compensation that would exceed 96 hours.
6. Employees who are eligible to receive the mandated on-call coverage compensation
must adhere to 22.1.3 Compensatory Policy, Section B, number 2.
6
7. Employees will receive eight (8) hours of compensatory time each month that they
satisfy the foregoing requirements, subject to a cap of 96 hours of compensatory time.
8. Employees assigned to the Criminal Investigation Unit shall be paid on-call pay as
follows:
a. A “day” of on call coverage is equal to a “Shift” on call and refers to all the
hours outside an Employee’s regularly scheduled hours between 8:00 AM
until 8:00 AM on the following day.
b. For each day an Employee is required to be in an On Call status, the
Employee will be compensated with Comp Time as follows:
• Monday through Friday – 1 hour each
• Saturday and Sunday– 3 hours
c. No smaller portion of time will be compensated beyond a day.
I. Field Training Officer Compensation
A certified Field Training Officer (FTO) will be paid one hour of Premium Pay for each day
the FTO is assigned and physically accompanies a recruit or Probationary Deputy during the
FTO’s regular shift. This is in addition to any shift differential. In order to qualify for the one
hour of Premium Pay, the FTO must submit a timesheet on an approved form to the FTO
Supervisor as directed. If the FTO exercises leave or does not have a recruit or Probationary
Deputy present with him or her, the FTO will not be paid the hour of Premium Pay for that
day.
J. Canine Pay
Employees assigned to as Canine Handlers as part of the Canine Program shall be compensated
as follows during the period of time that they are assigned to the Canine Program and have a
canine assigned them:
1. On those days during which the Employee is scheduled to work for the Washington County
Sheriff’s Office, s/he will be permitted to take one hour off of their scheduled time, with
pay, as compensation for the time spent maintaining their canine.
2. On those days the Employee is scheduled to be off-duty without pay, they will be
compensated for the time spent maintaining their canine by receiving one hour of Premium
Pay.
7
3. On those days the Employee takes leave, they will receive one hour of Premium Pay.
Employee leave encompasses vacation, sick, compensatory and personal days.
4. The Employer also agrees to pay for food and veterinary and other costs for the canine so
long as they are approved in advance, except in emergencies. In addition, equipment
approved by the Sheriff’s Office and necessary for the use of and care of the canine, will
be provided by the Sheriff’s Office. The canine shall be and remain the sole property of
the Sheriff’s Office.
K. Inclement Weather Pay
If County Government offices are declared closed due to weather, Employees who are required
to work at the time of the closure and those Employees who are required to work the two shifts
immediately following the closure shall be paid Premium Pay for all hours worked during those
shifts.
BENEFITS
Employees shall be provided health, dental, and vision insurance, life insurance, and disability
insurance under the same terms and conditions as are provided to Washington County employees
who are not covered by the terms of a collective bargaining agreement, and the Employer shall
continue in effect its pension benefits as provided pursuant to the Employees’ Retirement Plan of
Washington County (incorporating all amendments through January 2025); provided, however,
that during the term of this Agreement, an Employee shall contribute into the Employees’
Retirement Plan of Washington County not less than 6% of their Base Salary that is in effect at
the beginning of the first full pay period closest to July 1st of each year.
GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
A. Grievance Coverage
A “grievance” is defined as an alleged violation of this Agreement or a dispute concerning the
meaning, interpretation, or application of this Agreement or any terms or provisions thereof.
Any Employee or group of Employees covered by this Agreement may present grievances to
the Employer. However, only the Union may file a grievance pursuant to this grievance
procedure.
The procedures set forth in this Section shall be the exclusive remedy for the resolution of
grievances filed by the Union or its members. The Union may not file a grievance pursuant
to the Sheriff’s Office General Order 25 or any revisions thereto.
8
B. Procedure
All grievances shall be in writing on an approved grievance form. The writing shall state
specifically the substance of the grievance and identify the aggrieved Employee and the
specific provisions of this Agreement alleged to have been violated. All grievances shall be
processed in the following manner:
Step 1:
The Union will submit the grievance in writing within fourteen (14) calendar days of the
occurrence of the actions being grieved or within fourteen (14) calendar days of the Union
having reasonable knowledge of the actions, to the Chief Deputy. The Chief Deputy or his/her
designee shall meet with the Union and the aggrieved Employee to discuss the grievance within
fourteen (14) calendar days of receipt of the grievance form and shall reply to the Union, in
writing, within fourteen (14) calendar days after the meeting.
Step 2:
If not resolved at Step 1, the Union may appeal the grievance on the approved form to the
County Director of Human Resources within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of the Step
l decision. The Director of Human Resources or his/her designee shall meet with the Union
and the aggrieved Employee to discuss the grievance within fourteen (14) calendar days of
receipt of the grievance form and shall reply to the Union, in writing, within fourteen (14)
calendar days after the meeting.
Step 3:
If not resolved at Step 2, the Union may appeal the grievance on the approved form to the County
Administrator or his/her designee within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of the Step 2
decision. The appeal shall state specifically the substance of grievance and identify the
aggrieved Employee(s) and the specific provisions of this Agreement involved. The Union and
the aggrieved Employee shall meet with the County Administrator or his/her designee within
fourteen (14) calendar days of the filing of the grievance at this Step to discuss its substance
and possible resolutions. The County Administrator or his/her designee shall give a decision in
writing within fourteen (14) calendar days after the aforesaid meeting.
Step 4:
If the grievance has not been resolved in step 3, the Union may, within fourteen (14) calendar
days following the Step 3 decision from the County Administrator, submit the grievance to
arbitration through the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) or similar service.
The FMCS or similar service shall supply a list of five qualified labor arbitrators from the
Washington, D.C. Metropolitan area. Both the Employer and the Union shall have the right to
strike two names from the list. The parties shall flip a coin to determine who shall strike the
first name; the other party shall then strike one name. The process shall be repeated, and the
remaining person shall be the arbitrator. After the selection of the arbitrator as outlined above,
the party requesting arbitration shall advise the service provider of the name of the arbitrator.
9
The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties hereto. Expenses for the
arbitrator’s services and proceedings shall be borne equally by the Union and the Employer.
Each party shall be responsible for compensating its own witnesses and representatives. If either
party desires a verbatim record of the proceedings, it may cause such a record to be made by a
qualified Court Reporter. The cost of a verbatim record for proceedings shall be borne by the
party causing the record to be made or, if requested by both, shall be split equally.
C. Time Limits
A grievance must be presented and processed in accordance with the steps, time limits, and
conditions contained in this Article. The Employer and Union recognize that time is of the
essence and the prompt settlement of grievances is important to a sound and harmonious
relationship.
If the Employer fails to provide an answer to a grievance within the time limits so provided, the
Employee or Union may immediately appeal to the next step.
The failure of the Union to act upon a grievance within the time limits shall be deemed a
forfeiture of the right to advance further in the grievance process.
The time limits prescribed herein may be altered and/or waived by mutual agreement, in
writing, by the Employer and the Union.
NO STRIKE/NO LOCKOUT
The County and the Union subscribe to the principle that differences shall be resolved by peaceful
and appropriate means without interruption of work. In accordance with Md. Code, Courts &
Judicial Proceedings §2-335(g)(7), during the term of this Agreement, neither the Union nor its
agents or any Employee, for any reason will authorize, institute, aid, condone or engage in a
slowdown, work stoppage, strike, or any other interference with the work and statutory functions
or obligations of the employer. During the term of this Agreement, neither the employer nor its
agents for any reason shall authorize, institute, aid or promote any lockout of Employees covered
by this Agreement.
SAVINGS CLAUSE
If any provision of this Agreement, or the application of such provision, should be rendered or
declared invalid by any court action or by reason of any existing or subsequently enacted
legislation, the remaining parts or portions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect;
and upon issuance of such a decision, the County and the Union agree to immediately negotiate a
substitute for the invalidated Article, Section or portion thereof.
10
DURATION
This Agreement shall become effective July 1, 2025 and shall remain in full force and effect
until June 30, 2027.
This Agreement shall be automatically renewed from year to year after June 30, 2027 unless
either party shall notify the other in writing no later than October 1, 2026 (or October 1st of any
subsequent year thereafter in the case of an automatic renewal) that it desires to terminate, modify,
or amend this Agreement.
The County and the Union agree that the parties may enter into mutually acceptable side letter
agreements to clarify provisions of this Agreement during its term.
The Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
By:
John F. Barr, Commissioner President
The Sheriff of Washington County, Maryland
By: _________________________________
Brian K. Albert, Sheriff
The Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge 150
By: _________________________________
Kevin Klappert, President
4/23/2025
GRADE POSITION CODE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Base + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5%
11 COLONEL 0013 136,282 139,693 143,187 146,765 150,426 154,190 158,038 161,990 166,046 170,206 174,470 178,838 183,310 187,886 192,587 197,392 202,322 207,376 212,555 217,859
65.52 67.16 68.84 70.56 72.32 74.13 75.98 77.88 79.83 81.83 83.88 85.98 88.13 90.33 92.59 94.90 97.27 99.70 102.19 104.74
10 MAJOR 0321 123,698 126,797 129,958 133,203 136,531 139,942 143,437 147,014 150,696 154,461 158,330 162,282 166,338 170,498 174,762 179,130 183,602 188,198 192,899 197,725
59.47 60.96 62.48 64.04 65.64 67.28 68.96 70.68 72.45 74.26 76.12 78.02 79.97 81.97 84.02 86.12 88.27 90.48 92.74 95.06
9 CAPTAIN 0322 112,216 115,024 117,894 120,848 123,864 126,963 130,146 133,390 136,718 140,130 143,624 147,222 150,904 154,669 158,538 162,510 166,566 170,726 174,990 179,358
53.95 55.30 56.68 58.10 59.55 61.04 62.57 64.13 65.73 67.37 69.05 70.78 72.55 74.36 76.22 78.13 80.08 82.08 84.13 86.23
8 LIEUTENANT 0323 101,858 104,395 106,995 109,678 112,424 115,232 118,123 121,077 124,114 127,213 130,395 133,661 137,010 140,442 143,957 147,555 151,237 155,022 158,891 162,864
48.97 50.19 51.44 52.73 54.05 55.40 56.79 58.21 59.67 61.16 62.69 64.26 65.87 67.52 69.21 70.94 72.71 74.53 76.39 78.30
7 SERGEANT 0324 92,456 94,765 97,136 99,570 102,066 104,624 107,245 109,928 112,674 115,482 118,373 121,326 124,363 127,462 130,645 133,910 137,259 140,691 144,206 147,805
44.45 45.56 46.70 47.87 49.07 50.30 51.56 52.85 54.17 55.52 56.91 58.33 59.79 61.28 62.81 64.38 65.99 67.64 69.33 71.06
6 CORPORAL 0396 88,046 90,251 92,498 94,806 97,178 99,611 102,107 104,666 107,286 109,970 112,715 115,523 118,414 121,368 124,405 127,525 130,707 133,973 137,322 140,754
42.33 43.39 44.47 45.58 46.72 47.89 49.09 50.32 51.58 52.87 54.19 55.54 56.93 58.35 59.81 61.31 62.84 64.41 66.02 67.67
5 MASTER DEPUTY 81,058 83,075 85,155 87,277 89,461 91,707 93,995 96,346 98,758 101,234 103,771 106,371 109,034 111,758 114,546 117,416 120,349 123,365 126,443 129,605
38.97 39.94 40.94 41.96 43.01 44.09 45.19 46.32 47.48 48.67 49.89 51.14 52.42 53.73 55.07 56.45 57.86 59.31 60.79 62.31
4 DEPUTY 1ST CL. 0325 71,864 73,653 75,504 77,397 79,331 81,307 83,346 85,426 87,568 89,752 91,998 94,307 96,658 99,070 101,546 104,083 106,683 109,346 112,070 114,878
34.55 35.41 36.30 37.21 38.14 39.09 40.07 41.07 42.10 43.15 44.23 45.34 46.47 47.63 48.82 50.04 51.29 52.57 53.88 55.23
3 DEPUTY*0326 62,192 63,752 65,354 66,997 68,682 70,408 72,176 73,986 75,837 77,730
29.90 30.65 31.42 32.21 33.02 33.85 34.70 35.57 36.46 37.37
2 DFC (SECURITY) 0403 63,586 65,166 66,789 68,453 70,158 71,906 73,694 75,546 77,438 79,373 81,349 83,387 85,467 87,610 89,794 92,040 94,349 96,699 99,112 101,587
30.57 31.33 32.11 32.91 33.73 34.57 35.43 36.32 37.23 38.16 39.11 40.09 41.09 42.12 43.17 44.25 45.36 46.49 47.65 48.84
1 DEPUTY (SECURITY) 0385 55,016 56,389 57,803 59,238 60,715 62,234 63,794 65,395 67,038 68,723
26.45 27.11 27.79 28.48 29.19 29.92 30.67 31.44 32.23 33.04
*Laterial Salary for an officer with two (2) or more years of experience 65,354
STEP
FY26 Sheriff Patrol/Judiciary Salary Scale - DRAFT 3
6/21/2025
1 of 2
4/23/2025
GRADE POSITION
11 COLONEL
10 MAJOR
9 CAPTAIN
8 LIEUTENANT
7 SERGEANT
6 CORPORAL
5 MASTER DEPUTY
4 DEPUTY 1ST CL.
3 DEPUTY*
2 DFC (SECURITY)
1 DEPUTY (SECURITY)
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
+ 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5%
223,309 228,883 234,603 240,469 246,480 252,637 258,960 265,429 272,064 278,866 285,834 292,989 300,310 307,819 315,515 323,398 331,490 339,768 348,254 356,970
107.36 110.04 112.79 115.61 118.50 121.46 124.50 127.61 130.80 134.07 137.42 140.86 144.38 147.99 151.69 155.48 159.37 163.35 167.43 171.62
202,675 207,750 212,950 218,275 223,725 229,320 235,061 240,947 246,979 253,157 259,480 265,970 272,626 279,448 286,437 293,592 300,934 308,464 316,181 324,085
97.44 99.88 102.38 104.94 107.56 110.25 113.01 115.84 118.74 121.71 124.75 127.87 131.07 134.35 137.71 141.15 144.68 148.30 152.01 155.81
183,851 188,448 193,170 197,995 202,946 208,021 213,221 218,546 224,016 229,611 235,352 241,238 247,270 253,448 259,792 266,282 272,938 279,760 286,749 293,925
88.39 90.60 92.87 95.19 97.57 100.01 102.51 105.07 107.70 110.39 113.15 115.98 118.88 121.85 124.90 128.02 131.22 134.50 137.86 141.31
166,941 171,122 175,406 179,795 184,288 188,906 193,627 198,474 203,445 208,541 213,762 219,107 224,578 230,194 235,955 241,862 247,915 254,114 260,458 266,968
80.26 82.27 84.33 86.44 88.60 90.82 93.09 95.42 97.81 100.26 102.77 105.34 107.97 110.67 113.44 116.28 119.19 122.17 125.22 128.35
151,507 155,293 159,182 163,155 167,232 171,413 175,698 180,086 184,579 189,197 193,918 198,765 203,736 208,832 214,053 219,398 224,890 230,506 236,267 242,174
72.84 74.66 76.53 78.44 80.40 82.41 84.47 86.58 88.74 90.96 93.23 95.56 97.95 100.40 102.91 105.48 108.12 110.82 113.59 116.43
144,269 147,867 151,570 155,355 159,245 163,218 167,294 171,475 175,760 180,149 184,662 189,280 194,022 198,869 203,840 208,936 214,157 219,502 224,994 230,610
69.36 71.09 72.87 74.69 76.56 78.47 80.43 82.44 84.50 86.61 88.78 91.00 93.28 95.61 98.00 100.45 102.96 105.53 108.17 110.87
132,850 136,178 139,589 143,083 146,661 150,322 154,086 157,934 161,886 165,942 170,082 174,325 178,693 183,165 187,741 192,442 197,246 202,176 207,230 212,410
63.87 65.47 67.11 68.79 70.51 72.27 74.08 75.93 77.83 79.78 81.77 83.81 85.91 88.06 90.26 92.52 94.83 97.20 99.63 102.12
117,749 120,702 123,718 126,818 129,979 133,224 136,552 139,963 143,458 147,035 150,717 154,482 158,350 162,302 166,358 170,518 174,782 179,150 183,622 188,219
56.61 58.03 59.48 60.97 62.49 64.05 65.65 67.29 68.97 70.69 72.46 74.27 76.13 78.03 79.98 81.98 84.03 86.13 88.28 90.49
104,125 106,725 109,387 112,112 114,920 117,790 120,744 123,760 126,859 130,021 133,266 136,594 140,005 143,499 147,077 150,758 154,523 158,392 162,344 166,400
50.06 51.31 52.59 53.90 55.25 56.63 58.05 59.50 60.99 62.51 64.07 65.67 67.31 68.99 70.71 72.48 74.29 76.15 78.05 80.00
STEP
FY26 Sheriff Patrol/Judiciary Salary Scale - DRAFT 3
6/21/2025
2 of 2
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
AGREEMENT
between
THE NATIONAL CORRECTIONAL
EMPLOYEES UNION LOCAL 146, THE
SHERIFF OF WASHINGTON COUNTY
and
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
Effective from
July 1, 2025 – June 30, 2027
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREAMBLE ................................................................................................................................................. 2
RECOGNITION ........................................................................................................................................... 2
UNION SECURITY ..................................................................................................................................... 2
WAGES ........................................................................................................................................................ 2
BENEFITS .................................................................................................................................................... 6
GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE ....................................................................................................................... 6
NO STRIKE/NO LOCKOUT ....................................................................................................................... 8
SAVINGS CLAUSE ..................................................................................................................................... 9
DURATION .................................................................................................................................................. 9
2
PREAMBLE
This Collective Bargaining Agreement is entered into by the Board of County Commissioners
of Washington County, Maryland and the Sheriff of Washington County, Maryland
(hereinafter referred to as "Employer" or “County”), and Local 146 of the National Correctional
Employees Union (hereinafter referred to as "Union"), and has as its purpose the promotion
of harmonious relations between the County and the Union; the establishment of an
equitable and peaceful procedure for the resolution of differences; and includes the
agreement of the parties on wages and benefits as defined by Md. Code, Courts & Judicial
Proceedings §2-335(a).
RECOGNITION
The Board of County Commissioners of Washington County Maryland and the Sheriff of
Washington County, Maryland recognize the National Correctional Employees Union, to the
extent permitted by law, as the exclusive collective bargaining representative for all full-time
correctional deputies, including classification officers, at the rank of sergeant or below employed
by the Washington County Maryland, in matters relating to rates of wages and benefits as defined
by Md. Code, Courts & Judicial Proceedings §2-335(a). Employees who are full-time correctional
deputies, including classification officers, at the rank of sergeant or below are sometimes referred
to as “Employees” in this Agreement.
UNION SECURITY
A. All Employees subject to the provisions of this Agreement, who qualify pursuant to Md. Code,
Courts & Judicial Proceedings Art. § 2-335(h), and are either current members of the Union,
or who elect to become members during the terms of this Agreement, shall maintain their
membership, subject to an Employee’s right to discontinue membership in accordance with
Section B below and applicable federal, state, and/or local law.
B. The Employer agrees to the adoption of a Union “check-off” system whereby Union dues as
established by the Union will be withheld from each eligible Employee’s pay at source in equal
amounts from each pay. Such withholdings for Union dues are to be transmitted by check to
the Union not later than the twentieth (20th) day of each month. The Union shall notify the
Employer thirty (30) calendar days prior to any change in such dues. The Employee must give
the County written authorization for dues check-off. Any payroll deduction authorization shall
be revocable at will in writing by the employee, and upon written notice of any such revocation,
the County’s obligation to deduct dues shall cease beginning with the next pay cycle following
the County’s receipt of such revocation.
WAGES
A. Wage Increase
Full-time Correctional Deputies & Sergeants shall receive a 6% cost of living adjustment,
3
effective July 1, 2025.
For Fiscal Year 2027, Full-time Correctional Deputies & Sergeants shall receive a cost-of-
living adjustment (“COLA”) equal to that, if any, received by employees on the Washington
County Commissioners (“WCC”) pay scale at the same time that employees on the WCC pay
scale receive their cost of living increase. Employees covered by this Agreement shall not
receive any wage adjustment or pay scale adjustment implemented to decompress the scale
made for employees on the WCC pay scale in Fiscal Year 27.
B. Step Increase
For Fiscal Year 2026, full-time Correctional Deputies & Sergeants who are eligible for a 2.5%
step increase shall receive a step increase at the time step increases are normally paid.
In Fiscal Year 27, Employees who are eligible for a step increase shall receive a step increase
only if employees on the WCC pay scale receive a step increase. In the event that employees
on the WCC pay scale receive a step increase, Employees covered by this Agreement shall
receive an equivalent step increase at the same time that employees on the WCC pay scale
receive their step increase.
C. Wage Scale for Bargaining Unit Members
Wages shall be paid in accordance with the pay scale as adjusted to reflect cost of living
increases and attached as Exhibit A.
D. Salary Program
The salary program for Employees shall include, at a minimum:
1. Entry-level salary for the agency, which may be modified by the Washington County
Commissioners each year in conjunction with other grade adjustments. The entry-level
salary and all salaries can be found on the Human Resources Web site.
2. Salary differential within ranks will reflect time of service within the rank.
3. Salary differential between ranks will reflect differences in rank in accordance with the
County classification plan.
E. Shift Differential
1. Definitions
43-Hour Workgroup – Employees who are assigned to work a 43-hour work week
schedule.
40-Hour Workgroup – Employees who are assigned to work a 40-hour work week
4
schedule.
Regular Shift – A work period that is not defined as Evening Shift or Night Shift. Regular
Shift does not allow the Employee to receive a shift differential.
Evening Shift – A work period that occurs during designated hours that enable the
Employee to receive a 5% shift differential. Employees who are assigned to the 43-Hour
Workgroup and work the hours between 1530 and 2400 receive the Evening Shift pay
differential. Employees who are assigned to the 40-Hour Workgroup who work the hours
between 1600 and 2400 receive the Evening Shift pay differential. For the purposes of this
section, Evening Shift may be referred to as a Qualifying Shift.
Night Shift – A work period that occurs during designated hours that enable the Employee
to receive a 7% shift differential. Employees who are assigned to the 43-Hour Workgroup
and work the hours between 2330-0800 receive the Night Shift pay differential. Employees
who are assigned to the 40-Hour Workgroup and work the hours between 2400 and 0800
receive the Night Shift pay differential. For the purposes of this section, Night Shift may
be referred to as a Qualifying Shift.
2. Conditions
Employees who are employed in Qualifying Positions will receive the shift differential
when they are assigned by their supervisor to a Qualifying Shift. Callouts are not
considered a Qualifying Shift and Employees shall not receive the shift differential
compensation for Callouts.
3. Exceptions for Shift Differential
If an Employee is offered by the Sheriff or his designee, and accepts, compensatory time
in lieu of overtime payment for hours worked that would have qualified for shift
differential, no shift differential will be paid.
F. Compensatory Time Policy
1. Definitions
43-Hour Workgroup – Employees who are assigned to and work a 43-hour work week
schedule.
40-Hour Workgroup – Employees who are assigned to and work a 40-hour work week
schedule.
2. Conditions
a. Compensatory time may be granted in the discretion of the Sheriff in accordance with
the Fair Labor Standards Act.
b. Employees will only be able to transfer over 80 hours of compensatory time to a new
5
calendar year beginning on the first day in January. Compensatory time exceeding 80
hours at the start of the new calendar year, specifically the first day of January, will be
forfeited by the Employee.
c. Employees will be able to accrue a maximum of 96 hours of compensatory time at any
time. If an Employee reaches the maximum of 96 hours, their request for any additional
compensatory time shall be denied and the Employee may resubmit a request for
overtime.
d. Employees who are classified in the 40-Hour Workgroup may receive compensatory
time at 1.5 hours per hour worked over 40 hours per week.
e. Employees who are classified in the 43-Hour Workgroup may receive compensatory
time at 1.5 hours per hour worked over 43 hours per week.
f. The Sheriff may modify or discontinue the ability of Employees to accrue
compensatory time due to operational needs.
G. Overtime Policy
Overtime will be used to ensure adequate staffing of the operations.
1. Definitions
Overtime Pay – Extra compensation required by the Fair Labor Standards Act when
Employees work beyond, or in addition to, their normal workweek. Overtime is paid at a
rate of one and one-half times the Employees regular rate of pay.
Premium Pay – Compensation equal to one and one-half times an Employee’s base rate of
pay, exclusive of shift differential. Premium Pay shall be paid regardless of the number of
hours worked in a workweek.
43-Hour Workgroup – Employees who are eligible for overtime pay at 1.5 times their
regular rate for all hours worked over 43 hours per week.
40-Hour Workgroup – Employees who are eligible for overtime pay at 1.5 times their
regular rate of pay for all hours worked over 40 hours per week.
Call Back Pay – Employees will receive Premium Pay for being Called Back to work.
Staff Meetings Meeting Pay – Employees will receive Premium Pay for attending Staff
Meetings if they were not regularly scheduled for work during the time of the meeting.
Off Duty Court Pay – All personnel will receive 1.5 times their hourly rate for attending
Court if they were summoned and they were not regularly scheduled for work during the
time of the court appearance.
Holiday Day Pay – Washington County will publish a Holiday Schedule before each
6
calendar year starts. An employee who works on the date of a scheduled holiday will be
paid a premium of one and one-half times their hourly rate for all hours worked on that
holiday. When a scheduled holiday falls on a weekend, the County generally announces
that it will recognize the holiday during the work week (for example, when Christmas falls
on Sunday, it is observed on Monday). In such an event, employees working on the date
the holiday is recognized by the County will be paid straight-time for any hours worked on
that day but will not be paid a holiday premium. When a recognized holiday is observed
on a date different from the actual date of the holiday, the holiday pay premium will still
be paid to employees who work on the actual holiday but not paid to employees who work
on the date of the recognized holiday.
2. Court Appearances
Employees required to appear in court during off duty hours will receive a minimum of (2)
hours of Premium Pay. This will be applied for through the filing of an “Overtime Slip”
with a copy of the Summons/Subpoena attached.
H. Post Retirement Court Pay
Employees in good standing at the time of their retirement will be compensated at their base
hourly rate of pay, at the time of their retirement, for up to one year after retirement for court
appearances which are deemed necessary by the State’s Attorney’s Office.
I. Inclement Weather Pay
If County Government offices are declared closed due to weather, Employees who are required
to work at the time of the closure and those Employees who are required to work the two shifts
immediately following the closure shall be paid Premium Pay for all hours worked during those
shifts.
BENEFITS
Employees shall be provided health, dental, and vision insurance, life insurance, and disability
insurance under the same terms and conditions as are provided to Washington County employees
who are not covered by the terms of a collective bargaining agreement, and the Employer shall
continue in effect its pension benefits as provided pursuant to the Employees’ Retirement Plan of
Washington County (incorporating all amendments through January 2025); provided, however,
that during the term of this Agreement, an Employee shall contribute into the Employees’
Retirement Plan of Washington County not less than 6% of their Base Salary that is in effect at
the beginning of the first full pay period closest to July 1st of each year.
GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
A. Grievance Coverage
A “grievance” is defined as an alleged violation of this Agreement or a dispute concerning the
7
meaning, interpretation, or application of this Agreement or any terms or provisions thereof.
Any Employee or group of Employees covered by this Agreement may present grievances to
the Employer. However, only the Union may file a grievance pursuant to this grievance
procedure.
The procedures set forth in this Section shall be the exclusive remedy for the resolution of
grievances filed by the Union or its members. The Union may not file a grievance pursuant to
the Sheriff’s Office General Order 25 or any revisions thereto.
B. Procedure
All grievances shall be in writing on an approved grievance form. The writing shall state
specifically the substance of the grievance and identify the aggrieved Employee and the
specific provisions of this Agreement alleged to have been violated. All grievances shall be
processed in the following manner:
Step 1:
The Union will submit the grievance in writing within fourteen (14) calendar days of the
occurrence of the actions being grieved or within fourteen (14) calendar days of the Union
having reasonable knowledge of the actions, to the Chief Deputy. The Chief Deputy or his/her
designee shall meet with the Union and the aggrieved Employee to discuss the grievance within
fourteen (14) calendar days of receipt of the grievance form and shall reply to the Union, in
writing, within fourteen (14) calendar days after the meeting.
Step 2:
If not resolved at Step 1, the Union may appeal the grievance on the approved form to the
County Director of Human Resources within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of the Step
l decision. The Director of Human Resources or his/her designee shall meet with the Union
and the aggrieved Employee to discuss the grievance within fourteen (14) calendar days of
receipt of the grievance form and shall reply to the Union, in writing, within fourteen (14)
calendar days after the meeting.
Step 3:
If not resolved at Step 2, the Union may appeal the grievance on the approved form to the County
Administrator or his/her designee within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of the Step 2
decision. The appeal shall state specifically the substance of the grievance and identify the
aggrieved Employee(s) and the specific provisions of this Agreement involved. The Union and
the aggrieved Employee shall meet with the County Administrator or his/her designee within
fourteen (14) calendar days of the filing of the grievance at this Step to discuss its substance
and possible resolutions. The County Administrator or his/her designee shall give a decision in
writing within fourteen (14) calendar days after the aforesaid meeting.
Step 4:
8
If the grievance has not been resolved in step 3, the Union may, within fourteen (14) calendar
days following the Step 3 decision from the County Administrator, submit the grievance to
arbitration through the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) or similar service.
The FMCS or similar service shall supply a list of five qualified labor arbitrators from the
Washington, D.C. Metropolitan area. Both the Employer and the Union shall have the right to
strike two names from the list. The parties shall flip a coin to determine who shall strike the
first name; the other party shall then strike one name. The process shall be repeated, and the
remaining person shall be the arbitrator. After the selection of the arbitrator as outlined above,
the party requesting arbitration shall advise the service provider of the name of the arbitrator.
The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties hereto. Expenses for the
arbitrator's services and proceedings shall be borne equally by the Union and the Employer.
Each party shall be responsible for compensating its own witnesses and representatives. If either
party desires a verbatim record of the proceedings, it may cause such a record to be made by a
qualified Court Reporter. The cost of a verbatim record for proceedings shall be borne by the
party causing the record to be made or, if requested by both, shall be split equally.
C. Time Limits.
A grievance must be presented and processed in accordance with the steps, time limits, and
conditions contained in this Article. The Employer and Union recognize that time is of the
essence and the prompt settlement of grievances is important to a sound and harmonious
relationship.
If the Employer fails to provide an answer to a grievance within the time limits so provided, the
Employee or Union may immediately appeal to the next step.
The failure of the Union to act upon a grievance within the time limits shall be deemed a
forfeiture of the right to advance further in the grievance process.
The time limits prescribed herein may be altered and/or waived by mutual agreement, in
writing, by the Employer and the Union.
NO STRIKE/NO LOCKOUT
The County and the Union subscribe to the principle that differences shall be resolved by peaceful
and appropriate means without interruption of work. In accordance with Md. Code, Courts &
Judicial Proceedings §2-335(h)(7), during the term of this Agreement, neither the Union nor its
agents or any Employee, for any reason, will authorize, institute, aid, condone or engage in a
slowdown, work stoppage, strike, or any other interference with the work and statutory functions
or obligations of the employer. During the term of this Agreement, neither the employer nor its
agents for any reason shall authorize, institute, aid or promote any lockout of Employees covered
by this Agreement.
9
SAVINGS CLAUSE
If any provision of this Agreement, or the application of such provision, should be rendered or
declared invalid by any court action or by reason of any existing or subsequently enacted
legislation, the remaining parts or portions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect;
and upon issuance of such a decision, the County and the Union agree to immediately negotiate a
substitute for the invalidated Article, Section or portion thereof.
DURATION
This Agreement shall become effective July 1, 2025 and shall remain in full force and effect
until June 30, 2027. This Agreement shall be automatically renewed from year to year after
June 30, 2027 unless either party shall notify the other in writing no later than October 1st, 2026,
(or October 1st of any subsequent year thereafter in the case of an automatic renewal) that it desires
to terminate, modify, or amend this Agreement.
The County and the Union agree that the parties may enter into mutually acceptable side letter
agreements to clarify provisions of this Agreement during its term.
The Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
By: __________________________________________
John F. Barr, Commissioner President
The Sheriff of Washington County, Maryland:
By: __________________________________________
Brian K. Albert, Sheriff
The National Correctional Employees Union
By: __________________________________________
Christopher Murphy, President, NCEU
By: __________________________________________
VJ Vincent, President, NCEU Local 146
4/23/2025
GRADE POSITION CODE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Base + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5%
8 MAJOR 0035 112,133 114,941 117,811 120,765 123,781 126,880 130,062 133,307 136,635 140,046 143,541 147,139 150,821 154,586 158,454 162,406 166,462 170,622 174,886 179,254
53.91 55.26 56.64 58.06 59.51 61.00 62.53 64.09 65.69 67.33 69.01 70.74 72.51 74.32 76.18 78.08 80.03 82.03 84.08 86.18
7 CAPTAIN 0046 101,774 104,312 106,912 109,595 112,341 115,149 118,019 120,973 123,989 127,088 130,270 133,536 136,885 140,317 143,832 147,430 151,112 154,898 158,766 162,739
48.93 50.15 51.40 52.69 54.01 55.36 56.74 58.16 59.61 61.10 62.63 64.20 65.81 67.46 69.15 70.88 72.65 74.47 76.33 78.24
6 LIEUTENANT 0075 92,331 94,640 97,011 99,445 101,941 104,499 107,120 109,803 112,549 115,357 118,248 121,202 124,238 127,338 130,520 133,786 137,134 140,566 144,082 147,680
44.39 45.50 46.64 47.81 49.01 50.24 51.50 52.79 54.11 55.46 56.85 58.27 59.73 61.22 62.75 64.32 65.93 67.58 69.27 71.00
5 SERGEANT 0086 83,824 85,925 88,067 90,272 92,539 94,848 97,219 99,653 102,149 104,707 107,328 110,011 112,757 115,586 118,477 121,430 124,467 127,587 130,770 134,035
40.30 41.31 42.34 43.40 44.49 45.60 46.74 47.91 49.11 50.34 51.60 52.89 54.21 55.57 56.96 58.38 59.84 61.34 62.87 64.44
4 CORPORAL 0397 77,875 79,830 81,827 83,866 85,966 88,109 90,314 92,581 94,890 97,261 99,694 102,190 104,749 107,370 110,053 112,798 115,627 118,518 121,472 124,509
37.44 38.38 39.34 40.32 41.33 42.36 43.42 44.51 45.62 46.76 47.93 49.13 50.36 51.62 52.91 54.23 55.59 56.98 58.40 59.86
3 MASTERY DEPUTY 71,698 73,486 75,317 77,210 79,144 81,120 83,158 85,238 87,360 89,544 91,790 94,078 96,429 98,842 101,317 103,854 106,454 109,117 111,842 114,629
34.47 35.33 36.21 37.12 38.05 39.00 39.98 40.98 42.00 43.05 44.13 45.23 46.36 47.52 48.71 49.93 51.18 52.46 53.77 55.11
2 DEPUTY 1ST CL. 0138 63,586 65,166 66,789 68,453 70,158 71,906 73,694 75,546 77,438 79,373 81,349 83,387 85,467 87,610 89,794 92,040 94,349 96,699 99,112 101,587
30.57 31.33 32.11 32.91 33.73 34.57 35.43 36.32 37.23 38.16 39.11 40.09 41.09 42.12 43.17 44.25 45.36 46.49 47.65 48.84
1 DEPUTY*0164 55,016 56,389 57,803 59,238 60,715 62,234 63,794 65,395 67,038 68,723
26.45 27.11 27.79 28.48 29.19 29.92 30.67 31.44 32.23 33.04
*Lateral Salary for a correctional officer with two (2) or more years of experience $57,803
STEP
FY26 Sheriff Detention Salary Scale - DRAFT 3
6/21/2025
1 of 2
4/23/2025
GRADE POSITION
8 MAJOR
7 CAPTAIN
6 LIEUTENANT
5 SERGEANT
4 CORPORAL
3 MASTERY DEPUTY
2 DEPUTY 1ST CL.
1 DEPUTY*
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
+ 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5% + 2.5%
183,726 188,323 193,024 197,850 202,800 207,875 213,075 218,400 223,870 229,466 235,206 241,093 247,125 253,302 259,626 266,115 272,771 279,594 286,582 293,738
88.33 90.54 92.80 95.12 97.50 99.94 102.44 105.00 107.63 110.32 113.08 115.91 118.81 121.78 124.82 127.94 131.14 134.42 137.78 141.22
166,816 170,997 175,282 179,670 184,163 188,760 193,482 198,328 203,278 208,354 213,554 218,899 224,370 229,986 235,726 241,613 247,645 253,843 260,187 266,698
80.20 82.21 84.27 86.38 88.54 90.75 93.02 95.35 97.73 100.17 102.67 105.24 107.87 110.57 113.33 116.16 119.06 122.04 125.09 128.22
151,382 155,168 159,058 163,030 167,107 171,288 175,573 179,962 184,454 189,072 193,794 198,640 203,611 208,707 213,928 219,274 224,765 230,381 236,142 242,050
72.78 74.60 76.47 78.38 80.34 82.35 84.41 86.52 88.68 90.90 93.17 95.50 97.89 100.34 102.85 105.42 108.06 110.76 113.53 116.37
137,384 140,816 144,331 147,930 151,632 155,418 159,307 163,280 167,357 171,538 175,822 180,211 184,725 189,342 194,085 198,931 203,902 208,998 214,219 219,565
66.05 67.70 69.39 71.12 72.90 74.72 76.59 78.50 80.46 82.47 84.53 86.64 88.81 91.03 93.31 95.64 98.03 100.48 102.99 105.56
127,629 130,811 134,077 137,426 140,858 144,373 147,992 151,694 155,480 159,370 163,363 167,440 171,621 175,906 180,294 184,808 189,426 194,168 199,014 203,986
61.36 62.89 64.46 66.07 67.72 69.41 71.15 72.93 74.75 76.62 78.54 80.50 82.51 84.57 86.68 88.85 91.07 93.35 95.68 98.07
117,499 120,432 123,448 126,526 129,688 132,933 136,261 139,672 143,166 146,744 150,405 154,170 158,018 161,970 166,026 170,186 174,450 178,818 183,290 187,866
56.49 57.90 59.35 60.83 62.35 63.91 65.51 67.15 68.83 70.55 72.31 74.12 75.97 77.87 79.82 81.82 83.87 85.97 88.12 90.32
104,125 106,725 109,387 112,112 114,920 117,790 120,744 123,760 126,859 130,021 133,266 136,594 140,005 143,499 147,077 150,758 154,523 158,392 162,344 166,400
50.06 51.31 52.59 53.90 55.25 56.63 58.05 59.50 60.99 62.51 64.07 65.67 67.31 68.99 70.71 72.48 74.29 76.15 78.05 80.00
STEP
FY26 Sheriff Detention Salary Scale - DRAFT 3
6/21/2025
2 of 2
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Intergovernmental Cooperative Purchase (INTG-25-0191) – Personal Protective
Equipment (PPE) for Division of Emergency Services
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Kentner, CPPO, Director of Purchasing; Eric Jacobs,
Operations Manager, Division of Emergency Services; Dave Hays, Director, Emergency Services
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize by Resolution, for the approval of the purchase of
13 sets of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) (coats and pants) for the Division of Emergency
Services from Municipal Emergency Services of Rockville, MD at the contracted unit prices totaling
$53,148.55 based on the contract awarded by the Fairfax County, VA contract (4400010661)
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Section 106.3 of the Public Local Laws of Washington County grants
authorization for the County to procure goods or services under contracts entered into by other
government entities. On items over $50,000, a determination to allow or participate in an
intergovernmental cooperative purchasing arrangement shall be made by Resolution and shall indicate
that the participation will provide cost benefits to the county or result in administrative efficiencies and
savings or provide other justification for the arrangement.
The County will benefit with the direct cost savings in the purchase of PPE (pants and coat) because of
economies of scale this contract has leveraged. Additionally, the County will realize savings through
administrative efficiencies as a result of not preparing, soliciting and evaluating a bid. Acquisition of
the equipment by utilizing the Fairfax County, VA contract and eliminating our County’s bid process
would result in administrative and cost savings for the Division of Emergency Services in preparing
specifications and the Purchasing Department.
DISCUSSION: This structural-firefighting, turnout gear will be purchased to assist in outfitting our
first responders throughout the County. This is an annual program that has been supported through
general budget funding. Fairfax County awarded the initial contract with multiple renewal periods.
This contract offers a 30.5% discount off of list price.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funding is in the department’s FY’25 operating budget 599999-10-115 25.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: MES Quote dated 4/28/25
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Page 1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO. RS-2025-
(Intergovernmental Cooperative Purchase [INTG-25-0191] Personal Protective
Equipment [PPE] for Division of Emergency Services)
RECITALS
The Code of Public Local Laws of Washington County, Maryland (the “Public Local
Laws”), § 1-106.3, provides that the Board of County Commissioners of Washington County,
Maryland (the “Board”), “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.”
Subsection (c) of § 1-106.3 provides that “A determination to allow or participate in an
intergovernmental cooperative purchasing arrangement under subsection (b) of this section shall
be by resolution and shall either indicate that the participation will provide cost benefits to the
county or result in administrative efficiencies and savings or provide other justifications for the
arrangement.”
The Washington County Division of Emergency Services seeks to purchase thirteen (13)
sets of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) (coats and pants) from Municipal Emergency
Services of Rockville, Maryland, at the contracted unit prices totaling $53,148.55 based on the
contract awarded by the Fairfax County, Virginia contract (4400010661).
Eliminating the County’s bid process will result in administrative and cost savings for the
County. The County will benefit with direct cost savings because of the economies of scale the
aforementioned contract has leveraged. Additionally, the County will realize administrative
efficiencies and savings as a result of not preparing, soliciting, and evaluating bids.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board, pursuant to § 1-106.3 of the Public
Local Laws, that the Washington County Division of Emergency Services is hereby authorized to
purchase thirteen (13) sets of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) (coats and pants) from
Municipal Emergency Services of Rockville, Maryland, at the contracted unit prices totaling
$53,148.55 based on the contract awarded by the Fairfax County, Virginia contract (4400010661).
Adopted and effective this ____ day of June, 2025.
Page 2 of 2
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
_____________________________ BY: ______________________________________
Dawn L. Marcus, County Clerk John F. Barr, President
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency: Mail to:
Office of the County Attorney
______________________________ 100 W. Washington Street, Suite 1101
Zachary J. Kieffer Hagerstown, MD 21740
County Attorney
(877) 637-3473
Quote
Quote #QT1931947
Date 04/28/2025
QT1931947
Page 1 of 1
Bill To
Eric Jacobs
WASHINGTON COUNTY (MD) DES
16232 ELLIOTT PKWY
WILLIAMSPORT MD 21795-4083
United States
Expires 05/23/2025
Sales Rep Dunn, William
Shipping Method FedEx Ground
Customer WASHINGTON COUNTY DES (MD)
Customer # C242423
Ship To
Eric Jacobs
WASHINGTON COUNTY (MD) DES
16232 ELLIOTT PKWY
WILLIAMSPORT MD 21795-4083
United States
Item Alt. Item #Units Description QTY Unit Price Amount
HFRP Tail Coat MDWASH00045 MDWASH00045
HFRP Tail Coat
Morning Pride coat (ZIPPER CLOSURE), as per
Washington County spec ID# MDWASH00045.
List price is $3543.57.
13 $2,462.71 $32,015.23
HFRP Tail Pant MDWASH00044 MDWASH00044
HFRP Tail Pant
Morning Pride pant, as per Washington County spec
ID# MDWASH00044.
List price is $2339.05.
13 $1,625.64 $21,133.32
Pricing is per Fairfax County contract # 4400010661.
Honeywell- 30.5%
Subtotal $53,148.55
Shipping Cost $0.00
Tax Total $0.00
Total $53,148.55
This Quotation is subject to any applicable sales tax and shipping and handling charges that may apply. Tax and shipping charges are
considered estimated and will be recalculated at the time of shipment to ensure they take into account the most current information.
All returns must be processed within 30 days of receipt and require a return authorization number and are subject to a restocking fee.
Custom orders are not returnable. Effective tax rate will be applicable at the time of invoice.
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Intergovernmental Cooperative Purchase (INTG-25-0192) – Personal Protective
Equipment (PPE) for Division of Emergency Services
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Kentner, CPPO, Director of Purchasing; Eric Jacobs,
Operations Manager, Emergency Services; Dave Hays, Director, Emergency Services
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize by Resolution, for the approval of the purchase of
108 sets of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) (coats and pants) for the Division of Emergency
Services from Maryland Fire Equipment Corporation of Rockville, MD at contracted unit prices
totaling $410,284.53 based on the contract awarded by the Arlington County, VA contract (16-217-
ITB-1)
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Section 106.3 of the Public Local Laws of Washington County grants
authorization for the County to procure goods or services under contracts entered into by other
government entities. On items over $50,000, a determination to allow or participate in an
intergovernmental cooperative purchasing arrangement shall be made by Resolution and shall indicate
that the participation will provide cost benefits to the county or result in administrative efficiencies and
savings or provide other justification for the arrangement.
The County will benefit with the direct cost savings in the purchase of PPE (pants and coat) because of
economies of scale this contract has leveraged. Additionally, the County will realize savings through
administrative efficiencies as a result of not preparing, soliciting and evaluating a bid. Acquisition of
the equipment by utilizing the Arlington County, VA contract and eliminating our County’s bid process
would result in administrative and cost savings for the Division of Emergency Services in preparing
specifications and the Purchasing Department.
DISCUSSION: This structural-firefighting, turnout gear will be purchased to assist in outfitting our
first responders throughout the County. This is an annual program that has been supported through
general budget funding. Arlington County awarded the initial contract with multiple renewal periods.
This contract offers a 54% discount off of list price.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funding is in the department’s FY’25 operating budget 599999-10-11520.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Maryland Fire Equipment Corporation quote dated 5/7/25
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Page 1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO. RS-2025-
(Intergovernmental Cooperative Purchase [INTG-25-0192] Personal Protective
Equipment [PPE] for Division of Emergency Services)
RECITALS
The Code of Public Local Laws of Washington County, Maryland (the “Public Local
Laws”), § 1-106.3, provides that the Board of County Commissioners of Washington County,
Maryland (the “Board”), “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.”
Subsection (c) of § 1-106.3 provides that “A determination to allow or participate in an
intergovernmental cooperative purchasing arrangement under subsection (b) of this section shall
be by resolution and shall either indicate that the participation will provide cost benefits to the
county or result in administrative efficiencies and savings or provide other justifications for the
arrangement.”
The Washington County Division of Emergency Services seeks to purchase one hundred
and eight (108) sets of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) (coats and pants) for the Division of
Emergency Services from Maryland Fire Equipment Corporation of Rockville, Maryland, at
contracted unit prices totaling $410,284.53 based on the contract awarded by the Arlington
County, Virginia contract (16-217-ITB-1).
Eliminating the County’s bid process will result in administrative and cost savings for the
County. The County will benefit with direct cost savings because of the economies of scale the
aforementioned contract has leveraged. Additionally, the County will realize administrative
efficiencies and savings as a result of not preparing, soliciting, and evaluating bids.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board, pursuant to § 1-106.3 of the Public
Local Laws, that the Washington County Division of Emergency Services is hereby authorized to
purchase one hundred and eight (108) sets of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) (coats and
pants) for the Division of Emergency Services from Maryland Fire Equipment Corporation of
Rockville, Maryland, at contracted unit prices totaling $410,284.53 based on the contract awarded
by the Arlington County, Virginia contract (16-217-ITB-1).
Adopted and effective this ____ day of June, 2025.
Page 2 of 2
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
_____________________________ BY: ______________________________________
Dawn L. Marcus, County Clerk John F. Barr, President
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency: Mail to:
Office of the County Attorney
______________________________ 100 W. Washington Street, Suite 1101
Zachary J. Kieffer Hagerstown, MD 21740
County Attorney
Quotation
Date
5/7/2025
Quotation #
050725RSC
Name / Address
Washington County, MD
Div. of Emergency Services
16232 Elliott Parkway
Williamsport, MD 21795
Ship To
Washington County, MD
Div. of Emergency Services
16232 Elliott Parkway
Williamsport, MD 21795
Terms
NET 30
Expiration Date
6/6/2025
F.O.B.
Destination
Eric Jacobs
240-500-4026
scolvin@marylandfire.com301-881-2713
Scott Colvin
Signature:
Date:
Total
Acceptance of Quotation
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to quote you.
If you need further assistance, please contact
EmailPhone #
Custom orders cannot be canceled or returned once order is placed.
Item DescriptionQty U/M Unit Price Total
1K245-G Globe G-XTREME 3.0 Jacket Flex 7 Gold, Titanium SL2,
Crosstech Black, Per Washington County Spec. List Price
$4203.46 ea.
63 ea 1,933.59 121,816.17
FK245-G Globe, G-XTREME GPS Pant Flex 7 Gold, Titanium SL2,
Crosstech Black Per Washington County Spec. List Price
$3065.26 ea.
63 Pr 1,410.02 88,831.26
A42N3-G Globe, Athletix Jacket Kombat Stretch Gold, Titanium
Nano, Crosstech Black, Per Washington County Spec.
List Price $5558.72 ea.
45 ea 2,557.01 115,065.45
B42N3-G Globe, Athletix Pants Kombat Stretch Gold, Titanium
Nano, Crosstech Black Per Washington County Spec.
List Price $4085.59 ea.
45 Pr 1,879.37 84,571.65
Unit Prices Per Arlington County Contract #16-217-ITB-1
_____________________________________
_____________________________________
The above prices, specifications and conditions are
satisfactory and are hereby accepted.
Prices quoted are valid for 30 days from date of this
quotation unless noted in writing. Custom orders cannot be
canceled or returned once order has been placed.
$410,284.53
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Sole Source Procurement (PUR-1752) Fire House Software Agreement for Division
of Emergency Services
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Kentner, CPPO, Director of Purchasing; R. David Hays, Director,
Division of Emergency Services (DES)
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize a Sole Source procurement of a Maintenance
Software Agreement for the Division of Emergency Services for Auto-Cad software updates and
upgrades in the amount of $108,666.86 from ESO Solutions, Inc. of Dallas, TX.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: This is a maintenance agreement for the ESO Software platform, which is
utilized by County fire and EMS (volunteer and career) for fire incident reporting.
DES wishes to apply Sections 1-106.2(a)(1) & (2) of the Code of Local Public Laws of Washington
County, Maryland, to the procurement requested. These sections state that a sole source
procurement is authorized and permissible when: (1) Only one source exists that meets the
County’s requirements and (2) The compatibility of equipment, accessories, or replacement parts
is the paramount consideration.
This request requires the approval of four of the five Commissioners in order to proceed with a
sole source procurement. If approved, the following remaining steps of the process will occur as
outlined by the law: 1) Not more than ten (10) days after the execution and approval of a contract
under this section, the procurement agency shall publish notice of the award in a newspaper of
general circulation in the County and 2) An appropriate record of the sole source procurement shall
be maintained as required.
DISCUSSION: This software is a necessary tool to ensure that accurate and factual National Fire
Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) complaint documentation of fire, rescue and EMS incidents
can be completed.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds is available in account 515180-10-93130 for this procurement.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: ESO Solutions, Inc., quote dated 6/1/25
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Please send payments to: ESO Solutions, Inc. PO Box 738310Dallas, TX 75373-8310
Invoice
Date:6/1/2025
Invoice #ESO-168040
Terms Net 30
Due Date 7/1/2025
PO#
1 of 2
Bill To Ship To
Washington Cty Vol Fire & Resc AssocWashington County Fire & Rescue Assoc.1501 Pennsylvania AveHagerstown MD 21742United Statesrick.hemphill@myactv.net
Washington Cty Vol Fire & Resc AssocWashington County Fire & Rescue Assoc.HagerstownMD 21742US
Item From To QTY UOM Total
RMS Bundle - ESO Fire Incidents
Includes Auto EHR-import or Auto-CAD import, federal NFIRS data reporting, software updates and upgrades.
7/1/2025 6/30/2026 25 Stations USD $20,176.43
RMS Bundle - ESO Properties
Includes CAMEO integration, Pre-Plan view. Stores property and occupant history (presence of chemicals and tanks, Incidents, and previous
inspections).
7/1/2025 6/30/2026 25 Stations USD $6,062.55
RMS Bundle - Personnel Management
Includes tracking of Training classes, certifications, credentials, immunization records. Discounted as a part of the RMS Bundle.
7/1/2025 6/30/2026 471 Employees USD $11,007.76
RMS Bundle - ESO Hydrants
Inventory and document testing and status of hydrants.
7/1/2025 6/30/2026 25 Stations USD $4,538.90
RMS Bundle - ESO Activities - Fire and Fire/EMS
Agencies
Application for tracking non-response activities, including Operations and Community Risk Reduction and Daily Log.
7/1/2025 6/30/2026 25 Stations USD $3,496.39
Fire Incidents CAD Integration
Allows for integration of CAD data into the FIRE application. Ongoing maintenance included. Additional fees from your CAD vendor may apply.
7/1/2025 6/30/2026 10,000 Incidents USD $2,808.15
Fire Umbrella for Incident Reporting
Allows for reporting for multiple departments to one report.
7/1/2025 6/30/2026 1 USD $782.23
Assets-Checklist Bundle
Web-based asset management and apparatus checklist for Fire and EMS.
7/1/2025 6/30/2026 71 Vehicles USD $22,054.35
EMS1 Academy with ESO Integration
Track and report EMS training and access to CAPCE accredited online courses, with ESO integration.
7/1/2025 6/30/2026 300 Employees USD $16,041.00
FireRescue1 Academy with ESO Integration
Track and report Fire training and access to online courses following NFPA standards, with ESO integration.
7/1/2025 6/30/2026 300 Employees USD $15,756.00
ESO Checklists
Web-based apparatus checklist for Fire and EMS.
7/1/2025 6/30/2026 5 Vehicles USD $767.35
ESO Asset Management
Web-based asset management for Fire and EMS.
7/1/2025 6/30/2026 5 Vehicles USD $1,539.85
Fire Incidents CAD Integration
Allows for integration of CAD data into the FIRE application. Ongoing maintenance included. Additional fees from your CAD vendor may apply.
7/1/2025 6/30/2026 1 Incidents USD $1,539.85
ESO Fire Incidents
Includes Auto EHR-import or Auto-CAD import, federal NFIRS data reporting, software updates and upgrades.
7/1/2025 6/30/2026 1 Stations USD $1,024.85
Please send payments to: ESO Solutions, Inc. PO Box 738310Dallas, TX 75373-8310
Invoice
Date:6/1/2025
Invoice #ESO-168040
Terms Net 30
Due Date 7/1/2025
PO#
2 of 2
Item From To QTY UOM Total
ESO Activities - Fire and Fire/EMS Agencies 7/1/2025 6/30/2026 1 Stations USD $200.85
Personnel Management
Includes tracking of Training classes, certifications, credentials, immunization records. Integrated with ESO EHR and Ad Hoc Reporting.
7/1/2025 6/30/2026 20 Employees USD $870.35
Invoice Message:
ACH/EFT bank information: JP Morgan ChaseRouting: 111000614Account Number: 577211926
Check Remittance lockbox address: ESO Solutions, Inc. PO Box 738310Dallas, TX 75373-8310
Total (Without Tax):USD $108,666.86
Tax:USD $0.00
Grand Total:USD $108,666.86
Amount Paid/Credit:USD $0.00
Total Recurring:USD $108,666.86
Total One-Time:
Invoice Balance:USD $108,666.86
Please submit payment remittances to accountsreceivable@eso.com to ensure correct invoice application.
Amounts invoiced are per your agreement(s) which may include annual uplift and an increase in quantities based on usage overages. Your payment of this invoice serves as acceptance of such increases.
Questions? Contact: AccountsReceivable@eso.com 866-766-9471 option 8
Tax ID: 36-4566209
ESO will never e-mail you soliciting payment information. Please call us or e-mail AccountsReceivable@eso.com if you have any questions or wish to make a change.
This invoice presents the total net price of the product(s) and/or service(s) which is inclusive (net) of any discount. As the buyer of such product(s)/service(s), you may have additional reporting obligations to federal or state health care programs (including pursuant to 42 CFR 1001.952(h)) and/or upon inquiry by the HHS Secretary or other state or federal agencies. As the buyer, you must adhere to any other relevant federal or third-party payer requirements.
For a 3% fee, pay via Card
Direct Card Payment Link: https://app.suitesync.io/payments/acct_1FelgtGvY2g6ha8S/custinvc/8502996/?amount=11192686.58
Pay via Online Bank Transfer
Direct Bank Transfer Link: https://app.suitesync.io/payments/acct_1FelgtGvY2g6ha8S/custinvc/8502996/?card=false
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Bid Award (PUR-1740) – Leachate Hauling from County Landfill
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Kentner, CPPO, Purchasing Director, and David A. Mason, P.E.,
Deputy Director, Solid Waste
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the requirements contract for the Hauling of
Leachate from the County Landfill to A.C.& T. Co. Inc., of Hagerstown, MD based on the
responsive, responsible bidder with the lowest total lump sum amount of $438,400
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The bid was advertised in the local newspaper, listed on the State’s
eMaryland Marketplace website, the County Purchasing online bidding site (Ionwave) and on the
County’s website. The contract period is for a one (1) year period, tentatively commencing July
1, 2025, with an option by the County to renew for up to two (2) additional consecutive one (1)
year periods with the first term ending June 30, 2026. The County guarantees neither a
minimum/maximum of calls nor quantity of material for this contract. Eighteen (18)
persons/companies registered and downloaded the bid document on-line. One (1) bid was received
as indicated on the bid tabulation matrix.
The scope of services to be provided by the contractor includes loading, hauling, delivery, and
unloading leachate to Valicor located at the Department Water Quality’s Conococheague WWTP.
The leachate is transported from the Resh Road Landfill, Rubble Landfill, Old City/County
Landfill and 40 West Landfill.
The following hauling history (in gallons) is established at each location:
YEAR Resh Cell
4 & 5
Resh
N-1
Resh
N-2 & N-3
Rubble
Cell 1 County 40
West
2020 2,392,188 58,321 449,755 1,790,899 0* 16,143,433
2021 1,263,693 96,686, 478,369 2,278,679 189,850* 11,710,188
2025 1,463,861 113,782 261,625 2,441,259 4,192,066 9,349,209
2023 652,741 75,007 204,395 249,203 389,042* 9,195,436
2024 265,919 70,760 287,029 337,402 3,757,244* 8,299,043
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Funding is available in various accounts within the Department of Solid
Waste’s budget. 21030 – Resh Road Landfill, 21040 – Rubble Landfill, 21050 – City/County
Landfill, and 21020 – 40 West Landfill.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Bid Tabulation Matrix
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
PUR-1740
Leachate Hauling from County Landfill for Disposal
Item Description Unit Appr. Qty
1
Removal (loading/hauling/unloading) from Resh Landfill (Cells 4,5, N-1, N-2 and
N-3) to Valicor Environmental Services at the Conococheague Wastewater
Treatment Plant
Gal 1,500,000 .0208 $31,200.00
2 Removal (loading/hauling/unloading) from the Rubble Landfill to Valicore
Environmental Services at the Conococheague Wastewater Treatment Plant Gal 1,500,000 .0208 $31,200.00
3 Removal (loading/hauling/unloading) from the Old City/County Landfill to Valicor
Environmental Services at the Conococheague Wastewater Treatment Plant Gal 5,000,000 .0188 $94,000.00
4 Removal (loading/hauling/unloading) from the 40 West Landfill to Valicor
Environmental Services at the Conococheague Wastewater Treatment Plant Gal 15,000,000 .0188 $282,000.00
AC & T Co,. Inc.
Hagerstown, MD
$438,400.00TOTAL BASE BID - SUM OF ALL LOCATION TOTALS (LOCATIONS 1-4):
Correction calculations based on Unit Pricing
1 Bids Opened: May 7, 2025
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Bid Award (PUR-1742) – Electronics Recycling
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Kentner, CPPO, Director of Purchasing; Dave Mason, P.E., Deputy
Director, Department of Solid Waste
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Motion to award the bid for the Electronic Recycling for the Solid Waste
Department to the responsible, responsive bidder EACR, Inc., of Lakewood, NJ who submitted the lowest
Bid Price in the amount of $.14 per pound for CRT/Flat (Monitors/TV), $.10 per pound for NON-CRT
material (E-Waste) and $685 per trip for the Transportation from the 40 West Landfill to the Recycling
Facility.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Department of Solid Waste sought bids for the Electronics Recycling.
Service is required as needed and as the materials are collected at the 40 West Landfill. The County will
notify the Contractor when materials are ready for pick-up. Service will not be required on Sundays and
Holidays as specified. The project scope is the certified recycling or refurbishing of electronics to a
specified disposal facility periodically, as requested by the Deputy Director of the Department of Solid
Waste or his/her designee. Materials to be recycled will include, but are not limited to, CRT screen
televisions and computer monitors, laptops, flat screen televisions, stereos, printers, DVD players, VHS
Players, radios, and gaming systems. The County will notify and schedule delivery of the materials with
the Recycler.
The Contract period shall be for a one (1) year period tentatively commencing on or thereafter August 1,
2025 , with an option by the County to renew for up to two (2) additional consecutive one (1) year periods,
(i.e., August 1, 2025 to July 31, 2026), subject to written notice given by the County at least sixty (60)
calendar days in advance of each period’s expiration date. If the Bidder wishes to renew the Contract,
he/she shall submit a letter of intent to the County Purchasing Director at least ninety (90) calendar days
prior to the expiration of each contract period. The County reserves the right to accept or reject any request
for renewal and any increase in unit costs for each specified location to be serviced that the Bidder may
request. All other terms and conditions shall remain unchanged.
The bid was advertised on the State’s “eMaryland Marketplace Advantage”, the County’s website,
published in the local newspaper, and on the new online bidding site, Ionwave. Thirty-five (35)
persons/companies registered/downloaded the bid document online, and twelve (12) bids were received,
as indicated on the attached bid tabulation sheet.
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Funding in the amount of $43,000 has been approved in the FY’26 budget 588040-
21-21200 (Recycling) for these services.
CONCURRENCES: Division Director
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Bid Tabulation Matrix
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Line Description QTY UOM Unit Extended Unit Extended Unit Extended
1
Electronics Recycling
from 40 West Landfill 1 Pound $0.30 $0.30 $0.25 $0.25 $0.65 $0.65
2
Electronics Recycling
from 40 West Landfil 1 Pound $0.15 $0.15 $0.25 $0.25 $0.25 $0.25
3
Transportation from
40 West Landfill to
Recycling Facility
1 Trip $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.75 $0.75
Line Description QTY UOM Unit Extended Unit Extended Unit Extended
1
Electronics Recycling
from 40 West Landfill 1 Pound $0.39 $0.39 $0.40 $0.40 $0.40 $0.40
2
Electronics Recycling
from 40 West Landfil 1 Pound $0.39 $0.39 $0.20 $0.20 $0.22
$0.22
3
Transportation from
40 West Landfill to 1 Trip $275.00 $275.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00
PUR-1742
Electronics Recycling
& Recycling
(Pedalpoint Evterra Recycling,
Express
Communication, Inc.
Securis
(PC Recyler, Inc.)
Greenchip Sycamore International, Inc.WT World Trading inc
$1.65$0.50$0.45 PricePricePrice
$275.78 $500.60 $500.62
Bids Due: May 14, 2025
Line Description QTY UOM Unit Extended Unit Extended Unit Extended
1
Electronics Recycling
from 40 West Landfill 1 Pound $0.14 $0.14 $0.40 $0.40 $0.50 $0.50
2
Electronics Recycling
from 40 West Landfil
- NON-CRT Material
1 Pound $0.10 $0.10 $0.10 $0.10 $0.20 $0.20
3
Transportation from
40 West Landfill to 1 Trip $685.00 $685.00 $750.00 $750.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00
Line Description QTY UOM Unit Extended Unit Extended Unit Extended
1
Electronics Recycling
from 40 West Landfill
- CRT Material
1 Pound $2.20 $2.20 $0.35 $0.35 $0.65 $0.65
2
Electronics Recycling
from 40 West Landfil 1 Pound $3.90 $3.90 $0.10 $0.10 $0.50 $0.50
3
Transportation from
40 West Landfill to 1 Trip $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,050.00 $1,050.00 $1,760.00 $1,760.00
PUR-1742
Electronics Recycling
Green Wave Electronics
(Green Wave Computer Recycling)
1761.151006.1
Price
EcoReworld, LLC
EACR, Inc.
HARD COPY BID eRevival, LLC
$1,000.70$750.50685.24 PricePrice
1050.45
Bids Due: May 14, 2025
EACR, Inc.
EcoReworld, LLC
Electronic Recyclers, International, Inc.
eRevival, LLC
Line #1
Line #2
Line #3
Greenwave Electronics
Pedalpoint Lifecycle Solutins
Item #1
Item #2
Line #3
Item #1
anywhere between $50-$60 Per unit. For our bid
Line #2
Line #3
Chantilly, VA
Waste Collection Resolve, LLC
WT World Trading inc Westminster, CA
Baltimore, MD
Remarks / ExceptionsCity / StateSupplier
Express Communications, Inc.Dallas, TX
Greenchip Fredericksburg, VA
Lines #1, #2, and #3 Price indicated as a charge to the Coouty
incure the cost of dumping
$3.90 Per Pound
Securis does not accept loose batteries
Pricing is based on a live load piciup.
Securis does not accept loose batteries
Pricing is based on a live load piciup.
Securis does not accept loose batteries
Price indicated as a charge to the County.
Greenchip will pick-up e-waste materials at no
additional charge to the County.
CRT's/Flat (Monitors/TV's) Pricing is based on a
live load piciup.
Securis
PUR-1742
Electronics Recycling
Sycamore International, Inc.Westgrove, PA
Frederick, MD
Baltimore, MD
Fresno, CA
Philadelphia, PA
Lakewood, NJ
Indianapolis, IN
Bids Due: May 14, 2025
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Renewal / Extension - Sole Source Procurement Award (PUR-1654) – Munis
Software (Utility Billing) Support
PRESENTATION DA TE: June 10, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Kentner, CPPO, Director of Purchasing; Angie Poffenberger,
De puty Director -Software Support and Training, Budget and Finance
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize, for a renewal/extension for a Sole Source
Procurement of software licensing and support fees from Tyler Technologies of Dallas, TX for use by the
Office of Budget & Finance, Treasurer’s Office and others in the amount of $237,334 for the period of July
1, 2025, through June 30, 2026. This purchase was originally approved by the Board of County
Commissioners on November 28, 2023, for a two-year period totaling $474,668. This is the first year of a
two-year extension.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Purchasing Department received a request from Budget & Finance regarding
the procurement for the annual software support. Budget & Finance wishes to apply Sections 1-106.2(a)(1)
& (2) of the Code of Local Public Laws of Washington County, Maryland, to the procurement requested.
These sections state that a sole source procurement is authorized and permissible when: (1) Only one source
exists that meets the County’s requirements, and (2) The compatibility of equipment, accessories, or
replacement parts is the paramount consideration.
The Tyler Enterprise ERP software and support being recommended for renewal has expanded and
enhanced the County Treasurer’s Maryland Real Estate and Personal Property Tax Management system,
which was originally implemented in 2003. Additionally, the current software components replaced the
County’s old utility billing system, which was retired by Oracle/PeopleSoft in 2007. The current software
system consolidated tax, UB and general billing operations under one centralized cashiering and remitting
system across the enterprise and provides a comprehensive citizen web portal with 24/7 access to Tax,
Utility, and General billing information and On-line payments.
This request requires the approval of four of the five Commissioners in order to proceed with a
sole source procurement. If approved, the following remaining steps of the process will occur as
outlined by the law: 1) Not more than ten (10) days after the execution and approval of a contract
under this section, the procurement agency shall publish notice of the award in a newspaper of
general circulation in the County and 2) An appropriate record of the sole source procurement shall
be maintained as required.
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL I MPACT: Funding is available in the software account 515180-1 0-11000 for this
procurement.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Price Proposal from Tyler Technologies dated May 7, 2025.
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Bid Award (PUR-1735) Section A (North) Retention Pond Mowing for the
Department of Stormwater and Watershed Services
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Carin Bakner, Buyer, Purchasing Department; John Swauger,
Stormwater Management Coordinator, Water Quality
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the procurement of mowing services of fifty-
seven (57) retention ponds to the responsive, responsible bidder, Young’s Lawn Service, LLC of
Hagerstown, MD, for a Total Lump Sum Bid Price of $4,730.00 per mowing. The mowing cycle
is expected to be every three (3) to four (4) weeks; however, quantities may be more or less based
on weather. This award is contingent upon the vendor renewing its good standing status with the
Maryland Department of Assessments and Taxation.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The work consists of mowing and trimming all specified pond mowing
areas once every three (3) to four (4) weeks and notifying the Department of Stormwater
Watershed Services when each mowing cycle is to begin and is completed. The contractor is
required to utilize a GIS tracking application to document each mowing, and they will also be
responsible for collecting and properly disposing of all trash and debris from within the pond
mowing areas.
The Invitation to Bid (ITB) was advertised on the State of Maryland’s “eMaryland Marketplace
Advantage” website, the County’s website, in the local newspaper, and on the County’s new
electronic bid site (Euna/Ionwave). Thirty-one (31) persons/companies registered/downloaded the
bid document online, and on April 30, 2025, the county accepted bids; eleven (11) bids were
received. The Contract term shall be for a two-year period beginning on July 1, 2025, with an
option by the County to renew for up to three (3) additional consecutive one (1) year periods.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are available in the department’s operating budget account 515000-
40-40050.
CONCURRENCES: Mark Bradshaw, Division Director of Environmental Management
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Bid Tabulation Matrix
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
1
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $67.00 $67.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $67.50 $67.50
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $75.00 $75.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $135.00 $135.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $716.80 $716.80
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $72.00 $72.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $550.00 $550.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $65.00 $65.00
2
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $20.00 $20.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $45.00 $45.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $65.00 $65.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $116.80 $116.80
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $150.00 $150.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $30.00 $30.00
3
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $110.00 $110.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $112.00 $112.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $120.00 $120.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $240.00 $240.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,491.84 $1,491.84
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $128.00 $128.00
PUR-1735
Section A (North) Retention Pond Mowing Services
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $900.00 $900.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $90.00 $90.00
4
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $70.00 $70.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $82.50 $82.50
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $95.00 $95.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $165.00 $165.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,023.36 $1,023.36
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $88.00 $88.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $650.00 $650.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $70.00 $70.00
5
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $75.00 $75.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $82.50 $82.50
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $95.00 $95.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $165.00 $165.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,023.36 $1,023.36
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $88.00 $88.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $650.00 $650.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $85.00 $85.00
6
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $70.00 $70.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $75.00 $75.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $95.00 $95.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $150.00 $150.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $950.40 $950.40
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $80.00 $80.00
Pond No. 81, Access between 13931 and 13939 McIntosh Circle, Clear Spring, MD 21722
Pond No. 82, Access between 13903 and 13909 McIntosh Circle, Clear Spring, MD 21722
Pond No. 79, Access between 12534 and 12524 Garrow Drive, Clear Spring, MD 21722
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $600.00 $600.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $85.00 $85.00
7
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $45.00 $45.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $55.00 $55.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $65.00 $65.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $90.00 $90.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $491.20 $491.20
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $400.00 $400.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $45.00 $45.00
8
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $30.00 $30.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $45.00 $45.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $60.00 $60.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $270.40 $270.40
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $40.00 $40.00
9
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $70.00 $70.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $75.00 $75.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $95.00 $95.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $150.00 $150.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $950.40 $950.40
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $80.00 $80.00
Pond No. 85, Access adjacent to 13624 Creek View Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Pond No. 78, Access at end of Bivens Lane between 17010 and 17000, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Pond No. 86, Access adjacent to 13605 Creek View Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $600.00 $600.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $85.00 $85.00
10
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $82.50 $82.50
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $105.00 $105.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $105.00 $105.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $225.00 $225.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,372.80 $1,372.80
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $120.00 $120.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $850.00 $850.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $90.00 $90.00
11
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $97.50 $97.50
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $125.00 $125.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $130.00 $130.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $270.00 $270.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,647.36 $1,647.36
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $144.00 $144.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000.00
Actaeon, LLC $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $110.00 $110.00
12
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $65.00 $65.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $75.00 $75.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $95.00 $95.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $150.00 $150.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $950.40 $950.40
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $80.00 $80.00
Pond No. 55, Access west side of Seneca Ridge 150' north of Maugans Avenue, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Pond No. 54, Access east side of Seneca Ridge 150' north of Maugans Avenue, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Pond No. 53, Access between 13730 and 13846 Patriot Way, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $600.00 $600.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $80.00 $80.00
13
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $67.50 $67.50
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $70.00 $70.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $90.00 $90.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $135.00 $135.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $716.80 $716.80
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $72.00 $72.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $550.00 $550.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $70.00 $70.00
14
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $210.00 $210.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $375.00 $375.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $750.00 $750.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $4,620.00 $4,620.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $400.00 $400.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $2,600.00 $2,600.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $200.00 $200.00
15
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $70.00 $70.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $110.00 $110.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $120.00 $120.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $240.00 $240.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,491.84 $1,491.84
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $128.00 $128.00
Pond No. 96, Access at pump station 14704 Citicorp Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Pond No. 56, Access from across from 14207 Shelby Circle, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Pond No. 49, Access intersection of Sweet Vale Drive and Diller Drive, 18813 Diller Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21742
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $900.00 $900.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $85.00 $85.00
16
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $55.00 $55.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $65.00 $65.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $90.00 $90.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $491.20 $491.20
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $400.00 $400.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $40.00 $40.00
17
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $67.50 $67.50
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $70.00 $70.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $90.00 $90.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $135.00 $135.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $716.80 $716.80
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $72.00 $72.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $550.00 $550.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $80.00 $80.00
18
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $105.00 $105.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $105.00 $105.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $112.50 $112.50
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $225.00 $225.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,372.80 $1,372.80
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $120.00 $120.00
Pond No. 50, Access between 18828 and 18836 Diller Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21742
Pond No. 51, Access between 18914 and 18924 Diller Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21742
Pond No. 52, Access across the street from 13930 Pennsylvania Avenue, Hagerstown, MD 21742
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $850.00 $850.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $95.00 $95.00
19
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $110.00 $110.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $125.00 $125.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $135.00 $135.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $270.00 $270.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,647.36 $1,647.36
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $268.00 $268.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $144.00 $144.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $100.00 $100.00
20
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $105.75 $105.75
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $110.00 $110.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $125.00 $125.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $240.00 $240.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,491.84 $1,491.84
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $268.00 $268.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $128.00 $128.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $900.00 $900.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $110.00 $110.00
21
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $145.00 $145.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $195.00 $195.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $225.00 $225.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $450.00 $450.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $2,772.00 $2,772.00
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $333.00 $333.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $240.00 $240.00
Pond No. 97, Access through curb cut between 18541 and 18537 Maugans Avenue, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Pond No. 45, Access between 13602 and 13572 Cambridge Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21742
Pond No. 46, Access next to 13852 Ideal Circle, Hagerstown, MD 21742
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $1,600.00 $1,600.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $140.00 $140.00
22
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $105.00 $105.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $131.25 $131.25
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $135.00 $135.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $270.00 $270.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,647.36 $1,647.36
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $268.00 $268.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $144.00 $144.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $100.00 $100.00
23
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $105.00 $105.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $125.00 $125.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $131.20 $131.20
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $240.00 $240.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,491.84 $1,491.84
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $268.00 $268.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $128.00 $128.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $900.00 $900.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $100.00 $100.00
24
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $65.00 $65.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $175.00 $175.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $195.00 $195.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $390.00 $390.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $2,402.40 $2,402.40
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $333.00 $333.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $208.00 $208.00
Pond No. 44, Access between 19211 and 19123 Rock Maple Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21742
Pond No. 48, Access point between 19310 and 19306 Paradise Manor Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21742
Pond No. 47, Access between 13807 and 13819 Exeter Court, Hagerstown, MD 21742
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $1,400.00 $1,400.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $120.00 $120.00
25
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $45.00 $45.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $55.00 $55.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $70.00 $70.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $90.00 $90.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $491.20 $491.20
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $138.00 $138.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $48.00 $48.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $400.00 $400.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $50.00 $50.00
26
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $75.00 $75.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $115.00 $115.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $135.00 $135.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $270.00 $270.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,647.36 $1,647.36
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $144.00 $144.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $80.00 $80.00
27
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $50.00 $50.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $60.00 $60.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $70.00 $70.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $342.40 $342.40
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $138.00 $138.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Pond No. 36, Access between 19222 and 19224 Jamestown Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21742
Pond No. 42, Access between 18817 and 18901 Dover Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21742
Pond No. 43, Access intersection of Longmeadow Road and Paradise Church Road, Hagerstown, MD 21742
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $300.00 $300.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $50.00 $50.00
28
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $60.00 $60.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $60.00 $60.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $70.00 $70.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $120.00 $120.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $643.20 $643.20
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $64.00 $64.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $500.00 $500.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $65.00 $65.00
29
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $60.00 $60.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $75.00 $75.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $412.00 $412.00
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $138.00 $138.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $350.00 $350.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $40.00 $40.00
30
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $55.00 $55.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $70.00 $70.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $90.00 $90.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $491.20 $491.20
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $48.00 $48.00
Pond No. 41, Access from Mattley Drive adjacent to 12903 Mattley Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Pond No. 39, Access between 19723 and 19715 Marigold Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21742
Pond No. 38, Access intersection of Primrose Lane and Marigold Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21742
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $400.00 $400.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $60.00 $60.00
31
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $45.00 $45.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $55.00 $55.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $75.00 $75.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $105.00 $105.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $564.80 $564.80
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $56.00 $56.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $450.00 $450.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $60.00 $60.00
32
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $90.00 $90.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $110.00 $110.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $112.50 $112.50
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $225.00 $225.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,372.80 $1,372.80
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $120.00 $120.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $850.00 $850.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $95.00 $95.00
33
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $55.00 $55.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $60.00 $60.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $70.00 $70.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $105.00 $105.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $203.00 $203.00
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Pond No. 35, Access in front of 12827 El Paso Drive at Little Antietam Road and El Paso Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Pond No. 100, Access next to 23303 Angela Court, Smithsburg, MD 21783
Pond No. 37, Access next to 22107 Whitestone Court, Smithsburg, MD 21783
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $450.00 $450.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $65.00 $65.00
34
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $70.00 $70.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $82.50 $82.50
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $95.00 $95.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $165.00 $165.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,023.36 $1,023.36
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $88.00 $88.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $650.00 $650.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $85.00 $85.00
35
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $55.00 $55.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $55.00 $55.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $75.00 $75.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $90.00 $90.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $491.20 $491.20
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $48.00 $48.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $400.00 $400.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $70.00 $70.00
36
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $70.00 $70.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $75.00 $75.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $75.00 $75.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $150.00 $150.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $950.40 $950.40
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $80.00 $80.00
Pond No. 34, Access Foxville Road and Appalachian Court, Smithsburg, MD 21783
Pond No. 40, Access between 11432 and 11424 Orange Blossom Court, Smithsburg, MD 21783
Pond No. 101, Access end of cul-de-sac on Angela Court, Smithsburg, MD 21783
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $600.00 $600.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $60.00 $60.00
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $125.00 $125.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $142.50 $142.50
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $195.00 $195.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $285.00 $285.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,721.28 $1,721.28
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $268.00 $268.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $152.00 $152.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $1,050.00 $1,050.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $150.00 $150.00
38
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $125.00 $125.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $157.50 $157.50
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $195.00 $195.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $315.00 $315.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,915.20 $1,915.20
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $268.00 $268.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $168.00 $168.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $1,150.00 $1,150.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $150.00 $150.00
39
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $100.00 $100.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $105.00 $105.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $112.50 $112.50
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $225.00 $225.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,372.80 $1,372.80
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $268.00 $268.00
37
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $120.00 $120.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $850.00 $850.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $80.00 $80.00
40
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $100.00 $100.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $100.00 $100.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $105.00 $105.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $210.00 $210.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,290.24 $1,290.24
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $112.00 $112.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $800.00 $800.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $80.00 $80.00
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $175.00 $175.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $175.00 $175.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $187.50 $187.50
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $375.00 $375.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $2,310.00 $2,310.00
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $333.00 $333.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $200.00 $200.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $1,350.00 $1,350.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $135.00 $135.00
42
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $60.00 $60.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $67.50 $67.50
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $75.00 $75.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $135.00 $135.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $716.80 $716.80
41
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $72.00 $72.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $550.00 $550.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $65.00 $65.00
43
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $65.00 $65.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $67.50 $67.50
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $70.00 $70.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $135.00 $135.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $860.16 $860.16
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $72.00 $72.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $550.00 $550.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $60.00 $60.00
44
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $40.00 $40.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $50.00 $50.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $75.00 $75.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $95.00 $95.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $412.00 $412.00
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $138.00 $138.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $350.00 $350.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $60.00 $60.00
45
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $40.00 $40.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $50.00 $50.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $60.00 $60.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $185.00 $185.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $342.40 $342.40
Pond No. 15, Access beside 457 Westminster Court, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Pond No. 107, Access across street from 449 Westminster Court, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Pond No. 14, Access at Eagle Lane behind the Pumping Station, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $138.00 $138.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $300.00 $300.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $60.00 $60.00
46
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $75.00 $75.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $105.00 $105.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $135.00 $135.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $270.00 $270.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,647.36 $1,647.36
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $144.00 $144.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $75.00 $75.00
47
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $75.00 $75.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $110.00 $110.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $127.50 $127.50
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $255.00 $255.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,552.32 $1,552.32
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $136.00 $136.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $950.00 $950.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $70.00 $70.00
48
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $50.00 $50.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $60.00 $60.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $70.00 $70.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $342.40 $342.40
Pond No. 9, Access beside 17904 Sand Wedge Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21740; at the end of cul-de-sac
Pond No. 12, Access from South Pointe Drive at the corner of Winding Oak Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Pond No. 11, Access at the dead end of Oakmont Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $138.00 $138.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $300.00 $300.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $65.00 $65.00
49
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $110.00 $110.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $142.50 $142.50
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $149.00 $149.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $285.00 $285.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,721.28 $1,721.28
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $268.00 $268.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $152.00 $152.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $1,050.00 $1,050.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $80.00 $80.00
50
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $30.00 $30.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $45.00 $45.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $65.00 $65.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $270.40 $270.40
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $138.00 $138.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $30.00 $30.00
51
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $65.00 $65.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $67.50 $67.50
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $70.00 $70.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $135.00 $135.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $716.80 $716.80
Pond No. 76, Access between 17806 Greentree Terrace and 17813 Greentree Lane, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Pond No. 98, Access across street from 17823 Oak Ridge Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Pond No. 77, Access adjacent to 17303 Evergreen Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $72.00 $72.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $550.00 $550.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $55.00 $55.00
52
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $205.00 $205.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $210.00 $210.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $247.50 $247.50
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $495.00 $495.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $3,049.20 $3,049.20
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $398.00 $398.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $264.00 $264.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $1,750.00 $1,750.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $170.00 $170.00
53
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $91.00 $91.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $97.50 $97.50
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $110.00 $110.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $195.00 $195.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,198.08 $1,198.08
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $203.00 $203.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $104.00 $104.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $750.00 $750.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $85.00 $85.00
54
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $255.00 $255.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $270.00 $270.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $295.00 $295.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $540.00 $540.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $3,326.40 $3,326.40
Pond No. 106, Access on left after fence for Ryder Truck Rental on Business Parkway, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Pond No. 99, Access at 205 Western Maryland Parkway, Hagerstown, MD 21740 at pump station
Pond No. 105, Access at Enterprise Lane off Western MD Parkway, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $398.00 $398.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $288.00 $288.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $1,900.00 $1,900.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $175.00 $175.00
55
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $45.00 $45.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $55.00 $55.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $60.00 $60.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $342.40 $342.40
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $138.00 $138.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $50.00 $50.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $300.00 $300.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $40.00 $40.00
56
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $105.00 $105.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $135.00 $135.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $142.50 $142.50
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $285.00 $285.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,721.28 $1,721.28
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $268.00 $268.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $152.00 $152.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $1,050.00 $1,050.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $75.00 $75.00
57
Supplier QTY UOM Price Extended
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC 1 EA $91.00 $91.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC 1 EA $97.50 $97.50
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)1 EA $105.00 $105.00
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC)1 EA $195.00 $195.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)1 EA $1,198.08 $1,198.08
Pond No. 94, Access northside of Walnut Point Road across from 11822 Walnut Point Road, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Pond No. 93, Access from Walnut Point Road, 140' north of 11924 Walnut Point Road, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises 1 EA $268.00 $268.00
The Ground Keeper, Inc.1 EA $104.00 $104.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources 1 EA $750.00 $750.00
Actaeon, LLC 1 EA $325.00 $325.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC 1 EA $75.00 $75.00
Young's Lawn Service LLC $4,730.00
Cherry Blossom Lawn Care, LLC $5,390.00
Diamond Lawn & Landscape (L.A. Coulter Enterprises)$5,805.00
Inspo Landscaping, LLC $5,890.70
(*Corrected Calculations Based on Unit Pricing)$6,272.00*
TMG (Marathon Resource Management Group, LLC) $11,445.00
JF Enterprises/Fox Enterprises $12,806.00
Allegheny Ground Works, LLC $14,250.00
Actaeon LLC $18,525.00
Patriot Land & Wildlife Management Services, Inc dba Patriot Natural Resources $43,750.00
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Construction INC)$68,888.96
Supplier Notes:
M.E.P. Solutions Group (K&K Electric & Contruction Inc)
Annual Budget based on 8 mowing cycles per year (every 3-4 weeks from April to October, roughly 7 months)This price accounts for
mowing, trimming, debris removal, travel, and overhead, adjusted for complexity based on access and assumed features from
"Attachment A". If the images show significantly more fencing, riprap, or difficult terrain
Total Lump Sum (Item Nos. 1 thru 57 above)
Bids Due: April 30, 2025
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Bid Award (PUR-1730) Digital Air Park Sign at the Hagerstown Regional Airport
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Carin Bakner, Buyer, Purchasing Department; Andrew Eshleman,
Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the procurement of a digital Air Park sign to the
responsive, responsible bidder, Smart Signs, LLC of Beaver Falls, PA, for a Total Lump Sum Bid
Price of $194,308.39.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Hagerstown Regional Airport sought bids for the purchase and
installation of a thirty-five foot (35’) high, ten by thirty foot (10’x 30’) digital monopole 13 mm
LED sign to be located at the end of Air Park Road and visible to north bound I-81 traffic. The
work includes providing a complete digital sign system, structural work to construct the monopole
sign, electrical work, communication and computer-based control system and miscellaneous
additional work to complete the installation.
The Invitation to Bid (ITB) was advertised on the State of Maryland’s “eMaryland Marketplace
Advantage” website, the County’s website, in the local newspaper, and on the County’s new
electronic bid site (Euna/Ionwave). Fifty-one (51) persons/companies registered/downloaded the
bid document online, and on May 14, 2025, the County accepted bids; two (2) bids were received.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are available in the department’s Capital Improvement Project (CIP)
account BLD088 Airport Systemic Improvement Projects. The project cost is 100% covered by a
Maryland Department of Commerce Rural Maryland Economic Development Fund Grant
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Bid Tabulation Matrix
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Line #Description QTY UOM
1 Digital Air Park Sign 1 EA
Total
PUR-1730
Digital Air Park Sign at Hagerstown Regional Airport
Bids Due: May 14, 2025
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Ashcraft-Rice Rural Legacy Program (RLP) Easement
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Chris Boggs, Rural Preservation Administrator, Dept. of Planning & Zoning
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the Marilyn S. Ashcraft and Melva Rice RLP Easement
project, in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for 256.57 easement acres, paid for 100% by the Maryland Department
of Natural Resources, and to adopt an ordinance approving the easement purchase and to authorize the execution
of the necessary documentation to finalize the easement purchase.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Ashcraft-Rice property is located at 16865 Taylors Landing Road, Sharpsburg, and
the easement will serve to permanently preserve a valuable agricultural, scenic, historic and environmental
property in the County. The parcel contains a balanced mix of crop, pasture and woodland. It lies in a part of
Washington County that was heavily trafficked during the Civil War/Battle of Antietam and is listed on the
Maryland Inventory of Historic Places for the agricultural and architectural significance of its mid-19th Century
farm complex. Additionally, the property is less than a quarter mile from the C&O Canal and Potomac River.
The parcel adds on to a block of thousands of acres of contiguous preserved farmland near Antietam Battlefield
and Williamsport. Fourteen (14) development rights will be extinguished with this easement.
DISCUSSION: Since 1998, Washington County has been awarded more than $33 million to purchase Rural
Legacy easements on more than 9,400 acres near Antietam Battlefield in the Rural Legacy Area. RLP is a sister
program to the Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Program (MALPP) and includes the protection of
environmental and historic features in addition to agricultural parameters. RLP uses an easement valuation
system (points) to establish easement value rather than appraisals used by MALPP. For FY 2025, Washington
County was awarded RLP grants totaling $1,544,000. The Ashcraft-Rice RLP Easement will use part of those
funds. Easement applicants were previously ranked based on four main categories: the number of development
rights available, the quality of the land/land management (agricultural component), natural resources
(environmental), and the historic value.
FISCAL IMPACT: RLP funds are 100% State dollars, mainly from DNR Open Space funds. In addition to
the easement funds, we receive up to 3% of the easement value for administrative costs, a mandatory 1.5% for
compliance/monitoring costs, and funds to cover all of our legal/settlement costs.
CONCURRENCES: Both the State RLP Board and the State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) staff
have approved and support our program.
ALTERNATIVES: If Washington County rejects State funds for RLP, the funds will be allocated to other
counties in Maryland.
ATTACHMENTS: Aerial Map, Location Map, Ordinance
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
ORDINANCE NO. ORD-2025-
AN ORDINANCE TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF A CONSERVATION
EASEMENT UNDER THE MARYLAND RURAL LEGACY PROGRAM
(Re: Ashcraft-Rice RLP Conservation Easement)
RECITALS
1. The Maryland Rural Legacy Program ("RLP") provides the funding necessary to
protect large, contiguous tracts of land and other strategic areas from sprawl development and
to enhance natural resource, agricultural, forestry, and environmental protection through
cooperative efforts among State and local governments.
2. Protection is provided through the acquisition of easements and fee estates from
willing landowners and the supporting activities of Rural Legacy Sponsors and local
governments.
3. For FY 2025, Washington County (the "County") was awarded a RLP grant totaling
$1,544,000.00 (the "RLP Funds").
4. Marilyn S. Ashcraft and Melva Rice, (the "Property Owners") are the fee simple
owner of real property consisting of 256.57 acres, more or less (the "Property"), in Washington
County, Maryland. The Property is more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto.
5. The County has agreed to pay the sum of approximately ONE MILLION
DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($1,000,000.00), which is a portion of the RLP Funds, to the Property
Owner for a Deed of Conservation Easement on the Property (the “Ashcraft-Rice RLP
Conservation Easement”).
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Washington
County, Maryland, that the purchase of a conservation easement on the Property be approved
and that the President of the Board and the County Attorney be and are hereby authorized and
directed to execute and attest, respectively, all such documents for and on behalf of the County
relating to the purchase of the Ashcraft-Rice RLP Conservation Easement.
ADOPTED this 3rd day of June, 2025.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
_______________________________ BY:
Dawn L. Marcus, County Clerk John F. Barr, President
Approved as to legal sufficiency:
Mail to:
_____________________________ Office of the County Attorney
Aaron Weiss 100 W. Washington Street, Suite 1101
Assistant County Attorney Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
EXHIBIT A - DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
ALL that tract of farm land, and all the rights, ways, privileges, and appurtenances
thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining, situate in Election District No. 20,
Washington County, Maryland, being depicted and identified as “LANDS OF MAVIN V.
GOSSARD and MARILYN SMITH ASHCRAFT DEED BOOK 4062, PAGE 96 256.57 ACRES
+/-“ on the Plat entitled “Boundary Survey for Rural Legacy Easement of the Lands of Mavin
V. Gossard and Marilyn Smith Ashcraft” recorded at Miscellaneous Plat Folios 1093-1094
among the Plat Records of Washington County, Maryland.
TOGETHER WITH the easement or right of way to said farm tract over the private road
as more particularly described and set forth in the Deed from I.M. Wertz and Ruth D. Wertz,
his wife, to Sarah Jane Wertz dated November 22, 1936, and recorded in Liber 226, Folio 646
among the Land Records of Washington County, Maryland.
SUBJECT, however, to the easements or rights of way heretofore granted to or acquired
by The Potomac Edison Company.
BEING the same property which was conveyed from Mavin V. Gossard and Marilyn
Smith Ashcraft, Personal Representatives of the Estate of Vera V. Abbott, to Mavin V. Gossard
and Marilyn Smith Ashcraft, as tenants in common, by Deed dated March 22, 2011, and
recorded in Liber/Book 4062, Folio/Page 98 among the Land Records of Washington County,
Maryland. Mavin V. Gossard died on October 22, 2021; title to her half-interest in the said
property vested in Marilyn Smith Ashcraft, Personal Representative of the Estate of Mavin V.
Gossard, in Estate No. 78390 in the Orphans’ Court for Washington County, Maryland.
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Bond Rural Legacy Program (RLP) Easement
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Chris Boggs, Rural Preservation Administrator, Dept. of Planning & Zoning
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the Richard L. & Michele L. Bond RLP Easement project,
in the amount of $176,050.00 for 45.18 easement acres, paid for 100% by the Maryland Department of Natural
Resources, and to adopt an ordinance approving the easement purchase and to authorize the execution of the
necessary documentation to finalize the easement purchase.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Bond property is located at 6836 Tommytown Road, Fairplay, and the easement
will serve to permanently preserve a valuable agricultural, scenic, historic and environmental property in the
County. The parcel contains a balanced mix of crop, pasture and woodland. It lies in a part of Washington
County that was heavily trafficked during the Civil War/Battle of Antietam and is listed on the Maryland
Inventory of Historic Places for its early-19th Century stone and log farm complex. Additionally, the property is
adjacent to the C&O Canal and Potomac River.
The parcel adds on to a block of thousands of acres of contiguous preserved farmland near Antietam Battlefield
and Fairplay. Five (5) development rights will be extinguished with this easement.
DISCUSSION: Since 1998, Washington County has been awarded more than $33 million to purchase Rural
Legacy easements on more than 9,400 acres near Antietam Battlefield in the Rural Legacy Area. RLP is a sister
program to the Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Program (MALPP) and includes the protection of
environmental and historic features in addition to agricultural parameters. RLP uses an easement valuation
system (points) to establish easement value rather than appraisals used by MALPP. For FY 2025, Washington
County was awarded RLP grants totaling $1,544,000. The Bond RLP Easement will use part of those funds.
Easement applicants were previously ranked based on four main categories: the number of development rights
available, the quality of the land/land management (agricultural component), natural resources (environmental),
and the historic value.
FISCAL IMPACT: RLP funds are 100% State dollars, mainly from DNR Open Space funds. In addition to
the easement funds, we receive up to 3% of the easement value for administrative costs, a mandatory 1.5% for
compliance/monitoring costs, and funds to cover all of our legal/settlement costs.
CONCURRENCES: Both the State RLP Board and the State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) staff
have approved and support our program.
ALTERNATIVES: If Washington County rejects State funds for RLP, the funds will be allocated to other
counties in Maryland.
ATTACHMENTS: Aerial Map, Location Map, Ordinance
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
ORDINANCE NO. ORD-2025-
AN ORDINANCE TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF A CONSERVATION
EASEMENT UNDER THE MARYLAND RURAL LEGACY PROGRAM
(Re: Bond RLP Conservation Easement)
RECITALS
1. The Maryland Rural Legacy Program ("RLP") provides the funding necessary to
protect large, contiguous tracts of land and other strategic areas from sprawl development and
to enhance natural resource, agricultural, forestry, and environmental protection through
cooperative efforts among State and local governments.
2. Protection is provided through the acquisition of easements and fee estates from
willing landowners and the supporting activities of Rural Legacy Sponsors and local
governments.
3. For FY 2025, Washington County (the "County") was awarded a RLP grant totaling
$1,544,000 (the "RLP Funds").
4. Richard L. and Michele L. Bond, (the "Property Owners") are the fee simple owners
of real property consisting of 45.18 acres, more or less (the "Property"), in Washington County,
Maryland. The Property is more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto.
5. The County has agreed to pay the sum of approximately ONE HUNDRED
SEVENTY-SIX THOUSAND FIFTY DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($176,050.00), which is a portion
of the RLP Funds, to the Property Owner for a Deed of Conservation Easement on the Property
(the “Bond RLP Conservation Easement”).
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Washington
County, Maryland, that the purchase of a conservation easement on the Property be approved
and that the President of the Board and the County Attorney be and are hereby authorized and
directed to execute and attest, respectively, all such documents for and on behalf of the County
relating to the purchase of the Bond RLP Conservation Easement.
ADOPTED this 3rd day of June, 2025.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
_______________________________ BY:
Dawn L. Marcus, County Clerk John F. Barr, President
Approved as to legal sufficiency:
Mail to:
_____________________________ Office of the County Attorney
Victor Scarpelli 100 W. Washington Street, Suite 1101
Assistant County Attorney Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
EXHIBIT A - DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
ALL that tract, lot or parcel of land, and all the rights, ways, privileges, and
appurtenances thereunto belonging on in anywise appertaining, situate along the West side
of Tommytown Road and along the North side of Taylors Landing Road in Election District
No. 12, Washington County, Maryland, and being more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at a point in the intersection of Taylors Landing Road with Tommytown
Road, thence running along or near the centerline of Taylors Landing Road North 81 degrees
40 minutes 27 seconds West 1015.18 feet to a point; thence running along land now or formerly
of Guy Spielman (Liber 596, folio 849) North 4 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East 345.76 feet
to a recovered iron pin; thence along lands now or formerly of Robert C. Parks (Liber 630,
Folio 615) North 4 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East 145.46 feet to a corner fencepost; thence
along the lands now or formerly of Harry L. Powers, III (Liber 596, Folio 843) North 3 degrees
25 minutes 41 seconds East 370.95 feet to a corner fencepost; thence along lands of now or
formerly of Lee E. Stine, Jr. (Liber 615, Folio 540) North 10 degrees 28 minutes 51 seconds East
523.14 feet to a corner fencepost; thence along the same North 86 degrees 17 minutes 23
seconds West 228.90 feet to a corner fencepost; thence North 81 degrees 28 minutes 37 seconds
West 282.84 feet to a point; thence North 28 degrees 44 minutes 06 seconds East 333.87 feet to
a corner fencepost; thence along lands now or formerly of the Christian Church Capital Area
(Liber 450, Folio 460) North 35 degrees 35 minutes 23 seconds East 290.39 feet to a fencepost;
thence along the same North 40 degrees 26 minutes 02 seconds East 66.97 feet to a fencepost;
thence North 62 degrees 18 minutes 53 seconds East 18.57 feet to a fencepost; thence South 83
degrees 25 minutes 10 seconds East 484.15 feet to a fencepost; thence South 81 degrees 31
minutes 46 seconds East 638.09 feet to a fencepost; thence South 80 degrees 16 minutes 14
seconds East 86.11 feet to a point in Houser Road; thence along Houser Road South 47 degrees
10 minutes 00 seconds East 51.76 feet to a point in Tommytown Road; thence along
Tommytown Road the following 14 courses and distances: South 27 degrees 00 minutes 59
seconds West 208.51 feet to a point; thence South 23 degrees 41 minutes 30 seconds West
751.52 feet to a point; thence South 24 degrees 39 minutes 33 seconds West 52.94 feet to a point;
thence South 23 degrees 39 minutes 12 seconds West 322.49 feet to a point; thence South 31
degrees 02 minutes 16 seconds East 100 feet to a point; thence South 43 degrees 39 minutes 26
seconds East 70.33 feet to a point; thence South 15 degrees 11 minutes 26 seconds East 31.42
feet to a point; thence South 18 degrees 21 minutes 07 seconds East 20.74 feet to a point; thence
South 26 degrees 48 minutes 53 seconds East 30.70 feet to a point; thence South 38 degrees 04
minutes 00 seconds East 85.62 feet to a point; thence South 32 degrees 32 minutes 00 seconds
East 43.89 feet to a point; thence South 6 degrees 15 minutes 26 seconds East 53.99 feet to a
point; thence South 3 degrees 23 minutes 57 seconds East 204.03 feet to a point; thence South
17 degrees 26 minutes 50 seconds East 183.44 feet to the point of beginning ; containing 45.79
acres of land, more or less.
THE street address of the herein described property is currently known and designated
as 6836 Tommytown Road, Fairplay, Maryland, and further identified as tax account no. 12-
010486.
BEING all of the same property which was conveyed from Latimer/O’Neil Clan, LLC [a
Maryland limited liability company] to Richard L. Bond and Michele L. Bond, as joint tenants
with right of survivorship, by Deed dated December 3, 2019, and recorded in Liber/Book 6140,
Folio/Page 227 among the Land Records of Washington County, Maryland.
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Police Accountability, Community, and Transparency (PACT) Grant
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Lt Daniel Monn , CALEA Accreditation Manager, Washington County
Sheriff’s Office and Carsten Ahrens, Senior Grant Manager, Office of Grant Management
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the application for, and acceptance of funding as
awarded for the Police Accountability, Community, and Transparency FY26 in the amount of
$50,000.00
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Police Accountability, Community, and Transparency Grant program
supports the high impact support initiative of officer wellness. In this regard, the program will be
utilized to provide focused peer support training to ensure that our deputies have the tools and support
they need to effectively navigate the emotional and mental stresses associated with repeated
exposures to crisis environments.
DISCUSSION: The Washington County Sheriff's Office, for FY 2025 Police Accountability,
Community, and Transparency Grant Program was utilized training officers with the PoliceOne
Academy software. This system assisted officers with annual training mandates is designed to:
improve officer safety, decrease department liability, maximize training resources, develop leaders
and simplify training administration.
FISCAL IMPACT: Will provide $50,000 to the Washington County Sheriff’s Department
CONCURRENCES: Maria Kramer, Director, Office of Grant Management
ALTERNATIVES: Deny approval for application.
ATTACHMENTS: N /A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Department of Social Services Child Support Enforcement Grant for FY26
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Lt James Grimm, Washington County Sheriff’s Office and Carsten Ahrens,
Senior Grant Manager, Office of Grant Management
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the acceptance of funding as awarded for the
Department of Social Services Child Support Enforcement Grant FY26 in the amount of $636,806
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Department of Social Services Child Support Enforcement Grant is used
to cover the cost of salaries, fringe benefits and associated needs for the Sheriff’s office personnel
assigned to child support enforcement.
DISCUSSION: The child support enforcement unit is comprised of sworn and non-sworn personnel
who carry out the service of child support summons and warrant services, along with providing direct
assistance to the local Washington County Department of Social Services child support unit. This
state grant has been a recurring funding mechanism that has been utilized by the Sheriff’s office to
offset the cost associated with the agency members assigned to the child support enforcement unit.
This grant reimburses 66% for all allowable expenditures under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act
federal funds less the DHS Administrative fee of 1/9th of the local share of operating costs.
FISCAL IMPACT: Will provide $636,806 to partially reimburse the expenses incurred by the
Washington County Sheriff’s Office associated with child support enforcement.
CONCURRENCES: Maria Kramer, Director, Office of Grant Management
ALTERNATIVES: Deny approval for application.
ATTACHMENTS: N /A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Maryland 9-1-1 Board – Approval to Submit Application and Accept
Awarded Funding (Priority Dispatch System)
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Alan Matheny, Director of Emergency Management and
Communications, and Richard Lesh, Grant Manager, Office of Grant Management.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the submission of grant application to the
Emergency Numbers Systems Board in the amount of $428,286.00 and accept funding as awarded
to renew the contract with Priority Dispatch System.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The D epartment of Emergency Communications is requesting approval
for the submission of grant application and to accept grant funds in the amount of $428,286 from
the Emergency Numbers Systems Board for the renewal of the (5-year) contract for the Priority
Dispatch System.
DISCUSSION: The Priority Dispatch System is a comprehensive approach to Emergency
Dispatch built on the International Academies of Emergency Dispatch-approved unified protocol
systems. They provide Emergency Communications Centers the vital technology, tools, and
training needed to gather essential information, relay timely, accurate information to field
responders, and provide life-saving support – all within a single system. The total value of this
contract is $491,286 based on an annual cost of $94,444.00. However, the County has been given
a discount of $63,000 reducing the funding needed to $428,286.00. The contract includes the
System license renewal, One Plan Maintenance Package, and comprehensive services and support.
With this system the 911 center will continue to provide Washington County residents and visitors
with efficient, reliable and high-quality emergency dispatch services.
IMPACT: Provides $428,286.00 for the Department of Emergency Communications.
CONCURRENCES: Maria Kramer, 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: Maryland 9-1-1 Board – Approval to Submit Application and Accept
Awarded Funding (Security Enhancements)
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Alan Matheny, Director of Emergency Management and
Communications , and Richard Lesh, Grant Manager, Office of Grant Management
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the submission of grant application to the
Emergency Numbers Systems Board in the amount of $37,244.64 and accept funding as awarded
to fund 911 Center Security enhancements.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The D epartment of Emergency Communications is requesting approval
for the submission of grant application and to accept grant funds in the amount of $37,244.64 from
the Emergency Numbers Systems Board for the costs to upgrade security for the access entry and
exit doors for the 911 center.
DISCUSSION: Security upgrades are needed at the 911 Center due to our current system
continuously experiencing failures and its inability to keep the facility secured. Upgrades are for
the access, entry, and exit doors. The funds from the Numbers Systems Board will be used for new
strike plates and bolts as well as new card readers along with all associated wiring and labor costs.
This project is essential to ensure continued control, monitoring, and physical security within the
facility, especially as security requirements of our emergency communications center continue to
evolve.
IMPACT: Provides $37,244.64 for the Department of Emergency Communications.
CONCURRENCES: Maria Kramer, 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: Agriculture – June is National Dairy Month
PRESENTATION DATE: Tuesday, June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Danielle Weaver, Director, Public Relations and Marketing; Katie Yoder,
Multimedia Specialist, Public Relations and Marketing; and Kelsey Keadle, Business Specialist-
Agriculture, Business and Economic Development
RECOMMENDED MOTION: N/A
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Every June, we celebrate National Dairy Month—a time to recognize the
critical role that dairy plays in our health, economy, and daily lives.
In Maryland, dairy remains one of the state’s most important agricultural commodities. According to
the latest figures from the Maryland Department of Agriculture, cash receipts for milk in 2023
totaled nearly $185 million, underscoring the continued strength and significance of the industry.
Washington County is proud to be a major contributor to this success, home to 94 dairy farms whose
hardworking farmers produce the milk, ice cream, yogurt, cheese, and other dairy products that
nourish our families and fuel our communities.
National Dairy Month highlights not only the nutritional value of milk and dairy products as part of a
balanced diet, but also the economic importance of dairy farming to Maryland’s agricultural
landscape. Washington County encourages all residents to show support for our local dairy industry
—especially by enjoying one of our region’s favorite dairy treats: ice cream!
DISCUSSION: Washington County is thrilled to announce the launch of the fifth annual Washington
County Ice Cream Trail, celebrating our community’s local ice cream shops and the hardworking dairy
farms that make them possible.
The 2025 Ice Cream Trail features 13 locally owned and operated businesses, each serving up unique,
delicious frozen treats. By participating in the trail, residents and visitors alike have the opportunity
to support small businesses and local agriculture—two vital pillars of Washington County’s economy
and identity.
Last year’s Ice Cream Trail saw record-breaking participation, with 581 individuals completing the
trail—the most since the event’s inception. This year, we anticipate even greater participation as the
community embraces this fun and flavorful summer tradition.
Beginning today, June 3, 2025, Ice Cream Trail maps are available at all 13 participating establishments
and can also be downloaded at www.washco-md.net/icecreamtrail. Participants are encouraged to visit
each location, collect a stamp on their trail map, and return the completed map to the Washington
County Public Relations and Marketing Department either online or by mail.
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
All participants who complete the trail and submit a fully stamped map will receive an official 2025 Ice
Cream Trail T-shirt—a sweet reward for your efforts!
Whether you're a longtime fan or new to the trail, we invite everyone to grab a map, hit the road, and
enjoy some of the best ice cream Washington County has to offer.
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Ice Cream Trail Map
11 East Main St.Hancock, MD
21614B National PikeBoonsboro, MD
16230 Long Delite Lane
Williamsport, MD
13803 Maugansville Rd.
Maugansville, MD
1033 Virginia Ave.Hagerstown, MD
THE BIG DIPPER
16904 Virginia Ave.
Williamsport, MD
SCOOP-A-LICIOUS& MORE
14911 National Pike
Clear Spring, MD
SWEETSIES’
EATS & TREATS
100 East Main St.
Sharpsburg, MD
NUTTER’S ICECREAM
9 Potomac Street
Boonsboro, MD
POTOMAC STREETCREAMERY
14325 Misty Meadow Rd.
Smithsburg, MD
MISTY MEADOW
FARM CREAMERY
28 N. Conococheaue St
Williamsport, MD
RUTH’S MARKET
24949 Lake Wastler Dr.
Cascade, MD
MOUNTAIN TOP
ICE CREAM SHOP
22309 Old Georgetown Rd
Smithsburg, MD
DEBBIE’S
SOFT SERVE
COW’S CONES
DELITEFUL DAIRY
MAUGANSVILLECREAMERY
Welcome to the 2025 Washington County Ice Cream Trail! June 3 – September 22, 2025
Get ready for a sweet summer adventure right here in Washington County, Maryland! The Ice Cream Trail is back, inviting you to explore the best local ice cream spots across our beautiful county.
From June 3 to September 22, 2025, this self-guided trail gives you the chance to savor unique flavors, support our local ice cream shops, and enjoy the warm weather. Whether you’re a lifelong local or visiting for the summer, there’s no better way to celebrate the season than with a scoop (or two!) from Washington County’s finest creameries.
Complete the trail by September 22 and earn a FREE commemorative t-shirt!
How to join the fun:
1. Download the Ice Cream Trail map (or obtain a map at any location on the trail).2. Visit each of the listed ice cream shops and enjoy a sweet treat.3. Get your Ice Cream Trail passport stamped at each location.4. Submit your completed map via online form or mail.
MAIL IN ONLY: Please print neatly. Mail to Public Relations - 100 W. Washington Street, Suite 2600, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Name: Phone Number:
Address: Email:
T-shirt Size: Favorite Ice Cream Trail Shop:
To fill out the online form, visitwww.washco-md.net/icecreamtrail or scan the QR Code
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Approval of Zoning Map Amendment RZ-25-001
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Aaron Weiss, Assistant County Attorney, County Attorney’s Office
RECOMMENDED MOTION: The purpose of this agenda item is to seek approval of the request to
rezone the Applicants’ property.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Applicants have requested to amend the current zoning of the property
located at 6821 Sharpsburg Pike, Sharpsburg, Maryland 21781 to apply the Rural Business (“RB”)
floating zone over a 1.68-acre portion of the property, which is currently zoned for Preservation (“P”)
within the Antietam Overlay 2 (AO-2) District. The Applicants wish to open a tire repair shop on their
property.
DISCUSSION: The Planning Commission recommended in favor of the proposed map amendment on
April 7, 2025. The public hearing for the proposed rezoning request was held on May 20, 2025. A
consensus approval was reached by the Board of County Commissioners on May 20, 2025. This
matter is on the agenda for decision by the Board of County Commissioners in the form of proposed
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as prepared by the County Attorney’s Office for review,
approval, and adoption by the Commissioners.
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: Washington County Planning Commission
ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance with attached Decision and Findings of Fact
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
- 1 -
B EFORE THE
B OARD OF C OUNTY C OMMISSIONERS
OF W ASHINGTON C OUNTY , M ARYLAND
D ECISION
Rezoning Case RZ-25-001
Property Owner: Myron and Hazel Horst
Applicants: Myron and Hazel Horst
Requested Zoning Change: Preservation (P) with Antietam Overlay 2 (AO-2)
District and Rural Business (RB) overlay
Property: 6821 Sharpsburg Pike, Sharpsburg, Maryland
21782 (the “Property”)
Pursuant to Md. Code Ann., Land Use § 4-204 and Washington County Zoning
Ordinance (the “Zoning Ordinance”) § 27.3, the Board of County Commissioners
of Washington County, acting upon the Applicants’ Request, makes findings of
fact with respect to the matters set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. We also consider
the recommendation of the Planning Commission which was made in this case,
the present and future transportation patterns, the relationship of the proposed
reclassification to the Comprehensive Plan, and whether there has been
convincing demonstration that the proposed rezoning would be appropriate and
logical for the subject property. After considering the recommendation of the
Planning Commission and hearing evidence presented by the Applicant at a
Public Hearing on April 7, 2025, the Board will grant the requested zoning map
amendment and makes the following Decision, which largely adopts the findings
of the Staff Report and Planning Commission with additional conditions.
Location:
The subject parcel is located on the east side of Sharpsburg Pike (MD-65) at its
intersection with Taylors Landing Road. The property subject to this rezoning
encompasses 10.7 acres of agricultural land, 1.68 acres of which would be
encumbered with the Rural Business (RB) floating zone.
The property contains a single-family dwelling, barn, and a recently
constructed garage/office building. The garage/office building was originally
- 2 -
permitted as an agricultural support building for various farm related purposes in
2020.
In addition to the Preservation (P) base zoning which is applied to the property,
the parcel also falls within the Antietam Overlay-2 Zoning District (AO-2). The
AO-2 District extends 1,000 feet east/west from the road centerline along this
stretch of MD-65, encumbering multiple properties south of Bakersville Road and
Keedysville Road for approximately 1 mile south of this intersection. It defines an
approach buffer to Antietam National Battlefield which is designated to regulate
the exterior appearance of all commercial and non-residential uses, excluding farm
structures, to preserve the historic character of the road corridor on the approach
to the Battlefield. The AO-2 is also applied to many other properties along three
other road segments on MD-65 and MD-34 (Shepherdstown Pike), in or
immediately around the Towns of Sharpsburg and Keedysville.
There are no known sensitive environmental areas on the property.
CRITERIA ANALYSIS
Availability of Public Facilities
Water and Sewer
The adopted Water and Sewerage Plan for the County establishes the policies
and recommendations for public water and sewer infrastructure to help guide
development in a manner that helps promote healthy and adequate service to
citizens. By its own decree, the purpose of the Washington County Water and
Sewerage Plan is “…to provide for the continued health and well-being of
Washington Countians and our downstream neighbors…”1 This is achieved
through implementing recommendations within the County Comprehensive Plan
and the Water and Sewerage Plan to provide for services in a timely and efficient
manner and by establishing an inventory of existing and programmed services.
A. Water
1 Washington County, Maryland Water and Sewerage Plan 2009 Update, Page I-2
- 3 -
The proposed rezoning site is designated as W-7 in the 2009 Water and Sewer
Plan with no planned connection to public water. An existing well on the property
is depicted on Washington County Plat 4918, which subdivided the subject lot in
1996. The preliminary site plan in this application also locates the well. Well
locations are approved by the Washington County Health Department. The
Health Department is also responsible for monitoring wells for water quality
issues.
B. Sewer
The proposed rezoning site is designated as S-7 in the 2009 Water and Sewer
Plan with no planned connection to public sewer. An approximate location of the
existing septic system is depicted on the recorded plat noted above and on the
Preliminary Site Plan (PSP). The Applicant’s justification statement asserts that,
“The intended use will not create any sewage disposal, water supply, stormwater
or other issues that are not above and beyond impacts already accounted for by
the current residential use onsite.”
The Washington County Health Department is responsible for approving the
location and method of sewage disposal on individual properties in the County.
A copy of this rezoning application was routed for the Health Department for their
review. They offered no substantive comment.
Stormwater Management
The applicant’s Justification Statement comment regarding development
related effects on stormwater was noted above. SWM facilities are not shown on
the preliminary site plan included with the application.
The Washington County Department of Engineering had no comment when
routed the application for review.
Floodplain
The proposed rezoning site does not contain floodplain area.
Bulk Regulations
- 4 -
Zoning setbacks are shown on the applicant’s PSP and on the recorded plat for
this lot previously discussed.
Fire and Emergency Services
The Fairplay Community Volunteer Fire Company of District 12 is the nearest
emergency services provider to this site, located approximately 2 miles northwest.
The Division of Emergency Services had no comment when routed a copy of the
application.
Relationship of the Proposed Change to the Adopted Plan for the County:
The 2002 Comprehensive Plan designated this site as falling within the
Preservation Policy Area in its Land Use Plan. This Policy Area is the focus of
rural land preservation area efforts. It includes the County’s designated Rural
Legacy Area, federal lands, state parks, state wildlife management areas, county
parks, Edgemont Watershed, and most of the mountaintops as well as the Potomac
River. Purchase of development easements to support preservation efforts in this
area is encouraged. Limited development to support the goals and objectives of
preserving the resources of this area is a priority.
The Rural Business Zoning District (RB) is established to permit the
continuation and development of businesses that support the agricultural
industry and farming community, serve the needs of the rural residential
population, provide for recreation and tourism opportunities, and to establish
locations for businesses and facilities not otherwise permitted in the rural areas of
the County. It is established as a “floating zone” which may be located on any
parcel in an Agricultural, Environmental Conservation Preservation, or Rural
Village Zoning District. A floating zone is a zoning district that delineates
conditions which must be met before that zoning district can be approved for an
existing piece of land.
Section 5E.4 of the Rural Business Zoning District describes the criteria that
must be met for the establishment of a new Rural Business Zoning District. These
criteria include:
- 5 -
1. The proposed RB District is not within any designated growth area
identified in the Washington County Comprehensive Plan;
2. The proposed RB District has safe and usable road access on a road that
meets the standards under the “Policy of Determining Adequacy of
Existing Roads”. In addition, a traffic study may be required where the
proposed business, activity, or facility generates twenty-five or more peak
hour trips or where 40% of the estimated vehicle trips are anticipated to be
commercial truck traffic;
3. Onsite issues relating to sewage disposal, water supply, stormwater
management, floodplains, etc. can be adequately addressed; and
4. The location of an RB District would not be incompatible with existing land
uses, cultural or historic resources, or agricultural preservation efforts in
the vicinity of the proposed district.
Section 5E.6c further expands upon the above noted criteria in describing the basis
for which the Planning Commission should base its recommendation to the Board
of County Commissioners after the Public Information Meeting including:
1. The proposed district will accomplish the purpose of the RB District;
2. The proposed site development meets criteria identified in Section 5E.4 of
this Article;
3. The roads providing access to the site are appropriate for serving the
business-related traffic generated by the proposed RB land use;
4. Adequate sight distance along roads can be provided at proposed points of
access;
5. The proposed landscaped areas can provide adequate buffering of the
proposed RB land use from existing land uses in the vicinity;
6. The proposed land use is not of a scale, intensity, or character that would
be incompatible with adjacent uses or structures.
To be established, RB districts must also meet bulk requirements outlined
in Article 5E.5. A preliminary site plan which addresses the elements noted above
and other criteria in 5E.6.a(3) in greater detail is also a required part of the
application process. Finally, approval of the application to create an RB District
shall only be for the use identified on the application and PSP. An approved RB
District covers only the portion of the parcel or lot identified in the application.
Changes to the use, intensity, or area covered by an approved RB District shall be
- 6 -
reviewed by the Planning Commission. A new public hearing may be required to
approve the changed use.
Compatibility with Existing and Proposed Development in the Area
A. Zoning
As defined above, one purpose of the floating zone is to “establish locations for
businesses and facilities not otherwise permitted in the rural areas of the County.” “Auto
Sales and Services” are listed together as a single principal permitted use within
an RB Zoning District in the Table of Land Use Regulations for Rural Areas in
Article 3 of the Zoning Ordinance. Under the current P zoning, the proposed use
would not be permitted.
The applicant’s Justification Statement also contends that the proposed tire
repair shop would “support the agricultural industry and farming community,”
fulfilling one of the other stated purposes of the RB Zoning District.
The proposed site of this rezoning is located outside of the County’s current
Urban Growth Area boundary. This status is not proposed to change in the
forthcoming Comprehensive Plan update.
B. Land Use in the Vicinity
The surrounding lands contain a mixture of rural zoning classifications and
accompanying land uses as seen in the image at left. As noted previously, most
properties in the immediate area are zoning Preservation (P). These properties
include a mix of minor residential subdivisions along major roads, and larger
agricultural parcels further away from MD-65.
The Antietam Overlay-2 zone (Battlefield Approach) encompasses the area
previously described in the report introduction from Bakersville Road and
Keedysville Road south along MD-65.
The Antietam Overlay-1 zone (Battlefield Buffer) follows to the south of the
AO-2 corridor and encompasses the lands of Antietam National Battlefield.
- 7 -
The Historic Rural Village of Bakersville is found in the Rural Village
Zoning District to the northwest of the subject property.
Larger agricultural parcels are then found in the Agricultural Rural (AR)
lands to the north.
There are also two other existing RB Zoning Districts in the immediate
vicinity providing prior precedent for commercial uses along this stretch of MD-
65. These adjacent rural businesses include:
• Stoney Hollow Gifts at adjacent parcel to south – originally permitted
as an antique shop, noted in Applicant’s Justification Statement as being
an auction house.
• 6508 Sharpsburg Pike – former Clara Bee Gift Shop with Antietam
Battlefield diorama, currently used as an apartment building.
C. Historic Resources.
As the property is in close proximity to Antietam National Battlefield, there are
numerous existing historic sites within ½ mile or less of this proposed rezoning
site that should be considered in evaluating its compatibility. As previously
discussed, the site lies within the AO-2 zoning overlay which encompasses the
approach to Battlefield. The northern boundary of the Battlefield is roughly .25
miles south of the subject property.
Beyond the numerous historic resources pertaining to the Battlefield, there are
11 sites described in the Maryland Historic Trust Inventory of State Historic Sites
as follows:
• WA-II-303: “Remsburg Farm” (400’ southwest) – Early 20th century farm
complex with 2-story frame house, bank barn, and several outbuildings
• WA-II-318: “Brick Church Building” (550’ southwest) – Late 19th century
brick building, formerly a Brethren Church that may have served as a
temporary hospital after the Battle of Antietam, now converted to a
dwelling.
• WA-II-1144: “Ritchie Property” (.5 miles southwest) – Mid-19th century
farm complex with roughly a dozen contributing structures (2-story
- 8 -
stone dwelling, 2-story frame house, stone log house, stone bridge,
family cemetery, variety of domestic outbuildings of frame, log and
stone construction). These contributing structures encompass what
were formerly multiple farmsteads including those listed under the
following MHT listings:
o WA-II-1121: “Spring Wood Farm”
o WA-II-1136: “Jacob Coffman House and Cemetery”
• WA-II-359: “A. Hammond House/Sharon L. Hall Property” (.25 miles
southeast) – Mid-19th century farm complex with 2-story brick
farmhouse, frame barn, and outbuildings.
• WA-II-358: “Late 19th Century Farmstead” (.5 miles northeast) – Late 19th
century farm complex with 2-story brick farmhouse, bank barn, and
outbuildings.
• WA-II-453: “Mid-19th Century Brick Farm Complex” (.5 miles west) –
Mid-19th century farm complex including 2-story brick farmhouse and
frame barn.
• WA-II-325: “Eakle-Poffenberger House” (.33 miles north) – Early 20th
century 2-story frame farmhouse and outbuildings.
• WA-II-329: “Mid-19th Century Brick Farmhouse” (.4 miles north) – Mid-
19th century 2-story brick farmhouse with smoke house and bank barn.
D. Agricultural Land Preservation
The proposed rezoning site is located within the heart of the County’s
designated Rural Legacy Area (RL). The program was created to focus on some
of Maryland’s best natural, agricultural, historical, and cultural areas and
Maryland’s most significant rural landscapes. The Program encourages local
governments and private land trusts to identify Rural Legacy Areas and to
competitively apply for funds to complement existing lands and preservation
efforts or to develop new ones. Easements are sought from willing landowners in
order to protect areas vulnerable to sprawl development that can weaken an area’s
natural resources, thereby jeopardizing the economic value of farming, forestry,
recreation, and tourism. The RL is heavily concentrated in this area of southern
Washington County in the lands around Antietam Battlefield.
- 9 -
In service of the above objectives, the property itself is encumbered with an
easement from the Maryland Environmental Trust (MET). MET works with the
Maryland Department of Natural Resources to engage landowners who are
willing to donate a conservation easement for tax deductions, tax credits, and land
protection purposes. The purpose of the MET easement is, according to language
contained in the deed of easement is for:
“…conserving the dominant scenic, cultural, rural, historical, archeological,
agricultural, woodland, and wetland character of the Property…preventing the use or
development of the Property for any purpose or in any manner that would conflict with the
maintenance of the Property in its open-space condition and in protecting the viewshed
and landscape surrounding the Antietam Battlefield.”
Present and Future Transportation Patterns
A. Traffic Generation
Traffic counts on County and State roads in the vicinity of the rezoning site
provide limited insight on traffic flow or congestion that might be impacted with
an expanded business at this location. Single day traffic counts were collected for
one 24-hour period in 2016 at three local road intersections with Sharpsburg Pike
in the immediate vicinity of the subject site. The counts for these three locations
are noted below:
• Taylors Landing Road at Sharpsburg Pike (300 feet west): 388 vehicles
• Bakersville Road at Sharpsburg Pike (.50 miles northwest): 722 vehicles
• Keedysville Road at Sharpsburg Pike (.50 miles northeast): 934 vehicles
Until 2020, the Maryland State Highway Administration (SHA) maintained a
traffic counter approximately 2 miles north of the site, near the intersection of MD-
65 and MD-63 (Spielman Road).
These counts indicate an increase in traffic traveling north/south on MD-65
during the last twenty years. A high of 9,363 vehicles was counted in 2019 after
traffic remained largely steady at around 8,500 annual average daily traffic
volumes (AADT). The 2019 figure represents a 20.4% increase in the last twenty
years (or 1% annually).
- 10 -
As noted previously, the requirements of the RB District require a traffic study
when the proposed business, activity, or facility generates “25 or more peak hour
trips or where 40% of the estimated vehicle trips are anticipated to be commercial
truck traffic.” The applicant’s justification statement asserts that “The intended use
will not generate more than 15 peak hour trips.”
B. Road and Site Circulation Improvements
The site is located directly on Sharpsburg Pike. The road is classified as an
Other Principal Arterial (Non-Interstate) in the Functional Road Classification
portion of the Transportation Element in the County’s 2002 Comprehensive Plan.
This classification accounts for mobility and access characteristics of the roadway
in its categorization. Non-Interstate Arterial roads are designed to carry greater
than 5,000 Average Daily Traffic in rural areas. The County’s road classification
system is based upon the Federal Highway Functional Classification System, but
modified to reflect local road conditions.
A review of the County’s 10-Year CIP and the State Highway Administration’s
Consolidated Transportation Plan did not note any road improvements in the
vicinity of this proposed rezoning that would affect road capacity or traffic flow.
The Highways Plan in the 2002 Comprehensive Plan and in the current draft
of the Comprehensive Plan update also do not propose notable road projects for
this portion of MD-65. Much of the current attention for that roadway in
transportation planning documents focuses on improvements to the MD-65/I-70
interchange, or widening of the state highway from that point to Lappans Rd.
The Hagerstown/Eastern Panhandle Metropolitan Planning Organization’s
current Long Range Transportation Plan does call for long-term widening of MD-
65 all the way to the Town of Sharpsburg. This is, however, a long-term project,
not slated for implementation prior to 2036.
The Applicant’s preliminary site plan does not anticipate any access changes
from the property to MD-65.
SHA and the Washington County Department of Engineering had no comment
when routed the application for review.
- 11 -
Conclusion
Based on the information provided by the Applicants in the initial application,
further analysis by Staff and the recommendation of the Planning Commission,
the Board of County Commissioners believes that there is sufficient evidence
submitted to meet the criteria outlined in Article 5E of the Zoning Ordinance to
support the application of a Preservation (P) with Rural Business (RB) District
floating zone to the subject area. Changes to the use, intensity, or area covered by
an approved Rural Business District Overlay shall be reviewed by the Planning
Commission and may be required a new public hearing to approve the changes.
A TTEST : B OARD O F C OUNTY C OMMISSIONERS
O F W ASHINGTON C OUNTY ,
M ARYLAND
___________________________ BY: ________________________________
Dawn L. Marcus, Clerk John F. Barr, President
Approved as to form and legal sufficiency:
______________________________
Aaron Weiss
Assistant County Attorney
Page 1 of 2
ORDINANCE NO. ORD-2025-
A N O RDINANCE TO A MEND THE Z ONING M AP
FOR W ASHINGTON C OUNTY , M ARYLAND
(RZ-25-001)
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 5E et seq. of the Zoning Ordinance
for Washington County, Maryland (Zoning Ordinance), Myron and Hazel
Horst, the Applicants, have petitioned the Board of County Commissioners
of Washington County, Maryland (Board), seeking to apply the Rural
Business (RB) floating zone over a 1.68-acre portion of their property
located at 6821 Sharpsburg Pike, which is currently zoned Preservation (P)
with Antietam Overlay 2 (AO-2) District.
The matter has been designated as Case No. RZ-25-001.
This application was reviewed by the Planning Commission, and the
Planning Commission recommended that the application be approved.
The Board has considered all information presented at the public
hearing conducted on May 20, 2025, and the recommendation of the
Planning Commission. The Board has made factual findings and
conclusions of law that are set forth in the attached Decision. The findings
of fact and conclusions of law are incorporated herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED AND ORDAINED, by the Board of
County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland, that the
property which is the subject of Case No. RZ-25-001 be, and hereby is,
designated as Preservation (P) with Antietam Overlay 2 (AO-2) District and
Rural Business (RB) overlay.
IT IS FURTHER ENACTED AND ORDAINED that the official Zoning Map
for Washington County be, and hereby is, amended accordingly. The
Director of Planning and Zoning shall cause the Zoning Map to be amended
pursuant to this Ordinance.
Page 2 of 2
Adopted and effective this ____ day of May, 2025.
A TTEST : B OARD OF C OUNTY C OMMISSIONERS
OF W ASHINGTON C OUNTY , M ARYLAND
____________________________ BY:________________________________
Dawn L. Marcus, Clerk John F. Barr, President
Approved as to form and
legal sufficiency:
____________________________
Aaron Weiss
Assistant County Attorney
Mail to:
Office of the County Attorney
100 W. Washington Street, Suite 1101
Hagerstown, MD 21740
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Approval of Tri-Party MOU for the New Downsville Elementary School Facility
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Rosalinda Pascual, Deputy County Attorney
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve entering into the Project Memorandum of
Understanding with the Board of Education of Washington County (BOE) and the Maryland Stadium
Authority (MSA).
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The subject Project is the construction of the new Downsville Pike
Elementary School. The MOU is the agreement between the BOE, the Board of County
Commissioners, and MSA, on behalf of the state, that ensures state funding for this school
construction project.
DISCUSSION: The MOU outlines the responsibilities of the three parties and the cost sharing
obligations. The County’s main obligation is the provision of the local share of construction costs,
which the Commissioners have previously approved and allocated through the CIP. The Interagency
Commission on School Construction (IAC) approved Built to Learn (BTL) funds for the construction
of this new school, which is allocated by the State through the Maryland Stadium Authority. This
MOU is required to be entered into by the three parties for Washington County to receive these BTL
Funds. The BOE has approved the MOU.
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES:
ATTACHMENTS: Project Memorandum of Understanding for the New Downsville Pike
Elementary School Facility
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: EMS Staffing Transition Discussion, Volunteer Fire Company of Halfway
PRESENTATION DATE: June 3rd, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: R. David Hays - Director, Division of Emergency Services (DES)
David Chisholm – Deputy Director – Field Operations, Division of
Emergency Services (DES)
James Sprecher Jr. – President, Washington County Vol. Fire and
Rescue Association (WCVFRA)
Justin Gearhart, President, Volunteer Fire Company of Halfway
James Drawbaugh, Chief, Volunteer Fire Company of Halfway
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve the EMS Employee Transition and subsequent MOU
with the Volunteer Fire Company of Halfway (VFCH), and to authorize the Division of Emergency
Services (DES) to hire twelve (12) EMT’s/Paramedics to provide staffing of VFCH ambulances.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The specifics of the employee transition, relative to wages and benefits
for the existing Halfway EMS employees, and a requirement to move billing services to the County
vender are in line with the requirements during the EMS employee transitions for Smithsburg EMS,
Williamsport Fire/EMS, and Hancock Rescue Squad in 2024.
DISCUSSION: During discussions with the Volunteer Fire Company of Halfway Leadership,
it was agreed that by transitioning the VFCH’s EMS staffing to county employment would help to
establish a more sustainable EMS staffing plan for the VFCH and the citizens of Halfway and
surrounding areas.
FISCAL IMPACT: $261,855.72, dependent on timing of actual transition (budgeted in FY25/26)
CONCURRENCES: Director of Emergency Services, R. David Hays
Justin Gearhart, President, Volunteer Fire Company of Halfway
County Administrator Michelle Gordon
Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Kelcee Mace
President James Sprecher, WCVFRA
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Transition Staffing Spreadsheet and Staffing MOU
Breakdwon of Transition Cost
Fica Pension W.C.Health
Insurance
Other
Insurance Physicals EIP
Timing of Transition
Recoverable
Revenue
Needed
Budget
2025 on or after 7/1/2025 Total Salaries
County
Grade/Step
County
Hourly
Rate
Projected
County
Salary
Fica Pension W.C.Health
Insurance
Other
Insurance Stipend Total Staff
Wage Physicals EIP
Includes
revenue from
2nd
ambualnce
being staffed
0.0765 0.26 0.0862 Halfway EMS $1,413,130.72 $1,151,275.00 $261,855.72
Total Cost
Recoverable
revenue Add'l. Funding
Halfway EMS # Positions $1,413,130.72 $1,151,275.00 $261,855.72
EMT (FT) (1 EMT per day)
Operations/BLS EMT TBD 1 2/1 $20.57 $55,621.28 $4,255.03 $14,461.53 $4,794.55 $20,000.00 $600.00 $99,732.40 $1,500.00 $500.00 $6,000.00 $107,732.40
Operations/BLS EMT TBD 1 2/1 $20.57 $55,621.28 $4,255.03 $14,461.53 $4,794.55 $20,000.00 $600.00 $99,732.40 $1,500.00 $500.00 $6,000.00 $107,732.40
Operations/BLS EMT TBD 1 2/1 $20.57 $55,621.28 $4,255.03 $14,461.53 $4,794.55 $20,000.00 $600.00 $99,732.40 $1,500.00 $500.00 $6,000.00 $107,732.40
Operations/BLS EMT TBD 1 2/1 $20.57 $55,621.28 $4,255.03 $14,461.53 $4,794.55 $20,000.00 $600.00 $99,732.40 $1,500.00 $500.00 $6,000.00 $107,732.40
Operations/BLS EMT TBD 1 2/1 $20.57 $55,621.28 $4,255.03 $14,461.53 $4,794.55 $20,000.00 $600.00 $99,732.40 $1,500.00 $500.00 $6,000.00 $107,732.40
Operations/BLS EMT TBD 1 2/1 $20.57 $55,621.28 $4,255.03 $14,461.53 $4,794.55 $20,000.00 $600.00 $99,732.40 $1,500.00 $500.00 $6,000.00 $107,732.40 $646,394.37
$7,500.00 $2,500.00 $30,000.00
Paramedic (FT) (1 paramedic per day)
Operations/ALS Paramedic (LT.)TBD 1 5/1 $25.21 $68,167.84 $5,214.84 $17,723.64 $5,876.07 $20,000.00 $600.00 $5,400.00 $122,982.39 $1,500.00 $500.00 $6,000.00 $130,982.39
Operations/ALS Paramedic (LT.)TBD 1 5/1 $25.21 $68,167.84 $5,214.84 $17,723.64 $5,876.07 $20,000.00 $600.00 $5,400.00 $122,982.39 $1,500.00 $500.00 $6,000.00 $130,982.39
Operations/ALS Paramedic (LT.)TBD 1 5/1 $25.21 $68,167.84 $5,214.84 $17,723.64 $5,876.07 $20,000.00 $600.00 $5,400.00 $122,982.39 $1,500.00 $500.00 $6,000.00 $130,982.39
Operations/ALS Paramedic TBD 1 4/1 $23.55 $63,679.20 $4,871.46 $16,556.59 $5,489.15 $20,000.00 $600.00 $5,400.00 $116,596.40 $1,500.00 $500.00 $6,000.00 $124,596.40
Operations/ALS Paramedic TBD 1 4/1 $23.55 $63,679.20 $4,871.46 $16,556.59 $5,489.15 $20,000.00 $600.00 $5,400.00 $116,596.40 $1,500.00 $500.00 $6,000.00 $124,596.40
Operations/ALS Paramedic TBD 1 4/1 $23.55 $63,679.20 $4,871.46 $16,556.59 $5,489.15 $20,000.00 $600.00 $5,400.00 $116,596.40 $1,500.00 $500.00 $6,000.00 $124,596.40 $766,736.35
12
Uniforms
PPE, Duty
Uniform, Class A
Total Staff
Needed
(24hrs.)
Uniforms
PPE, Duty
Uniform, Class A
Total cost
w/
Healthcare,
taxes, etc..
Volunteer Fire Company of Halfway
1
EMS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
THIS EMS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (“MOU”) is entered into this
____ day of _______________, 2025, by and between THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND, a body corporate and politic
of the State of Maryland (the “County”), and the VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY OF
HALFWAY, Inc., a Maryland non-profit corporation (the “Station”).
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Division of Emergency Services (the “Division”) was created by the
County for the purpose of administering the County’s affairs regarding fire, rescue and emergency
medical services and associated activities while maintaining the existing volunteer services in
Washington County.
WHEREAS, the Station wishes to participate in the organizational component of the
Division by cooperating with the County to facilitate the transition of the full-time and part-time
Station employees to County employment.
WHEREAS, the parties agree that this MOU shall serve as the guiding document setting
forth the terms to which the parties will abide.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein, the parties agree as
follows:
1. Definitions.
a. Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ). The Board of County Commissioners of
Washington County, MD by resolution (RS-2014-17) maintain the Authority
Having Jurisdiction over all matters involving fire, rescue and emergency
medical serves in Washington County, MD.
b. County Personnel. (“County Personnel”) County Fire/EMS employees
assigned to various Volunteer Stations and/or apparatus throughout Washington
County to provide fire and emergency medical services. County Personnel are
supervised and managed by the Director, or his/her designees and are subject to
Volunteer Station assignment changes at the discretion of the Director.
c. Division. The Division of Emergency Services (“DES”) serves as the oversight
agency on behalf of the Washington County Board of County Commissioners
on all matters involving fire, rescue, and emergency medical services for
Washington County, Maryland. The Division shall include County Personnel
operating under the management of the Division Director (the “Director”).
d. New Employees. All eligible full-time and all eligible part-time employees of
the Station, as of the date of this MOU, to be hired by the County pursuant to
the terms herein.
2
e. Property. Real and personal property including apparatus(es), vehicles, and
equipment.
f. Washington County Volunteer Fire and Rescue Association (WCVFRA). A
volunteer Association representing the 26-volunteer fire and EMS companies
that are authorized to operate in Washington County, MD. The WCVFRA
provides administrative and operational guidance to the volunteer fire and EMS
companies within Washington County, MD.
g. Volunteer Fire and Rescue Stations. (“Volunteer Stations”) Independent,
legally incorporated non-profit organizations responsible for their own
corporate administrative affairs, including but not limited to members,
employees, risk management, investments, and the management of their assets.
The Volunteer Stations are officially recognized by the County to provide fire,
rescue, and emergency medical services in accordance with the policies,
procedures, and laws of the County and the Division.
h. Washington County Fire and EMS Volunteers. (“Volunteers”) All Volunteer
Station fire and emergency medical services volunteers performing duties
without promise, expectation, or receipt of compensation for services rendered.
2. Transfer of Current Employees.
a. The County agrees to hire all current full-time and part-time employees of the
Station (“Station Employees”), which shall be conditioned on the successful
completion of the County’s standard hiring process (See Appendix A)
consisting of the following:
i. Submittal of completed application for County employment,
ii. Completion of an EMS Oriented Physical Abilities Test,
iii. Physical examination,
iv. Background check,
v. Psychological evaluation, and
vi. Alcohol and Substance Use Testing.
b. All full-time New Employees will be hired as regular full-time employees at
the grade and step on the County’s wage and salary scale commensurate with
the New Employee’s hourly or salary wage rate paid while a Station Employee.
c. All part-time New Employees will be hired as regular part-time employees at
the grade and step on the County’s wage and salary scale commensurate with
the New Employee’s hourly wage rate paid while a Station Employee.
d. The Station will provide the County with payroll documentation showing the
current wages of the Station Employees. The County will not honor any
increase in wage or salary given by the Station to a Station Employee after the
start of the County’s current fiscal year, July 1, 2023, that was not enacted as
3
part of regular step-increases, promotion or otherwise within the normal course
of operations of the Station, as the case may be.
e. New Employees will serve a 1-year probationary period.
f. New Employees’ eligibility for defined benefit participation and leave accruals
shall be in accordance with existing policy as promulgated by the County’s
Department of Human Resources (See Appendix A), in the Employee
Handbook or on the County’s Human Resources webpage. Personnel Policies -
Washington County (washco-md.net).
g. Seniority for full-time New Employees within the Division, as to priority for
scheduling, Kelly Days, and vacation approvals, will be determined by current
Division practices. General County employment seniority shall follow standard
Human Resources Department policies.
h. The County assumes no liability for any compensation owed to Station
Employees by Station, including but not limited to: wages, back-pay,
accumulated vacation time or sick leave, health insurance liabilities, retirement
or other deferred compensation plan, or any other amount or sum due and owing
to a Station Employee.
i. The provisions of this Section 2, shall apply only to those Station Employees
employed by the Station as of the date of this MOU. Nothing contained herein
shall be construed as an ongoing, open, or rolling hiring process. The Station
shall provide a list of the full-time and part-time Station Employees requesting
to be hired by the County.
3. County Personnel and Volunteer Relations.
a. Assignment and Scheduling of County Personnel
i. The Division agrees to provide staffing to the Station based upon
available resources and Division priorities.
ii. The Division shall have sole responsibility and final authority over the
assignment and /or schedule of County Personnel.
iii. Within the limits of ability, the Division will provide the Company with
access to the Division scheduling program or provide a copy of the
scheduled Division coverage for their station.
iv. The County shall provide liability coverage for the acts and omissions
of County Personnel that are committed within the scope of their public
duties and employment. The County will make a copy of its insurance
coverage for County Personnel available to the Volunteer Station for
file.
4
4. Management of County Personnel.
a. The County, through its oversight of the Division will maintain responsibility
for hiring, training and maintaining the qualifications, assignments, and
discipline of all County Personnel.
b. County Personnel are subject to Washington County Personnel Rules and
Regulations (See Appendix A).
c. A copy of the Washington County Personnel Rules and Regulations will be
provided to the Volunteer Station Chief or designee.
d. Any violation of a Volunteer Station or Company policy should be reported to
the assigned Division Regional Officer who will either refer the issue as
appropriate, or conduct an appropriate inquiry, and determine an appropriate
course of action, in accordance with the County’s progressive discipline policy
(See Appendix A).
e. The Division maintains responsibility for all matters involving the conduct and
services provided by Division personnel, regardless of the equipment,
apparatus, or the facility being used or represented.
f. The County shall be responsible for all compensation and benefits of County
Personnel, including the worker’s compensation coverage for County Personnel
assigned to the Volunteer Station.
g. To the extent possible, County Personnel shall operate under the policies and
procedures of the Volunteer Station, provided no conflict exists with County
policy or regulation. Copies of these policies must be provided to the Director
or his/her designee prior to County Personnel placement at the Station and any
amendments or new policies shall be provided to the Director as they are
implemented. Station specific administrative rules and regulations will not be
altered, amended, or deleted by the Director unless mutually agreed upon, in
writing by the leadership of the Volunteer Station. It is highly recommended
that the Volunteer Station post all applicable rules or regulations for County
Personnel in a space accessible to County Personnel. To the extent there is an
unresolvable conflict, the County policy shall control.
h. County Personnel will not be responsible for, or given tasks associated with
maintenance, janitorial duties, etc. of portions of the Station’s property whose
general primary purpose is revenue generation, such as bingo halls, carnival
grounds, banquet facilities, and activities buildings.
i. On-duty County Personnel may not be requested and shall not assist in the
Volunteer Station’s gaming or fund-raising activities, such as but not limited
to, selling raffle tickets, working bingo, working a carnival booth, or selling
food.
5
j. On-duty County Personnel may be requested to participate in event set-up or
clean-up, to include trash removal, so long as no health hazard is created in
doing so.
k. The Station shall provide apparatus and other vehicles (Station and/or Division
owned) to County Personnel assigned to the Station to enable County Personnel
to perform their duties, including driver’s training, incident responses, Station
supported/authorized training, public education and community related events
and activities. County Personnel and Volunteers may operate only the vehicle
they are licensed and approved to operate under the Division and Station
standard operating procedures and standard operating guidelines. Station and
the Director shall establish other criteria governing the use of the Station and
Division-owned vehicles. Director shall not lessen any Station mandated
standards for operation of any equipment.
l. Station shall be responsible for ensuring all maintenance and inspections are
performed on Station-owned apparatus and vehicles and that said apparatus and
vehicles have current certifications and have passed all required inspections as
required by all federal, state, or local laws or regulations.
m. As needed, the Volunteer Station will provide housing space, inside the facility,
for Division assigned apparatus.
5. Station Obligations to County Personnel. Station agrees to provide the following for
County Personnel:
a. At a minimum, the Station must purchase and maintain fully functional and
adequately equipped (per County standards and State requirements) EMS
transport unit(s) (ambulance). The units will be of a sufficient quantity for the
number of EMT(s) and/or Paramedic(s) assigned to the station. As of the
effective date of this MOU, the parties acknowledge that the Station currently
maintains two (2) ambulance units. Nothing in this section shall be interpreted
as to constitute a waiver, by the County, of its full and absolute authority and
discretion to administer the provision of fire, rescue, and emergency medical
services in Washington County.
i. For the purposes of defining the number of required transport units, each
transport unit is regularly assigned 2 providers for the time the unit is
required to be in service.
b. A workplace that is compliant with all safety standards and codes.
c. A smoke and tobacco free work setting (See Appendix A). This does not include
Station-owned property not designated as a work setting (to include attached or
unattached spaces used for public rentals, bingo or other social gatherings).
d. Adequate parking for each assigned County Personnel.
6
e. One (1) bed (if Station receives 24-hour-per-day-County Personnel staffing) for
every assigned position on a shift. The bed shall be, at a minimum, a twin bed
of acceptable construction with a mattress and mattress cover. Beds must be
located in an area suitable for sleeping. This may be a common space shared
with Volunteers.
f. Restroom facilities to include appropriate shower facilities. Appropriate
facilities are defined as being clean and free of mold and mildew, supplied with
ample hot and cold water and personal privacy with locking door(s) where co-
ed facilities are utilized.
g. One secure locker for each County Personnel regularly assigned to work at the
Station to accommodate a uniform change and house personal hygiene items.
(Suggested 12”W x 18”D x 72”H)
h. Access to a functional kitchen with adequate facilities (i.e., stove/oven,
refrigerator, sink/countertops, kitchen table/chairs, cooking pots/pans, dishware
and utensils) to allow County Personnel to prepare meals during their shift.
i. Access to a washer/dryer to allow for uniform washing. If available, access to
and use of a gear washer to allow for washing of PPE.
j. At a minimum, a functional telephone in the sleeping areas of the Station.
k. If available, access to physical training areas and equipment. If physical fitness
equipment is not available within the Volunteer Station, the Station shall
provide reasonable allowance to County Personnel to travel in Station Property
to an alternate facility for the same. The County will ensure that all mandated
physical training activities are covered under the County’s Worker’s
Compensation insurance or employees and volunteers.
l. A storage area free from direct sunlight or UV light for the storage of personal
protective equipment.
m. Adequate cleaning supplies and equipment for County Personnel use and for
Station maintenance.
n. Access to audio visual equipment in the Station for training programs.
o. As necessary, access to a County-provided network connection for computer
placement, and a functional fax, scan, and copy (multifunctional) machine and
a bulletin board. Station agrees to permit installation of necessary equipment
for County Personnel to operate on County hardware and software, at County’s
sole cost and expense. County agrees to perform all restorative acts necessary
to return Station to good condition immediately following any installation.
7
p. Suitable secure storage space for County Personnel paperwork and sufficient
supply of office supplies needed to accomplish routine administrative tasks.
6. County/Division Obligations to Stations.
a. When County information/technology services are needed as determined by the
Division, the County will provide for the installation, maintenance, licensing,
and expenses for such services under the same terms and conditions as
paragraph 3(m) above. Station will remain responsible for its own
information/technology equipment.
b. Use of Apparatus/Vehicles – For the use of the apparatus/vehicles, the County
agrees to continue funding the daily operational costs associated with the use of
the apparatus/vehicles through the annual budget process. This shall include,
but not be limited to, funding for fuel, maintenance, insurance, etc.
c. Work Environment – The Division desires to work with Volunteers and
WCVFRA to create a safe and civil work environment in the Station. The
County Personnel and Volunteers agree to follow all Federal, State, County,
and Division policies to ensure a harmonious relationship.
d. The County, as Authority Having Jurisdiction and through the Division, and the
Station will recognize an integrated chain-of-command defined as any
Volunteer or County Personnel officer at the same rank are recognized in equal
capacity/authority within the assigned Volunteer Station.
e. Complaints (Volunteer) (See Appendix B)
i. Volunteer complaints regarding County Personnel will first be directed
to the Division station officer or regional officer in the absence of a
station officer.
ii. If the Division station officer is involved in the complaint, the complaint
shall be directed to the Volunteer Chief or the station duty officer per
Volunteer Station policy.
iii. In instances where it is felt that the in-station Division officer has not
adequately addressed the complaint, the volunteer complaint will be
escalated to the Volunteer Chief.
iv. The station officer will address the complaint by following Escalation
Matrix, as defined by the Division.
v. If the chief officer is not satisfied with the response, he/she shall direct
the complaint to the on-duty Division Duty Officer.
f. Complaints (Division) (See Appendix B)
i. County Personnel complaints regarding a Volunteer shall first be
directed to the Station Duty Officer.
8
ii. If the Station Duty Officer cannot be contacted, or the complaint
involves that officer, the complaint shall be directed to the DES
Regional Officer.
iii. In instances where it is felt that the Station Duty Officer, or Division
Regional Officer has not adequately addressed the complaint, a
complaint from County Personnel will be escalated to the Operations
Manager, or DES Duty Officer if the incident occurs after hours.
g. Discipline – The Division agrees that all disciplinary action stemming from
strictly Station/Volunteer affairs are the responsibility of the Station. If Station
discipline involves a Volunteer’s removal from operations, the Director shall
be notified of the removal. The Director will serve as a resource to the Station
on matters, if requested.
h. Communications – Station President and Volunteer Fire Chief, or their
designees, shall meet with the Director at least once per quarter, or as required
to ensure a professional work environment.
i. The Station, having an EMS transport unit, shall be guaranteed to retain at least
one staffed transport unit, even when staffed by County Personnel. It will be
the discretion of the Director to determine additional staffing levels for each
additional unit and will be dependent upon evolving metrics.
7. Budget and Funding.
a. Upon the County’s hiring of the New Employees and subsequent staffing of the
Station, the County shall receive eighty percent (80%) of the net billing revenue
generated by the Station for providing emergency medical services. The Station
shall retain the remaining twenty (20%) percent of said revenue.
b. When the Station staffs a second EMS transport unit to respond to a call, with
appropriate Volunteer staffing, defined as a qualified driver and qualified EMS
clinician (based on call type), the Station shall be entitled to retain a greater
share of the net billing than stated above. In this scenario, the County and the
Station shall each receive 50% of said net billing.
c. Upon the County’s hiring of the New Employees, the County shall cease
providing the health insurance subsidy and the staffing subsidy previously
provided to the Station.
d. The annual funding provided by the County to the Station will not be affected
by the terms of this MOU. Additionally, the following funding sources are
intended to remain unaffected by this MOU:
i. Senator Amoss 508 funding,
ii. State Gaming funding,
9
iii. The Station may continue its annual subscription/membership fund
drive, the obligations of which the County agrees to honor, with regard
to billing of the Station’s subscribers/members.
iv. County Fuel and Maintenance programs, and
v. Property, casualty, liability and vehicle insurance.
e. The Division will assume EMS billing responsibility upon placement of County
Personnel in the Station.
f. The Company will complete and provide all documents, signatures and
cooperate necessary to facilitate EMS billing.
g. The County will establish billing rates upon the County assuming EMS billing
for the Company.
h. The Authority Having Jurisdiction, or their designee, shall have the authority to
audit Station expenditures of County funds and provide input and analysis on
proposed Station budgets. The County reserves the right to review actual
expenditures made pursuant to prior budgets.
8. Indemnification and Insurance.
a. The County shall indemnify, protect, and save harmless the Station from
financial loss and expense, including legal fees and costs, if any, arising out of
any claim, demand, or judgment where County Personnel is deemed at fault or
negligent, up to the applicable tort caps and immunities.
b. Insurance deductibles will be the responsibility of the owner of the Property,
unless damage was caused by County Personnel operating Station owned
Property or Volunteers operating County-owned Property.
c. These coverage levels shall be reviewed annually by the insurance carrier, the
County’s risk management specialist, and individual Station representatives. To
the extent available, the County shall maintain coverage based on the agreed-
upon values on all insured Property. These values shall be mutually agreed-
upon by all parties during the annual review of coverage. If an agreement cannot
be reached, the insured value will be determined by an independent insurance
appraisal.
d. In the event of a claim for partial loss of any Station-owned Property, all
amounts paid by any insurer for said Property, shall be made directly to the
contractor or County (as the first insured) for the repair of said damage. In the
event of a total loss, the entity responsible for replacing the Property shall
receive any insurance proceeds from the County.
10
e. The County will process claims with the cooperation of the Station, as well as
fund insurance coverage for the following: i) Property, ii) Crime, iii) Liability,
iv) Accident & Sickness for Volunteers, and v) Worker’s Compensation.
9. Term. The term of this MOU shall be continuous (the “Term”) and may be reviewed
by the County by sending a written notice through the Director to commence said
review. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the Station shall have no right to
terminate this MOU during the first ten (10) years of the Term, except for acts of gross
negligence by the County. Termination of this MOU by either party will result in the
cessation of staffing of the Station with County Personnel.
10. Governance. The terms of this MOU and its execution shall be construed, interpreted,
and enforced according to the laws of the State of Maryland.
11. Understanding of the Parties. This MOU represents the complete, total, and final
understanding of the parties and no other understanding or representations, oral or
written, regarding the subject matter of this MOU, shall be deemed to exist or bind the
parties at the time of execution.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this MOU on the date first written
above.
VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY OF
HALFWAY, INC.
___________________________ BY: ___________________________ (SEAL)
Name:
Title:
WITNESS: COUNTY:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY,
MARYLAND
11
____________________________ BY:________________________(SEAL)
John F. Barr, President
Approved as to form for execution by the County:
____________________________
Zachary J. Kieffer
Assistant County Attorney
APPENDIX A
LIST OF SELECT COUNTY PERSONNEL POLICIES
• PR-2: Progressive Discipline and Dismissal
• PR-5 Alcohol and Substance Abuse Testing
• PR-5A Alcohol-Free Drug-Free Workplace
• PR-13 Anti-Harassment
• PR-21 Violence in Workplace
• PR-24 Hiring Process
• PR-37 Anti-Discrimination
**Appendix A is for reference purposes related to this MOU, only and not an exhaustive
list of all personnel policies applicable to New Employees and County Personnel.**
12
APPENDIX B
CONFLICT ESCALATION MATRIX
DES Responsibility/Conflict Escalation Matrix
(each notification required within this document will be made to the indicated individual(s) by the DES
staff member(s) identified within each section)
DES Duty Officer/Operations Manager-Fire
General daily oversight of DES Fire/EMS personnel
Handles station and staff operational complaints during normal working hours
Escalates unresolved issues to the Deputy Director – Operations or Director as requested
Handles issues between multiple personnel with emphasis on resolution at the lowest level
Escalates unresolved issues to the DES Operations Manager - Fire, or the DES Duty Officer outside of normal working ho
Situations requiring escalation and/or notification to the Deputy Director and Director
Physical Altercation
Hostile Work Environment
Sexual Assault
Staff Under Influence
Station Captain/Lieutenant’s
Station Liaison and In-station 24-hour DES Staff Supervision
Handles issues involving assigned personnel, with emphasis on resolution at this level
Situations requiring escalation to the Operations Manager-Fire
Physical Altercation
Hostile Work Environment
Sexual Assault
Staff Under Influence
Firefighter, Firefighter/Paramedic, Paramedics, EMT’s
Handles “person to person” issues, with emphasis on resolution at this level
Escalates unresolved issues to the DES station officer for input or resolution
Situations requiring escalation to DES Station Officer
Physical Altercation
Hostile Work Environment
Sexual Assault
Staff Under Influence