HomeMy WebLinkAbout250624a
John F. Barr, President
Jeffrey A. Cline, Vice President
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
June 24, 2025
OPEN SESSION AGENDA
9:00 AM INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CALL TO ORDER, President John F. Barr
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: June 3, 2025
9:05 AM COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS AND COMMENTS
9:20 AM STAFF COMMENTS
9:25 AM 1. YOUTH MERITORIOUS AWARD PRESENTATION
Richard Lesh, Grant Manager, Grant Management; Board of County Commissioners
9:30 AM 2. FY26 HEALTHY FAMILIES HOME VISITING GRANT – APPROVAL TO
SUBMIT APPLICATION
Richard Lesh, Grant Manager, Grant Management
9:35 AM 3. MARYLAND 9-1-1 BOARD – APPROVAL TO SUBMIT APPLICATION AND
ACCEPT AWARDED FUNDING
Alan Matheny, Director, Emergency Management; Richard Lesh, Grant Manager,
Grant Management
9:40 AM 4. DAY REPORTING CENTER – APPROVAL TO USE OPIOID RESTITUTION
FUNDS
Maria Kramer, Director, Grant Management; Major Craig Rowe, Warden,
Washington County Detention Center
9:45 AM 5. MULTI-SIGNATURE CHANGE ORDER FOR COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH
CARE SERVICES FOR INMATES – APPROVAL OF THE CHANGE ORDER
Major Craig Rowe, Warden, Washington County Sheriff’s Office Detention Center
9:50 AM 6. COMMUNITY LEGACY GRANT APPLICATION – REQUEST FOR
APPROVAL
Jennifer Kinzer, Deputy Director, Planning & Zoning; Carsten Ahrens, Senior Grant
Manager, Grant Management
9:55 AM 7. HOPEWELL ROAD PROPERTY ACQUISITION
Todd Moser, Real Property Administrator, Engineering
Randal A. Leatherman
Randall E. Wagner
Page 2 of 4
OPEN Session Agenda
June 24, 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.
10:00 AM 8. ACCEPTANCE OF REAL PROPERTY, DECLARATION OF SURPLUS
PROPERTY, AND INTENT TO CONVEY REAL PROPERTY FOR THE CHASE
SIX BOULEVARD PROPERTY
Todd Moser, Real Property Administrator, Engineering
10:05 AM 9. FORT RITCHIE CELL TOWER LEASE
Todd Moser, Real Property Administrator, Engineering; Andrew Eshleman, Director,
Public Works
10:10 AM 10. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) BETWEEN THE EASTERN
PANHANDLE REGIONAL PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL (REGION
IX) AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON
COUNTY REPRESENTING THE HAGERSTOWN/EASTERN PANHANDLE
METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (HEPMPO)
Jill Baker, Director, Planning and Zoning; Matt Mullenax, Executive Director,
HEPMPO
10:20 AM 11. WASHINGTON COUNTY TRANSIT – FACILITY EXPANSION
FEASIBILITY STUDY
Andrew Eshleman, Director, Public Works; Shawn Harbaugh, Director, Transit; Matt
Mullenax, Executive Director, Hagerstown/Eastern Panhandle Metropolitan Planning
Organization; Troy Truax, Michael Baker International
10:30 AM 12. THE COMMUNITY FREE CLINIC CHARITY TOURNAMENT – LICENSE
AGREEMENT
Andrew Eshleman, Director, Public Works
10:35 AM 13. BID AWARD (PUR-1749) POLE BARN BUILDING DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION
Brandi Kentner, Director, Purchasing; Andrew Eshleman, Director, Public Works;
Tom Gozora, Facility Administrator, Agricultural Education Center; Jay Miller,
President, Agricultural Education Center Advisory Board
14. QUOTATION AWARD (Q-25-800) ELECTION MANAGEMENT SOLUTION
AND SERVICES FOR THE WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS
Brandi Kentner, Director, Purchasing; Barry Jackson, Director, Washington County
Board of Elections
15. REJECTION OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (PUR-1743) EVENT
PRODUCTION SERVICES
Brandi Kentner, Director, Purchasing; Danielle Weaver, Director, Public Relations
and Marketing
Page 3 of 4
OPEN Session Agenda
June 24, 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.
10:45 AM 16. CONTRACT AWARD (PUR-1747) NORTHWEST QUADRANT UTILITY
EXPANSION AT THE HAGERSTOWN REGIONAL AIRPORT
Brandi Kentner, Director, Purchasing; Neil Doran, Director, Hagerstown Regional
Airport
17. SOLE SOURCE AWARD (PUR-1755) – MOYNO PUMPS FOR THE
DEPARTMENT OF WATER QUALITY
Brandi Kentner, Director, Purchasing; Joe Moss, Deputy Director – Engineering
Services, Water Quality
18. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATIVE PURCHASE (INTG-25-0195)
2024 FORD F-350 CREW CAB
Brandi Kentner, Director, Purchasing; Eric Jacobs, Assistant Director- Field
Operations, Emergency Services
19. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATIVE PURCHASE (INTG-25-0193)
FIVE (5) 2026 CHEVROLET EQUINOX AWD FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
PERMITS AND INSPECTIONS
Brandi Kentner, Director, Purchasing; Terry Feiser, Chief Building Inspector, Permits
and Inspections
20. CONTRACT AWARD (PUR-1726) – INSURANCE BROKERAGE AND RISK
MANAGEMENTS SERVICES
Brandi Kentner, Director, Purchasing; Tracy McCammon, Risk Management
Coordinator, Human Resources
11:00 AM 21. 2025-2026 PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE RENEWAL
Tracy McCammon, Risk Management Coordinator, Human Resources; Patrick Buck,
CBIZ Insurance Services
11:05 AM 22. ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION ADOPTING A FEE SCHEDULE FOR THE
CIVIL CITATIONS OF THE WASHINGTON COUNTY FIRE PREVENTION
CODE
Greg Cartrette, Director/Code Official, Permits and Inspections
11:10 AM 23. MOU BETWEEN OFFICE OF STATE FIRE MARSHAL (OSFM) AND
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Greg Cartrette, Director/Code Official, Permits and Inspections; Rosalinda Pascual,
Deputy County Attorney
Page 4 of 4
OPEN Session Agenda
June 24, 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.
11:15 AM 24. APPOINTMENT - WASHINGTON COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE
CHARGING COMMITTEE
Rosalinda Pascual, Deputy County Attorney
25. REAPPOINTMENT– WASHINGTON COUNTY POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY
BOARD
Rosalinda Pascual, Deputy County Attorney
11:20 AM 26. APPROVAL OF SITING STUDY AND CVS 30% DESIGN STAGE REPORT
FOR REPLACEMENT AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER
Neil Doran, Director, Hagerstown Regional Airport; Andrew Eshelman, Director,
Public Works
11:25 AM 27. 2025 SAFER GRANT APPLICATION – REQUEST TO APPLY AND ACCEPT
R. David Hays, Director, Emergency Services
11:30 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.
• Discussion of hiring part-time position in DES.
• Appointment to County Board of Social Services
• Appointments to Agricultural Education Center Advisory Board
• Appointment to Tri-County Council for Western Maryland
• Hiring of Fire Plans Examiner in Permits and Inspections.
To consult with counsel to obtain legal advice on a legal matter (7). Open session discussion would
breach attorney/client privilege.
• Update and legal advice from County Attorney concern
To consult with staff about potential litigation (8). Discussion in open session would damage litigation
strategy in forthcoming collections actions.
• Discussion of billing/collections for hazardous spill clean ups.)
12:25 PM RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION FOR POTENTIAL ACTION ON CLOSED
SESSION ITEMS
ADJOURNMENT
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Youth Meritorious Award Presentation
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Richard Lesh & Board of County Commissioners
RECOMMENDED MOTION: No motion or action is requested or recommended.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Throughout the school year the Board of County Commissioners present
“Youth Meritorious Awards” to students attending both public and private schools or those being home
schooled in Washington County. The following individual has been selected based on his scholastic
achievement, leadership qualities, community service performed or other positive contributions to his
community.
This exceptional youth has consistently worked and distinguished herself as model student and member
of our County.
It is my pleasure to present the following youth for recognition today:
Ariella Adjangba-Baker - Williamsport High School
Parent(s) – Angela Baker
Nominated by Angela Baker
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: FY26 Healthy Families Home Visiting Grant – Approval to Submit Application
and Accept Awarded Funding
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Richard Lesh, Grant Manager, Office of Grant Management
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the submission of the grant application to the
Maryland State Department of Education in the amount of $400,000.00 and to accept funding as
awarded.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Washington County Office of Grant Management, on behalf of the
Local Management Board, is seeking approval to submit a Fiscal Year 2026 Healthy Families
Home Visiting grant application to the Maryland State Department of Education.
DISCUSSION: The Healthy Families Home Visiting Program is a comprehensive program
modeled after a nationally renowned initiative Healthy Families America. The goals of the
program are to prevent child maltreatment through early intervention, promote healthy growth,
development, and strengthening of the parent-child relationship. This funding is valid from July
1, 2025 until June 30, 2026. Funding in the amount of $6,606 is included in the award for County
administrative support. No County funds are involved in this award.
FISCAL IMPACT: Provides $6,606 for County administrative expenses.
CONCURRENCES: Maria Kramer, Director, Office of Grant Management
ALTERNATIVES: Deny acceptance of awarded funds
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.
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Alan Matheny, Director of Emergency Management, 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 $2,681,763.76 and accept funding as awarded to fund a Multi-
Site Geo-Diverse 911 System Upgrade under a comprehensive 5-year contract.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Department of Emergency Communications is requesting approval for the
submission of grant application and to accept grant funds in the amount of $2,681,763.76 from the
Emergency Numbers Systems Board for the costs to upgrade the 911 call center system to a Geo-Diverse
system that will prevent all locations from being affected by a single disaster or event.
DISCUSSION: This Multi-Site system will provide multiple 911 call centers back-up service in case of a
major disaster or event. The geo-diverse approach ensures that if one call center goes down due to a power
outage, network outage, or other issues, calls can be rerouted to another operational site. Included in this
funding request is:
• FortiGate Remote Access Firewalls with 5-years of FortiGuard Unified Threat Management, Patch
Management, and Subscription Services.
• 5-year HP Extended Warranties for all servers and workstations.
• 5-years of VESTA Call Handling Software Support including:
o Managed Services
o Monitoring and Remediation
o Anti-Virus Protection
o Patch Management
This critical investment will enhance cybersecurity, ensure system redundancy and geo-diversity, and
provide long-term sustainability and reliability of Washington County’s emergency communication
infrastructure.
IMPACT: Provides $2,681,763.76 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: Day Reporting Center- Approval to use Opioid Restitution Funds
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Maria Kramer, Director, Office of Grant Management and Major Craig
Rowe, Warden, Washington County Detention Center
RECOMMENDED MOTION(S): Move to approve use of $399,350 of the Opioid Restitution
Local Direct Funds to support two programs at the Day Reporting Center for FY26.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Approval of this request will allow for two vital programs at the Day
Reporting Center to be fully funded for FY26. These programs are Washington County Jail-
Based Medication-Assisted Treatment Program and Recover, “Rebuild, & Reconnect” Reentry
Workshops.
DISCUSSION: Applications for MOOR's competitive grant program for the Jail-Based MAT
Program and "Recover, Rebuild, and Reconnect" Reentry workshops were submitted to the State
for the FY26 funding cycle. Funding available for this competitive grant program comes from
MOOR's state general funds. For FY26 the state received over 150 applications and cannot fund
them all. In this funding cycle, the state has prioritized entities that do not have direct access to
opioid settlement funds over those who do. This request is for approval to use $399,350 from the
Local Direct Funds for these two programs in FY26. These two programs are essential to the
operations of the Day Reporting Center.
FISCAL IMPACT: Reduce the balance of the Opioid Restitution Local Direct Fund by
$399,350.
CONCURRENCES: Office of Grant Management, Budget and Finance, and Washington
County Sheriff’s Office.
ALTERNATIVES: Deny use of funding
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL TO BE USED: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Multi-Signature change order for Comprehensive Health care Services for Inmates –
Approval of the Change Order.
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Major Craig Rowe, Warden, Washington County Sheriff’s Office, Detention
Center.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the Multi-Signature Change Order from
$3,853,910.00 to $4,308,970.00, an increase of $455,060.00 for inmate medical claims exceeding the
amount originally budgeted. The State of Maryland reimburses the County for claims exceeding a total
of $25,000 per inmate. The County expects to receive reimbursement of $308,477.84. The remainder
can be absorbed in the FY25 budget.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Washington County Sheriff’s Office, Detention Division is requesting
approval of the multi-signature change order so that invoices for June billing and catastrophic billing
can be paid and then submitted to the State for reimbursement.
DISCUSSION: The contract with PrimeCare Medical, Inc. states in the “scope of work, section W”
that “The Center shall also, upon receiving the appropriate documentation from the contractor, file for
and reimburse the contractor for any funds received from the State of Maryland for any individual
inmate in excess of $25,000 per fiscal year pursuant to Maryland Code, Correctional Services Articles,
Section 9-405.” The detention center must pay these medical fees then invoice the State of Maryland
in order to receive reimbursement.
FISCAL IMPACT: The County will be reimbursed $308,477.84 from the State of Maryland and the
remainder will be covered by savings in other budget line items.
CONCURRENCES: Purchasing Department and Chief Financial Officer
ALTERNATIVES: The medical fees have been incurred in FY25 and must be paid.
ATTACHMENTS: Multi-Signature Change Order Form
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS:
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
PrimeCare Medical, Inc.Digitally signed by PrimeCare
Medical, Inc.
Date: 2025.06.05 14:23:46 -04'00'
Major Craig Rowe Digitally signed by Major Craig
Rowe
Date: 2025.06.05 13:40:58 -04'00'
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Community Legacy Grant Application – Request for Approval
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Jennifer Kinzer, Deputy Director, Department of Planning & Zoning,
Carsten Ahrens, Sr. Grant Manager, Office of Grant Management
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve submission of the grant application for
rehabilitation of Fort Ritchie Building 603 to the Maryland Department of Housing &
Community Development (DHCD) in the amount of $800,000, and subsequently accept awarded
funding and enter into a subrecipient agreement with Cascade Properties, LLC.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Department of Planning & Zoning is requesting permission to
submit a grant application to and accept funding awarded from the DHCD’s Community Legacy
grant program on behalf of Cascade Properties, LLC. The request for $800,000 is to assist with
the costs for Phase One of rehabilitating Building 603 to facilitate future development of the
former Fort Ritchie Property.
DISCUSSION: As part of the continuing efforts in the Fort Ritchie Redevelopment Project,
Cascade Properties, LLC intends to rehabilitate Building 603 and convert it into a ‘Boutique
Hotel’ at Historic Fort Ritchie, which will provide a new location for overnight lodging in the
Fort Ritchie - Cascade Sustainable Communities area. The rehabilitation of this 30,000+/- square
foot building will pay homage to the Fort’s historic past and will be another significant addition
to Fort Ritchie’s Revival. This project will be completed in two phases; the cost estimate for
Phase One is $1,612,289 and the total project cost is estimated at $3,221,026. This is a shovel
ready project.
FISCAL IMPACT: Grant funds would provide up to $800,000 for building rehabilitation. The
grant does not require any matching fund contribution from the County and any remaining
balance on the project will be the responsibility of Cascade Properties, LLC.
CONCURRENCES: Jill Baker, Director, Department of Planning & Zoning, and Maria
Kramer, Director, Office of Grant Management
ALTERNATIVES: Reject involvement with the project.
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
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 REAL PROPERTY
(Wright/Hopewell Road Improvements – Byrd Properties)
RECITALS
1. The Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland (the
“County”) believes that it is in the best interest of the citizens of Washington County to acquire
certain real properties identified on the attached Exhibit A (the “Properties”) to be used for public
purposes.
2. The County approved the acquisition of the Properties on June 24, 2025.
3. A public hearing was not required by Section 1-301(b)(2), of the Code of the Public
Local Laws of Washington County, Maryland, as the funds utilized to purchase the Properties
are not to be expended from the General Fund of the County.
4. The acquisition of the Properties is necessary for improvements to Wright and
Hopewell Road(s) in Washington County, Maryland.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Washington
County, Maryland that the acquisition of the Property be approved and that the President of the
Board and the County Clerk 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 acquisition of the
Properties.
ADOPTED this ____ day of ______________, 2025.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
__________________________ BY:
Dawn L. Marcus, Clerk John F. Barr, President
Approved as to legal sufficiency:
Mail to:
__________________________ Office of the County Attorney
Zachary J. Kieffer 100 W. Washington Street, Suite 1101
County Attorney Hagerstown, MD 21740
EXHIBIT A--DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
Election District No. 02
Parcel 552
Situate along the east side of Hopewell Road in District 02 in Washington County,
Maryland,
Fee Area:
Beginning at the intersection of northern boundary of the lands of Donald M. Bowman
and Jone L. Bowman as described in a deed dated April 14, 1983, and being recorded among the
Land Records of Washington County, Maryland in Liber 741 at folio 884 and the eastern margin
of the existing Right of Way line observed to be ten (10) foot offset from the centerline in
accordance with a deed recorded in the said Land Records in Road Book 1 on Pages 247-249, Said
point being fifteen (10) feet right of and perpendicular to Existing centerline of Hopewell Road’s
station 18+95.20 thence with the existing Right of Way line for the following three (3) courses, the
first being a curve to the right having a radius of 1323.50 feet, a length of 56.05 feet, a delta of 2 ֯
25’ 35” and a bearing and distance of
֯
֯
a radius of 204.74 feet, a length of 55.90 feet, a delta of 15
֯ 38’ 42” and a bearing and distance of
֯
radius of 686.74 feet, a length of 18.84 feet, a delta of 1
֯ 34’ 20” and a bearing and distance of
֯
lands of the lands of Richard A. Byrd and Peggy L. Byrd
(Liber 528, folio 568), thence departing the said existing
lands of Richard A. Byrd and Peggy L. Byrd (Liber 528,
folio 568)
֯
lands of Richard A. Byrd and Peggy L. Byrd (Liber 528,
Richard A. Byrd and Peggy L. Byrd (Liber 478, folio 595)
by a new of Right of Way course hereby establ
being a non-tangent curve to the left having a radius of
438.49 feet, a length of 166.17 feet, an delta of 21 ֯ 42’ 46”
6) South 14 ֯ 37’ 53” West 165.18 feet to a point in the norther line of the land of
Donald M. Bowman and Jone L. Bowman (Liber 741,
lands of Donald M. Bowman and Jone L. Bowman (Liber
741, folio 884)
֯
Square feet or 0.02165 acre of land more or less.
Being part of the lands conveyed from Bernadene Zombro Voorhees and Edward A. Voorhees
to Richard A. Byrd and Peggy L. Byrd by deed dated October 7, 1968, and recorded among the
land records of Washington County, Maryland in Liber 478 at folio 595.
TOGETHER with the right to use the area designated TEMPORARY EASEMENT to be
Used Only during the Period of Construction, encompassing 4,869 square feet or 0.11178 acre of
land, more or less; the outline(s) of which are graphically depicted on the said Right-of-Way Plat
No.100-10-621.The purpose of the Temporary Easements shall be to provide working space for
grading and access upon GRANTORS’ property during the performance of the impending
Washington County Division of Engineering Contract No. 515000-30-11620-DNG040-MGMT-
000000 Hopewell Road Culvert 02/02. The Temporary Easement shall revert to the Grantors by
operation of law upon the completion and acceptance of the Project by the County.
SUBJECT to all easements, rights-of-way, covenants, conditions, and restrictions of
record applicable thereto.
Parcel 704
Situate along the east side of Hopewell Road in District 02 in Washington County,
Maryland,
Perpetual Easement Area:
Beginning at a point in the northern boundary of the lands of Richard A. Byrd and Peggy
L. Byrd as described in a deed dated October 7, 1968, and recorded among the Land Records of
Washington County, Maryland in Liber 478 at folio 595, Said point being fifteen and eighty-nine
hundredths (15.89) feet right of and perpendicular to Existing centerline of Hopewell Road’s
station 20+64.86 thence with the existing western platted boundary of the lands of the Grantor,
(Liber 478, folio 595)
֯
with the southern boundary of the lands of Cleonica A.
Sutch (Liber 1584, folio 899)
֯
lands of Cleonica A. Sutch (Liber 1584, folio 899) over
and across the lands of the grantor, Richard A. Byrd and
Peggy L. Byrd (Liber 528, folio 568) by a new of lines of
easement hereby established, the first being a non-
tangent curve to the left having a radius of 6377.00 feet,
a length of 101.37 feet, an delta of 0 ֯ 54’ 39” and a bearing
and distance of
֯
5 ֯ 19’ 48” and a bearing and distance of
֯
֯ 14’ 21” East 22.52 feet to a point in the northern boundary of the
lands of Richard A. Byrd and Peggy L. Byrd (Liber 478,
lands of Richard A. Byrd and Peggy L. Byrd (Liber 478,
folio 595)
֯
Square feet or 0.02165 acre of land more or less.
Being part of the lands conveyed from Herbert S. Robins and Ingeborg W. Robins to Richard A.
Byrd and Peggy L. Byrd by deed dated July 15, 1971, and recorded among the land records of
Washington County, Maryland in Liber 528 at folio 568.
TOGETHER with the right to use the area designated TEMPORARY EASEMENT to be
Used Only during the Period of Construction, encompassing 3,146 square feet or 0.07222 acre of
land, more or less; the outline(s) of which are graphically depicted on the said Right-of-Way Plat
No.100-10-621.The purpose of the Temporary Easements shall be to provide working space for
grading and access upon GRANTORS’ property during the performance of the impending
Washington County Division of Engineering Contract No. 515000-30-11620-DNG040-MGMT-
000000 Hopewell Road Culvert 02/02. The Temporary Easement shall revert to the Grantors by
operation of law upon the completion and acceptance of the Project by the County.
SUBJECT to all easements, rights-of-way, covenants, conditions, and restrictions of record
applicable thereto.
ORDINANCE NO. ORD-2025-___
AN ORDINANCE TO APPROVE THE ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTIES
(Chase Six Boulevard)
RECITALS
1. The Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland (the
“County”), believes that it is in the best interest of the citizens of Washington County to acquire
certain real properties (the “Properties”) from the Board of Education of Washington County,
Maryland, to be used for public purposes, said real properties identified on the attached Exhibit
A.
2. The County approved the acquisition of the Properties on June 24, 2025.
3. A public hearing was not required by Section 1-301, Code of the Public Local Laws
of Washington County, Maryland, as the Properties are being donated by the Board of Education
to the County and no funds will be utilized from the General Fund of the County for the
acquisition of the Properties.
4. The acquisition of the Properties is for no consideration because it is part of a land
exchange between the County and the Board of Education of Washington County, Maryland.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Washington
County, Maryland, that the acquisition of the Property be approved and that the President of the
Board and the County Clerk 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 acquisition of the
Properties.
ADOPTED this ___ day of June, 2025.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
__________________________ BY:
Dawn L. Marcus, Clerk John F. Barr, President
Approved as to legal sufficiency: Mail to:
Office of the County Attorney
__________________________ 100 W. Washington Street, Suite 1101
Zachary J. Kieffer Hagerstown, MD 21740
County Attorney
EXHIBIT A—DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTIES
PROPERTY 1 – Lot 1, Section One on an Unrecorded Addition Plat
Situated on Mapleville Avenue (Maryland Route 66) (also known as Mapleville
Road), Town of Boonsboro, in Boonsboro Election District 6, Washington County,
Maryland,
Being a piece or parcel of land situate, lying, and being within the Town of
Boonsboro town limits, Boonsboro Election District 6, Washington County, Maryland,
and being part of the lands conveyed from Hershel C. Dean and Rachel E. Dean, his wife,
unto the Board of Education of Washington County, Maryland, by deed dated May 14,
1959, and recorded in Liber 347, folio 256; also being part of the lands conveyed from
Webster W. Stottlemyer, widower, unto The Board of Education of Washington County,
a body corporate, by deed dated July 1, 1949, and recorded in Liber 252, folio 462; both
being among the Land Records of Washington County,
Beginning for the said piece or parcel of land at the end of the 18th, or South 25
degrees West, 12 foot line, of the Board of Education of Washington County lands as
recorded in Liber 252, folio 462 of the above noted Land Records, the reference point also
being on the eastern margin of Mapleville Avenue (also known as Mapleville Road and
MD Route 66), and at the northeast common corner with the Emily M. Burkett and
Timothy J. Kofoet, II, property (Liber 6266, folio 309), the reference line drawn North 61
degrees 25 minutes 16 seconds East 45.65 feet to the true point of beginning being a
capped rebar to be set (#21581) at the southwest corner of Lot 1, Section One, shown on
an additional plat entitled ‘Town of Boonsboro and Washington County Board of
Education Property’ to be recorded subsequent to the writing of this description, thence
running by, with and along the eastern donation line as delineated on SHA Plat #62364,
two courses, the bearings noted below based on Maryland State Plane datum
(NAD83/91),
1. North 22 degrees 19 minutes 47 seconds East, 203.23 feet a capped rebar to be set
(#21581), thence
2. 22.42 feet along an arc, deflecting to the right, having a radius of 3,459.515 feet, a
central angle of 0 degrees 22 minutes 16 seconds, a chord bearing of North 22 degrees
30 minutes 56 seconds East, and a chord length of 22.41 feet to a capped rebar to be set
(#21581), thence leaving the donation line, and crossing the lands of the Board of
Education so as to include a portion within the following five courses,
3. South 84 degrees 29 minutes 40 seconds East, 12.94 feet to a capped rebar to be set
(#21581), thence
4. South 51 degrees 44 minutes 12 seconds East, 204.73 feet to a capped rebar to be set
(#21581), thence
5. South 25 degrees 23 minutes 45 seconds West, 170.44 feet to a capped rebar to be set
(#21581), said corner also being the northeast corner of Outlot ‘X’, as delineated on the
aforementioned addition plat, thence running by, with and along the northern
boundary of Outlot ‘X’, one course,
6. North 68 degrees 31 minutes 25 seconds West, 200.23 feet to the point of beginning,
containing 41,357 square feet or 0.9494 acre, more or less, of land, and subject to any
recorded or unrecorded easements, rights-of-way and agreements.
PROPERTY 2 – Outlot ‘X’ on an Unrecorded Addition Plat
Situated on Mapleville Avenue (Maryland Route 66) (also known as Mapleville Road),
Town of Boonsboro, Boonsboro Election District 6, Washington County, Maryland,
Being a piece or parcel of land situate, lying, and being within the Town of Boonsboro
town limits, Boonsboro Election District 6, Washington County, Maryland, and being part of the
lands conveyed from Hershel C. Dean and Rachel E. Dean, his wife, unto The Board of Education
of Washington County, Maryland, by deed dated May 14, 1959, and recorded in Liber 347, folio
256; also being part of the lands conveyed from Webster W. Stottlemyer, widower, unto The
Board of Education of Washington County, a body corporate, by deed dated July 1, 1949, and
recorded in Liber 252, folio 462; both being among the Land Records of Washington County,
Beginning for the said piece or parcel of land at a reference point at the end of the 18th, or
South 25 degrees West, 12 foot line, of the Board of Education lands as recorded in Liber 252, folio
462 of the above noted Land Records, the reference point also being on the eastern margin of
Mapleville Avenue (also known as Mapleville Road or MD Route 66), and at the northeast
common corner with the Emily M. Burkett and Timothy J. Kofoet, II, property (Liber 6266, folio
309), the reference line being drawn South 68 degrees 31 minutes 25 seconds East 28.79 foot to the
true point of beginning at a capped rebar to be set (#21581) at the southwest corner of Outlot ‘X’,
on an addition plat entitled ‘Town of Boonsboro and Washington County Board of Education
Property’ to be recorded subsequent to the writing of this description, thence running by, with,
and along the eastern donation line as delineated on SHA Plat #62364, one course, the bearings
noted below based on Maryland State Plane datum (NAD83/91),
1. North 22 degrees 19 minutes 47 seconds East, 35.00’ a capped rebar to be set (#21581)
at the southwest corner of Lot 1, thence running by, with, and along part of the
southern boundary of Lot 1, one course,
2. South 68 degrees 31 minutes 25 seconds East, 180.69 feet to a capped rebar to be set
(#21581), thence
3. South 21 degrees 28 minutes 35 seconds West, 35.00 feet to a capped rebar to be set
(#21581), thence running by, with, and along the northern boundary line of the
Burkett-Kofoet property (Liber 6266, folio 309), one course,
4. North 68 degrees 31 minutes 25 seconds West, 181.21 feet to the point of beginning,
containing 6,333 square feet or 0.1454 acre, more or less, of land, and subject to any
recorded or unrecorded easements, rights-of-way, and agreements.
PROPERTY 3 – Also known as Parcel ‘E’ on an Unrecorded Addition Plat
Situated off Mapleville Avenue (Maryland Route 66) (also known as Mapleville Road),
Town of Boonsboro, Boonsboro Election District 6, Washington County, Maryland,
Being a piece or parcel of land situate, lying, and being within the Town of Boonsboro
town limits, Boonsboro Election District 6, Washington County, Maryland, and being part of the
lands conveyed from Charles G.K. Harris and Ruth N. Harris, his wife, and May Hagan Bentz,
widow, unto The Board of Education of Washington County, by deed dated December 21, 1959,
and recorded in Liber 354, folio 113, Parcel 1, also being part of the lands conveyed from Webster
W. Stottlemyer, widower, unto The Board of Education of Washington County, a body corporate,
by deed dated July 1, 1949, and recorded in Liber 252, folio 462, both being among the Land
Records of Washington County,
Beginning for the said piece or parcel of land at the southeast corner of the lands of the
Town of Boonsboro as recorded in Liber 793, folio 420, Parcel 1 of the above noted Land Records,
at the southern end of the South 20 degrees 52 minutes 44 seconds West 194.79 foot line, said
point also being at the southwest corner of an area delineated as ‘Recreation Area’ on a plat
entitled 'Section 'B', Kinsey Heights’ and recorded as Plat #707-C, lastly the point being on the
southeast boundary of Parcel ‘E’ as delineated on an addition plat entitled ‘Town of Boonsboro
and Washington County Board of Education Property’, to be recorded subsequent to the writing
of this description, thence running by, with, and along the souther, or North 53 degrees 11
minutes 45 seconds West 595.02 foot line, reversed, as delineated on Plat #707-C, one course, the
bearings noted below based on Maryland State Plane datum (NAD83/91),
1. South 52 degrees 27 minutes 40 seconds East, 34.92 feet a capped rebar to be set
(#21581), thence leaving the Recreation Area boundary, and crossing the lands of the
Board of Education so as to include a portion within the following four courses,
2. South 38 degrees 15 minutes 48 seconds West, 102.39 feet to a capped rebar to be set
(#21581), thence
3. North 51 degrees 44 minutes 12 seconds West, 227.80 feet to a point on the southern,
or North 85 degrees 13 minutes 46 seconds West, 249.80 foot line of the Town of
Boonsboro property (Liber, folio 420), thence by, with, and along said line, reversed,
to its eastern end,
4. South 84 degrees 29 minutes 40 seconds East, 187.59 feet to a point, thence with the
North 53 degrees 11 minutes 46 seconds West, 35.08 foot line of the Town of Boonsboro
property (Liber 793, folio 420), reversed,
5. South 52 degrees 27 minutes 40 seconds East, 35.12 feet to the point of beginning,
containing 15,147 square feet or 0.3477 acre, more or less, of land, and subject to any
recorded or unrecorded easements, rights-of-way, and agreements.
PROPERTY 4 – Parcel ‘Y’ on an Unrecorded Addition Plat, and a Donation Parcel, as
Delineated on SHA Plat #62364
Situated on Mapleville Avenue (Maryland Route 66) (also known as Mapleville Road),
Town of Boonsboro, Boonsboro Election District #6, Washington County, Maryland,
Being a piece or parcel of land situate, lying, and being within the Town of Boonsboro
town limits, Boonsboro Election District 6, Washington County, Maryland, and being part of the
lands conveyed from Hershel C. Dean and Rachel E. Dean, his wife, unto The Board of Education
of Washington County, Maryland, by deed dated May 14, 1959, and recorded in Liber 347, folio
256; also being part of the lands conveyed from Webster W. Stottlemyer, widower, unto The
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, a body corporate, by deed dated July 1,
1949, and recorded in Liber 252, folio 462; both being among the Land Records of Washington
County,
Beginning for the said piece or parcel of land at a point at the end of the 18th, or South 25
degrees West 12 foot line, of the Board of Education of Washington County lands as recorded in
Liber 252, folio 462 of the above noted Land Records, said point also being and at the northeast
common corner with the Emily M. Burkett and Timothy J. Kofoet, II, property (Liber 6266, folio
309), said point also being on the western margin of the dedication area of Mapleville Avenue
(also known as Mapleville Road and Maryland Route 66) as delineated on Maryland State
Highway Administration Plat #62364, thence running by, with, and along the western donation
line as delineated on said SHA plat, two courses, the bearings noted below based on Maryland
State Plan datum (NAD83/91),
1. North 22 degrees 05 minutes 19 seconds East, 252.02 feet to a point, thence
2. South 84 degrees 29 minutes 40 seconds East, 31.26 feet to a capped rebar to be set
(#21581) on the eastern margin of the SHA dedication area, said point also being the
northern corner of Lot 1, as shown on an addition plat entitled ‘Town of Boonsboro
and Washington County Board of Education Property’ to be recorded subsequent to
the writing of this description, thence running by, with, and along the eastern
dedication margin, and Lot 1, two courses,
3. 22.41 feet along an arc, deflecting to the right, having a radius of 3,459.515 feet, a
central angle of 0 degrees 22 minutes 16 seconds, a chord bearing of South 22 degrees
30 minutes 56 seconds West, and a chord length of 22.41 feet to a capped rebar to be
set (#21581), thence
4. South 22 degrees 19 minutes 47 seconds West, 203.23 feet to a capped rebar to be set
(#21581) at the northeast corner of Outlot ‘X’, on the aforesaid addition plat, thence
with Outlot ‘X’, one course,
5. South 22 degrees 19 minutes 47 seconds West, 35.00 feet to a capped rebar to be set
(#21581) on the northern boundary of the Burett-Kofoet property (Liber 6266, folio
309), thence with the Burkett-Kofoet property,
6. North 68 degrees 31 minutes 25 seconds West, 28.79 feet to the point of beginning,
containing 7,518 square feet or 0.1726 acre, more or less, of land, and subject to any
recorded or unrecorded easements, rights-of-way, and agreements.
ORDINANCE NO. ORD-2025-____
AN ORDINANCE TO APPROVE THE CONVEYANCE OF REAL PROPERTIES
(Chase Six Boulevard)
BE IT ORDAINED by the County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
(the "County"), as follows:
1. It is hereby established and declared that the real properties (the “Properties”)
described on Exhibit A are no longer needed by the County for public purposes or a public
use.
2. The County believes that it is in the best interest of the citizens of Washington
County to dispose of the Properties by conveyance to the Town of Boonsboro, of Washington
County, Maryland. Notice of Intention of Washington County to Convey Real Property was
not required pursuant to Section 1-301, Code of the Public Local Laws of Washington County,
Maryland, as the conveyance is between government entities.
3. The conveyance of the Properties is for no consideration because it is part of a
land exchange between the County and the Town of Boonsboro, Maryland.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Washington County, Maryland, that the conveyance of the Properties to the Town of
Boonsboro, Maryland, be approved and that the President of the Board and the County Clerk
be and are hereby authorized and directed to execute and attest, respectfully, all documents
for and on behalf of the County relating to the conveyance of the Properties.
ADOPTED this ____ day of _______, 2025.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
__________________________ BY: ________________________________________
Dawn L. Marcus, Clerk John F. Barr, President
Approved as to legal sufficiency:
__________________________
Zachary J. Kieffer
County Attorney
EXHIBIT A—DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTIES
PROPERTY 1 – Lot 1, Section One on an Unrecorded Addition Plat
Situated on Mapleville Avenue (Maryland Route 66) (also known as Mapleville
Road), Town of Boonsboro, in Boonsboro Election District 6, Washington County,
Maryland,
Being a piece or parcel of land situate, lying, and being within the Town of
Boonsboro town limits, Boonsboro Election District 6, Washington County, Maryland,
and being part of the lands conveyed from Hershel C. Dean and Rachel E. Dean, his
wife, unto the Board of Education of Washington County, Maryland, by deed dated
May 14, 1959, and recorded in Liber 347, folio 256; also being part of the lands
conveyed from Webster W. Stottlemyer, widower, unto The Board of Education of
Washington County, a body corporate, by deed dated July 1, 1949, and recorded in
Liber 252, folio 462; both being among the Land Records of Washington County,
Beginning for the said piece or parcel of land at the end of the 18th, or South 25
degrees West, 12 foot line, of the Board of Education of Washington County lands as
recorded in Liber 252, folio 462 of the above noted Land Records, the reference point
also being on the eastern margin of Mapleville Avenue (also known as Mapleville
Road and MD Route 66), and at the northeast common corner with the Emily M.
Burkett and Timothy J. Kofoet, II, property (Liber 6266, folio 309), the reference line
drawn North 61 degrees 25 minutes 16 seconds East 45.65 feet to the true point of
beginning being a capped rebar to be set (#21581) at the southwest corner of Lot 1,
Section One, shown on an additional plat entitled ‘Town of Boonsboro and
Washington County Board of Education Property’ to be recorded subsequent to the
writing of this description, thence running by, with and along the eastern donation
line as delineated on SHA Plat #62364, two courses, the bearings noted below based
on Maryland State Plane datum (NAD83/91),
1. North 22 degrees 19 minutes 47 seconds East, 203.23 feet a capped rebar to be set
(#21581), thence
2. 22.42 feet along an arc, deflecting to the right, having a radius of 3,459.515 feet, a
central angle of 0 degrees 22 minutes 16 seconds, a chord bearing of North 22
degrees 30 minutes 56 seconds East, and a chord length of 22.41 feet to a capped
rebar to be set (#21581), thence leaving the donation line, and crossing the lands of
the Board of Education so as to include a portion within the following five courses,
3. South 84 degrees 29 minutes 40 seconds East, 12.94 feet to a capped rebar to be set
(#21581), thence
4. South 51 degrees 44 minutes 12 seconds East, 204.73 feet to a capped rebar to be
set (#21581), thence
5. South 25 degrees 23 minutes 45 seconds West, 170.44 feet to a capped rebar to be
set (#21581), said corner also being the northeast corner of Outlot ‘X’, as delineated
on the aforementioned addition plat, thence running by, with and along the
northern boundary of Outlot ‘X’, one course,
6. North 68 degrees 31 minutes 25 seconds West, 200.23 feet to the point of beginning,
containing 41,357 square feet or 0.9494 acre, more or less, of land, and subject to
any recorded or unrecorded easements, rights-of-way and agreements.
PROPERTY 2 – Outlot ‘X’ on an Unrecorded Addition Plat
Situated on Mapleville Avenue (Maryland Route 66) (also known as Mapleville Road),
Town of Boonsboro, Boonsboro Election District 6, Washington County, Maryland,
Being a piece or parcel of land situate, lying, and being within the Town of Boonsboro
town limits, Boonsboro Election District 6, Washington County, Maryland, and being part of
the lands conveyed from Hershel C. Dean and Rachel E. Dean, his wife, unto The Board of
Education of Washington County, Maryland, by deed dated May 14, 1959, and recorded in
Liber 347, folio 256; also being part of the lands conveyed from Webster W. Stottlemyer,
widower, unto The Board of Education of Washington County, a body corporate, by deed
dated July 1, 1949, and recorded in Liber 252, folio 462; both being among the Land Records
of Washington County,
Beginning for the said piece or parcel of land at a reference point at the end of the 18th,
or South 25 degrees West, 12 foot line, of the Board of Education lands as recorded in Liber
252, folio 462 of the above noted Land Records, the reference point also being on the eastern
margin of Mapleville Avenue (also known as Mapleville Road or MD Route 66), and at the
northeast common corner with the Emily M. Burkett and Timothy J. Kofoet, II, property (Liber
6266, folio 309), the reference line being drawn South 68 degrees 31 minutes 25 seconds East
28.79 foot to the true point of beginning at a capped rebar to be set (#21581) at the southwest
corner of Outlot ‘X’, on an addition plat entitled ‘Town of Boonsboro and Washington County
Board of Education Property’ to be recorded subsequent to the writing of this description,
thence running by, with, and along the eastern donation line as delineated on SHA Plat
#62364, one course, the bearings noted below based on Maryland State Plane datum
(NAD83/91),
1. North 22 degrees 19 minutes 47 seconds East, 35.00’ a capped rebar to be set
(#21581) at the southwest corner of Lot 1, thence running by, with, and along part
of the southern boundary of Lot 1, one course,
2. South 68 degrees 31 minutes 25 seconds East, 180.69 feet to a capped rebar to be
set (#21581), thence
3. South 21 degrees 28 minutes 35 seconds West, 35.00 feet to a capped rebar to be set
(#21581), thence running by, with, and along the northern boundary line of the
Burkett-Kofoet property (Liber 6266, folio 309), one course,
4. North 68 degrees 31 minutes 25 seconds West, 181.21 feet to the point of beginning,
containing 6,333 square feet or 0.1454 acre, more or less, of land, and subject to any
recorded or unrecorded easements, rights-of-way, and agreements.
PROPERTY 3 – Also known as Parcel ‘E’ on an Unrecorded Addition Plat
Situated off Mapleville Avenue (Maryland Route 66) (also known as Mapleville Road),
Town of Boonsboro, Boonsboro Election District 6, Washington County, Maryland,
Being a piece or parcel of land situate, lying, and being within the Town of Boonsboro
town limits, Boonsboro Election District 6, Washington County, Maryland, and being part of
the lands conveyed from Charles G.K. Harris and Ruth N. Harris, his wife, and May Hagan
Bentz, widow, unto The Board of Education of Washington County, by deed dated December
21, 1959, and recorded in Liber 354, folio 113, Parcel 1, also being part of the lands conveyed
from Webster W. Stottlemyer, widower, unto The Board of Education of Washington County,
a body corporate, by deed dated July 1, 1949, and recorded in Liber 252, folio 462, both being
among the Land Records of Washington County,
Beginning for the said piece or parcel of land at the southeast corner of the lands of
the Town of Boonsboro as recorded in Liber 793, folio 420, Parcel 1 of the above noted Land
Records, at the southern end of the South 20 degrees 52 minutes 44 seconds West 194.79 foot
line, said point also being at the southwest corner of an area delineated as ‘Recreation Area’
on a plat entitled 'Section 'B', Kinsey Heights’ and recorded as Plat #707-C, lastly the point
being on the southeast boundary of Parcel ‘E’ as delineated on an addition plat entitled ‘Town
of Boonsboro and Washington County Board of Education Property’, to be recorded
subsequent to the writing of this description, thence running by, with, and along the souther,
or North 53 degrees 11 minutes 45 seconds West 595.02 foot line, reversed, as delineated on
Plat #707-C, one course, the bearings noted below based on Maryland State Plane datum
(NAD83/91),
1. South 52 degrees 27 minutes 40 seconds East, 34.92 feet a capped rebar to be set
(#21581), thence leaving the Recreation Area boundary, and crossing the lands of
the Board of Education so as to include a portion within the following four courses,
2. South 38 degrees 15 minutes 48 seconds West, 102.39 feet to a capped rebar to be
set (#21581), thence
3. North 51 degrees 44 minutes 12 seconds West, 227.80 feet to a point on the
southern, or North 85 degrees 13 minutes 46 seconds West, 249.80 foot line of the
Town of Boonsboro property (Liber, folio 420), thence by, with, and along said
line, reversed, to its eastern end,
4. South 84 degrees 29 minutes 40 seconds East, 187.59 feet to a point, thence with
the North 53 degrees 11 minutes 46 seconds West, 35.08 foot line of the Town of
Boonsboro property (Liber 793, folio 420), reversed,
5. South 52 degrees 27 minutes 40 seconds East, 35.12 feet to the point of beginning,
containing 15,147 square feet or 0.3477 acre, more or less, of land, and subject to
any recorded or unrecorded easements, rights-of-way, and agreements.
ORDINANCE NO. ORD-2025-____
AN ORDINANCE TO APPROVE THE CONVEYANCE OF REAL PROPERTY
(Chase Six Boulevard)
BE IT ORDAINED by the County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
(the "County"), as follows:
1. It is hereby established and declared that the real property (the “Property”)
described on Exhibit A is no longer needed by the County for a public purpose or a public
use.
2. The County believes that it is in the best interest of the citizens of Washington
County to dispose of the Property by conveyance to the State Highway Administration (SHA),
Maryland. Notice of Intention of Washington County to Convey Real Property was not
required pursuant to Section 1-301, Code of the Public Local Laws of Washington County,
Maryland, as the conveyance is between government entities.
3. The conveyance of the Property is for no consideration because it is part of a
land exchange between the County and the SHA, Maryland.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Washington County, Maryland, that the conveyance of the Property to the SHA, Maryland,
be approved and that the President of the Board and the County Clerk be and are hereby
authorized and directed to execute and attest, respectfully, all documents for and on behalf
of the County relating to the conveyance of the Property.
ADOPTED this ____ day of _______, 2025.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
__________________________ BY: ________________________________________
Dawn L. Marcus, Clerk John F. Barr, President
Approved as to legal sufficiency:
__________________________
Zachary J. Kieffer
County Attorney
EXHIBIT A—DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
Parcel ‘Y’ on an Unrecorded Addition Plat, and a Donation Parcel, as Delineated on SHA
Plat #62364
Situated on Mapleville Avenue (Maryland Route 66) (also known as Mapleville Road),
Town of Boonsboro, Boonsboro Election District #6, Washington County, Maryland,
Being a piece or parcel of land situate, lying, and being within the Town of Boonsboro
town limits, Boonsboro Election District 6, Washington County, Maryland, and being part of
the lands conveyed from Hershel C. Dean and Rachel E. Dean, his wife, unto The Board of
Education of Washington County, Maryland, by deed dated May 14, 1959, and recorded in
Liber 347, folio 256; also being part of the lands conveyed from Webster W. Stottlemyer,
widower, unto The Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, a body
corporate, by deed dated July 1, 1949, and recorded in Liber 252, folio 462; both being among
the Land Records of Washington County,
Beginning for the said piece or parcel of land at a point at the end of the 18th, or South
25 degrees West 12 foot line, of the Board of Education of Washington County lands as
recorded in Liber 252, folio 462 of the above noted Land Records, said point also being and at
the northeast common corner with the Emily M. Burkett and Timothy J. Kofoet, II, property
(Liber 6266, folio 309), said point also being on the western margin of the dedication area of
Mapleville Avenue (also known as Mapleville Road and Maryland Route 66) as delineated on
Maryland State Highway Administration Plat #62364, thence running by, with, and along the
western donation line as delineated on said SHA plat, two courses, the bearings noted below
based on Maryland State Plan datum (NAD83/91),
1. North 22 degrees 05 minutes 19 seconds East, 252.02 feet to a point, thence
2. South 84 degrees 29 minutes 40 seconds East, 31.26 feet to a capped rebar to be set
(#21581) on the eastern margin of the SHA dedication area, said point also being
the northern corner of Lot 1, as shown on an addition plat entitled ‘Town of
Boonsboro and Washington County Board of Education Property’ to be recorded
subsequent to the writing of this description, thence running by, with, and along
the eastern dedication margin, and Lot 1, two courses,
3. 22.41 feet along an arc, deflecting to the right, having a radius of 3,459.515 feet, a
central angle of 0 degrees 22 minutes 16 seconds, a chord bearing of South 22
degrees 30 minutes 56 seconds West, and a chord length of 22.41 feet to a capped
rebar to be set (#21581), thence
4. South 22 degrees 19 minutes 47 seconds West, 203.23 feet to a capped rebar to be
set (#21581) at the northeast corner of Outlot ‘X’, on the aforesaid addition plat,
thence with Outlot ‘X’, one course,
5. South 22 degrees 19 minutes 47 seconds West, 35.00 feet to a capped rebar to be set
(#21581) on the northern boundary of the Burett-Kofoet property (Liber 6266, folio
309), thence with the Burkett-Kofoet property,
6. North 68 degrees 31 minutes 25 seconds West, 28.79 feet to the point of beginning,
containing 7,518 square feet or 0.1726 acre, more or less, of land, and subject to any
recorded or unrecorded easements, rights-of-way, and agreements.
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Between the Eastern Panhandle Regional
Planning & Development Council (Region IX) and the Board of County Commissioners for
Washington County representing the Hagerstown/Eastern Panhandle Metropolitan Planning
Organization (HEPMPO)
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Jill Baker, AICP, Director Department of Planning and Zoning and
Matt Mullenax, Executive Director of the HEPMPO
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Recommend executing the proposed MOU to assist the
HEPMPO in carrying out regional transportation planning efforts
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Each year the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit
Authority allocate funding to all 50 states including the States of Maryland and West Virginia for
the purpose of conducting and coordinating regional planning activities for transportation related
issues. Federal funds are further allocated by the State Departments of Transportation to regional
planning groups known as Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). MPOs are federally
designated areas that are approved for expenditure of federal funds related to transportation
planning.
There is currently an MOU between the Region IX planning council and the Board of County
Commissioners as they act on behalf of the HEPMPO that was executed in 2008. The purpose of
the updated MOU is to clarify and update outdated language, acknowledge better delineate the
additional financial responsibility that has impacted Region IX in the last 18 years, and amend the
current administrators of the agencies.
DISCUSSION:
Part of the responsibility of the county in being the cognizant agency for the HEPMPO, is to
manage the financial administration of Federal, State and local funds that are allocated to the
organization. Washington County issues payment of HEPMPO expenditures and is, in turn,
reimbursed on a quarterly basis by the State DOTs.
While Washington County acts as the cognizant agency for the HEPMPO, Region IX plays a
significant role by acknowledging HEPMPO employees as part of their organization. They have
accepted the responsibility to issue paychecks, provide office space, and administer associated
benefit and tax responsibilities. To implement this arrangement, Region IX pays the salary of the
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
HEPMPO employees as well as their benefits. On a monthly basis, Region IX issues an invoice
to Washington County for reimbursement of these administrative costs.
FISCAL IMPACT: Execution of this MOU will not subject the county to any additional
expenditure beyond the 10% local match required by federal law in accepting the allocated
funds. Local match funds are included within the FY 2025 and 2026 operating budgets.
CONCURRENCES: County Attorney, Region IX
ALTERNATIVES: If this amended MOU is not executed, the existing MOU would still be in
effect and could result in unnecessary confusion about expectations and responsibilities of the
organizations involved.
ATTACHMENTS: Amended MOU in track changes
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: n/a
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Between
Eastern Panhandle Regional Planning & Development Council (Region 9)
And
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland as representing the Hagerstown
Eastern Panhandle Metropolitan Planning Organization (HEPMPO)
This Memorandum of Understanding made this day of May 2025 by and between the
Eastern Panhandle Regional Planning and Development Council ("Region 9") and the Board of
County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland as representing the Hagerstown
Eastern Panhandle Metropolitan Planning Organization ("HEPMPO").
RECITALS
1.Region 9 is the Regional Planning & Development Council formed under the West
Virginia State Code and empowered to provide intergovernmental cooperation on a
regional basis within Berkeley, Jefferson, and Morgan Counties to approach common
planning and development problems and seek more efficient and economic solutions to
common problems of local government.
2.HEPMPO is the federal and state designated regional transportation planning
organization that serves as a forum for cooperative decision making in the three-county
region of Berkeley and Jefferson Counties in West Virginia and Washington County,
Maryland.
3.A Memorandum of Understanding between Region 9 and HEPMPO is imperative for
cohesive planning between the common areas of Berkeley and Jefferson Counties. and,
when necessary, the inclusion of Morgan County, West Virginia for special planning
opportunities.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, conditions, and agreements hereinafter
expressed, Region 9 and HEPMPO agree as follows:
1.This The Memorandum of Understanding shall be effective for a period of one (1) year
from the date of execution and shall automatically renew for additional periods of one (1)
yearat the start of each County fiscal year unless a party provides notice of the
termination at least sixty ( 60) days prior to a renewal date. This Memorandum of
Understanding and the obligations herein shall be terminable by either party voluntarily
upon sixty (60) days notice to the other party.
2.Region 9 agrees to provide office space for the HEPMPO Executive Director and
HEPMPO Staff that includes office space, utilities, and supplies.
3.Region 9 agrees to provide bi-weekly salary in an amount predetermined by the
HEPMPO Interstate Council to the HEPMPO Executive Director and two (2) additional
Formatted: Not Highlight
employees, which amounts will shall be reimbursed on a monthly basis monthly by the
Board of the County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland (the “County”),
but not to exceed the amount predetermined and budgeted by HEPMPO for such
purposes and not to exceed the amount to be reimbursed to the County by the federal
government. The monthly invoice may include:
a.Salary, Pension Plan Contributions (10.5% 9.0%), Employee Health Insurance or
457(b) Supplemental Retirement, Life Insurance, Medicare Expenses, Social
Security Expenses, SUTA State Unemployment Insurance Expenses and
Workman’s Compensation Expenses.
b.Payroll processing fee . to consist of a proportionate share of Administrative
Assistant salary with fringe, payroll software licensing and supplies, and
accountant and other professional fees.
c.A fixed amount agreed by the parties in writing to cover additional expenses
incurred which include Board of Risk Insurance, office space, and utilities.
4.Monthly invoices will reflect total payroll expenses and fees to the County. The County
shall provide Region 9 with quarterly invoices to reflect the mandatory West Virginia
Local Match monies for the HEPMPO program.
5.At the end of each County fiscal year, Region 9 and HEPMPO will assess this
Memorandum of Understanding and modify invoices as necessary.
6.Notice: All notices and correspondence under or regarding this Memorandum of
Understanding shall be in writing and shall be hand-delivered or sent postage prepaid by
either (i) United States mail, certified, return receipt requested, or, (ii) for delivery the
next business day with a nationally recognized express courier.
To Region 9:
Carol Crabtree, Executive Director
Eastern Panhandle Regional Planning & Development Council
400 W. Stephen Street, Suite 301
Martinsburg, West Virginia 25401
Rachel Snavely, Executive Director
Eastern Panhandle Regional Planning & Development Council
226 Pilot Way, Ste. E
Martinsburg, West Virginia 25405
To HEPMPO:
John F. Barr, President
Board of County Commissioners
Formatted: Not Highlight
100 West Washington Street, Room 2261101
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
and
County Attorney's Office
100 West Washington Street, Suite 2021101
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
7.Laws of Maryland: This Memorandum of Understanding was made and entered into in
the State of Maryland and is to be governed by and construed under the laws of the State
of Maryland. Any disagreement arising from this agreement shall be adjudicated by the
County of appropriate jurisdiction in Washington County, Maryland.
8.Recitals: The Recitals are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as substantive
provisions.
9.Entire Agreement Modification: This Memorandum of Understanding constitutes the
entire agreement and understanding of the parties. There are no other promises or other
agreements, oral or written, expressed or implied, between the parties other than as set
forth in this Memorandum of Understanding. No change or modification of, or waiver
under, this Memorandum of Understanding shall be valid unless it is in writing and
signed by authorized representatives of each party.
10.Severability: If any provision of the Memorandum of Understanding shall be determined
to be invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions herein shall not be affected
thereby, and every provision herein shall remain in full force and effect, enforceable to
the fullest extent permitted by law.
11.Waiver: Neither party’s waiver of the other’s breach of any term, covenant, or condition
contained in this Memorandum of Understanding shall be deemed to be a waiver of any
subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant, or condition in this
Memorandum of Understanding.
12.Survival: The covenants contained herein or liabilities accrued under this Memorandum
of Understanding which, by their terms, require their performance after the expiration or
termination of this Memorandum of Understanding shall be enforceable notwithstanding
the expiration or other termination of this Memorandum of Understanding.
13.Counterparts/Execution: This Memorandum of Understanding may be executed in one or
more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together
shall constitute one and the same instrument. A facsimile or photocopy of a signature of a
party shall constitute an original signature, fulling binding the party for all purposes.
14.Assignment: This Memorandum of Understanding and the obligations herein may not be
assigned by either party without the express written consent of each party.
15.Successors Bound: This Memorandum of Understanding and obligations contained
herein shall ensure to the benefit of the successors, permitted assigns, and legal
representatives of the parties.
15.16. Mutual Negotiation. The parties agree that they have each had the benefit of
mutual negotiation including, if desired, the opportunity for review of this agreement by
their legal counsel. As such, this agreement shall not be interpreted to the detriment of
either party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Memorandum of Understanding under
their respective seals as of the day and year first above written.
ATTEST: Eastern Panhandle Regional Planning &
Development Council
____________________________
By: ______________________________
Its:_______________________Executive Director
ATTEST: Board of County Commissioners of Washington
County, Maryland, representing Hagerstown Eastern
Panhandle Metropolitan Planning Organization
____________________________
By: ______________________________
John F. Barr, President
Approved as to legal sufficiency:
Andrew F. Wilkinson
Assistant County Attorney
Zachary J. Kieffer
County Attorney
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", No bullets or numbering
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Washington County Transit – Facility Expansion Feasibility Study
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Andrew Eshleman, Director of Public Works, Shawn Harbaugh,
Director of Washington County Transit, Matt Mullenax, Executive Director Hagerstown/Eastern
Panhandle Metropolitan Planning Organization, and Troy Truax, Michael Baker International
RECOMMENDED MOTION(S): For Informational Purposes Only
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Hagerstown Eastern Panhandle Metropolitan Organization
(HEPMPO) provided funding and contracted services via Michael Baker International to
complete a Washington County Transit (WCT) Facility Expansion Feasibility Study. The study
investigated WCT current and future facility and administrative needs through the year 2050.
DISCUSSION: The facility is located at 1000 West Washington Street and originally operated
as an automotive dealership until its acquisition by Washington County in 1974. The facility was
last renovated in 2009 and is at full capacity. The study conducted a space needs analysis that
informed a proposed facility expansion conceptual design and site layout. The facility concept
was the basis for the MDOT/WCT Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development
(BUILD) Expanding Rural Transit Options grant application that, if awarded, would provide the
engineering design services to improve the facility.
The full study including the attachments can be viewed on the HEPMPO website.
https://hepmpo.com/our-work/special-studies/
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES:
ALTERNATIVES:
ATTACHMENTS: Facility Expansion Feasibility Study (excluding attachments)
AUDIO/VISUAL TO BE USED: Powerpoint Presentation
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
1
May 2025
2
The Hagerstown/Eastern Panhandle Metropolitan Planning Organization (HEPMPO) would like to thank
the stakeholders involved for their valuable contributions throughout the planning process.
• City of Hagerstown
o Mayor and City Council
o Planning Commission
o Engineering Department
o Planning and Zoning Department
• Maryland Department of Transportation, Maryland Transit Administration
• Orchard Hills Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses
• Washington County
o Board of Commissioners
o Public Works Department
o Washington County Transit
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................... 2
1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 5
Background .......................................................................................................................................... 5
Facility History ..................................................................................................................................... 6
Project Summary .................................................................................................................................. 8
2 W.C.T. Facility Space Needs Assessment ...................................................................................... 10
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ 10
Needs Assessment ............................................................................................................................. 11
Quit-Claim for Alleyway No. 1-35 ......................................................................................................... 12
Current to Future Comparison ............................................................................................................. 13
Current Circulation and Operations ...................................................................................................... 16
Space Program and Operating Needs Requirements ............................................................................. 21
3 Environmental Screening Needs .................................................................................................. 29
Environmental Screening .................................................................................................................... 29
Recommendations .............................................................................................................................. 36
4 Conceptual Facility Design and Site Plan Layout ............................................................................ 37
Initial Site Concepts............................................................................................................................ 37
5 Financial Analysis and Capital Funding Strategy ............................................................................ 40
Cost Estimation .................................................................................................................................. 40
Capital Funding Strategy ..................................................................................................................... 41
Next Steps ......................................................................................................................................... 43
6 Quit Claim ................................................................................................................................ 43
Purpose ............................................................................................................................................. 43
Application ......................................................................................................................................... 44
7 Lot Consolidation ...................................................................................................................... 46
8 Attachments ............................................................................................................................. 48
Attachment A — Aerial Location Map .......................................................................................................
Attachment B — Photograph Log .............................................................................................................
Attachment C — Environmental Resource Map .........................................................................................
4
Attachment D — National Wetlands Inventory Map and Hydric Rating Map ................................................
Attachment E — FEMA MAP ....................................................................................................................
Attachment F — USFWS Species List .......................................................................................................
Attachment G — Facility Expansion Rough Order of Magnitude .................................................................
Attachment H — Quit-Claim .....................................................................................................................
Attachment I — Site Consolidation ..........................................................................................................
5
1 INTRODUCTION
Background
The Washington County Transit (d/b/a WCT) desires to expand its current facility located at 1000 W.
Washington St, Hagerstown, MD 21740, to provide additional space to meet its current and future (year 2050)
administrative and operational needs. Such needs are supported by WCT’s historic growth and its Five-Year
Transit Development Plan (TDP), which projects the authority’s current annual ridership to increase by 30
percent in transit demand from 2010 to 2030.
The WCT facility is situated on the Washington County-owned parcel (Parcel #25035194) that encompasses
approximately 1.7 acres (73,616 square feet). The facility includes approximately 16,056 square feet and
provides administrative offices, conference rooms, indoor vehicle storage, a full-service vehicle maintenance
facility, and a bus wash bay. Figure 1 is an ariel view of the WCT. The WCT parcel is divided into two sections
by the City of Hagerstown-owned alleyway (Alleyway No. 1-35) as illustrated in Attachment A.
Figure 1. WCT Aerial View
Source: Google Earth
6
Today, WCT employs a staff of 59 administrative, operations and maintenance employees and operates 21
revenue vehicles and 5 support vehicles. Maintaining a state of good repair of WCT’s vehicles is adequate
given the current service levels. Changes in future service repair levels have the potential to create challenges.
The facility’s storage space is insufficient to house the current number of vehicles under cover, necessitating
outdoor storage which reduces the life of the vehicle and creates maintenance challenges during winter
months.
In addition to accommodating the WCT’s building facility, the 73,616 square feet parcel also accommodates
on-site parking (i.e., 48 spaces for staff, drivers, visitors, revenue, and non-revenue vehicle storage, and transit
vehicle circulation). WCT currently allows for one Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) parking space. The
current parking vehicle storage and circulation area is inadequate and in turn creates unsafe conditions for
pedestrians and constrains transit bus circulation.
Facility History
The property located at 1000 W Washington St, Hagerstown, MD, initially operated as an automotive
dealership (Hoffman Chevrolet) until its acquisition by Washington County in 1974. This acquisition initiated
its conversion into a pivotal infrastructure for WCT’s public transportation services. In 1989, the facility
underwent a substantial expansion to augment WCT’s capacity for vehicular storage and maintenance,
addressing the escalating demands of the transit system. A comprehensive renovation was executed in 2009,
primarily targeting the modernization of the administration sector and the enhancement of the maintenance
and vehicle storage areas. This renovation aimed to optimize operational efficiency and improve the aesthetic
appeal for both personnel and visitors. The facility now exemplifies the ongoing dedication to delivering
superior public transportation services within Washington County. Figure 2 is an aerial photo of the dealership
prior to 1972.
7
Figure 2. Hoffman Chevrolet
Source: Kevin Cerrone, Washington County Transit
Since 1989, the physical dimensions of the WCT transit facility have remained constant. However, the service
area has significantly expanded to accommodate a burgeoning population and the increased demand for
public transportation. Ridership has experienced considerable growth, indicative of the community’s reliance
on and confidence in the transit services provided. Furthermore, WCT’s transit vehicle fleet has evolved,
incorporating newer, larger, and more technologically advanced models to better meet passenger needs and
enhance operational efficiency. Figure 3 is a picture interior storage of WCT’s 2022 Eldorado EZ Rider 32’
fixed route buses.
8
Figure 3. WCT Fixed Route Buses
Project Summary
This project determined the existing space constraints and long-term (2050) needs of the current WCT facility.
The study’s space needs analysis was then used to support the proposed facility expansion conceptual design
and site layout requirements --- inclusive of the City of Hagerstown’s Land Management Code and Stormwater
Management Ordinance requirements – and identify any potential environmental impacts using a National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) screening analysis approach. The existing WCT property and facility is highly
constrained given that it does not accommodate the current number of WCT fleet vehicles and administrative
staff, inhibits safe bus circulation, and is entirely impervious. And as previously noted, WCT’s current Five-
Year TDP predicts ridership growth over 30% to year 2030 compared to current ridership levels. This growth
will necessitate the hiring of additional staff and/or the operation of more vehicles, further accentuating the
current facility constraints.
9
For these reasons, WCT, in collaboration with the Hagerstown/Eastern Panhandle Metropolitan Planning
(HEPMPO) and its on-call transportation planning technical consultant, Michael Baker International, Inc.,
conducted this feasibility study to comprehensively evaluate the on-site expansion of its current facility
located at 1000 W Washington St. The study included a Facility Space Needs Assessment (for current
conditions to 2050), an Environmental Screening Analysis, Conceptual Facility Design, Site Plan Layout and
Cost Estimate, Quit-Claim of the alleyway, Financial Analysis and Capital Funding Strategy, and Property
Survey and Lot Consolidation.
Specifically, the study achieved the following objectives:
» Objective #1 – Determine WCT’s facility space needs to the year 2050 (i.e., Direction 2050 Long Range
Transportation Plan) to accommodate administrative office space, vehicle maintenance, vehicle
circulation, vehicle storage areas and parking needs.
» Objective #2 – Perform an inventory of existing environmental screening analysis of site conditions
to identify potential constraints. This will include an evaluation of the City of Hagerstown’s zoning
and stormwater management requirements pursuant to the City of Hagerstown’s Land Management
Code v3.11, Article 4 Zoning and Stormwater Management Chapter 213 of the City Code.
» Objective #3 – Prepare conceptual facility design and site layout alternatives (maximum of 2) to
address the space and operational needs. Conceptual design and site layout will meet current City
International Building Code (IBC) standards and include ADA compliance.
» Objective #4 – Determine a probable cost estimate for the preferred conceptual facility design and
site layout plan and determine the required capital budgeting and programming needs. Sources of
funding, such as FTA competitive and applicable formula grant programs, and other federal, state,
and local sources will be identified.
» Objective #5 – Determine critical path forward to include decisions and timeframes to proceed the
study’s implementation.
10
2 W.C.T. FACILITY SPACE NEEDS
ASSESSMENT
Executive Summary
Washington County Transit has completed this comprehensive Transit Facility Space Needs Assessment to
evaluate and plan for the expansion of its current facility at 1000 W. Washington St, Hagerstown, MD. This
expansion aims to meet the administration and operational needs projected through the year 2050, supported
by WCT’s historic growth and its 5-Year TDP, which anticipates a 34% population growth from 2010 to 2050.
The assessment was conducted as part of the Direction 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan, with the
objective of determining the facility space requirements necessary to accommodate future needs for
administration office space, vehicle maintenance, vehicle circulation, vehicle storage areas, and parking
facilities. This analysis ensures that WCT can enhance its operational efficiency and service delivery to meet
the increasing demands of the community.
The study involved a detailed evaluation of current facilities, projected growth, and future trends in
transportation and infrastructure. The primary objective was to identify the facility space requirements for
WCT, considering projected staffing and service levels, and determining if the current 1000 W. Washington St.
property could accommodate the facility expansion needs, including meeting the City’s zoning and
stormwater management code requirements, and achieving the successful Quit-Claim of the City-owned
alleyway bisecting the property.
This was achieved through a combination of qualitative and quantitative data collection methods. Key
findings indicate that the existing facilities are operating at near full capacity, necessitating expansion to
accommodate future growth. Projections show a need for a 140 % increase in facility space to meet the
demands of a growing population and expanded services by 2050. Space constraints are currently affecting
operational efficiency and safety, including maintenance schedules, vehicle storage and circulation, and
administrative functions, leading to increased operational costs and reduced service reliability. Input from
staff, riders, and community stakeholders underscores the urgent need for expanded and modernized
facilities to improve service quality and meet future needs.
The methodology included structured interviews with key stakeholders, such as Andrew Eshleman
(Washington County Director, Public Works), Shawn Harbaugh (WCT Director/Facility and Fleet Manager), and
11
Matt Mullenax (HEPMPO, Executive Director), that provided in-depth insights into projected needs and
expectations. Quantitative data from current utilization metrics, historical growth trajectories, and future
service demand forecasts were analyzed to model various scenarios. The American Public Transit
Association’s (APTA) Facility Space Needs Calculator (FSNC) was used to convert qualitative and quantitative
data into specific space requirements, ensuring realistic and achievable recommendations. A thorough
walkthrough of the current WCT site identified potential areas for expansion or modification and documented
immediate issues influencing future spatial planning. During the site walkthrough, photographic
documentation of the existing facility environment was systematically compiled and logged in Attachment B.
Comprehensive research and validation analysis of the space program and operating requirements for each
functional area within the proposed facility were also conducted.
The recommendations include the reconfiguration of the existing facility and construction of a new storage
facility and employee parking area to meet projected space needs and achieve the City’s zoning and
stormwater management requirements. Upgrading current facilities with modern infrastructure, including
alternative fueling methods, is essential to enhance operational efficiency and safety. Developing a long-term
strategic plan that aligns facility expansion with projected growth in ridership and service areas, including
phased development to manage costs and minimize service disruptions, is crucial. Exploring funding
opportunities and partnerships with local, state, and federal agencies will support facility expansion and
modernization efforts. By addressing these space needs, WCT will be well-equipped to handle current
demands and future growth, ultimately improving service delivery and operational efficiency.
Needs Assessment
A comprehensive work analysis was conducted with a specific focus on evaluating the administration,
maintenance, and vehicle storage requirements. This analysis entailed a meticulous assessment of the
current infrastructure, identifying deficiencies and areas for enhancement. Additionally, projections were
formulated to anticipate future needs, considering potential growth and shifts in operational dynamics. This
assessment aims to delineate future facility requirements for sustained operational success.
Key areas of focus included the following:
» Administration: Evaluating office spaces, meeting rooms, and administration support areas to ensure
alignment with current and projected staffing requirements. This included assessing the adequacy of
12
workspace configurations, technological infrastructure, and support services to enhance productivity
and accommodate future administration expansions.
» Maintenance: Reviewing maintenance facilities, storage areas, and infrastructure to support ongoing
upkeep and long-term site sustainability. This involved analyzing the capacity and efficiency of
existing maintenance operations, identifying potential bottlenecks, and recommending
improvements to ensure the facility can handle increased maintenance demands and technological
advancements.
» Fleet Storage: Determining the spatial requirements for interior storage of revenue vehicles, non-
revenue vehicles, and vehicle circulation. This included evaluating the current storage capacity,
assessing the need for additional space to accommodate fleet expansion, and ensuring optimal
vehicle circulation to enhance operational efficiency and safety.
The findings from this analysis were pivotal as they outlined the specific requirements necessary for the
project team to make informed decisions regarding the size and scope of the new facility. By defining these
needs, WCT can ensure that the expanded facility will be appropriately sized and equipped to support its
operations both presently and in the future. This comprehensive approach not only addresses immediate
infrastructure needs but also incorporates strategic foresight to adapt to evolving operational demands,
thereby ensuring long-term viability and success.
Quit-Claim for Alleyway No. 1-35
As part of the needs assessment, it was assumed that the Quit-Claim deed to Alleyway No. 1-35 would be
successfully obtained through the City Council approval of Washington County’s Quit Claim application
request. In Section 6 Quit Claim, provides an elaboration of the Quit Claim application process that was
submitted to the on September 4, 2024 (note at the time of this study’s preparation the Quit Claim request is
still pending City approval). Figure 4 is a visual of the Quick-Claim deed request to the applicable portion of
the alleyway.
The alleyway area is integral to the spatial planning and architectural design phases, as the incorporation of
the alleyway into the site plan would facilitate the expansion of critical infrastructure. The additional land area
provided by the alleyway will reduce safety risks by eliminating the no-low visibility of the cross traffic of the
alleyway for vehicles exiting the bus wash, enhance logistical efficiency by optimizing bus storage with
13
universal parking, designated space for interior circulation, the elimination for Line Service Attendants to have
a CDL, and thereby improving overall required operational site space needs.
Obtainment of the Quit-Claim deed to the alleyway is essential for aligning the facility’s operational
capabilities with both current and projected future demands. If the Quit-Claim deed is not obtained, then this
would necessitate an additional 10-foot setback along the northern lot’s alleyway. This setback will result in
a significant reduction of available fleet vehicle storage capacity and introduce further operational challenges
for WCT.
Figure 4. Quit-Claim Area of Alleyway No. 1-35
Current to Future Comparison
The collected data was pivotal in conducting a comprehensive analysis of current facility requirements,
identifying potential areas for expansion, and making informed decisions regarding spatial calculations. This
information is essential for understanding the evolving facility needs of WCT and for strategizing future
initiatives that align with their projected growth.
14
The data was meticulously analyzed to address the following key questions:
» Does WCT’s current facility adequately meet their operational requirements?
» What are the spatial requirements to accommodate WCT’s projected growth?
Utilizing the collected data, insights from interviews, and the APTA FSNC, the assessment team developed
theoretical floor plan layouts to ascertain the spatial requirements. Table 1 itemizes WCT’s current spatial
allocation against its projected requirements.
Table 1. WCT Space Needs Assessment
Use Current Sq. Ft. Need Sq. Ft. Current Needs Met
Administration 2,314 5,230 Needs Not Met
Maintenance 5,191 6,882 Needs Not Met
Interior Vehicle Storage 7,715 24,458 Needs Not Met
Total Building 15,220 36,570 Needs Not Met
Vehicle Parking ~48 spaces* 27 / 36
spaces** Needs Met
Stormwater Management 0 8,000 SF Needs Not Met
*Number of existing physical spaces.
** Number of spaces required (27) per the City’s Land Management Code (LMC) Article 4 Zoning requirements for
parking / Number of physical spaces to be provided as part of the proposed expansion.
Table 2 presents a detailed breakdown of the facility’s administration, maintenance, and storage areas, both
for the current year and projected for 2050. Accompanying this table, Figure 5 offers a current visual
representation, while Figure 6 provides a future visual depiction of the facility.
Table 2. Facility Breakdown
Use Current Sq. Ft. Year 2050 Sq. Ft.
Administration 2,134 5,230
Maintenance 5,191 6,882
Interior Vehicle Storage 7,715 24,458
15
Figure 5. Current Facility Space
16
Figure 6. 2050 Facility Space
The results of the assessment, when contrasted with the current facility’s capabilities, reveal that the existing
infrastructure is insufficient to meet the anticipated operational and spatial requirements projected for the
year 2050. This discrepancy underscores the necessity for strategic upgrades and expansions to ensure that
the facility can accommodate future demands, advancements, and increased capacity needs.
Current Circulation and Operations
ADMINISTRATION
The current administration area (delineated in yellow) in Figure 5 has reached its maximum capacity with all
offices and workspaces currently occupied. Any increase in staff or services would necessitate the sharing
of offices and workspaces. Furthermore, this area lacks adequate workflow circulation, and the alignment of
workspaces is suboptimal. The dispatch office is located within this area, posing a risk as all employees have
access to freely walk about the building.
17
Table 3 delineates all the administration working areas. Table 4 enumerates all full-time and part-time
employees utilizing this area.
Table 3. Administration Work Area
Area Room Dimension Size Sq Ft. Area Notes
Lobby 100 15' X 14' 210 Administration
Restroom 101 5' X 7' 35 Administration ADA Gender Neutral Public
Restroom
Copy/Storage 102 18' X 10' 180 Administration
Hallway 103 22’ x 4’ 88 Administration Administration
Restroom 104 4' X 4' 16 Administration Women's Restroom
Kitchenet 105 8' X 7' 56 Administration
Restroom 106 4' X 4' 16 Administration Men's Restroom
Office 107 10' X 10' 100 Administration Operation Supervisor
Office 108 10' X 14' 140 Administration Fiscal Technician
Office 110 8' X 10' 80 Administration Training Room
Office 129 12' X 11' 132 Administration Communication Specialist
Office 131 10' X 12' 120 Administration Communication and Outreach
Manager
Office 132 10' X 8' 80 Administration Communication Specialist
Office 109B 10' X 16' 160 Administration Directors
Conference
Room 109A 14' X 17' 238 Administration
Hallway 111 4' X 10 ' 40 Administration Administration - Maintenance
Break Room 130 18' X 14' 252 Administration Drivers Lounge
Other 191 Administration Hallways, Wall space,
Miscellaneous
Total 2,134
18
Table 4. Administration Area Employee Count
Use Full-time Part-time Total
Administration 6 0 6
Operations 8 31 39
Total 14 33 45
MAINTENANCE
The current maintenance area (delineated in orange) in Figure 5 has reached its maximum capacity in terms
of office space, workspaces, storage, and parts areas. The maintenance department currently lacks additional
office space to accommodate future personnel. The facility is equipped with only two fully operational repair
bays, each with inherent limitations. Furthermore, the maintenance department faces constrained storage
capacity for equipment and tools, necessitating the use of portions of the repair b ays for storage purposes.
Table 5 delineates all the maintenance working areas.
Table 5. Maintenance Working Area
Area Room Dimension Sq. Ft. Area Notes
Parts Room 112 23' X 8' 184 Maintenance Parts Storage
Parts Storage Lower 32' X 8' 256 Maintenance Parts Storage
Repair Bay 113 48' X 16' 768 Maintenance Large Repair Bay (Primary)
Repair Bay 115 48' X 17' 816 Maintenance Large Repair Bay (Primary)
Office 114 10' X 22' 220 Maintenance Fleet and Facility Manager
Storage Area 116 13' X 15' 195 Maintenance Equipment Storage
Restroom 117 14' X 6' 84 Maintenance Gender Neutral Restroom and
Shower
Fire/Sprinkler
Room 122/133 14' X 7' 98 Maintenance Rooms Merged Together
Hallway 123 14' X 4' 56 Maintenance Maintenance - Bus Storage
Locker Room 124 10' X 8' 80 Maintenance Operator/Maintenance Lockers
Repair Bay 125 16' X 40' 640 Maintenance Repair Bay
Restroom 126 6' X 6' 36 Maintenance Operator/Maintenance Gender
Neutral Restroom
19
Area Room Dimension Sq. Ft. Area Notes
Restroom 127 6' X 6' 36 Maintenance Operator/Maintenance Gender
Neutral Restroom
Office 128 12' X 8' 96 Maintenance Line Service Attendant Office
Other 1,630 Maintenance Other Storage Areas, Walkways, Wall
Space
Total 5,195
Washington County Transit is currently encountering difficulties in recruiting Line Service Attendants due to
the requirement for candidates to possess a Commercial Driver’s License (CDL), necessitated by the need to
traverse the alley between parcels. This stipulation significantly restricts the candidate pool, complicating the
recruitment process. A successful Quit Claim would preclude the CDL requirement, as vehicles would no
longer need to exit the property. This modification would streamline the hiring process, enabling WCT to
attract a broader spectrum of candidates and fill positions more efficiently. Additionally, it would reduce the
costs associated with CDL training and certification, resulting in further operational savings.
The existing bus wash system is constrained by its design as a portable, walk-around unit rather than a
conventional drive-through system. This battery-operated apparatus can only service a limited number of
vehicles and requires over eight hours to recharge. Furthermore, the water supply necessitates continuous
refilling, presenting an additional challenge. These limitations substantially impact the efficiency and
effectiveness of vehicle maintenance operations. The prolonged charging time and frequent water refills lead
to extended downtime, thereby reducing the number of vehicles that can be serviced within a given timeframe.
This not only affects the cleanliness and upkeep of the fleet but also has potential implications for vehicle
longevity and public perception.
Currently, only diesel-powered vehicles can be refueled onsite. However, the fueling station’s location within
the paratransit vehicle parking and employee parking area poses significant challenges. This arrangement
can lead to congestion and potential safety hazards, as well as disrupt the workflow and accessibility for both
paratransit operations and staff. The future facility will need to have the capability to support and
accommodate alternative fuels for WCT future fleet transition.
20
FLEET VEHICLE STORAGE
Due to current constraints in vehicle storage capacity (delineated in blue) in Figure 5, only fixed-route vehicles
are accommodated indoors, while all paratransit and non-revenue vehicles are stored externally. Ideally, all
fleet vehicles, irrespective of their revenue-generating status, should be housed indoors. Indoor storage is
advantageous as it preserves the vehicles by shielding them from continuous exposure to environmental
elements, provides a secure environment to mitigate theft and damage, and ensures a safe, well-illuminated
area for vehicle access. Table 6 delineates the current interior storage area and Table 7 identifies the location
where each fleet vehicle is stored.
Table 6. Current Interior Storage
Area Mode Sq. Ft.
Storage 1 Fixed Route 3,720
Storage 2 Fixed Route 3,995
Total 7,715
Table 7. Storage Location
ID Mode Length FT Year Make Model Storage
713 Fixed Route 30 2015 Eldorado Passport Interior
714 Fixed Route 30 2015 Eldorado Passport Interior
715 Fixed Route 30 2021 Eldorado Passport Interior
716 Fixed Route 30 2021 Eldorado Passport Interior
717 Fixed Route 30 2021 Eldorado Passport Interior
718 Fixed Route 30 2021 Eldorado Passport Interior
719 Fixed Route 30 2021 Eldorado Passport Interior
720 Fixed Route 30 2021 Eldorado Passport Interior
801 Fixed Route 32 2022 Eldorado EZ-Rider Interior
802 Fixed Route 32 2022 Eldorado EZ-Rider Interior
803 Fixed Route 32 2022 Eldorado EZ-Rider Interior
804 Fixed Route 32 2022 Eldorado EZ-Rider Interior
21
805 Fixed Route 32 2022 Eldorado EZ-Rider Interior
505 Paratransit 21 2015 Chevy 3500 Exterior
506 Paratransit 22 2017 Ford E-350 Exterior
507 Paratransit 22 2017 Ford E-350 Exterior
508 Paratransit 23 2021 Ford E-450 Exterior
509 Paratransit 23 2017 Ford E-450 Exterior
510 Paratransit 23 2017 Ford E-450 Exterior
205 Paratransit 16 2019 Ford Transit Exterior
206 Paratransit 16 2019 Ford Transit Exterior
T-1 Non-Revenue 16 2005 Chevy Silverado Exterior
S-1 Non-Revenue 15 2008 Chevy Uplander Exterior
S-3 Non-Revenue 15 2022 Chevy Equinox Exterior
S-4 Non-Revenue 15 2024 Chevy Malibu Exterior
S-5 Non-Revenue 15 2024 Chevy Malibu Exterior
Space Program and Operating Needs Requirements
ADMINISTRATION
The proposed administration area expansion and reconfiguration (delineated in yellow) in Figure 6 will
encompass ADA upgrades and designated spaces for cubicles, workstations, restrooms, nursing room,
breakroom, conference rooms, meeting rooms, and a training room. These spaces are designed to support
the administration functions of the transit system, providing comfortable, efficient, and accommodating
environment for staff to perform their duties. The breakroom includes a kitchen, computer workstations,
restrooms, mailboxes, communication boards, and material storage areas. The lounge serves as a
multifunctional space for all staff, offering a place to rest, collaborate, and access essential resources.
Lockers and restrooms ensure personal belongings are secure and staff have access to necessary facilities.
The nursing room supports staff with nursing needs, and computer workstations enable administration tasks
and communication.
Table 8 provides a proposed detailed breakdown of the administration area. Table 9 enumerates all full-time
and part-time employees utilizing this area.
22
Table 8. Administration Area
Area Room Size Sq.
Ft. Department Title/Function
Large Office 109B 180 Administration Director
Small Office 108 100 Administration Fiscal Technician
Small Office 129 95 Administration Communication Specialist
Small Office 132 95 Administration Communication Specialist
Small Office 131 100 Administration Communication & Outreach Manager
Small Office 107 100 Administration Operations Supervisor
Small Office 153 100 Administration Safety and Training Coordinator
Small Office 150 95 Administration Meeting/Interview Room
Small Office 151 100 Administration Expansion
Small Office 152 100 Administration Expansion
Small Office 154 100 Administration Expansion
Large Storage Room 180 350 Administration File Storage
Conference Room 109 400 Administration Conference Room
Training Room 110 200 Administration Training Room
Restroom 101 35 Administration ADA Gender Neutral Public Restroom
Restroom 104 16 Administration Gender Neutral Restroom
Restroom 106 16 Administration Gender Neutral Restroom
Restroom 126 36 Administration Operator/Maintenance Gender Neutral
Restroom
Restroom 127 36 Administration Operator/Maintenance Gender Neutral
Restroom
Copy & Supply 161 40 Administration Copy Room
Nursing Room 160 80 Administration Private Room
Phone/Computer 140 50 Administration Employee Room
Vault 190 100 Administration Vault, Safe, and Counting Room
IT Utility Room 191 150 Administration Utility Room
Nook 170 140 Administration Counter, Sink, Microwave
Employee Lounge 300 450 Administration Kitchenette, Tables, Quiet Room, TV, Mailboxes
23
Area Room Size Sq.
Ft. Department Title/Function
Office 128 120 Administration Line Service Attendant Office
Small Storage Room 200 100 Administration Lost and found
Fire/Sprinkler Room 122/123 98 Administration Rooms Merged
Restroom 117 84 Administration Gender Neutral Restroom and Shower
Locker Room 124 100 Administration Operator/Maintenance Lockers
Hallway 103 300 Administration Hallway
Hallway 111 140 Administration Hallway
Hallway New 104 Administration Left Side N/S
Hallway New 240 Administration Service to Lounge
Vestibule/Hallway 100 200 Administration Vestibule/Hallway
Hallway New 80 Administration Bathroom Shower Hallway
Other 400 Administration Space Adjusting
Total 5,230
Table 9. Administration Area Employee Count
Use Full-time Part-time Total
Administration 7 2 9
Operators 8 38 46
Total 15 40 55
MAINTENANCE
The proposed maintenance area expansion and reconfiguration (delineated in orange) in Figure 6 will
encompass designated spaces for service bays, parts storage, wash systems, administration offices,
functional equipment placement, equipment storage, restrooms, and showers. The service bays are outfitted
for vehicle maintenance and repairs, ensuring the fleet remains in optimal condition. Parts storage and wash
systems are critical for maintaining vehicle performance and cleanliness. Administration offices within this
area facilitate maintenance management, while equipment storage ensures all necessary tools and materials
24
are readily accessible. Restrooms and showers provide essential facilities for maintenance personnel. Table
10 provides a proposed detailed breakdown of the maintenance area.
Table 10. Maintenance Area
Area Room Size Sq. Ft. Department Title/Function
Large Office 210 150 Maintenance Fleet and Facility Manager
Small Office 100 100 Maintenance Service Coordinator
Large Bay 201 900 Maintenance All Vehicles All Repairs
Large Bay 202 900 Maintenance All Vehicles All Repairs
Large Bay 203 900 Maintenance All Vehicles All Repairs
Storage 220 700 Maintenance Equipment Storage
Fluid Room 230 150 Maintenance Bulk Fluid
Storage 250 500 Maintenance Parts Storage
Tire Area 240 500 Maintenance Tire Repair
Bus Wash 1,612 Maintenance Bus Wash
Hallway/Walkway/Delivery 470 Maintenance
Total 6,882
Maintenance bay counts are derived from the FSNC, which projects the total future vehicle inventory,
segmented by vehicle dimensions and service modes. Table 11 provides a detailed analysis of the WCT’s fleet
projected composition, while Table 12 specifies the square footage of the universal maintenance bays and
the corresponding fuel lane requirements.
Table 11. Fleet Breakdown
Vehicle Type Total
Fixed Route 15
Paratransit 12
Non-Revenue 6
Total 33
25
Table 12. Maintenance Bay and Fuel Lane Requirement
Item Quantity Size Sq. Ft. Total
Maintenance Bays 3 900 2,700
Fuel Lane 1 5,000 5,000
Implementing onsite fueling is crucial and offers significant cost-saving potential for WCT. By negotiating fuel
prices with a vendor, WCT can secure a reduced rate compared to standard pump prices, resulting in
substantial financial savings over time. Currently, 42% of the fleet operates on gasoline, while 58% utilizes
diesel. Among revenue vehicles, 33% use gasoline and 67% use diesel. It is recommended to utilize a fuel
tank with capacities of 2,000 gallons for gasoline and 10,000 gallons for diesel. This capacity would
accommodate weekly refills and provide a buffer period in case of scheduling delays or delivery issues.
An onsite fueling station and management system not only ensure a steady supply of gasoline but also
enhance operational efficiency by reducing downtime associated with offsite refueling. The onsite fueling
system can improve fleet management by enabling better monitoring and control of fuel usage, leading to
more accurate budgeting and forecasting, as well as the implementation of fuel-saving strategies. Overall,
investing in an onsite and modern fueling system is a strategic move that supports WCT’s operational
objectives and financial health, and increases WCT’s commitment to environmental sustainability.
The facility will need to have the capability to support future
alternative fueling methods, including the infrastructure
necessary for electric vehicle (EV) charging stations,
compressed natural gas, hydrogen fueling stations, or other
sustainable energy sources. The facility must have the capability
to support at least one of these alternatives fueling methods if
selected, ensuring the WCT system remains environmentally
friendly and future-ready, and aligning with the Maryland
Department of Transportation (MDOT) Zero Emissions and FTA’s
Low or No Emissions Program goals.
26
A stationary bus wash, equipped with a chassis wash, capable of servicing both paratransit-sized vehicles
and fixed-route buses, is essential for WCT’s operations and maintenance needs. Implementing a
comprehensive wash system will prevent early vehicle deterioration by removing corrosive substances and
debris, thereby extending the lifespan of the WCT fleet. A traditional drive-through wash system would allow
for continuous operation, servicing a higher volume of vehicles with greater consistency. A state-of-the-art
wash system should also incorporate water recycling technology. This not only aligns with WCT’s
environmental sustainability goals by reducing water consumption but also results in significant cost savings
over time. By having a proper wash system, this will enhance operational efficiency, improve vehicle
maintenance standards, and project a more professional image to the public. It would also contribute to the
overall longevity and performance of the fleet, ensuring that the vehicles remain in optimal condition and
continue to provide reliable service to the community.
FLEET VEHICLE STORAGE
The proposed new 21,300 sq. ft. fleet vehicle storage space area expansion (delineated in blue) in Figure 6
will encompass designated spaces for the storage of both revenue-generating and non-revenue vehicles.
Within this new storage facility, vehicles will be systematically arranged in lines and parked in a nose-to-tail
configuration to optimize spatial efficiency. The vehicle storage aisles will require the width for operators to
perform a proper pre-trip allowing for the space to deploy the vehicle lift. The storage facility is engineered to
shield vehicles from environmental elements and ensure they are readily accessible for dispatch and
maintenance operations. Table 13 delineates the spatial requirements for vehicle storage, derived from the
APTA FSNC. Additionally, Table 14 provides a detailed breakdown of the projected fleet vehicles by size.
Table 13. Vehicle Storage Requirements
Storage Mode Size Sq. Ft.
Fixed Route 12,000
Paratransit 7,500
Non-Revenue 1,800
Total 21,300
27
Table 14. Vehicle Length Breakdown
Length 15 FT 16 FT 21 FT 22 FT 23 FT 30 FT 32 FT
Fixed Route 8 7
Paratransit 6 1 2 3
Non-Revenue 4 2
PARKING
The proposed parking area expansion and reconfiguration will encompass designated spaces for the parking
of employee and visitor vehicles. The parking area is strategically positioned to provide convenient access to
the facility while ensuring the safety and security of vehicles.
The parking allocation is calculated based on the City of Hagerstown’s Land Management Code v3.11, Article
4: Zoning Ordinance, O. Off-Street Parking Requirements, 4. Required Number of Parking Spaces as follows:
• Office building: One space per 200 square feet of net floor area
• Transportation terminals (trucking, etc.): One space per main shift employee.
Table 15 details the net office space, Table 16 specifies the peak main shift employees, and Table 17 provides
a count for all parking spaces.
Table 15. Net Office Space
Area Room Size Sq. Ft. Department Title/Function
Large Office 109B 180 Administration Director
Small Office 108 100 Administration Fiscal Technician
Small Office 129 95 Administration Communication Specialist
Small Office 132 95 Administration Communication Specialist
Small Office 131 100 Administration Communication & Outreach Manager
Small Office 107 100 Administration Operations Supervisor
Small Office 153 100 Administration Safety and Training Coordinator
Small Office 150 95 Administration Meeting/Interview Room
28
Area Room Size Sq. Ft. Department Title/Function
Small Office 151 100 Administration Expansion
Small Office 152 100 Administration Expansion
Small Office 154 100 Administration Expansion
Large Office 210 150 Maintenance Fleet and Facility Manager
Small Office 100 100 Maintenance Service Coordinator
Total Rounded Up 1,600 = 8 parking spaces
Table 16. Peak Main Shift Employees
Table 17. Total Parking Spaces
Code Category Spaces Needed
Peak Main Shift Employees 19
Office Space Sq ft / 200 Sq Ft 8
Total 27
Position/Time 0500 0530 0600 0630 0700 0730 0800 0830 0900 0930 1000 1030 1100 1130 1200 1230 1300 1330 1400 1430 1500 1530 1600 1630 1700 1730 1800 1830 1900 1930 2000 2030 2100 2130
0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
13 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
16 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
17 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
18 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Para-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Para-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Para-2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Para-2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
JOBS-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
JOBS-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
JOBS-2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
JOBS-2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Mechanic 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Mechanic 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Service Cord 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Maint. Worker 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
LSA - F/T 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
LSA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
LSA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
LSA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Total 2 10 12 14 15 15 17 18 19 18 18 18 18 18 18 16 15 17 15 18 14 15 15 15 15 15 12 9 4 4 4 4 3 2
29
NEEDS ANALYSIS CONCLUSION
After a thorough analysis of Washington County Transit’s current and projected operational needs, it is evident
that a larger facility is imperative to support the organization’s growth and enhance service delivery.
Expanding the administration space is crucial to accommodate additional staff and streamline administrative
functions. Furthermore, a comprehensive storage facility is essential to securely house all transit vehicles,
protecting them from environmental elements, ensuring they are readily accessible for deployment, extending
the lifespan of the vehicles, and increasing WCT’s overall operational safety. Additionally, the inclusion of a
maintenance area with ample storage and three repair bays is vital for the efficient servicing of the fleet,
minimizing downtime and extending the lifespan of the vehicles. This strategic expansion will enable WCT to
meet current demands and future operations, thereby ensuring continued excellence in transit services for
the community.
3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING NEEDS
The environmental screening conducted on the WCT property and the following findings do not fulfill
requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), but rather are intended to highlight the
NEPA environmental subject areas that will require further investigation through the project’s engineering and
design phase (assuming federal funds will be used in the design and/or construction phase) . Should the
project progress, the appropriate coordination must occur with state and federal agencies as indicated
throughout this document.
Environmental Screening
The environmental screening process relied on field views and desktop research of online data sources to
provide the necessary site context for each of the following topics. No outside agency coordination was
conducted for this study. The location of environmental resources identified within or adjacent to the project
area can be found on the Environmental Resources Map included as Attachment C.
LAND USE & ZONING
Existing land use types in the area are mixed, consisting of commercial, transportation, and residential uses.
The WCT facility property is located within a mixed-use area, consisting of residential uses and commercial
businesses such as, an automobile garage, a gas station and convenience store connecting to a Salon and
Barber shop, as well as other non-residential uses, including the adjacent Jehovah’s Witnesses church
30
property. The WCT parcel consists of the administrative building, indoor vehicle storage, a vehicle
maintenance building, paved parking/bus circulation, and a bus wash bay. Prior to 1972, the WCT parcel was
originally a Chevrolet Dealership. The southern lot housed the main building and customer parking, while the
northern lot was used to store the majority of the vehicles for sale.
According to the City of Hagerstown’s Land Management Code (LMC), Article 4 Zoning, the WCT property
zoned Commercial – General (CG), which is to provide locations for businesses of a general nature to serve
the community. According to the City Engineering and Planning Departments, the WCT transit facility use of
the property is a conforming permitted use under the LMC. In addition to the meeting the LMC’s off-street
parking requirements, the proposed expansion will also need to conform to the CG’s applicable maximum bulk
and area requirements specified as follows:
» Setbacks:
o Front = 15 ft.
o Rear = 30 ft.
o Side = 20 ft. (25 ft. when adjoining a residential district)
» All Public Street Frontages Are Front Yards. On corner lots and through lots, all sides of a lot adjacent
to streets shall be considered front yards, but only the side of the lot opposite the frontage of the
building shall be considered the rear yard.
o Height: 60 ft.
CITY STORMWATER
Washington County Transit prepared a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for their facility previously on
May 1, 2023. This document details the facility’s discharge of BOD (Biochemical Oxygen Demand), non-tidal
bacteria, nutrients such as phosphorous, and sediment into Antietam Creek. Potential pollutants include
activities such as transit vehicle fueling and maintenance, as well as potential leaks from tanks #1-#5 that
are tied to either city sewer or to a sample location. WCT has enacted stormwater control measures to address
these issues. These include BMPs (Best Management Practice) such as materials storage for waste,
minimizing drips and debris of vehicles in storage, and storage of motor oils and fluids in the vehicle and
equipment maintenance areas. WCT also has detailed spill response procedures in place to address minor or
major discharge and resulting waste disposal.
31
The City of Hagerstown’s Stormwater Management regulations specified under Chapter 213 of the City Code
apply to the WCT facility expansion project. Discussions with the City Engineer confirmed that the § 213-9
Redevelopment standards including those listed below, will specifically apply.
» § 213-9 B.(1) Reduce impervious area within the limit of disturbance (LOD) by at least 50% according
to the Design Manual;
» § 213-9 B.(2) Implement ESD to the MEP to provide water quality treatment for at least 50% of the
existing impervious area within the LOD; or
» § 213-9 B.(3) Use a combination of Subsection B(1) and (2) of this section for at least 50% of the
existing site impervious area.
» § 213-9 C. Alternative stormwater management measures may be used to meet the requirements in
Subsection B of this section if the owner/developer satisfactorily demonstrates to the City Engineer
that impervious area reduction has been maximized and ESD has been implemented to the MEP.
» § 213-9 D. The City may develop separate policies for providing water quality treatment for
redevelopment projects if the requirements of Subsections A and B of this section cannot be met.
HAZARDOUS WASTE
The United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (U. S. EPA) NEPAssist Tool was queried to identify
potential sources of hazardous materials releases within the project study area. No Superfund, Brownfields,
or Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) facilities under the jurisdiction of the EPA were identified within the study
area.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information (RCRAInfo) properties were also reviewed. According
to the U.S. EPA, the “RCRAInfo system enables cradle-to-grave waste tracking of many types of information
regarding the regulated universe of RCRA hazardous waste handlers. RCRAInfo characterizes facility status,
regulated activities, and compliance histories in addition to capturing detailed data on the generation of
hazardous waste from large quantity generators and on waste management practices from treatment,
storage, and disposal facilities.” These facilities have the potential to be an environmental concern for the
Subject Parcel through the migration of soil and groundwater contaminants during leaks or spills. One
RCRAInfo property, a very small quantity generator, is located approximately 0.10 miles south of the project
area, along Concord Street at Coderman’s Auto Body. This location is also a site of air pollution concern,
32
described as a General Automotive Repair with minor emissions of total particulate matter, metal hap, and
volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Another site of air pollution concern, Amoco, is located approximately
0.05 miles from the facility, along West Washington Street to the west. This location is described as a Gasoline
Service Station with minor emissions of total particulate matter. There are no other hazardous waste sites
within 0.25 miles of the project area (Attachment C).
Hazardous waste facilities are mapped on the Environmental Resources Map in Attachment C to provide a
general sense of where some hazardous materials facilities are located in the vicinity of the project area.
However, these databases are not wholly inclusive of hazardous materials facilities, and some hazardous
contaminants are capable of migrating significant distances. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA)
would consider hazards in much greater detail (note the Environmental Screening process confirmed no
previously recorded or knowledge of a Phase I ESA for the WCT property).
SECTION 106
Aboveground Properties
A review of the Maryland Historical Trust’s Cultural Resources Information System, Medusa, identified no
previously recorded, historic-age (50 years of age or older) aboveground properties within or surrounding the
subject parcels. The surrounding parcels contain a mixture of late-nineteenth century through mid-twentieth
century housing, early-to-mid-twentieth century commercial buildings, and an early-twentieth century former
school building.
An architectural survey is recommended to determine if historic properties are present within the project’s
area of potential effects.
Archaeological Sites
A review of Medusa found no previously recorded archaeological sites or archaeological investigations on or
adjacent to the subject parcels. There have been five previous archaeological surveys and there are five
previously recorded archaeological sites within one mile of the subject parcels. These resources are located
within the Hagerstown Historic District and the Hagerstown City Park Historic District and include Pre-Contact
Native American resources and nineteenth and twentieth century historic occupations in downtown
Hagerstown.
Historic maps, atlases, and aerial photography from the early 1900s through present-day indicate that the
subject parcels were not developed until the early 1950s and the commercial use of the parcels appears to
33
have been unchanged since then. Prior to the 1950s this area was outside the historically developed
downtown and was likely in agricultural use.
The potential for Pre-Contact archaeological resources on the subject parcel is considered low due to its
location away from available water sources and because of the development of the parcel in the 1950s.
Similarly, the archaeological potential for historic period resources is low because this immediate location
does not appear to have been occupied prior to the 1950s.
WATER RESOURCES
Waterways
A cursory review of Maryland’s Environmental Resource and Land Information Network (MERLIN) did not
identify any waterways within 0.25 miles of the project study area.
Wetlands
A cursory review of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) did not
identify any wetlands within the project study area.
A review of the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey for the project area and
surrounding area identified soils as non-hydric, Urban land. The NWI Map and hydric rating soils map are both
included in Attachment D. A desktop review of topographic mapping and aerial imagery by Michael Baker
wetland staff determined that there is no potential for wetlands to occur within the boundaries of the project
area.
Floodplains
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has mapped the project study area on Flood Insurance
Map 24043C0138D, effective August 15, 2017. According to the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map, the study
area is mapped within Zone X (Area of Minimal Flood Hazard). A FEMA FIRMette is included within
Attachment E.
34
RECREATIONAL RESOURCES
Databases were queried to identify recreational resources within the vicinity of the study area. These websites
included MERLIN, the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR)’s website, DNR’s Maryland Trail Atlas,
the State of Maryland’s Recreation Atlas, and aerial imagery.
There are several recreational resources in the project vicinity. Hellane Park is a city-owned recreational park
located about 0.14 miles northwest of the project area. This park is home to the West End Little League and
Hagerstown Colt League’s baseball fields, as well as being used by locals for its bike paths and playground
equipment. Additionally, National Road Park is another city-owned recreational park designed by
neighborhood residents to honor Maryland’s National Road history and to provide an innovative play area for
children. This park is located about 0.22 miles east of the project area, along West Washington Street.
No protected federal lands, state game lands, state forests, or recreational trails were identified in the project
vicinity.
Section 4(f) and Section 6(f) Resources
Below is a summary of each recreational resource’s Section 4(f) or Section 6(f) status.
• Hellane Park is an outdoor recreational venue owned by the City of Hagerstown. This park may qualify
as a Section 4(f) resource.
• National Road Park is a small park owned by the City of Hagerstown. This park may qualify as a
Section 4(f) resource.
No other protected federal lands, state game lands, state forests, conservancies, Rails to Trails, or
recreational trails were identified within the study area. Likewise, no properties receiving Land and Water
Conservation Fund grants were identified within 0.25 miles of the study area.
The distance between the proposed project area and the identified recreational resources is great enough that
the project will likely not result in a Section 4(f) use.
THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
A threatened and endangered species assessment was completed for the WCT facility and immediate
surrounding area using the online US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and
Conservation (IPaC) tool. IPaC is a project planning tool which streamlines the USFWS environmental review
35
process by providing an official species list containing a list of species and critical habitat that should be
considered under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. A response from the USFWS dated September 3,
2024, details the results of the assessment (Attachment F). The results indicate potential impacts to a
candidate species, the Monarch Butterfly (Danaus plexipus). However, no critical habitats were found to exist
within the designated project area. Further coordination with the USFWS is required through submission of a
project review request to the local Maryland Fish and Wildlife Service Field Office.
Additionally, seven migratory birds of conservation concern are expected to occur or may be affected by
project activities at this location, including Bald Eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and Golden Eagles (Aquila
chrysaetos). These species are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act. Activities for this project are unlikely to affect the listed species in the project area. However,
if the presence of migratory birds is confirmed in the project location, then the local Maryland Fish and Wildlife
Service Field Office should be contacted to assist with implementing proper conservation measures to avoid
or minimize potential impacts.
Official species lists obtained from IPaC are valid for 90 days. After 90 days, project proponents should
confirm their results by requesting an updated official species list for their project in IPaC.
NEPA DOCUMENTATION
If the proposed project plans to receive federal funding through the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the
project is subject to NEPA, Section 106 (36 CFR PART 800), and Section 4(f) (36 CFR 59.3) requirements. It is
likely that the proposed work will fall under the Categorical Exclusions (CE) identified in Title 23 Chapter I,
Part 771, subsections § 771.116, § 771.117, and § 771.118. Coordination should be initiated with the state
and/or federal funding agency(ies) to discuss environmental documentation requirements. If FTA funding is
applicable, then FTA’s CE Worksheet is the anticipated document type.
OTHER PERMITTING
Additional environmental permits regulated by Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10
of the Rivers and Harbors Act will likely not be required for impacts to wetlands, waterways, and floodways,
or for installation of new outfalls. As the project progresses, early coordination with applicable federal, state,
and local agencies is recommended to ensure the appropriate permit(s) and types of permit(s) are selected
for the project.
36
Recommendations
Based on the cursory desktop environmental screening, this study recommends the following as project
design progresses:
1. The project team should consider conducting a Phase I ESA to determine if further action is in order.
Communications with Washington County and WCT staff confirmed that a Phase I ESA was not
previously performed for the property.
2. An architectural survey is recommended to determine if historic properties are present within the
project’s area of potential effects.
3. The results of an online IPaC query indicate potential impacts to a candidate species, the Monarch
Butterfly (Danaus plexipus), under the jurisdiction of the USFWS. The project team should coordinate
with the USFWS through submission of a project review request to the local Maryland Fish and Wildlife
Service Field Office.
4. Coordination should be initiated with the state and/or federal funding agency(ies) to discuss
environmental documentation requirements. If FTA funding is applicable, then FTA’s CE Worksheet is
the anticipated document type.
5. Early coordination with applicable federal, state, and local agencies is recommended to ensure the
appropriate permit(s) and types of permit(s) are selected for the project.
37
4 CONCEPTUAL FACILITY DESIGN AND SITE
PLAN LAYOUT
Initial Site Concepts
Working with WCT management, HEPMPO, Maryland Transit Association (MTA), and Hagerstown City staff,
Michael Baker created a design concept that would address administration, maintenance, storage needs,
ensure ADA compliance, and meet City of Hagerstown Code requirements.
It was determined that expanding the current facility to their northern parcel and conducting a Quit-Claim for
the portion of Alleyway No. 1-35 bisecting the property. Doing so would allow the property to be designed as
one continuous parcel optimizing and maximizing the current building footprint and defined setbacks. Based
on this design the consultant team created a design scheme that focused on the feasibility of expanding the
facility northward. Other considerations in the development of these schemes include:
» Allowing WCT to maximize its current facility footprint without having to rebuild parts of the facility.
» Allowing WCT the continue to operate at the current level and build in phases without disrupting the
daily day-to-day operations.
» Eliminating the safety concerns of vehicles traveling in the alley for transit vehicles leaving the facility
and crossing over the alleyway.
» Eliminating the need for LSA’s to have a commercial driver's license.
» Accommodating inside storage of all WCT fleet vehicles.
» Including program space for additional administration space for expansion and workspaces to
include a large conference room and adequate training area.
» Supporting future needs for alternative energy/fuels.
» Providing for a modern and expanded gasoline and diesel fueling and storage.
» Streamlining servicing vehicles and reduce additional circulation.
38
Design Scheme Site Layout
The proposed WCT facility expansion design scheme illustrated in Figure 7 will fully utilize the existing ~1.7-
acre lot owned by Washington County, as well as the additional alleyway. The administration building will
remain in its current location and expand into the existing maintenance area. The maintenance operations
will be relocated to the current fixed-route vehicle storage area. The bus wash facility will remain unchanged
but will incorporate a stationary bus wash system. Fleet vehicle storage will be situated in the current overflow
parking lot and will be connected to the maintenance department. Employee parking will also be located in
the current overflow parking lot.
A significant concern with this scheme is the necessity of acquiring the alleyway through a Quit-Claim deed.
If the Quit-Claim is denied by the City Council, this scheme will be unfeasible, rendering the proposed plans
inoperative. However, after consultations with the Planning Commission and City Council, it has been
determined that the Quit-Claim is feasible under specific conditions, allowing for the advancement of transit
infrastructure in Hagerstown and Washington County.
39
Figure 7. Site Layout
40
5 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS AND CAPITAL
FUNDING STRATEGY
Cost Estimation
A probable cost estimate of the sketch-level design concepts for the proposed WCT facility expansion was
developed and is itemized in Table 18. The probable cost estimate was calculated using construction industry
standards and procedures based on the parameters shown in Table 18. The probable cost estimate was
prepared to assist WCT with programming the project into its capital improvements plan and to begin
developing a capital budgeting strategy to achieve the project.
Table 18. WCT Facility Expansion Probable Cost Estimate
Element GSF NSF Cost Subtotal
Administration 5,230 2,916 $ 307/ sf $ 895,212
Maintenance 6,882 1,691 $ 319/ sf $ 539,429
Interior Vehicle Storage (structure to
support alternative fuels) 24,458 21,300 $ 359/ sf $ 7,646,700
Parking Lot 15,800 15,800 $ 43,901
Fleet Fueling Island and Staging 5,040 5,040 $ 2,983,994
Stormwater Management 8,000 8,000 $ 68,789
Additional Scope $ 1,171,335
Total 65,410
54,747 $ 13,349,360
Cost Escalation to Mid-point
construction $ 2,336,138
Escalation Construction Cost -
Subtotal $ 15,685,498
Construction Contingency $ 3,137,100
Engineering/Arch Design $ 2,823,390
Construction Management During
Construction $ 1,694,034
Estimated Probable Total Cost $ 23,340,022
41
The sketch level-based cost estimate of approximately $23,340,022 supports WCT’s capital planning and
budgeting process, which will identify and program appropriate and available funding necessary to finance
the proposed improvements. Attachment G provides a further breakdown for each line item. Given the
estimated costs, it is recommended that WCT consider the next phase to obtain funding for the engineering
and design and then for the construction of the project.
Capital Funding Strategy
Table 19 identifies a number of potential funding resources that could be used to program WCT’s capital
budget for the proposed facility expansion project. It is highly recommended that WCT continue to build both
public and private support for its facility expansion project to maximize and leverage these programs to the
greatest extent possible.
Table 19. WCTA Facility Expansion Funding Resources
Funding Source Summary
Federal
FTA Bus & Bus Facilities Infrastructure
Investment Program
The FTA Bus & Bus Facilities Infrastructure Investment Program (49 U.S.C.
5339) makes federal resources available to states and direct recipients
such as EPTA to replace, rehabilitate and purchase buses and related
equipment and to construct bus-related facilities including technological
changes or innovations to modify low or no emission vehicles or facilities.
Funding is provided through formula allocations and competitive grants.
FTA Capital Investment Grant (5309) This FTA discretionary grant program funds transit capital investments,
including heavy rail, commuter rail, light rail, streetcars, and bus rapid
transit. Federal transit law requires transit agencies seeking Capital
Investment Grant (CIG) funding to complete a series of steps over several
years.
• For New Starts and Core Capacity projects, the law requires
completion of two phases in advance of receipt of a construction
grant agreement: Project Development and Engineering.
• For Small Starts projects, the law requires completion of one
phase in advance of receipt of a construction grant agreement:
Project Development.
FTA Low- or No-Emission Grant
Program
The Low- or No-Emission Grant Program 5339I provides funding for eligible
uses to include purchasing or leasing low- or no-emission buses, acquiring
low- or no-emission buses with a leased power source, constructing or
leasing facilities and related equipment (including intelligent technology
and software) for low- or no-emission buses, constructing new public
transportation facilities to accommodate low- or no-emission buses, and
rehabilitating or improving existing public transportation facilities to
accommodate low- or no-emission buses.
42
USDOT Better Utilizing Investments to
Leverage Development (BUILD)
The BUILD Grant program, managed by the U.S. Department of
Transportation (USDOT), provides funding for significant surface
transportation infrastructure projects, including those related to public
transit. BUILD grants can be used for a variety of public transportation
projects, such as the construction and improvement of transit facilities.
The program aims to enhance economic competitiveness, improve safety,
promote environmental sustainability, increase quality of life, and support
innovative solutions in public transportation. By funding transit projects,
the BUILD Grant program helps improve mobility, reduce congestion, and
provide more efficient and reliable public transportation options.
Congressionally Directed Spending
Requests
In fiscal year (FY) 2025, the Senate will accept requests for earmarks,
formally called congressionally directed spending (CDS). Earmarks allow
Members of Congress to request that federal funds be set aside for
specific projects in their states. This is an opportunity for state, local, and
tribal governments, and nonprofit organizations to apply for funding for
projects that would benefit from a one-time allocation of funds.
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
Program
CMAQ provides funding to areas in nonattainment or maintenance for
ozone, carbon monoxide, and/or particulate matter. States that have no
nonattainment or maintenance areas still receive a minimum
apportionment of CMAQ funding for either air quality projects or other
elements of flexible spending. Funds may be used for any transit capital
expenditures otherwise eligible for FTA funding as long as they have an air
quality benefit.
Economic Development Initiative (EDI)
- Community Project Funding (CPF)
grant
The Economic Development Initiative (EDI), Community Project Funding
(CPF) grant is a congressionally legislated provision that directs specific
approved funds to be awarded to a particular entity for a specific amount
and to be spent on the project or purpose identified in the authorizing
legislation. This provision is made explicit in a particular a fiscal year’s
appropriations bill.04.CPF grants have been used for a variety of economic
development and community development purposes across the country.
Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) expanded tax credits for various
renewable and clean energy initiatives, such as investments in electric
vehicles (EVs), EV charging stations, alternative fuels, and renewable
technologies including solar, wind, geothermal, and battery storage.
State
MDOT, Maryland Transit
Administration
The Maryland Department of Transportation Maryland Transit
Administration (MDOT MTA) directs funding and statewide assistance to
Locally Operated Transit Systems (LOTS). Additionally, a number of funding
programs are available to transportation operators throughout the State.
These programs support both public transportation and specialized
transportation services.
MDOT Transportation Discretionary
Grants
The MDOT Discretionary Grants are designed to support a wide range of
transportation projects across Maryland. These grants are part of the
Maryland Department of Transportation’s efforts to enhance infrastructure
and improve transportation systems statewide.
Statewide Transit Innovation Grant The MDOT MTA Statewide Transit Innovation Grant is a competitive grant
program with the goal of supporting local efforts to improve transit
reliability, improving access and connections to activity centers, and
improving transit mobility options. The program seeks to fund cost-
effective public transportation projects that reduce delays for people and
43
improve connectivity between regional and economic population centers.
Projects may incorporate bus, rail, or other transit modes.
Toll Credits – Maryland Toll Credit
Account Balance
Federal law permits States with toll facilities to earn credits that can be
applied towards the non-Federal share requirement on Federal-aid projects.
Toll facilities may include toll roads, bridges, tunnels, and ferries that serve
as a link on a public highway. A toll authority may be a public, quasi-public,
or private entity, including a chartered multistate agency or State
Department of Transportation. The private entity may be under contract or
concession agreement with the State. A State may earn toll credits when a
public, quasi-public, or private agency uses toll revenues to build, improve,
or maintain highways, bridges, or tunnels that serve the public purpose of
interstate commerce. Currently, Maryland’s FY23 ending toll credit balance
is $462,058,788.
Next Steps
WCT and the Washington County Board of Commissioners should continue working with HEPMPO and MDTO
MTA to execute a funding strategy, inclusive of the funding opportunities identified above, and monitor their
application for the FY25 BUILD Discretionary Grant, previously known as RAISE Grant that will secure funding
for the facility’s engineering and design, including NEPA clearance. Completing the design phase of the
project will position the County to pursue multiple funding options for the project’s construction.
Additionally, WCT and the Washington County Board of Commissioners should continue to advocate for the
Hagerstown City Council’s approval of the Quit Claim Deed for the portion of Alleyway No. 1-35 necessary to
support the facility expansion project. The Quit Claim process is detailed in the following section.
6 QUIT CLAIM
Purpose
The purpose of the Quit Claim Deed request is to facilitate the planned expansion of WCT’s W. Washington
Street transit facility that houses our administration offices, and bus maintenance and storage operations.
The planned expansion will be accommodated on WCT’s existing property inclusive of the proposed Quit
Claim area of Alley No. 1-35. The location of the Quit-Claim resources identified within or adjacent to the
project area can be found in Attachment H.
Washington County Transit has been a steadfast presence at this location for several decades, providing over
516,000 annual passenger trips. However, due to the significant increase in public transit demand over the
years and the projected future mobility growth, they find their current space increasingly constrained.
44
Application
The Washington County Public Works Department has submitted a Quit Claim application to the City of
Hagerstown for the portion of the city owned Alley No. 1-35 that divides the Washington County Transit (WCT)
property (Parcel #25035194) located at 1000 W. Washington Street, Hagerstown, MD into two separate lot
areas. In pursuant to the Hagerstown City’s Quit-Claim Policy E-260.
Washington County Transit is working with the Hagerstown/Eastern Panhandle MPO to examine the facility
expansion needs and determine the requirements for accommodating these needs within the confinements
of our current property (Parcel #25035194). Obtaining the City’s approval of this Quit Claim request will permit
WCT to maximize its current property area for the planned expansion, which is crucial to meet the growing
needs of our community and to continue providing efficient and reliable public transit services.
The Figure 8 is a sketch plan exhibit illustrates WCT’s property boundaries in conjunction with Alley No. 1-35.
As illustrated, Alley No 1-35 extends between Devonshire Rd. and Nottingham Rd. and its eastern segment
divides our property into two separate lots along our entire parcel boundary. WCT is submitting this Quit Claim
request for the eastern segment of Alley No. 1-35 only.
The western segment, which is not part of WCT’s Quit Claim request, serves as the primary driveway access
to the Jehovah’s Witness property located at 30 Nottingham Rd, Hagerstown, MD (Parcel No. 25033752),
secondary access to the 1020 W. Washington Street property, and rear access to the commercial property
located at 1014 W. Washington St. Washington County has notified each of these property owners of the
County’s Quit Claim request through certified mailings, copies of which are attached to this application.
45
Figure 8. Quit-Claim Parcel
The following is a timeline of WCT’s Quit Claim request to the City of Hagerstown:
On October 9, 2024, WCT, HEPMPO, and Michael Baker attended the Hagerstown Planning Commission
meeting. During the meeting WCT and Michael Baker presented the case for the needs of the Quit-Claim and
the impacts making their recommendation to city council would have for the future of WCT.
On October 15, 2024, WCT and Micheal Baker attended the City Council work session and presented the case
for support of the Quit-Claim. During this meeting WCT and Michael Baker presented a presentation and
46
answered questions from City Counsel. The result of this meeting was that City Council was in favor of the
Quit-Claim under the following two conditions (Attachment H).
» WCT needs to confirm favor of the request with the other two property owners.
o On December 4, 2024, WCT received written acknowledgment and support from the two
property owners (Attachment H).
» WCT needs to continue to work with Jehovah Witness to address their parking and access
concerns/needs.
o On December 11, 2024, WCT supported the Jehovah's Witness parking plan in support of
the Quit Claim at the Planning Commission Workshop.
On March 18, 2025, a representative for WCT attended the City Council work session to present the Quit-
Claim request. This request was made following WCT's fulfillment of the two conditions stipulated by the
City Council’s October 15, 2024, meeting (Attachment H).
On March 25, 2025, a representative for WCT attended the City Council City regular session to introduce the
Quit-Claim Ordinance. The City Council voted 4-0 in favor of the Quit-Claim (Attachment H).
On April 22, 2025, a representative for WCT attended the City Council regular session, where the City Council
was presented with the Quit Claim Deed (Attachment H).
At the time of the publication of this study, the Quit-Claim is scheduled to become effective on May 22, 2025
(Attachment H).
7 LOT CONSOLIDATION
Pending the Hagerstown City Council’s approval of the Quit Claim Deed Request, Michael Baker’s
subconsultant partner and Maryland Licensed Professional Land Surveyor (PLS), Frederick, Seibert &
Associates, Inc (FSA) will proceed with preparing a lot consolidation plan of the existing Washington County-
owned parcel. The lot consolidated plat will incorporate the Quit Claimed portion of the Alleyway No. 1-35 and
into Parcel #25035194 and consolidate the parcel’s existing seven (7) lots (delineated in yellow) as illustrated
in Figure 9 into one single and contiguous parcel area. The final lot consolidation plat will ultimately be
recorded with the County. The location of the Lot Consolidation resources to the project area can be found in
Attachment I.
47
Figure 9. WCT Parcel #25035194 Lots
Source: City of Hagerstown Tax Maps. https://www.hagerstownmd.org/250/Mapping-Surveying
48
8 ATTACHMENTS
49
–
HEPMPO
33 West Washington St.
Ste. 402 - 4th Floor.
Hagerstown, MD 21740
HTTPS://HEPMPO.COM/
Washington County
Transit (WCT)
1000 Washington Street, Hagerstown, MD
•Washington County Transit (WCT) needs to expand its current facility located on the county-owned ~1.7-acre parcel at 1000 W. Washington St., to provide additional space to meet its current and future (year 2050) administrative and operational needs.
•The existing WCT property and facility is highly constrained; it does not accommodate the current number of WCT fleet vehicles and administrative staff, inhibits safe bus circulation, and is entirely impervious.
•WCT’s expansion needs are also supported by WCT’s historic growth and its Five-Year Transit Development Plan (TDP), which projects its current annual ridership to increase by 30% by 2030.
2
WCT Expansion Feasibility
Study
•WCT, in collaboration with the Hagerstown/ Eastern Panhandle MPO (HEPMPO) and the Maryland Transit Administration (MTA), engaged Michael Baker International, Inc. in July 2024 to execute a Facility Space Needs Assessment and Conceptual Design Feasibility Study.
•The Feasibility Study was funded by HEPMPO and Michael Baker was engaged under its on-call contract with the MPO.
•The study (1) evaluated WCT’s facility space requirements to meet its current and future (year 2050) administrative and operational needs, and (2) determined if the current ~1.7-acre site could accommodate the facility expansion requirements.
3
WCT Expansion Feasibility
Study
Existing Operation Challenges
•All current office space is occupied and no room
for additional expansion in the exiting building
•Conference room is undersized
•No training room space
•Paratransit vehicles are parked outside
•On-site gasoline refueling is not available
•An outdated and inefficient portable bus washing
machine is used for vehicles
•Transit busses currently make unsafe crossings
over the public alleyway
•Vehicle movement requires the use of public
streets; requires additional CDL-licensed drivers
4
5
Space Needs Assessment
6
Proposed Expansion Concept
Next Steps
•Pending USDOT’s June 28, 2025, decision
on MTA’s FY2025 USDOT BUILD
Discretionary Grant Application.
•Quit Claim Ordinance enacted and Deed for
Alley 1-35 has been granted.
•Lot Consolidation Plan for 1000 Washington
St. completed and pending recording.
•WCT will continue to collaborate with
HEPMPO and MTA on other funding
sources for implementation.
7
Questions?
8
The full study can be viewed on the
HEPMPO website.
https://hepmpo.com/our-work/special-
studies/
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: The Community Free Clinic Charity Tournament – License Agreement
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Andrew Eshleman, Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDED MOTION(S): Move to approve the License Agreement with the
Community Free Clinic to use Board of County Commissioners of Washington County owned
property at 520 Western Maryland Parkway, Hagerstown for a Charity Tournament.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Community Free Clinic hosts an annual MUDD Volleyball Charity
Tournament. For many years the County leased property at the Hagerstown Regional Airport to
host the event. Due to recent event permitting issues at the Airport, an alternate location is
required. Multiple sites were considered and reviewed. The County recently purchased property
at 520/540 Western Maryland Parkway and the 520 Western Maryland Parkway property is a
suitable undeveloped site that accommodates the event date and facility requirements to host the
event.
DISCUSSION: This year will be the 25th anniversary of the MUDD Volleyball Tournament,
which is a major fundraiser for the Community Free Clinic. The Washington County Board of
Commissioners have historically supported the event via providing in-kind facility use. The
Agreement provides a fifteen-day period in July for the event. The Community Free Clinic is
responsible for all setup and removal of event facilities including site stabilization. No permanent
facilities are permitted. The Community Free Clinic shall be responsible for providing insurance
and compliance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations. The Agreement affords the
opportunity for annual renewal. The Community Free Clinic understands that the County has
long term plans for use of the property and the Agreement describes the County’s right to
terminate.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
CONCURRENCES: County Attorney and Sheriff’s Office
ALTERNATIVES: Do not offer Agreement; find alternative site
ATTACHMENTS: License Agreement
AUDIO/VISUAL TO BE USED: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
1
LICENSE AGREEMENT
THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT (the “Agreement”) is made this _____ day of
_________, 2025, by and between the Board of County Commissioners of Washington
County, Maryland, a body corporate and politic and a political subdivision of the State of
Maryland (the “County”) and the Community Free Clinic, Inc., a Maryland corporation, 249
Mill Street, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740 (the “Licensee”).
RECITALS
WHEREAS, The County is the sole owner of the premises known as 520 Western
Maryland Parkway (the “Premises”) and desires to permit the Licensee to License a portion of
the premises for the 25th Anniversary MUDD Volleyball Charity Tournament (the “Charity
Tournament”).
WHEREAS, The specifics of the Charity Tournament are outlined in a letter dated May
5, 2025 from Jeremy Cantner, Executive Director of the Community Free Clinic, to Andrew
Eshleman, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and is incorporated herein by
reference.
WHEREAS, The parties desire to enter into a licensure agreement defining their rights,
duties, and liabilities relating to the use of the premises by the Licensee for the Charity
Tournament.
WHEREAS, the parties do not intend to establish a lease or landlord tenant relationship
in this licensure agreement.
AGREEMENT
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, terms, conditions,
obligations, and agreements contained in this Agreement, the sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
1. Premises: In exchange for goodwill and other valuable nonmonetary consideration, the
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the County hereby grants to the Licensee a
license to utilize the premises more particularly described as property at 520 Western
Maryland Parkway, Hagerstown, Maryland and included as Exhibit B.
2. Term of License: The term of this license shall be for fifteen (15) days commencing July
10th, 2025 and ending July 25th, 2025.
a. Both parties hereto agree to the following:
2
The term of this license shall automatically renew yearly on July 10th of each year
and terminate on July 25th of each year under the terms of this agreement.
The Licensee shall have the right to terminate this Agreement without
cause, at the end of the Term, or any annual renewal periods, by giving the
County written notice of its intention to terminate at least ninety (90) days prior to
the start of the renewal periods.
The County shall have the right to terminate this Agreement, without cause, at
any time without notice.
3. Use of Premises: Licensee shall use the Premises during the term of this license for the
Charity Tournament only and for no other purpose. Licensee shall not construct any
permanent facilities, improvements, storage units or alter the property in any permanent
way. Licensee covenants to keep the premises clean and safe, to use all land, equipment,
and facilities in or about the Premises in a proper manner and Licensee agrees to not
deliberately or negligently waste or damage the Premises or knowingly allow any person
to do so. If Licensee or any guest or invitee wastes or damages the Premises, Licensee
shall promptly pay the County for any costs relating to the necessary repairs.
Licensee shall control the conduct and demeanor of its employees, its vendors,
invitees, and of those doing business with it as well as any of those visiting the Premises
as part of the Charity Tournament, in and around the Premises, and shall take such steps
as are necessary to remove persons whom the County may, for good and sufficient cause,
deem objectionable. Licensee shall keep the Premises clean and free of debris at all
times. In utilizing the Premises during the terms of this Agreement, Licensee agrees to
and shall comply with all applicable ordinances, rules and regulations, and laws
established by any federal, State, or local government agency and by any reasonable rules
and regulations promulgated by the County. Failure on the part of the Licensee to
comply with these requirements shall be a breach of this Agreement.
4. Insurance: During the term of the Agreement, Licensee shall procure and maintain, at its
sole cost and expense, the following types and amounts of insurance:
Comprehensive General Liability Combined Single Limit
(Bodily Injury and Property Damage) $1,000,000 per
Occurrence
Liquor Liability $1,000,000
The insurance carrier and the form and substance of all policies shall be approved
by the County. The insurance carrier shall be a responsible insurance carrier authorized
to do business in the State of Maryland and shall have a policyholders’ rating of no less
than “A-“ in the most recent edition of Best’s Insurance Reports.
3
The Licensee shall name the Board of County Commissioners of Washington
County, Maryland as an additional insured on all policies required herein; and shall
provide the County with a certificate of insurance evidencing the above-referenced
insurance and requiring at least thirty (30) days advance notice, in writing, of any
cancellation or material change to the policy prior to the execution of this Agreement and
upon any renewal of any policy required by this Agreement.
Said policies or certificates shall be delivered to the County prior to the execution
of this Agreement. The name of the insured on the certificate of insurance must be the
same as the “Licensee” on this Agreement.
5. Indemnification: Licensee shall hold harmless and indemnify the County and its agents,
contractors or subcontractors or its or their present and future controlling persons,
appointed or elected officials, directors, officers, agents, or employees from and against
any and all fines, claims, suits, demands, actions, causes of action, liability and damages
of any kind or nature including, but not limited to personal injury, death, or property
damage arising in connection with Licensees use or occupancy of the Premises or other
facilities at the property, or the act or omission of Licensee, Licensee’s agents, servants,
contractors or invitees (including reasonable attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and court
costs incurred by the County in defending against any such claim or in the enforcement
of this paragraph).
6. Compliance with Laws: The Licensee shall comply with any and all applicable laws,
rules, regulations, and guidelines of any governmental authority which may be applicable
to the Premises and shall comply with all reasonable rules and regulations adopted by the
County. The Licensee shall pay all costs, claims, fines, fees, and damages which may
arise out of a failure of Licensee to comply with the provisions of this Paragraph and
shall fully indemnify and hold the County harmless from all liability resulting from any
acts of the Licensee, Licensee’s employees, attendees, and/or invitees.
7. Permits, Licenses, and Inspections: Any and all permits, licenses, and inspections
required by federal, State, and/or County agencies are the responsibility of the Licensee,
who shall supply County with proof of compliance and satisfactory completion of any
and all inspections.
8. No Assignment : Licensee agrees that the license granted in this Agreement shall not be
assigned in whole or in part without the prior written consent of the County. This
prohibition includes assignment or subletting by operation of law or otherwise.
9. Licensee’s Personal Property: Neither the County nor its agents, contractors or
subcontractors, or its or their present and future controlling persons, appointed or elected
officials, directors, officers, agents, or employees shall be responsible for any loss or
damage to any personal property of Licensee placed on, in, or about the Premises, or for
any personal injury to Licensee’s agent, employees, invitees, or contractors unless such
4
loss or damage is caused by the negligence or willful misconduct or the County or its
contractors or subcontractors or its or their present and future controlling persons,
directors, officers, agents, or employees. The County shall not be deemed a bailee as to
any personal property placed on, in, or about the Premises, and Licensee agrees to pay, as
additional rent, all reasonable costs incurred by the County in removing and storing any
of Licensee’s personal property remaining at the Premises following the expiration or
termination of this Agreement. Licensee is encouraged to maintain property damage
insurance on any personal property which is kept in, on, or about the Premises.
10. End of Term: Upon termination of this Agreement, by expiration or otherwise, Licensee
shall immediately surrender possession of the Premises and the surrounding area in as
good or better condition as when received, ordinary wear and tear excepted. Licensee
shall leave the Premises in a clean, orderly, and useable condition. More specifically, as
outlined in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and within ten
days of the event, the Licensee shall refill / backfill all excavated areas of the Premises
and shall return those areas and any other disturbed areas to their original condition,
including but not limited to, bringing in additional topsoil to the Premises and reseeding
the affected or disturbed areas (the Licensee acknowledges that the removal of standing
water in excavated areas may be necessary). Licensee further agrees to surrender the
Premises free and clear of all personal or other property and debris and to timely return
all equipment and keys to the Premises to the County. Licensee shall be liable for any
and all damage to the Premises caused by Licensee’s use.
11. Default: In the event of a default by Licensee of any provision of this Agreement, the
County shall have the right to recover consequential damages resulting from Licensee’s
occupancy of the Premises beyond the expiration or earlier termination of this
Agreement. In any action brought by or against the County in the interpretation or
enforcement of this Agreement, Licensee, in addition to all other damages, shall pay the
reasonable value of attorney’s services incurred by the County in such action, together
with the County’s litigation expenses and court costs. This provision shall apply
regardless of whether the County is represented in such proceedings by an attorney
employed by the County.
12. Right of Entry: The County, its agents, servants, employees and contractors, and others
with the consent of the County, shall have the absolute right to enter the Premises at
reasonable times for the purposes of inspecting the same, making repairs, improvements,
or betterments to the Premises or for any other lawful purpose, upon reasonable advanced
oral or written notice to Licensee. In addition, the County reserves the right to have
authorized persons enter the Premises in an emergency, without notice, at any time to
ensure that it is free of fire, hazards, and debris.
13. Notices: Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement , all notices to be given to the
Licensee under the terms of this Agreement shall be personally delivered to Licensee or
5
mailed by certified mail or commercial overnight courier to Licensee at the address
specified on page 1 of this Agreement or to such other mailing address provided by
Licensee to the County, or sent via electronic mail to the Executive Director of Licensee.
All notices to the County shall be given in the same manner.
14. Binding Effect: This Agreement shall be binding upon and insure to the parties hereto,
and their respective heirs, personal representatives, successors, and assigns.
15. Non-Waiver: The Failure of the County to insist upon compliance with any term of this
Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of any right to enforce such provision.
16. Headings: The headings are used herein are used for convenience or reference only and
do not in any way define, limit, or describe the scope or intent of this Agreement.
17. Severability: The invalidity or unenforceability of one provision of this Agreement shall
not affect the validity or enforceability of the other provisions.
18. Counterparts: This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of
which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute one and the
same instrument. A facsimile or photocopy of a signature of a party shall constitute an
original signature, fully binding the party for all purposes.
19. Governing Law: This Agreement shall be construed, interpreted, and governed in
accordance with the laws of the State of Maryland.
20. Jurisdiction: Any conflict arising between the parties related to this Agreement shall be
adjudicated by the appropriate Court of jurisdiction in Washington County Maryland.
21. Recitals: The Recitals are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as substantive
provisions.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day and
year first written above.
ATTEST / WITNESS: BORD OF COUNTY COMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY,
MARYLAND
_______________________ BY:______________________________
(SEAL)
John F. Barr, President
6
ATTEST / WITNESS: COMMUNITY FREE CLINIC, INC.
_______________________ BY:______________________________
(SEAL)
Board Member
Approved as to form and
legal sufficiency:
_________________
Zachary J. Kieffer County Attorney
7
Exhibit A: Letter from Community Free Clinic
8
Exhibit B: Property plot map showing area of Premises (Insert new exhibit)
Exhibit B
Fire Showers
Beer
Garden
Foo
d
T
r
u
c
k
s
Tea
m
s
Courts
Portable
Toilets
Addit
i
o
n
a
l
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
if Re
q
u
i
r
e
d
Dumpster
Parking
Wes
t
e
r
n
M
a
r
y
l
a
n
d
P
k
w
y
Inte
r
s
t
a
t
e
8
1
Legend
Property Boundaries
0 200 400100Feet
9
Exhibit C: Certificate of Insurance
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Bid Award (PUR-1749) Pole Barn Building Design and Construction
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Kentner, CPPO, Purchasing Director; Andrew Eshleman,
Director of Public Works; Tom Gozora, Agriculture Education Center Facility Administrator; Jay
Miller, President, Ag Board
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the procurement of a Pole Barn Building Design
and Construction, to the responsive, responsible bidder, Reese’s Home Improvement, Inc., of
Boonsboro, MD, for a Total Lump Sum Bid Price of $87,200.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Washington County Agriculture Education Center, Inc, solicited
design-build bids for a 60’ wide x 120’ long x 12’ finished floor to ceiling wood post frame open
pole barn building at the Washington County Agriculture Education Center.
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 (50) persons/companies registered/downloaded the bid
document online, and on June 4, 2025, the County accepted bids; eight (8) bids were received.
FISCAL IMPACT: Project is funded by the Washington County Agriculture Education Center
Corporation “Ag Center Board” via a donation received from Adna Fulton
CONCURRENCES: Agriculture Education Center Board
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Bid Tabulation Matrix
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Total
Price $110,800.00 $149,000.00 $216,789.45
Line Description QTY UOM Unit Extended Unit Extended Unit Extended
Item No. 1 - TOTAL PRICE FOR
PROVIDING ENGINEERING/
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
AND RECORD DRAWINGS
Item No. 2 - TOTAL PRICE FOR
ALL POLE BARN BUILDING
MATERIALS
Item No. 3 -TOTAL PRICE FOR
ERECTING AND CONSTRUCTING
THE POLE BARN BUILDING
Total
Price $258,596.00 $347,033.00 $403,000.00
Line Description QTY UOM Unit Extended Unit Extended Unit Extended
Item No. 1 - TOTAL PRICE FOR
PROVIDING ENGINEERING/
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
AND RECORD DRAWINGS
Item No. 2 - TOTAL PRICE FOR
ALL POLE BARN BUILDING
MATERIALS
Item No. 3 -TOTAL PRICE FOR
ERECTING AND CONSTRUCTING
PUR-1749
Pole Barn Building Design and Construction
Grassfield
Construction, LLC
Bethesda, MD
Fayetteville
Contractors, Inc.
Fayetteville, PA
Buildprotech, LLC
Potomac, MD
Warner Construction
Frederick, MD
United Entrprises
Greencastle, PA
Trang Construction Co.
Bethesda, MD
$12,000.00
$62,000.00
$75,000.00$75,000.00
$11,703.00$11,703.00
$49,092.00
$50,005.00$50,005.00
$49,092.00
3
2
1 1
EA1
EA1
EA
$62,000.00
$12,000.00 $25,000.00$25,000.00
$75,332.21$75,332.21
$116,457.24$116,457.24
1
1
EA1
EA
EA
$35,000.00$35,000.00$35,000.00$35,000.00$25,000.00$25,000.00
$89,700.00
$143,896.00$143,896.00
$89,700.00
$202,000.00
$166,000.00
$202,000.00
$166,000.00
$156,016.50
$156,016.50
$156,016.50
$156,016.50
1
3
2
Bids Due: June 4, 2025
Total
Price $142,700.00 $87,200.00
Line Description QTY UOM Unit Extended Unit Extended
Item No. 1 - TOTAL PRICE FOR
PROVIDING ENGINEERING/
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
AND RECORD DRAWINGS
Item No. 2 - TOTAL PRICE FOR
ALL POLE BARN BUILDING
MATERIALS
Item No. 3 -TOTAL PRICE FOR
ERECTING AND CONSTRUCTING
THE POLE BARN BUILDING
Buildprotech, LLC
Reeses's Home Improvement
Item No. 1 - $7,200 is figured for excise tax. If tax does not apply. Total lump sum is $80,000
Response Totals
Reese's Home Improvement, Inc.Fayetteville Contractors, Inc.$347,033.00
Warner Construction Buildprotech LLC $403,000.00
JFenterprises / Fox Enterprises
United Entrprises
Trang Construction Co.
Grassfield Construction LLC
JFenterprises /
Fox Enterprises
Hagerstown, MD
Reese's Home
Improvement, Inc.
Boonsboro, MD
$7,950.00$7,950.00$5,700.00
$63,700.00
$5,700.00EA1
EA
EA
1
1
3
2
1
PUR-1749
Pole Barn Building Design and Construction
$50,000.00$50,000.00$73,300.00$73,300.00
$29,250.00$29,250.00$63,700.00
Remarks / Exceptions:
Response Totals
Bids Due: June 4, 2025
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Quotation Award (Q-25-800) Election Management Solution and Services for the
Washington County Board of Elections
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Kentner, CPPO, Director of Purchasing; Barry Jackson, Election
Director
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the Quotation for the Election Management
Solution and Services to the responsible, responsive bidder, Soch Inc., of Richmond, VA who
submitted the responsive Total Lump Sum of $70 ,177.87.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: An election management system is required to replace an outdated election
management system and combine multiple tools into one. This system will be a web-based
dashboard to help the Board of Elections better manage the election process, to include election
workers, polling places, inventory and supply management, and incident response. The system
will be developed by Soch, Inc.to the Board of Elections’ specifications in Year One, then Soch,
Inc. will continue to provide support services through Years One, Two, and Three.
DISCUSSION: The Request for Quotation was advertised on the State of Maryland’s “eMaryland
Marketplace Advantage” website, the County’s website, and on the County’s new electronic bid
site (Euna/Ionwave). Sixteen (16) persons/companies registered/downloaded the bid document
online, and on May 21, 2025, the County accepted bids; five (5) bids were received. One (1) bid
was received at a lower total sum however this bidder did not meet the specifications of the
solicitation.
It was anticipated these services would be quoted below the $50,000 threshold, which would not
have required using the Invitation to Bid (ITB) advertisement process. As such, the Request for
Quotation process was followed and not the formal bid process. As noted previously, a significant
number of vendors reviewed the document; as such we do not believe publicly advertising the
project in the newspaper would have yielded any difference in the final outcome. Given the value
of the quotations, the Board of County Commissioners’ approval is necessary to award the
purchase of the equipment.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $70,177.87 are available in the department’s account
515000-10 -10400 for this purchase.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Quote Tabulation Matrix
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Total
Price $37,000.00 $70,177.87 $150,000.00
Line #Description QTY UOM Unit Extended Unit Extended Unit Extended
Implementation and Year One (1)
Service and Support
Year Two (2)
Service and Support
Year Three (3)
Service and Support
Total
Price $210,000.00 $296,625.00
Line #Description QTY UOM Unit Extended Unit Extended
Implementation and Year One (1)
Service and Support
Year Two (2)
Service and Support
Year Three (3)
Service and Support
EasyVote Solutions, Inc. Wilmington, NC
Soch, Inc. Richmond, VA
Tenex Software Solutions, Inc. Tampa, FL
Mobikasa, LLC. New York, NY
Kinetch (Kinetech Cloud, LLC) San Antonio, TX
Q-25-800
Election Management Solution and Services
Mobikasa, LLC
$11,500.00
$11,500.00
$14,000.00
$11,500.00
Tenex Software
Solutions, Inc.Soch, Inc.EasyVote Solutions Inc
$11,500.00
$14,000.00
$23,668.47
$23,968.00
1
2
3
1
YEAR
YEAR
YEAR
1
1
YEAR
2
3
1
$22,541.40
$23,968.00
$50,000.00
$50,000.00
$50,000.00
$50,000.00
$50,000.00
$50,000.00
$23,668.47
$22,541.40
$73,875.00
$73,875.00
$148,875.00
$73,875.00
$73,875.00YEAR
YEAR
1
1
1 $148,875.00
$20,000.00
$20,000.00
$170,000.00
$20,000.00
$20,000.00
$170,000.00
Response Total:
$296,625.00
$37,000.00
Q-25-800 Addendum 2 - Page 1
EasyVote Solutions, Inc. Wilmington, NC
Delivery / Service can be performed no later than 30 calendar days from receipt of order
Soch, Inc. Richmond, VA
Line 1 - Esttimated Date of Delivery is two weeks from the Start of the Contract Date
Line 2 - Service and support includes all software, hardware, security fix, patch and upgrades to the Integra. There is no need for any
additional resources at county side to support it.
Line 3 - Estimated Date of Delivery: Fall 2027 (SaaS License)
Tenex Software Solutions, Inc. Tampa, FL
Line 1 - Estimated Date of Delivery: Fall 2025 (SaaS License)
Line 2 - Estimated Date of Delivery: Fall 2026 (SaaS License)
Line 3 - Estimated Date of Delivery: Fall 2027 (SaaS License)
Mobikasa, LLC. New York, NY
Line 1 - Cost for design, development and launch of the website
Line 2 - 600 hrs for maintenance per year
Line 3 - 600 hrs for maintenance per year
Kinetch (Kinetech Cloud, LLC) San Antonio, TX
Line 1 - Implementation time is 60 - 120 days, depending on the availability of team schedules
Line 2 - 1 year from contract signing
Line 3 - 2 years from contract signing
Q-25-800
Election Management Solution and Services
Q-25-800 Addendum 2 - Page 2
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Rejection of Request for Proposal (PUR-1 743) Event Production Services
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Kentner, CPPO, Director of Purchasing, Danielle Weaver,
Director of Public Relations and Marketing
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to take action, in the best interest of the County, and to
request the proposal for the Event Production Services be rejected due to the proposal exceeding
the available budget, and request approval to re-advertise a revised document.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Notice of the Request for Proposal (RFP) was listed on the State of
Maryland’s “eMaryland Marketplace Advantage” (eMMA) website, on the County’s website, on
Euna’s website, the County’s new online bidding site, IonWave, and in the local newspaper.
Eighty-Nine (89) persons/companies registered/downloaded the quote document online, and one
(1) proposal was received for these services.
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Contract Award (PUR-1747) Northwest Quadr ant Utility Expansion at the
Hagerstown Regional Airport
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Kentner, CPPO, Director of Purchasing; Neil Dor an, Director,
Hagerstown Regional Airpor t
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the Northwest Quadrant Utility Expansion at the
Hagerstown Regional Airport project to the responsive, responsible bidder, C. William Hetzer,
Inc. of Hagerstown, MD who submitted the lowest total sum bid in the amount of $344,860 and
contingent upon the County Attorney’s Office approval of the contract Agreement.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The scope of work includes the extension of an existing waterline as well as
the extension of electrical and telecommunication utilities to a proposed sign (awarded by the
board on June 3, 2025) at the end of Air Park Road. The project also includes the extension of
utilities for future hangar pads.
The Invitation to Bid (ITB) was advertised in the local newspaper, listed on the State’s “eMaryland
MarketplaceAdvantage”, on the County’s website and on the County’s new online bidding site,
Ionwave. Thirty-two (32) persons/companies registered/downloaded the bid document on-line;
one (1) bid was received as indicated on the attached bid tabulation.
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted in the department’s Airport Systemic Improvement
Project Account 515000-35-45010-BLD088. This project is being funded through a 2023 grant
and later addition grant funds totaling $908,000 from the Tri-County Council for Western
Maryland, Inc. through the Maryland Department of Commerce.
CONCURRENCES: Public Works Division Director; Airport Consultant - ADCI
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Bid Tabulation Matrix
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Total Price $344,860.00
Line #Description QTY UOM Unit Extended
1 M-100-4.1 Maintenance and Protection of Traffic 1 LS $14,700.00 $14,700.00
2 M-150-5.1 Project Survey and Stakeout 1 LS $1,570.00 $1,570.00
3 C-105-6.1 Mobilization 1 LS $17,240.00 $17,240.00
4 02101-4.1 Erosion and Sediment Control Measures 1 LS $24,980.00 $24,980.00
02660-3.1 12-Inch Waterline, Installed Complete in Place
Through Turf
02660-3.2 12-Inch Waterline, Installed Complete in Place
Through Pavement
7 02660-3.3 Stub and Cap Waterline for Future Extension 3 EA $1,930.00 $5,790.00
8 02660-3.4 Waterline Tee 2 EA $1,970.00 $3,940.00
L-110-5.1 4” Conduit w/ Pull Rope, Installed Complete in Place
Through Turf for Fiber Optic Cable
L-110-5.2 3” Conduit w/ Pull Rope, Installed Complete in Place
Through Turf for Electric Cable
L-110-5.3 5” Conduit w/ Pull Rope, Installed Complete in Place
Through Turf (For Fiber Optic Cable)
12 L-115-5.1 Hand Boxes (Fiber Optic or Electric)8 EA $1,150.00 $9,200.00
13 T-901-5.1 Seeding 1 LS $16,340.00 $16,340.00
PUR-1747
Northwest Quadrant Utility Expansion
At the Hagerstown Regional Airport
C. William Hetzer, Inc.
Hagerstown, MD
11
10
9
6
5 $26,250.00$210.00LF125
$62,050.00$36.50LF1700
$56,100.00$33.00LF1700
$65,450.00$19.25LF3400
$41,250.00$275.00LF150
Bids Due: May 28, 2025 ]
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Sole Source Award (PUR-1755) – Moyno Pumps for the Department of Water Quality
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Kentner, CPPO, Director of Purchasing, Joe Moss, Deputy Director of
Water Quality, Engineering Services
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to authorize a sole-source procurement for the purchase of two (2)
Moyno Pumps from Geiger Pump and Equipment of Baltimore, MD., for the total sum in the amount of
$125,349.62 based on its quote dated June 10, 2025.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Department of Water Quality wishes to apply Section 1-106.2(a)(2) of
the Code of Public Laws of Washington County, Maryland, to procure the request. This section states
that a sole source procurement is authorized and permissible when: 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 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: Water Quality currently has 3 Sludge Feed Pumps for dewatering operations. The
newest Pump was installed as part of the ENR upgrade, and it can supply either centrifuge with sludge
by itself. The other 2 are smaller in size and have been in service for over 20 years. Having all 3 pumps
the same gives us more flexibility to maintain continuous operation and control for our sludge
dewatering process. We are requesting to sole-source the purchase of 2 new sludge feed pumps for the
Conococheague WWTP for the following reasons:
-Purchasing the same make/model as the newest Sludge Feed Pump will reduce the inventory of spare
parts needed to maintain all 3 sludge feed pumps. (1 new pump & 2 old pumps)
-Operations personnel at the plant are already fully trained on the operation of these Moyno Brand
pumps thus eliminating the need for additional training to operate a different brand pump.
-Programming the new pumps through the Programmed Logic Controller will not require additional
integration for a different brand pump. That would then require additional training for the
Operations staff.
-The operating conditions related to the duty point and pumping range will be identical to the 3rd
pump already in service thus not requiring any modifications to the set points of the third pump
which is remaining in service.
-Maintenance personnel will not need to be trained on the proper routine maintenance of another
brand of pump.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted in the Division’s Capital Improvement Project (CIP) account
515000-32-42010-TRP026.
CONCURRENCES: Mark Bradshaw, Division Director of Environmental Management
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Geiger Quote dated June 10, 2025
www.geigerinc.com Page 1 of 2
Geiger Pump & Equipment Co.
8924 Yellow Brick Road
Baltimore, MD 21237
410.682.2660 phone
410.682.4750 fax
Date: June 10, 2025
To:Washington County - Conococheague WWTP
Attention: Bill Blair
From: Irene Pais Email: IPais@geigerinc.com
Quote #: Q-250519-23028-F7 - 0
Reference: New Centrifuge Feed Sludge Pump
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to provide you with this quotation.
Per your request, we are pleased to offer the following:
Description:
Price Per Unit:
Quantity:
Extended Price:
Lead Time:
All prices are valid for 15 days and are quoted FOB shipping point and are offered per our standard terms
and conditions included here. Freight will be Allowed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or require any additional information.
Best regards,
Irene Pais
Sales Engineer
www.geigerinc.com Page 2 of 2
Geiger Pump & Equipment Co.
8924 Yellow Brick Road
Baltimore, MD 21237
410.682.2660 phone
410.682.4750 fax
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
PRICING: Quotations are valid for acceptance within 15 days from the date of the proposal. Prices quoted are
net and will be held firm, except as noted in this document, for the delivery period quoted provided we have
received an acceptable written purchase order, and all submittal data is approved and returned to us within 60
days from date submitted. We do not accept responsibility for typographical errors. Geiger will make efforts to
avoid price changes due to government-imposed tariffs. We reserve the right to pass on unavoidable charges.
ESCALATION: In the event that the completion of the purchase order is materially delayed by the convenience
of the Purchaser, the Purchaser agrees to additionally pay for the resulting documented price increases in the cost
of the supplied items, including storage costs that may be incurred by the Seller.
SALES TAX: Geiger Pump & Equipment is required to charge applicable sales tax on all items for which a tax
exemption certificate has not been provided. Tax exemption certification is the responsibility of the purchaser.
PAYMENT TERMS: Invoices rendered to the Purchaser are payable upon receipt of the invoice. For all
purchases with established credit, terms are net 30 days from the date of shipment. All payment must be in U.S.
Dollars. All equipment is invoiced on date of shipment. Partial shipments and partial payment to be allowed
unless otherwise noted. A 1-1/2% per monthly carrying charge will apply to all amounts due which exceed 30
days.
NONCANCELLATION: Purchaser may not cancel or terminate for convenience, or direct suspension of
manufacture, except on mutually acceptable terms.
FREIGHT POLICY: Unless otherwise stated in the quotation, all merchandise is F.O.B. manufacturer’s plant.
WARRANTY: Any warranty given is the minimum required by law. Products sold by Geiger Pump & Equipment
have a LIMITED WARRANTY for materials and workmanship only. This warranty is for a period not to exceed
one year from shipment, and Geiger Pump & Equipment’s liability in all events is limited to and shall not exceed
the purchase price paid. Repair or replacement will be a Geiger Pump and Equipment Company, option. ANY
LIABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIAL AND INCIDENTAL DAMAGE IS EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMED.
THERE IS NO IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY: OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
USE OR PURPOSE, NOR ANY OTHER WARRANTY WHICH EXTENDS BEYOND THE DESCRIPTION
ON THE FACE THEREOF. Most products sold by Geiger Pump & Equipment are covered by a manufacturer’s
warranty. When warranted by the manufacturer, Geiger Pump & Equipment will pass on such warranty to the
customer and be limited to the terms of that warranty. The manufacturer’s warranty is then given in lieu of any
and all warranties, express or implied, by Geiger Pump & Equipment. Copies of the manufacturer’s warranties
are available through Geiger Pump & Equipment at no charge when requested by the customer.
DESTINATION: All products sold are for domestic use only, unless specifically documented otherwise by
purchaser. Export and re-export sales must comply in all respects with the laws and regulations of the United
States, the intended use and destination must be documented and approved by Geiger Pump & Equipment, and
minimum billing is two hundred and fifty (250) dollars net.
ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS: Geiger Pump & Equipment shall not be liable for any damages
suffered by the buyer for any delays in delivery of goods. Purchase Orders made out directly to the equipment
manufacturer may be subject to the terms and conditions of that manufacturer in addition to those stated herein.
Return of goods is within the discretion of Geiger Pump & Equipment. A copy of Geiger Pump & Equipment’s
written return policy will be provided upon request.
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Intergovernmental Cooperative Purchase (INTG-25-0195) 2024 Ford F-350 Crew Cab
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi J. Kentner, CPPO, Director, Purchasing, Eric Jacobs, EFO, Assistant
Director, Division of Emergency Services (DES)
RECOMMENDATION: Move to authorize by Resolution, for the Department of Emergency
Services to purchase one (1) 2024 Ford F-350 Crew Cab 4X4 Vehicle from Apple Ford of Columbia,
MD at the price of $83,977 and to utilize another jurisdiction's contract (#10000666-5) that was
awarded by Baltimore County to Apple Ford.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: This vehicle will replace a 2005 Ford Expedition that was formerly used as a
utility vehicle/support for the Emergency Support unit (forme rly Air Unit and Rehab Unit). Upon
replacement, the 2005 Ford Expedition will be stripped of emergency lighting and such, from which
point it will be advertised on GovDeals for sale.
The Code of Public Laws of Washington County, Maryland (the Public Local Laws) §1-106.3 provides
that the Board of County Commissioners may procure goods and services through a contract entered
into by another governmental entity, in accordance with the terms of the contract, regardless of whether
the County was a party to the original contract. Baltimore County took the lead in soliciting the resulting
agreement. If the Board of County Commissioners determines that participation by Washington County
would result in cost benefits or administrative efficiencies, it could approve the purchase of this vehicle
in accordance with the Public Local Laws referenced above by resolving that participation would result
in cost benefits or in administrative efficiencies.
The County will benefit from direct cost savings in the purchase of this vehicle because of the
economies of scale this buying group leveraged. I am confident that any bid received as a result of an
independent County solicitation would exceed the spending savings that the Baltimore County contract
provides through this agreement. Additionally, the County will realize savings through administrative
efficiencies as a result of not preparing, soliciting, and evaluating a bid. This savings/cost avoidance
would, I believe, be significant.
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Funding is available in the department's capital budget 600300-30-11430 -
VEH009 for this purchase.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Apple Ford Quote dated: May 28, 2025
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Page 1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO. RS-2025-
(Intergovernmental Cooperative Purchase [INTG-25-019 5] 2024 Ford F-350 Crew Cab)
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 Department of Emergency Services seeks to purchase one (1)
2024 Ford F-350 Crew Cab 4X4 vehicle from Apple Ford of Columbia, Maryland, at the price of
$83,977, and to utilize another jurisdiction’s contract (#10000666-5) that was awarded by
Baltimore County to Apple Ford.
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 Department of Emergency Services is hereby authorized
to purchase one (1) 2024 Ford F-350 Crew Cab 4X4 vehicle from Apple Ford of Columbia,
Maryland, at the price of $83,977, and to utilize another jurisdiction’s contract (#10000666-5) that
was awarded by Baltimore County to Apple Ford.
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
Fleet/Government Sales
8800 Stanford Blvd. Columbia, MD 21045 5/28/25
Quote for 2024 Ford F-350 Crew Cab Riding Baltimore County Contract #10000666-5
Vehicle 2024 Ford F-350 Crew Cab 4x4 $85,427
99N 7.3L V8 Gas
44G 10 Speed Auto Trans
TDX All Terrain Tires
X4M 4.30 Electric Locking axle
18B Platform Running Boards
41P Skid Plates
43C 120V Outlet
473 Snow Plow Prep
52B Trailer Brake Controller
86M Dual Battery
872 Rear Camera
Duramag Duramag Enclosed Utility
BCD Baltimore County Contract Discount -$1,450
Truck Built and in stock.
Color Exterior: Oxford White
Interior: Vinyl Seats
Delivery Days Before 6/30
Net Price Per (1) Unit: $83,977
Total Price For (1) Unit (s): $83,977
Please contact me with any questions, changes, or to finalize your order. I look forward to hearing from
you. You can reach me at 443-539-1281 or by e-mail at: nruby@AppleFord.com.
Thank you,
Noah Ruby
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Intergovernmental Cooperative Purchase (INTG-25-0193 ) Three (3) 2026 Chevrolet
Equinox AWD for the Department of Permits and Inspections
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi J. Kentner, CPPO, Director, Purchasing, Greg Cartrette, Director,
Permits and Inspections, and Terry Feiser, Chief Building Inspector, Permits and Inspections
RECOMMENDATION: Move to authorize by Resolution, for the Department of Permits and Inspections to
purchase three (3) 2026 Chevrolet Equinox AWD vehicles from Hertrich Fleet of Milford, DE at the price of
$29,172 each for a total of $87,516 and to utilize another jurisdictions contract (4400004546) that was awarded
by Howard County.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: These vehicles will replace the following vehicles: One (1) 2006 Jeep Liberty
with 158,634 miles, One (1) 2015 Jeep Patriot with 175,410 miles, and One (1) 2015 Jeep Patriot with
172,258 miles.
The Code of Public Laws of Washington County, Maryland (the Public Local Laws) §1-106.3 provides
that the Board of County Commissioners may procure goods and services through a contract entered
into by another governmental entity, in accordance with the terms of the contract, regardless of whether
the County was a party to the original contract. Howard County took the lead in soliciting the resulting
agreement. If the Board of County Commissioners determines that participation by Washington County
would result in cost benefits or administrative efficiencies, it could approve the purchase of these
vehicles in accordance with the Public Local Laws referenced above by resolving that participation
would result in cost benefits or in administrative efficiencies.
The County will benefit from direct cost savings in the purchase of these vehicles because of the
economies of scale this buying group leveraged. I am confident that any bid received as a result of an
independent County solicitation would exceed the spending savings that the Baltimore County contract
provides through this agreement. Additionally, the County will realize savings through administrative
efficiencies as a result of not preparing, soliciting, and evaluating a bid. This savings/cost avoidance
would, I believe, be significant.
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Funding is available in the department's capital budget 600300-30-10500-
VEH008 for this purchase.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Hertrich Fleet Quote received June 16, 2025
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
HeRTRICH FLEET SERVICES, INC.
1427 Bay Road Milford, DE 19963
Ford - Chevrolet - Dodge - Jeep
Lincoln - Mercury - Buick - GMC - Toyota - Nissan
“A Member of the HeRTRICH Family of Automobile Dealerships”
(800) 698-9825 (302) 422-3300 Fax: (302) 839-0555
WASHINGTON COUNTY
2026 Chevrolet Equinox AWD
Pricing per Howard County Contract
# 4400004546
MSRP $ 31,995
INVOICE $ 30,587
HOWARD CO CONTRACT $ - 485
GOVERNMENT INCENTIVE $ -1,130
SUB-TOTAL $ 28,972
1 ADDITIONAL FOB $+ 200
TOTAL EACH $ 29,172
TOTAL FOR 3 $ 87,516
To place orders please contact
Susan Hickey
800-698 -9825
shickey@hertrichfleet.com
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Contract Award (PUR-1726) – Insurance Brokerage and Risk Management Services
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Kentner, CPPO, Director of Purchasing, and Tracy McCammon,
Risk Management Coordinator, Human Resources
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the contract for the Insurance Brokerage and
Risk Management Services to the responsible, responsive proposer , with the lowest proposal cost.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Proposals were seeking a team of industry professionals to assist and
guide the County in identifying and managing the unique public sector risks and exposures
encountered in its daily operations. The County accepted proposals from firms interested in
providing the County with design of its risk financing program, including brokerage services, to
include, but not be limited to, its property and casualty risk financing program for the County
which would contemplate use of cost-effective self-insured retentions, insurance deductibles, and
other risk financing techniques. Services will also extend to preparation of insurance specifications
for the insurance market, marketing and solicitation of insurance quotations, placement of
insurance policies at the request of the County and other broker services as enumerated in the
Scope of Services contained in the Request for Proposals, including efforts necessary to insure
those volunteer fire and rescue companies who are members of the Washington County Volunteer
Fire & Rescue Association. The term of the contract is for a one (1) year period tentatively to
commence July 1, 2025, with an option by the County to renew for up to four (4) additional
consecutive one (1) year periods thereafter contingent upon satisfactory annual performance by
the Contractor and fiscal appropriations.
The Coordinating Committee shall be comprised of the County Administrator, Risk Management
Administrator, Safety Compliance Coordinator, Director of Human Resources (Chairman
Designee), and Director of Purchasing. The Request for Proposals (RFP) was advertised on the
State’s “eMaryland Marketplace Advantage” website, on the County’s web site, the County’s new
online bidding site with Ionwave and in the local newspaper. Twenty-eight (28) persons/firms
accessed the RFP from the County’s web site. Submittals were received on May 28, 2025 , from
three (3) firms. The Qualifications & Experience/Technical Proposals of two (2) of the firms were
considered non-responsive by the Coordinating Committee. The Price Proposals of the one
responsive, responsible firm was opened.
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Public Copy
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted in individual departments for each of the lines of
coverage.
CONCURRENCES: As recommended by the Coordinating Committee.
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: 2025-2026 Property and Casualty Insurance Renewal
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Tracy McCammon, Risk Management Coordinator and Patrick Buck, CBIZ
Insurance Services
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to renew the property and liability policies with Travelers
Insurance Company and the airport liability with AIG. Also, approve the attached budget adjustment
to cover the additional premium for the cyber liability policy.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Renewal quotes from insurance carriers are reflected in the attached premium
comparison. The total renewal is a 14.7% increase in premium compared to last year’s actuals.
DISCUSSION: As you can see from the attached premium comparison, our biggest increases are in
cyber liability and drone liability coverage lines. We recently added seven new drones to the policy
that were not budgeted earlier in the year. Also, Travelers has agreed to remove the sublimit on the
ransomware coverage.
FISCAL IMPACT: A budget adjustment is attached to transfer funds to help pay for the increase in
the cyber liability premium. Excluding the additional cost for cyber, premiums for FY 2026 are
$1,886,000. Unfortunately, we are over budget by 1.0 %.
CONCURRENCES: Michelle Gordon, County Administrator and Kelcee Mace, CFO
ALTERNATIVES: Complete a market bid which would cause a lapse in insurance coverage
ATTACHMENTS: Premium comparison and budget adjustment for the additional cost to cyber
liability.
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: None
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Line of Coverage FY2025 FY2026 $Change
%
Travelers
Pkg – Auto Liability (Incl. Buses) $548,412 $596,888 $48,476 8.8%
Pkg - Auto PD (Incl. Buses) $123,537 $136,501 $12,964 10.5%
Pkg - Property $288,825 $314,519 $25,694 8.9%
Pkg - Inland Marine $18,469 $19,872 $1,403 7.6%
Pkg - Boiler & Machinery $20,637 $22,453 $1,816 8.8%
Pkg – GL, Liquor, Products, EBL $154,360 $168,870 $14,510 9.4%
Pkg – Law (Incl. Dispatch E&O) $218,693 $300,750 $82,057 37.5%
Pkg - Excess Liability $101,078 $107,969 $6,891 6.8%
Pkg – Management Liability $30,856 $34,964 $4,108 13.3%
Pkg – Employment Practice Liability (EPL) $72,593 $79,380 $6,787 9.3%
Pkg - Professional Liability (PSTC) $4,495 $4,495 $0 0.0%
Pkg – Crime $5,061 $6,387 $1,326 26.2%
**Pkg - Cyber $61,181 $92,571 $31,390 51.3%
$237,422 14.4%
Airport Liability $21,198 $21,198 $0 0.0%
**Drone IM & Liability $2,070 $9,925 $7,855 379.5%
$7,855 33.8%
** Cyber coverage - removal of
ransomware sublimit additional $30k
otherwise leaving the sublimit; premium
** Drone coverage - Seven additional
Washington County, Maryland
Budget Adjustment Form
Are external signatures needed?
Yes No
Fiscal Year *
Budget Amendment BOCC Approval Date (if known)
Budget Transfer Preparer, if applicable
Department Head Authorization
Division Director / Elected Official Authorization
Click here to reorder rows
0000
0000
Explain Budget Adjustment *
Attach Additional Items
Save as Draft Submit
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Adoption of the Resolution adopting a Fee Schedule for the Civil Citations of the
Washington County Fire Prevention Code
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Greg Cartrette, Director of Permits and Inspections/Code Official
RECOMMENDED MOTION: To approve the resolution that adopts the civil citations of the
Washington County Fire Prevention Code subject to fines listed in the previously approved Fire
Code Fee Schedule.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Similar to the adoption of such a resolution for the County’s Building
Code, the County must adopt the resolution which outlines which sections of the Washington County
Fire Prevention Code Create a civil offense punishable by a fine, outlined in the Fire Code Fee Schedule.
DISCUSSION: Washington County held a public hearing and adopted a local Fire Prevention
Code and its accompanying Fire code Fee Schedule on April 29, 2025. The Fee Schedule allows
for fines as a result of civil citations. This resolution outlines the provisions of the Fire
Prevention Code, which are considered civil citations and punishable by the relevant fee in the
adopted Fee Schedule.
FISCAL IMPACT: None currently.
CONCURRENCES: Deputy County Attorney
ALTERNATIVES: Decline to approve the resolution
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
1 OF 2
RESOLUTION NO. RS-2025-___
(RESOLUTION ADOPTING FEE SCHEDULE FOR CIVIL CITATIONS)
RECITALS
On April 29, 2025, the Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
(the "County") adopted the following code governing all fire prevention work performed in
Washington County, Maryland, said code being effective July 1, 2025:
the Maryland State Fire Prevention Code (i.e. the National Fire Protection
Association (”NFPA”) 101 Life Safety Code, the NFPA 1 Fire Code, with State
Amendments) with local amendments (the "County Fire Code").
Pursuant to Maryland Code, Public Safety Article Section 9-701(a), the County may
impose civil citations for violations of the County Fire Code and the Code provides for such civil
citations. The Code of Public Local Laws of Washington County, Maryland Section 1-112 also
provides that the fine for a civil offense shall be established by resolution of the Board of County
Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Washington County, Maryland that the fine for a civil citation issued for a violation set forth
below be established as follows:
1. Civil citations will only be issued for the following violations of the above-
referenced Codes:
a. Work started without proper permit (NFPA 1.12);
b. Stop work order (unlawful continuance) (NFPA 1.7.13); or
c. Violation of unsafe structure posting (NFPA 1.16.3);
2. Any violation of the above shall be punishable by a fine of One Hundred Dollars
($100.00) per day. Each day the violation continues shall be deemed a separate offense.
3. In the event a second citation for a violation is issued regarding the same property
within two-years from the date of the initial citation, the fine shall increase to Two Hundred
Dollars ($200.00) per day for each day the property is in violation.
2 OF 2
Adopted this ____ day of __________, 2025.
Effective the 1st day of July, 2025.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
____________________________ BY:__________________________________
Dawn L. Marcus , Clerk John F. Barr, President
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency:
____________________________ Mail to:
Rosalinda Pascual Office of the County Attorney
Deputy County Attorney 100 W. Washington Street, Suite 1101
Hagerstown, MD 21740
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: MOU between Office of State Fire Marshal (OSFM) and Washington County
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Greg Cartrette, Director of Permits and Inspections/Code Official &
Rosalinda Pascual, Deputy County Attorney
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move for an approval to accept the revised MOU between the
OSFM and Washington County pending State Approval and County Attorney's Office final
review
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The OSFM has presented a MOU detailing what responsibilities the
OSFM will continue to have in Washington County and the responsibilities Washington County
Division of Permits & Inspections will assume for enforcing fire prevention and the adopted fire code.
Deputy County Attorney has provided redline changes and awaits approval of such changes from the
State.
DISCUSSION: By the Division of Permits & Inspections moving to take over the fire plan
review and fire inspection there are certain areas, the OSFM will continue to operate in
Washington County. The OSFM will still continue to provide fire investigation, bomb squad/
explosive, permit and inspecting of fireworks, fire plan review and inspections for state
owned building, health care and schools. Comments and track changes provided to the State
namely correct the party signing the document and cite to a relevant statute.
FISCAL IMPACT: None currently.
CONCURRENCES: County Administrator
ALTERNATIVES: Stay with SFM
ATTACHMENTS: Draft MOU with Redlines/Comments
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU)
BETWEEN
THE OFFICE OF THE STATE FIRE MARSHAL
AND
THE WASHINGTON COUNTY GOVERNMENT
REGARDING THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF EACH AGENCY IN CARRYING OUT THEIR
MISSIONS IN WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is made this _______ day of June, 2025, by and
between the Washington County Government and the Office of the State Fire Marshal (OSFM).
It is the intent of the Washington County Government to manage the County’s compliance with the
State Fire Prevention Code.
Previous to this agreement, the Office of the State Fire Marshal was the primary agency responsible
for enforcing the State Fire Prevention Code within Washington County.
The Washington County Government and the Office of the State Fire Marshal are entering into this
MOU to define and clarify specific authorities, roles, and responsibilities.
Therefore, the Washington County Government and the Office of the State Fire Marshal do hereby
promise and agree as follows:
1. The Washington County Government will serve as the principal agency for managing the
County’s compliance with the State Fire Prevention Code and other applicable fire safety
laws and standards in accordance with Item 5 of this MOU.
2. The Washington County Director of Permits & Inspections/Code Official may serve as an
Assistant State Fire Marshal-Inspections, as prescribed in §6-304 of the Maryland Public
Safety Article.
3. The Washington County Fire Inspectors may be delegated authority as Special Assistant
State Fire Marshals by the State Fire Marshal, as prescribed in §6-304 of the Maryland Public
Safety Article.
4. The OSFM will have primary responsibility for the following activities in Washington County:
a. Plan review and inspections for all;
i. new and existing CMS-certified health care and ambulatory health care
facilities,
ii. educational facilities,
iii. state-licensed foster care homes, and
iv. state-licensed day care facilities, as defined by the State Fire Prevention
Code.
v. new and existing state-owned properties.
vi. new and existing facilities and properties requiring a state license to operate.
vii. all public fireworks displays, and consumer fireworks retail facilities and
properties
b. Review and inspection, including the witnessing of tests, of fire protection systems
associated with the above-listed occupancies.
c. The completion of all fire protection matters on all projects submitted to the OSFM
for review or request for inspection before the effective date of this MOU.
d. Technical assistance to the Washington County Government on fire protection
matters.
e. The collection of fees for services provided by the OSFM in accordance with §6-308
of the Maryland Public Safety Article.
1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
Summary of Comments on 2025 - MOU Washington
County.docx
Page: 1
Number: 1 Author: rpascual Subject: Sticky Note Date: 6/10/2025 3:39:13 PM
Change "Washington County Government" to "Board of County Commissioners of Washington County" ("County")
Number: 2 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:09:44 PM
Number: 3 Author: rpascual Subject: Inserted Text Date: 6/20/2025 9:15:40 AM
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY
Number: 4 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/10/2025 3:41:08 PM
Number: 5 Author: rpascual Subject: Inserted Text Date: 6/20/2025 9:14:54 AM
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County (the "County")
Status
rpascual None 6/20/2025 9:29:34 AM
Number: 6 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:10:48 PM
Number: 7 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:10:51 PM
Number: 8 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:07:54 PM
Number: 9 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:07:57 PM
Number: 10 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:08:01 PM
Number: 11 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:08:04 PM
Number: 12 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:08:08 PM
Number: 13 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:08:11 PM
Number: 14 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:08:32 PM
Number: 15 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:08:35 PM
f. The investigation of all fire and explosive incidents.
5. The Washington County Government will have the primary responsibility for the following
activities in Washington County:
a. Plan reviews and inspections for all new and existing buildings within Washington
County housing occupancy classifications and conditions not listed in Item 4 of this
MOU.
b. Complaints regarding fire protection matters in all new and existing buildings
housing occupancy classifications and conditions not listed in Item 4 of this MOU.
c. Review and inspection, including the witnessing of tests, of fire protection systems
associated with occupancies and conditions not listed in Item 4 of this MOU.
d. The collection of fees for services provided by the Washington County Government
in accordance with established procedures.
e. Fire safety education and training within the County.
6. Appeals on matters regarding requirements of the State Fire Prevention Code shall be
directed to the State Fire Prevention Commission by the Washington County Government, as
prescribed in §6-501 of the Maryland Public Safety Article.
7. The Washington County Government will provide documentation and statistical data on the
enforcement of the State Fire Prevention Code as requested by the OSFM.
8. The Washington County Government and the OSFM agree to collaborate in furthering each
agency's goals.
9. Neither party waives any immunities of defense available in law or equity.
10. This MOU shall be governed by the laws of the State of Maryland, and the forum and
jurisdiction for any disputes or claims shall rest in Washington County, Maryland.
11. The term of this MOU shall be for one year, with five-year automatic renewals. Either party
may terminate this MOU for convenience with thirty days' notice.
This agreement shall become effective on July 1st, 2025.
Signed and adopted this _____ day of June, 2025.
________________________ ________________________
Witness Roland L. Butler Jr., Secretary
Maryland Department of State Police
________________________ ________________________
Witness Jason M. Mowbray
Acting State Fire Marshal
Office of the State Fire Marshal
________________________ ________________________
Witness NAME
Washington County Government
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9
10 11
1213
Page: 2
Number: 1 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:08:41 PM
Number: 2 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:08:43 PM
Number: 3 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:09:02 PM
Number: 4 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:09:08 PM
Number: 5 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:09:14 PM
Number: 6 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:09:18 PM
Number: 7 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:09:21 PM
Number: 8 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/11/2025 2:09:24 PM
Number: 9 Author: rpascual Subject: Inserted Text Date: 6/11/2025 2:15:18 PM
The designations granted in Item 2 and 3 may only be terminated in accordance with §6-304 of the Maryland Public Safety Article .
Number: 10 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/10/2025 3:39:25 PM
Number: 11 Author: rpascual Subject: Inserted Text Date: 6/10/2025 3:39:41 PM
John Barr, President
Number: 12 Author: rpascual Subject: Cross-Out Date: 6/10/2025 3:39:44 PM
Number: 13 Author: rpascual Subject: Inserted Text Date: 6/10/2025 3:40:03 PM
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County
ORDINANCE NO. ORD-2025-___
(Designation of County Fire Marshal)
RECITALS
It has been recommended that the Board of County Commissioners of Washington
County, Maryland (the “County”) enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (the
“MOU”) between the Office of the State Fire Marshal (the “State Fire Marshal”) and the
County, and to designate a County Fire Marshal.
The Office of the Fire Marshal (the “Fire Marshal”) is hereby authorized and
established as an office (the “Office”) within the Washington County Permits Department
(the “Department”). The Fire Marshal shall be responsible for the functions of the Office as
prescribed by the Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR) Title 6, and in accordance with
the MOU between the State Fire Marshal and the County acting on behalf of the
Department regarding the roles and responsibilities of the Office and the State Fire Marshal
in carrying out their respective missions in Washington County, Maryland.
The Board desires to designate Gregory Cartrette as its Fire Marshal on behalf of
Washington County, Maryland, in accordance with the MOU.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Washington County, Maryland, that:
1. The County shall enter into an MOU with the State Fire Marshal; and
2. Gregory Cartrette is appointed as Fire Marshal for Washington County,
Maryland.
Adopted and effective this _____ day of ____________, 2025.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
_________________________ ____________________________________
Dawn L. Marcus, Clerk John F. Barr, President
Approved as to form and Mail to:
and legal sufficiency: Office of the County Attorney
100 W. Washington Street, Suite 1101
___________________________ Hagerstown, MD 21740
Rosalinda Pascual
Deputy County Attorney
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Appointment – Washington County Administrative Charging Committee
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Rosalinda Pascual, Deputy County Attorney
RECOMMENDED MOTION: To approve the appointment of Doug Mullendore to fill the
vacancy on the Washington County Administrative Charging Committee due to Charlie
Summers’ resignation. This current three-year term ends August 31, 2026. This is a paid board.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Washington County Administrative Charging Committee
(ACC), in accordance with the provisions of ORD-2022-10, known as the Washington County
Maryland Police Accountability Ordinance, has two members who are appointed by the BOCC.
The ACC is 5-member board that reviews investigatory files of police misconduct complaints
against police officers in our County. They make determinations, based upon review of said files,
of whether to administratively charge involved police officers.
DISCUSSION:
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Reappointment – Washington County Police Accountability Board
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Rosalinda Pascual, Deputy County Attorney
RECOMMENDED MOTION: To Approve to re-appoint Steve McCarty to serve his
second full, three-year terms with the Police Accountability Board from July 1st, 2025 through
June 30th, 2028, and to appoint Amber Hill-Smart as the new Chair of the PAB, for the
remainder of her term, which ends August 31, 2026. This is not a paid board.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The PAB is a 7-member board that meets quarterly and an make policy
recommendations to law enforcement agencies, and other responsibilities as laid out by ORD-
2022-10, also known as the Washington County Maryland Police Accountability Ordinance. The
PAB is required to exist per the Maryland Police Accountability Act of 2021. Per the Ordinance,
the BOCC appoints the Chair of the PAB.
DISCUSSION:
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Approval of Siting Study and CVS 30% Design Stage Report for Replacement Air
Traffic Control Tower.
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24th, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Neil Doran, Airport Director, Andrew Eshleman, Director of Public
Works.
RECOMMENDED MOTION(S):
• Motion to empower the BOCC President to execute documents related to Siting Study
and CVS 30% Design Stage services with Engineering firm ADCI, and to authorize the
Airport Director to apply for and accept related grant offer from the MAA.
• Motion to approve the budget adjustment as presented.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Project involves obtaining an updated Replacement Air Traffic Control
Tower Siting Report as the previous report from 2016 has been determined by the FAA to be too
old to use. Project includes Virtual Modeling to obtain FAA approvals and a CVS Report
(Criteria, Plans, Cost) for the preferred alternative. Estimated to approximate a 30% design level.
Maryland Aviation Administration (MAA) is offering to fund 75% of these costs as a FY26
Special Grant for a project not to exceed $283,703.
Project increases the likelihood the State of Maryland may agree to fund the construction costs of
the replacement tower under a separate design-build grant that could be coming, provided it
meets an identified, highly compressed timeline. Time-sensitive project targeting December
2025 as a possible time for further project funding announcements (if we can be ready). Due to
our compressed timeline, requesting authorization for the Airport Director to sign/execute the
Task Order #7 agreement with Airport Design Consultants, Inc. (ADCI) for not-to-exceed
amount of $283,703.00.
DISCUSSION: Staff recommends approval. With BOCC approval/concurrence, President Barr
could sign the ADCI Task Order #7 document, Maryland Aviation Administration Special Grant
agreement (forthcoming) and related paperwork.
FISCAL IMPACT:
• MAA 75% share. Local Match 25% (Airport Fund).
Maryland Aviation Admin (Special Grant FY26) $212,777.00 (75%)
Airport Capital Fund $70,926.00 (25%)
Total $283,703.00
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Local funding will be transferred from three existing Airport CIP projects, pending BOCC
approval, as identified in the budget adjustment attached (EQP041 – $5,000, COM026 –
$59,930, and BLD088 – $5,996).
CONCURRENCES: Michelle Gordon, County Administrator; Kelcee Mace, CFO; Andrew
Eshleman, Director of Public Works.
ALTERNATIVES: We could choose to not undertake the updated FAA-required Siting study
or take advantage of this grant funding opportunity to mature the project to the 30% design stage.
Note: This course of action would lessen the chance the airport is ready should the State of
Maryland, Department of Transportation or Governor’s Office express further interest in funding
the follow-on design & construction phases for the replacement tower. We have been advised
that being “ready” by having more preliminary study and design work completed – would
increase our chances of receiving the desired funds for construction of the project.
ATTACHMENTS: ADCI/AJT proposal, and budget adjustment.
AUDIO/VISUAL TO BE USED: N/A.
PROJECT TITLE:
Hagerstown Regional Airport – Richard A. Henson Field (HGR)
PROJECT NO: County PO No.: Pending
FAA Grant No.: Pending
State Grant No.: Pending
06/17/25
Design/Bidding:Lump Sum
Construction:Pending
Design/Bidding: $283,703.00
Construction: $0.00
Task Order Total: $283,703.00
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
PO
ACCEPTED APPROVED
by: by:
______________________________ ______________________________
Ronald N. Morris, PE, CM for John F. Barr
Mahesh S. Kukata, P.E President
Vice President Board of Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Airport Design Consultants, Inc Washington County Administration Complex
6011 University Blvd, Suite 490 100 W. Washington St.
Ellicott City, MD 21043 Hagerstown, MD 21740
TASK ORDER NO: 7
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT: PUR-1714
AIRPORT DESIGN CONSULTANTS, INC.
AIRPORT:
ATTACHMENTS:
DATE OF ISSUANCE:
Construct New Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) - Siting Study and Concept Validation
Documents (CVD)
The original Agreement for Professional Services between Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland (County) and Airport Design
Consultants, Inc. (ADCI) for professional services at the Hagerstown Regional Airport – Richard A. Henson Field (HGR) dated January 27, 2025 shall
govern all task orders executed under this agreement unless modified in writing and agreed to by the County and ADCI. The current Federal Contract
Provisions have been included in Attachment A and are herewith being made a part of this Task Order Proposal.
METHOD OF PAYMENT:
TASK ORDER AMOUNT:
See the attached ADCI's Scope of Work and Price Proposal.
L:\Proposals\HGR\2025-HGR-1707 ATCT Siting Study-PDD TO 7\20250617 TO 7 Fee - 2025-HGR-1707 ATCT Siting Study-CVD R1.xlsx
AIRPORT DESIGN CONSULTANTS, INC.
6031 UNIVERSITY BLVD. SUITE 330 ELLICOTT CITY, MD 21043 www.adci-corp.com 410.465.9600
June 17, 2025
Mr. Neil Doran, C.M, ACE
Airport Director
Hagerstown Regional Airport – Richard A. Henson Field
18434 Showalter Road
Hagerstown, Maryland 21742
Sent electronically to: ndoran@washco-md.net
Reference: Scope of Work and Price Proposal (Revision No. One (1))
Task Order No. Seven (7) – Construct New Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) - Siting
Study and Concept Validation Documents (CVD)
Hagerstown Regional Airport – Richard A. Henson Field (HGR), Hagerstown, MD
Dear Mr. Doran:
The Airport Design Consultants, Inc. (ADCI) team is pleased to submit this proposal to the Board of County
Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland, a body corporate and politic and a political subdivision of
the State of Maryland (County), to provide Professional Services associated with the Construct New Air
Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) - Siting Study and Concept Validation Documents (CVD) Services (Project) at
the Hagerstown Regional Airport – Richard A. Henson Field (HGR). Our proposal has been updated based
on comments received from the Maryland Aviation Administration Office of Regional Aviation Assistance
(MAA) on June 16, 2025.
Whereas the County and ADCI entered into an Agreement (PUR-1714) for ADCI to provide Professional
Services that was originally executed on January 27, 2025. All the terms and conditions of the Agreement
remain in full effect and apply to this Specific Project Proposal.
For this task, the following subconsultants will assist us:
AJT Engineering Inc. – Siting Study and Concept Validation
Whereas, the County and ADCI in their mutual covenants herein agree in respect to the scope of work and
price proposal for the referenced Project as set forth below:
2025-HGR-1707
Mr. Neil Doran, C.M, ACE
June 17, 2025
Page 2 of 8
A. DESCRIPTION OF WORK
Background Information
The Airport serves all aviation markets including general aviation, business, military and commercial
service. Scheduled passenger service is offered at HGR by Allegiant Air. The Airport Reference
Code is shown as C-III on the current Airport Layout Plan (ALP) and the Design Aircraft is A321-200.
The ATCT is located in Hagerstown, Maryland on Hagerstown Regional Airport (HGR) which is
approximately 5 miles north of city center, 67 miles west northwest of Baltimore and 14 miles west
of Camp David. The airport adjoins US Interstate 81 on the west and is just south of the Pennsylvania
state line.
The proposed Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) is a replacement for the existing short and
substandard tower originally built in 1935. The new tower is projected to handle over 550 Air Carrier
and 40,000 operations of very diverse and strategic traffic. Allegiant Airlines provides scheduled
commercial traffic and there are a multitude of aviation related tenants on the airport to include Sierra
Nevada who provides critical aviation related services to the US Government. Several flight schools
exist as well. There are approximately 157 based aircraft including numerous based corporate jets,
rotary wing and equipment test bed aircraft.
Washington County owns and operates the airport. Air Traffic Control Specialists (ATCS) provide air
traffic service through the FAA Contract Tower Program. The ATCSs are employed by Midwest ATC
Services, Inc. (Midwest). It is anticipated that the new ATCT, communications, weather and NAVAID
equipment will continue to be maintained by the FAA.
A siting study will be performed utilizing the FAA Alternate Siting Process (ASP). In accordance with
FAA Order 6480.4B - Airport Traffic Control Tower Siting Process, the site selection study will review
three (3) different locations at the airport. Conceptual plans and elevations for each candidate site
will be developed for review and selection. All concepts will be reviewed based on the building codes
and regulatory standpoints. ADCI will meet with the County and other Stakeholders to present the
siting and height study and to discuss the most feasible option. After the construction of the new
tower, the existing tower will be demolished and removed.
Under this Proposal, the following Professional Engineering Services will be provided:
B. BASIC SERVICES OF CONSULTANT
Professional Engineering Services to be performed under this task will be as detailed below.
1. Project Development
a. Scoping Meeting - Prepare for and attend one (1) project Scoping meeting with
personnel from the County, HGR, Maryland Aviation Administration Office of Regional
Aviation Assistance (MAA) and the Design Team to discuss the overall project scope,
work schedule, airport operational safety, contract relationships, contract time, utility
interface, project coordination, design investigations, and other project specific items.
Prepare and distribute meeting minutes.
b. Proposal Preparation. Prepare the Scope of Work, Schedule of Fees/Fee Estimate by
Mr. Neil Doran, C.M, ACE
June 17, 2025
Page 3 of 8
Task. Verify Disadvantage Business Enterprise (DBE) requirements for Project and
ensure that DBE Goals are included.
c. Airspacing. Completion and submission of required Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) Form 7460-1, Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration’s, for the ATCT and
critical Construction Equipment in accordance with FAA Office of Airports (ARP)
Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) 9.2 Standard Operating Procedure for FAA
Aeronautical Study, Coordination and Evaluation.
d. ALP P&I Update. Prepare a Pen & Ink (P&I) Update to the Airport Layout Plan (ALP),
in accordance with FAA SOP 2.0 Standard Procedure for FAA Review and Approval of
Airport Layout Plans (ALPs) for the proposed location of the ATCT for submission to and
approval by the FAA/MAA.
e. FAA Documented Categorical Exclusion (CATX). Based on coordination with the
FAA it was determined that the FAA Documented Categorical Exclusion (CATX) would
be the appropriate National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) document for this Project.
This Project will include the preparation of one (1) FAA Documented Categorical
Exclusion (CATX) for the construction of the proposed development in accordance with
the requirements set forth in Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airports Standard
Operating Procedure (SOP) No. 5.1, based upon the guidance in Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) Orders 1050.1F – Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures, and the Environmental Desk Reference for Airport Actions and 5050.4B –
NEPA Implementing Instructions for Airport Actions for submission to and approval by
the FAA.
2. Project Administration
a. Project Administration. Throughout the course of the project ADCI shall provide all
necessary coordination with County, HGR Staff, Subconsultants, and appropriate
Federal, State and Local agencies, including correspondence, telephone contact,
memorandums and a maximum of one (1) meeting(s) or conference(s). Such
coordination shall be provided during period covered by the agreed upon schedule for
completion of the Project.
b. Grant Management Assistance. Throughout the course of the project ADCI shall
provide the following grant management services to assist the County:
1. Prepare one (1) MAA Grant Application for County Review and submittal to MAA,
including all correspondence and communications related thereto.
2. Assist County with Quarterly Performance Reporting, as required.
3. Assist County with Financial Reporting, as needed.
4. Assist County in the preparation of Requests for Reimbursement (RFR) from the
MAA during the duration of the Project, with legal assistance provided by the
County. Prepare and submit draft MAA requests for reimbursement of County's
project expenses. Prepare pay request summary spreadsheet, project summary
spreadsheet and documentation for County's use in submitting RFR’s.
Mr. Neil Doran, C.M, ACE
June 17, 2025
Page 4 of 8
5. Preparation and Submission of one (1) Final Grant Closeout Package including the
Additional Documents Needed for Financial Close Out of Grant.
c. Internal QA/QC Review. Engineer’s Senior Engineer and Senior Project/Construction
Manager will perform an Independent Technical Quality Assurance/Control Review of
the Documents for each submittal prior to submitting them to County/Agencies for each
submittal and prior to approval to advertise the Project for Bidding. ADCI will utilize the
checklist included in the FAA ARP SOP 1.00, FAA Evaluation of Sponsor’s Construction
Safety and Phasing Plans Funded by the AIP or PFC Programs, as a guide for the
review of the CSPP.
3. Siting Report/ Safety Risk Management Document
The intent of this task is to establish lines of communications, confirm the project scope, and
collect the information necessary to prepare the Siting Report. Services will include:
a. Kick-off Meeting. Key members of the Project Team will participate in a kick-off
meeting with representatives of the County, HGR and, at a minimum, perform the
following:
Assist in review of the scope of work, approach, deliverables, and overall program
goals
Review project schedule
Establish design criteria
Review operational considerations
Review communication processes
Review formats and standards
b. Site Visit/Data Collection. Conduct field investigations and collect available data on
the site, facilities, related utilities and proposed changes to establish existing conditions
and confirm the functionality and compatibility of the proposed ATCT. Review current
Airport Master Plan and planimetric and topographic survey data to determine its
adequacy to support the siting and design effort. Compile a list of additional design
survey elements that may be necessary to complete the siting analysis. Discuss with
Airport staff and utility providers (telephone, electric, etc.) to determine location and
quality of existing utilities. Coordinate with permitting authorities to establish code,
permitting requirements and timelines.
c. Drone Survey. Establish the scope of any special surveys, boundary surveys, or
special tests which may be required for the design.
1. Survey will be conducted using a drone and will include the following:
a. Pre-Flight Planning
Coordinate with County to define project limits and flight objectives
Obtain FAA airspace authorization, if required
Conduct site-specific risk assessment and flight planning
Verify weather conditions and NOTAMs for safe flight operations
Mr. Neil Doran, C.M, ACE
June 17, 2025
Page 5 of 8
b. Drone Flight Operations
Mobilize FAA-certified drone pilot(s) and required UAS equipment to the
project site
Conduct flights to capture high-resolution aerial imagery and/or video
Perform operations in accordance with FAA Part 107 regulations and
applicable local laws
Use autonomous or manual flight paths as needed (grid mapping, orbit,
linear path, etc.)
Perform site reconnaissance and obstacle avoidance to ensure safety
d. Alternative Sites Development. Identify and evaluate potential ATCT locations. A
maximum of three (3) sites will be evaluated using appropriate design criteria to
determine optimal location for the new tower.
TERPS and Airspace analysis
Filing Form 7460-1
Draft Siting Study Document
Risk Management Panel Meeting, Travel and Preparation
Final Siting Study Document
Siting Coordination
e. Design Review Meetings. Meet with airport and Town staff to develop the best strategy
for addressing the Siting Study and Shadow Analysis required in the current edition of
FAA Order 6480.4, Airport Traffic Control Tower Siting Process. The principal objective
of this task will be to gain approval to utilize the "Alternative Siting Process" outlined in
Chapter 9 of FAA Order 6480.4 in lieu of the AFTIL process.
f. Safety Risk Management Panel (SRMP) Meeting. Establish personnel requirements
and date for Safety Risk Management Panel (SRMP) meeting. Assist in the SRMP
meeting to generate the hazards required.
g. Prepare Siting Report. Develop a draft Siting Study and distribute to the Airport.
Revise Siting Study based on comments received and resubmit as final to the Airport.
The report will meet the requirements of FAA Order 6480.4.
4. Concept Validation Documents (CVD)
Based on the results and acceptance of the Siting Report, the Concept Validation
Documents (CVD) is a crucial document in the development of a new FAA Air Traffic Control
Tower (ATCT). Its purpose is to clearly define the project's scope, objectives, and
requirements. In essence, the CVD serves as a roadmap for the project team. More
specifically the CVD phase includes the following tasks:
a. Pre-Design Meeting. Prepare for, attend, and provide meeting notes for one (1) project
Pre-Design Meeting with personnel from the County, FAA, ATCT, MAA, and other
stakeholders to discuss the overall project scope, work schedule, airport operational
safety, project coordination, design investigations, and other project specific items in
Mr. Neil Doran, C.M, ACE
June 17, 2025
Page 6 of 8
accordance with the requirements of FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5370-12B Quality
Management for Federally Funded Airport Construction Projects. All comments will be
given due consideration and differences resolved.
b. Preliminary Plans. Design effort to reach schematic plans to include evaluation and
documentation of design criteria, and written descriptions of the work elements involved
in each phase of the Project. The current editions of FAA Advisory Circular (AC)
150/5370-2, Operational Safety on Airport During Construction, and AC 150/5300-13B,
Airport Design, will be the basis of most geometric design parameters ADCI will utilize
for this Project. Plans to be included in this submission generally include:
Cover Sheet
General and Phasing Plans
Demolition Plans
Site Plans
Typical Sections and Paving Details
Grading and Drainage Plans
Drainage Details
Utility Plans
Utility Details
Building Elevations
Floor Plans
c. Preliminary Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Cost (EOPC). Based on the information
contained in the preliminary design documents, prepare and submit an Engineer’s
Opinion of Probable Cost (EOPC).
d. Concept Validation Report. Prepare the 4. Concept Validation Report in accordance
with the Federal and/or State requirements and furnish to the County such documents
and design data, so that approval may be secured from such governmental authorities
having jurisdiction over the Project. Reference documents will be primarily FAA Order
6480.4, current International Building Code (IBC), Maryland Building Performance
Standards (MBPS), and any Washington County, Maryland adaptations of these codes.
C. COMPENSATION
For the Professional Engineering Services described in Paragraph B above, we request
compensation on a Lump Sum Fee basis. Billing will be based on the approximate percentage of
work completed. The detailed fee estimate is attached. Reimbursable expenses will be billed in
accordance with the Master Consultant Agreement. The total cost for the scope of services to be
provided is $283,703.
A list of tasks, including list of drawings and breakdowns of the man-hours and costs required for the
project are attached to this Proposal.
Mr. Neil Doran, C.M, ACE
June 17, 2025
Page 7 of 8
D. DELIVERABLES
Deliverables included in this contract include:
1. Required Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Form 7460-1 filings.
2. ALP P&I Update.
3. FAA Documented Categorical Exclusion (CATX).
4. Siting Report/ Safety Risk Management Document.
5. Concept Validation Documents (CVD) (Plans, EOPC and Report).
E. ASSUMPTIONS
Items not included in this contract include:
1. All application, submission, and review fees will be paid by the client and are not part of this
proposal. If paid for by ADCI, they shall be reimbursed as an additional service, in addition to
the quoted fee herein.
2. Should additional services for revisions or work outside of this Scope of Services be required,
we will provide a scope of work and fee estimate for those services to the client. We will not
commence additional services work until the additional services scope and fee estimate have
been approved.
3. Final Design, Bidding and Construction Phase Services will be provided under a separate
agreement(s).
4. All expenses will be billed on a reimbursable basis on the assumptions presented in the attached
fee.
F. TIME OF COMPLETION
ADCI will endeavor to complete the Siting Report and Concept Validation Documents services by
the MAA requested milestone date of December 31, 2025. A schedule has been attached to attempt
to achieve this milestone. Critical input, reviews and approvals are required by outside agencies,
such as the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Air Traffic Organization (ATO) who has a defined
process for reviewing and approving new Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) siting. This process
is primarily governed by FAA Order 6480.4B, Airport Traffic Control Tower Siting Process, and is
outlined on two pages in Appendix A of that Order. Every attempt will be made to achieve the
milestone, but it should be noted that we have no control over the comment and review time required
by external government agencies.
G. AUTHORIZATION
ADCI will proceed with this project immediately upon receipt of the written Notice-to-Proceed by the
County.
Mr. Neil Doran, C.M, ACE
June 17, 2025
Page 8 of 8
Thank you for the opportunity to submit this Proposal. We look forward to collaborating with you and
your stakeholders on this Project. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Ronald N. Morris, PE, CM
Senior Engineering Manager
Attachments
L:\Proposals\HGR\2025-HGR-1707 ATCT Siting Study-PDD TO 7\20250616 TO 6 Proposal - 2025-HGR-1707 ATCT Siting Study-CVD R0.docx
Date Prepared: 06/17/25
No. Hrs. Rate/Hr. Total No. Hrs. Rate/Hr. Total
3 $110.00 $330.00 0 $110.00 $0.00
113 $105.00 $11,865.00 0 $105.00 $0.00
194 $60.00 $11,640.00 0 $60.00 $0.00
226 $50.00 $11,300.00 0 $50.00 $0.00
0 $65.00 $0.00 0 $65.00 $0.00
201 $45.00 $9,045.00 0 $45.00 $0.00
$44,180.00 $0.00
$915.00 $0.00
III. MATERIAL AND SUPPLIES (Not Included in G&A costs)$0.00 $0.00
IV. INDIRECT COSTS
1. Overhead on Direct Labor 148.70% $65,696.00 $0.00
2. General and Administrative Costs 0% $0.00 $0.00
3. Profit - All above Direct and Indirect Costs 10% $10,988.00 $0.00
$76,684.00 $0.00
$121,779.00 $0.00
VI. REIMBURSABLE ITEMS
$1,589.00 $0.00
$160,335.00 $0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$161,924.00 $0.00
$283,703.00 $0.00
$283,703.00
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COST SUMMARY
Airport Design Consultants, Inc.
6011 University Blvd., Suite 490, Ellicott City, MD 21043
Hagerstown Regional Airport – Richard A. Henson Field (HGR)
Construct New Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) - Siting Study and Concept Validation Documents (CVD)
TOTAL OF SECTION I
I. DIRECT COSTS Design and Bidding Phase Services Construction Phase Services
Work Classification
Senior Project Manager
Senior Airport Engineer
II. CONTRACTOR IN HOUSE REPRODUCTION COSTS
TOTAL OF SECTION IV
Project Engineer
Design Engineer
Resident Project Representative
CAD Designer
TOTAL OF SECTION I
TOTAL OF SECTION VI
VII. PROPOSAL (TOTAL OF SECTIONS V AND VI)
VIII. PROPOSAL (TOTAL ALL SUBTASKS)
V. TOTAL OF SECTIONS I, II, III, AND IV
1. Travel and Subsistence
2. Sub-Consultant Services
L:\Proposals\HGR\2025-HGR-1707 ATCT Siting Study-PDD TO 7\
20250617 TO 7 Fee - 2025-HGR-1707 ATCT Siting Study-CVD R1.xlsx Page 1 of 3
Date Prepared: 06/17/25
Direct Costs Labor Classifications Totals
Task Activity Description
180 = Total Design Duration (Calendar Days)
1 Project Development (PD)
1.01 Scoping Meeting 1 1 1 0 8 0 0 0 8 16 $3,282.84
1.02 Proposal Preparation 0 0 0 1 8 0 0 0 4 13 $3,091.34
1.03 Airspacing 5 0 0 0 0 5 10 0 5 20 $2,804.09
1.04 ALP P&I Update 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 0 8 14 $2,106.49
1.05 FAA Documented Categorical Exclusion (CATX) 0 0 0 0 10 48 24 0 16 98 $16,003.85
Subtotal Project Development (PD) 6 1 1 1 28 53 38 0 41 161 $27,288.61
2 Project Administration (PA)
2.01 Project Administration (1 Meeting and 2 hrs/Week for 26 Weeks) 1 1 1 0 8 52 0 0 0 60 $10,833.37
2.02 Grant Management Assistance 7 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 0 28 $3,829.98
2.03 Internal Independent Technical Review (ITR) 3 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 24 $6,893.96
Subtotal Project Administration (PA) 11 1 1 0 32 52 28 0 0 112 $21,557.31
3 Siting Report/ Safety Risk Management Document
3.01 Kickoff Meeting 1 2 1 0 0 4 4 0 4 12 $1,696.13
3.02 Site Visit/Data Collection 1 0 0 0 8 0 16 0 0 24 $4,486.55
3.03 Drone Survey Coordination 1 0 0 0 2 0 4 0 0 6 $1,121.64
3.04 Alternative Sites Development 3 0 0 0 12 36 48 0 24 120 $18,876.33
3.05 Design Review Meetings 3 6 3 0 0 12 12 0 12 36 $5,088.40
3.06 Safety Risk Management Panel (SRMP) Meeting 1 0 0 0 2 2 6 0 2 12 $1,969.70
3.07 Prepare Siting Report 1 0 0 0 2 8 12 0 6 28 $4,267.69
Subtotal Siting Report/ Safety Risk Management Document 11 8 4 0 26 62 102 0 48 238 $37,506.44
4 Concept Validation Documents (CVD)
4.01 Pre-Design Meeting 1 1 1 2 0 0 4 0 4 10 $1,641.42
4.02 Preliminary Plans
Cover Sheet 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 4 8 $1,217.39
General and Phasing Plans 3 0 0 0 3 3 6 0 12 24 $3,652.16
Demolition Plans 4 0 0 0 4 4 8 0 16 32 $4,869.55
Site Plans 2 0 0 0 2 2 4 0 8 16 $2,434.77
Typical Sections and Paving Details 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 4 8 $1,217.39
Grading and Drainage Plans 4 0 0 0 4 4 8 0 16 32 $4,869.55
Drainage Details 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 4 8 $1,217.39
Utility Plans 2 0 0 0 2 2 4 0 8 16 $2,434.77
Utility Details 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 4 8 $1,217.39
Building Elevations 2 0 0 0 2 2 4 0 8 16 $2,434.77
No
.
o
f
M
e
a
l
s
No
.
o
f
T
r
i
p
s
Se
n
i
o
r
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
Ma
n
a
g
e
r
Se
n
i
o
r
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
De
s
i
g
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
Re
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
v
e
CA
D
D
e
s
i
g
n
e
r
Total Hours Task Fee
Hagerstown Regional Airport – Richard A. Henson Field (HGR)
Design and Bidding Phase Services
Airport Design Consultants, Inc.
6011 University Blvd., Suite 490, Ellicott City, MD 21043
No
.
o
f
S
h
e
e
t
s
,
Re
p
o
r
t
s
,
E
t
c
.
Construct New Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) - Siting Study and Concept Validation Documents (CVD)
SCHEUDLE OF FEES/FEE ESTIMATE BY TASK
BASIC SERVICES
L:\Proposals\HGR\2025-HGR-1707 ATCT Siting Study-PDD TO 7\
20250617 TO 7 Fee - 2025-HGR-1707 ATCT Siting Study-CVD R1.xlsx Page 2 of 3
Date Prepared: 06/17/25
Direct Costs Labor Classifications Totals
Task Activity Description No
.
o
f
M
e
a
l
s
No
.
o
f
T
r
i
p
s
Se
n
i
o
r
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
Ma
n
a
g
e
r
Se
n
i
o
r
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
De
s
i
g
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
Re
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
v
e
CA
D
D
e
s
i
g
n
e
r
Total Hours Task Fee
Hagerstown Regional Airport – Richard A. Henson Field (HGR)
Design and Bidding Phase Services
Airport Design Consultants, Inc.
6011 University Blvd., Suite 490, Ellicott City, MD 21043
No
.
o
f
S
h
e
e
t
s
,
Re
p
o
r
t
s
,
E
t
c
.
Construct New Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) - Siting Study and Concept Validation Documents (CVD)
SCHEUDLE OF FEES/FEE ESTIMATE BY TASK
Floor Plans 4 0 0 0 4 4 8 0 16 32 $4,869.55
4.03 Preliminary Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Cost (EOPC) 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 4 8 $1,217.39
4.04 Concept Validation Report 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 4 8 $1,217.39
Subtotal Concept Validation Documents (CVD) 28 1 1 2 27 27 58 0 112 226 $34,510.88
SUBTOTAL BASIC SERVICES 56 11 7 3 113 194 226 0 201 737 $120,863.24
SUBTOTAL SPECIAL SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0.00
TOTAL HOURS/FEE (BASIC AND SPECIAL SERVICES) 56 11 7 3 113 194 226 0 201 737 $120,864.00
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES CALCULATION
Item Rate Total
Travel and Substance
Airfare (To/From Airport) 0 miles/trip x 0 trips $1.740 /mile $0.00
Mileage (To/From Airport) 160 miles/trip x 7 trips $0.670 /mile $751.00
Per Diem (RPR) 0 days @ local GSA rates $166.00 /day $0.00
Meals & Incidentals (M&IE) 11 people on trips $68.00 /person $748.00
Lodging 0 nights $110.00 /night $0.00
Cell Phone 0 months $60.00 /month $0.00
Tolls 0 trips $0.00 /trip $0.00
Postage 6 packages $15.00 /package $90.00
Subtotal Travel and Substance $1,589.00
Reproduction
Copies 5000 copies $0.12 /copy $600.00
Exhibit Prints/Plots 50 dwgs $1.80 /drawing $90.00
Drawing Prints/Plots 25 dwg per set x 5 sets $1.80 /drawing $225.00
Subtotal Reproduction $915.00
Sub-Consultant Services
Safety Risk Management Decision (SRMD) Document - AJT Engineering, Inc. 1 Lump Sum $131,681.00 $131,681.00
Concept Validation- AJT Engineering, Inc. 1 Lump Sum $28,654.00 $28,654.00
Subtotal Sub-Consultant Services $160,335.00
TOTAL REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES $162,839.00
TOTAL FEE $283,703.00
Calculation
SPECIAL SERVICES
L:\Proposals\HGR\2025-HGR-1707 ATCT Siting Study-PDD TO 7\
20250617 TO 7 Fee - 2025-HGR-1707 ATCT Siting Study-CVD R1.xlsx Page 3 of 3
Total Direct Labor from page 2 $83,868
OTHER DIRECT COSTS
Subconsultants
Meetings, Survey of Site Elevation and UAV Elevation (ADCI)
Site Plan and Utilities Support, UAV Photos and Videos (ADCI)
Environmental Assessment/CATEX (ADCI)
SRM Preparation and Support ADCI
Virtual ATCT Airport Model $32,552
Subtotal ODC $32,552
Field Investigations/Meetings Travel Costs
# Personnel # Days # PerDiem Days # Hotel Days Vehicle Days Airfare Tickets
KickOff Meeting at HGR 1 2 2 1 2 $132 1
Safety Risk Mgmt Panel at HGR 1 4 4 3 4 $164 2
Note: Hotel and PerDiem per GSA JTR Subtotal 6 4 6 3
Unit cost $64 $123 $85 $296 $500
Extended Cost $384 $492 $510 $296 $1,500
Subtotal Travel for Kickoff and Panel Meeting $3,182
Reproduction for Siting and Pre Design
Drawings
1/2 Size 50 @ $0.65 =$33
Documentation & Electronic Media
"A" Size 500 @ $0.15 =$75
Subtotal Repro $108
Subtotal $119,710
Operating Margin 15%$17,956.46
Grand Total Labor and Other Direct Costs $137,666
Hagerstown Regional Airport (HGR) ATCT Engineering Services Cost Proposal
SUMMARY SHEET
Siting Study SRMD Pre Design Evaluation Phase
10%Fee $11,971
$131,681
Project Project Arch Designer/Doc
Principal Engr Designer Drafter Admin
Task $88 $74 $45 $45 $40 Total
Pre Design Evaluation
KickOff Meeting and Field Work in AUO 16 16
Meeting Preparation 8 8
Concept Kickoff Meeting Virtual
Initial Concept Generation 24 24 48
Site Alternatives 16 16
Meeting 4 4 4 12
TERPs and Air Space Analysis Coordination 4 4
Teleconferencing 16 16
FAA 7460 for 3 Sites Coordination 12 12
Model Generation Support 40 16 8 64
Draft Siting Study Document 40 40 16 8 104
Risk Management Panel Meeting Travel, Attendance and Preparation 80 80
Comparative Site Analysis Document Review 4 8 16 16 44
Final Siting Study Document 16 4 8 16 44
SRMD Coordination with FAA 40 40
Comm and Weather Equipment Evaluation 8
QC Review (Inhouse peer review)8 4 2 14
Subtotal 240 128 30 84 48 530
Subtotal Base Rate $21,120 $9,472 $1,350 $3,780 $1,920 $37,642
Concept Validation -25% Design
Site/Facility Layout/Elements/Reqts.ID/Plans (assume update of previous concept)16 40 40 96
Renderings 4 40 44
Subtotal Concept Validation 4 40 44
Subtotal Base Rate $352 $1,800 $2,152
Total Labor $39,794
Combined Overhead 110%$43,773
Subtotal $83,567
FCCM 0.36%$301
Total AJT Labor $83,868
Auburn Airport ATCT Engineering Services Cost Proposal
Manhour Breakdown-AJT Engineering-SRMD and PreDesign
Hagerstown
HGR
at HGR
Total Direct Labor from page 2 $26,049
OTHER DIRECT COSTS
Subconsultants
Subtotal ODC $0
Field Investigations/Meetings Travel Costs
# Personnel # Days # PerDiem Days # Hotel Days Vehicle Days Airfare Tickets
KickOff Meeting at HGR
Safety Risk Mgmt Panel at HGR
Note: Hotel and PerDiem per GSA JTR Subtotal 0 0 0 0
Unit cost $64 $123 $85 $0 $500
Extended Cost $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal Travel for Kickoff and Panel Meeting $0
Reproduction for Siting and Pre Design
Drawings
1/2 Size @ $0.65 =$0
Documentation & Electronic Media
"A" Size @ $0.15 =$0
Subtotal Repro $0
Subtotal $26,049
Operating Margin 15%$3,907.42
Grand Total Labor and Other Direct Costs $29,957
Hagerstown Regional Airport (HGR) ATCT Engineering Services Cost Proposal
SUMMARY SHEET
Preliminary Design Document - Pre Design Evaluation Phase
10%Fee $2,605
$28,654
Project Project Arch Designer/Doc
Principal Engr Designer Drafter Admin
Task $96 $74 $45 $40 $45 Total
Pre Design Evaluation
KickOff Meeting 2 2 2 6
Meeting Preparation 4 4
Teleconferencing 16 16
FAA 7460 12 12
FAA Coordination 16 16 8 40
PDD Input 16 16 16 48
Comm and Weather Equipment Evaluation 8
Cost Estimating 4 4
QC Review (Inhouse peer review)4 2 2 8
Subtotal 70 14 20 34 8 146
Subtotal Base Rate $6,720 $1,036 $900 $1,360 $360 $10,376
Concept Validation -15% Design
Site/Facility Layout/Elements/Reqts.ID/Plans (assume update of previous concept)16 40 40 96
Renderings 4 40 44
Subtotal Concept Validation 4 40 44
Subtotal Base Rate $384 $1,600 $1,984
Total Labor $12,360
Combined Overhead 110%$13,596
Subtotal $25,956
FCCM 0.36%$93
Total AJT Labor $26,049
Auburn Airport ATCT Engineering Services Cost Proposal
Manhour Breakdown-AJT Engineering-SRMD and PreDesign
Hagerstown
HGR
Pre-Design
Washington County, Maryland
Budget Adjustment Form
Preparer:
Budget Amendment
Budget Transfer
Fiscal Year
BOCC Approval Date (if known)
Deputy Director - Finance
CNST
0000
CNST
0000
0000
CNST
0000
OTHR
0000
BF Deputy DIrector Approval https://lf-forms.washco-md.net/Forms/form/avsubmission?RemoveHead=true&clientHandles...
1 of 2 6/17/2025, 10:47 AM
Explain Budget Adjustment
Attach Additional Items
Reject
BF Deputy DIrector Approval https://lf-forms.washco-md.net/Forms/form/avsubmission?RemoveHead=true&clientHandles...
2 of 2 6/17/2025, 10:47 AM
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: 2025 SAFER Grant Application – Request to Apply and Accept
PRESENTATION DATE: June 24, 2025
PRESENTATION BY: Division of Emergency Services, Director, R. David Hays
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to authorize the Division of Emergency Services (DES) to
submit a FEMA SAFER Grant application to hire eighteen (18) firefighters and accept the grant
funding, if awarded.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The DES has placed additional FT firefighters in multiple fire stations
throughout Washington County over the last four (4) years. While the addition of these firefighters
has increased the number of trained and certified firefighters on duty each day, there are still
instances when apparatus and/or departments struggle to get adequate firefighters on apparatus for
call responses.
DISCUSSION: By authorizing the DES to hire eighteen (18) additional firefighters, it
will enable the DES to continue strategically placing firefighters in various fire stations throughout
Washington County.
Response statistics are being prepared for the BOCC that will help to determine the recommended
placement of the additional firefighters.
FISCAL IMPACT: YR 1: $ 760,582.90 (actual hire 10/1/25 = $570,437.18
YR 2: $1,412,511.10
YR 3: $1,412,511.10
YR 4: $2,173,093.99 (Full Cost)
CONCURRENCES: R. David Hays, Director, Division of Emergency Services
Michelle Gordon, County Administrator
Kelcee Mace, Chief Financial Officer
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: None
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form