PG Delegation bills to interfere with, or raise the cost of, PG County government
The Prince George’s County house delegation is not only sponsoring multiple bills to override the will of Prince George’s County voters by forcing county-specific taxes on the residents of the county, these Tax and Spend Democrats are also sponsoring bills that would both interfere in and micromanage local affairs and increase the costs of the already deficit-ridden county government.
I would hope that, when these bills come to committee and to the floor, Republicans will oppose them rather than defer to the wishes of their Big Government, Tax and Tax and Spend and Spend Democratic colleagues.
HB 958 (PG 404-09)
Entitled: Prince George’s County – Public School Construction – Joint Signature Letter and State Funding
Prohibiting the submission of a specified letter to the Interagency Committee on School Construction without the signatures of the Senate and House chairs of the Prince George’s County delegation to the General Assembly; requiring the Board of Public Works to include planning and design as an eligible public school construction or capital improvement cost for Prince George’s County; etc.
Comment: Provides for delegation leaders to interfere with and micromanage the administration of the school system. Requires additional and unncessary bureaucratic work and expenditures by the county board of public works.
HB 960 (PG 407-09)
Entitled: Prince George’s County – Board of Education – Elected Members Benefits PG 407-09
Providing that the elected members of the Prince George’s County Board of Education are entitled to health insurance and other fringe benefits provided to the employees of the Board of Education.
Comment: Requires diverting scarce funds away from educating or children in order to provide increased benefits for elected officials.
HB 961 (PG 410-09)
Entitled: Prince George’s County – Developers Receiving State Funding – Compliance with Minority Business Enterprise Goals
Requiring entities that receive specified direct or indirect funding from the State for a development project located in Prince George’s County to comply with specified minority business enterprise goals under specified circumstances; and requiring Prince George’s County to conduct a disparity study and report the results to the Prince George’s Senate and House delegations of the Maryland General Assembly by December 31, 2010.
Comment: Provides for micromanagement of county contracting by general assembly members and staff and requires additional bureaucratic work and expenditures by both the county and state governments.
HB 962 (PG 322-09)
Entitled: Prince George’s County – Alcoholic Beverages – Wine Festival License
Authorizing the Prince George’s County Board of License Commissioners to issue a wine festival license for the sale of wine at the Prince George’s County Wine Festival; establishing licensing requirements; providing for a license fee; requiring the Board to set the date and location for the Festival and to assure that the primary focus of the Festival is the promotion of Maryland wine; etc.
Comment: Micromanages and adds to the workload and expenses of the county board of license commissioners.
HB 1131 (PG 406-09)
Entitled: Prince George’s County – Tax Increment Financing – Small, Local, or Minority Business Enterprises
Requiring that specified small, local, or minority business enterprises receive at least a 20% ownership in specified projects wholly or partially financed through specified bonds in Prince George’s County; providing that the ownership requirement does not apply to specified tax-exempt or not-for-profit entities or to specified projects; requiring the County Council of Prince George’s County to enact specified local laws; requiring the County Council of Prince George’s County to conduct a specified study; etc.
Comment: Additional micromanagement of contracting in Prince George’s County plus an explicit requirement to increase county bureaucracy and expenditures.