|
of Public Works be abolished. We are sim-
ply recommending that it not be a consti-
tutional agency. Indeed, we recognize that
many of the functions of the Board are of
vital importance to the State, but under
the committee's recommendation the deci-
sion as to the composition of the Board of
Public Works, and as to its continuing
existence, would be left to the General As-
sembly — where the decision ought to be.
For all practical purposes, all of the
functions of the Board of Public Works
are now statutory. Its original constitu-
tional functions, the reasons for its orig-
inally coming into being have vanished for
all practical purposes with the passage of
time.
The General Assembly at its next session
could create a board of fiscal management,
provide for a composition of such board
entirely different from that of the Board
of Public Works, and transfer all of the
existing powers of the Board of Public
Works to the new board.
Indeed, under the reorganization author-
ity the Committee proposes to give to the
governor in section 4.19 of the executive
article, subject to the approval of the Gen-
eral Assembly, he could transfer all of the
functions of the Board of Public Works to
a new board.
So the issue of whether the Board of
Public Works should be a constitutional
agency or not is from the standpoint of
state policy, in our opinion, insignificant.
We really cannot understand what the con-
troversy is over in this item. The functions
of the board are now almost completely
under legislative control. Those functions
can be changed, transferred to another
agency, or indeed, abolished. The Commit-
tee was of the opinion that the composition
of the Board and its continued existence
should be under the control of the General
Assembly.
The Board of Public Works is created
by Article XII of the present Constitution
and is composed of the governor, the comp-
troller, and the treasurer. Under the pres-
ent Constitution the comptroller is elected
by the people, and the treasurer is ap-
pointed by the General Assembly. Thus,
neither of these two officials is responsible
to the governor or in any manner under
his control.
The Board of Public Works has, through
the process of statutory accretion, acquired
substantial responsibilities.
It has been assigned power by law to fix
interest rates on and to sell state bonds,
|
determine the conditions thereof in adver-
tising the sale of bonds, and approves all
contractors for expenditures from the pro-
ceeds of any loans authorized by the Gen-
eral Assembly.
Similarly, it supervises expenditures of
all sums appropriated for the acquisition
of land, buildings, equipment, new con-
struction, and other capital expenditures,
except those in connection with state roads
and bridges. It has broad authority over
all state property or rights, having the
power of transfer and disposal of state
real or personal property.
The board has the power to borrow on the
credit of the State, and to issue tax an-
ticipation notes within legally specified
limits.
The Board supervises the administration
of the general emergency fund.
The Board establishes the state property
tax rate.
The Committee believes that the vesting
of these powers in a three-man board not
responsible to the governor, the majority
of which is not even appointed by the gov-
ernor, is an unwarranted dilution of the
governor's executive authority and responsi-
bility. It has been argued before the Com-
mittee that over the last twenty years the
Board has seldom had a vote, and there-
fore, the Board has not interfered with
the governor's decision-making prerogative.
Maryland has indeed been fortunate in
having had responsible public officials who
have resisted the temptation to use the
Board as an arena of internecine warfare,
but the Committee believes it imperative to
assure that all decisions of the Board are
in keeping with the governor's views and
policies and not the result of compromise
with other officials who have no responsi-
bility to the governor.
The removal of the Board of Public
Works from the constitution will not dis-
turb the power of the General Assembly
or of the governor through his reorganiza-
tion authority to allocate the Board's pres-
ent powers, functions, and duties. It should
be noted that the president of the Board
is called upon to give approval to literally
thousands of small, routine transactions.
For example, the Board approves such
matters as travel expenses, write-off of
equipment.
John Leutkemeyer, the state treasurer,
has indicated these transactions could bet-
ter be handled by certification by the proper
|
