|
and say I think the argument has been
covered.
THE CHAIRMAN: Chairman Adkins.
DELEGATE ADKINS: I will yield such
additional time that is required to Delegate
Sickles.
You have 6-1/2 minutes.
DELEGATE SICKLES: Mr. Chairman
and members of the Convention: I will not
use anywhere near that time because I
think the arguments have been made on
both sides and I think the basic issue is
clear. I think, however, that there is more
to it than just the basic arguments which
have been made, and I think it is the re-
sult of the questions which I have asked.
If by our action today we would be con-
doning the existing situation and we would
be proposing and supporting the proposi-
tion that a banker in Baltimore City can,
by becoming the treasurer of the State, be
continued to be allowed to put funds of the
State in his bank, I cannot support this
proposition.
I clearly and unequivocally say that it
is a conflict of interest. I think that when
those of you who have gone around the
city and have asked the citizens whether
they want to elect a particular office or not,
try this weekend to ask them if the treas-
urer of the State ought to put any state
funds in his bank, and then duck. I tried
it for the last two weeks, and they are all
on my side on this issue.
So as an added incentive to vote against
including the treasurer in the Constitution.
We ought to stand up for what is right and
what is decent and for the image of the
State of Maryland.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Adkins,
do you desire to yield to anyone else?
DELEGATE ADKINS: No.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any delegate
desire to speak in favor of the amendment
and against the Committee Recommenda-
tion?
Delegate Storm.
DELEGATE STORM: Mr. Chairman,
in order to get a little understanding and
answer to Mr. Boyce's inquiry of Mr.
James, I talked with Mr. Shammel, who is
in the treasurer's office and specifically
charged with investing funds of the State.
It is interesting to note that all of the
non-interest-bearing funds, as I understand
it, are deposited in compensatory bank ac-
|
counts. At the end of the year, the bank
figures up the cost of handling these ac-
counts and then the next year either gives
them more of a deposit interest-free or less.
Probably some of you have accounts in
banks where at the end of the month they
will send you little slips saying they de-
ducted a certain amount because of the
cost of handling your account. That is the
way the State does it.
So if the treasurer puts money in his
bank without bearing interest, it is a com-
pensatory balance, and it is figured at the
end of the year, and will be reduced or
raised the following year.
During 1967, I understand four and a
half million was earned from U. S. bonds
and certificates of deposit and as I under-
stand it any bank that has any funds, even
interest account funds from the State, has
to deposit and show or have collateral for
the amount deposited.
It seems to me that this shows there
would be no conflict of interest, but I will
suggest to the legislature next session to
appoint a Frederick banker or maybe one
from Silver Spring or even an investment
banker if they feel it is wise.
Now, one other point. Since the legisla-
ture meets only part time and since many
things arise between sessions of the legis-
lature where emergency funds have to be
spent, such as new jobs being created,
which are legislative functions, it seems to
me that there should be somebody in power
to deal with these emergency legislative
matters and I think the legislature should
have a representative on this body. You
can call him what you will, but I think the
present situation of the treasurer and the
Board of Public Works is a good one.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any delegate
desire to speak against the amendment in
favor of the recommendation?
Does any other delegate desire to speak
on the recommendation?
(There was no response.)
Are you ready for the question?
(Call for the question.)
The question arises on the amendment
of Recommendation No. 3. The Clerk will
please ring the quorum bell.
So that there will be no misunderstand-
ing, the Chair desires to make it clear
again that there will be two votes on Rec-
ommendation No. 3. The first is a vote on
the amendment, to delete the word "not" in
|
