|
DELEGATE HENDERSON: No.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any other
questions of the minority spokesman?
Delegate Marvin Smith.
DELEGATE M. SMITH: Delegate John-
son, you have just made a statement here
about a number of judges being opposed to
this appointment power on the part of the
commissioner. Now, my notes show that
there was one judge who made the state-
ment, one from a metropolitan area, not
familiar with the problem, and no others.
Now, maybe you have a better recollec-
tion than I and can enlighten me.
DELEGATE JOHNSON: My recollec-
tion, Delegate Smith, is that with very
little exception, and that may be just the
one exception that you are speaking of, no
judge came before our committee and urged
the adoption of the appointive power in the
judiciary of the commissioner.
I draw an analogy between clerks and
commissioners, and I felt that the matter
was fairly evenly divided on that subject.
I felt that there were a number of judges,
according to my notes, who said that they
did not want the power; there were a few
that said with respect to clerks that they
did; and there were some who did not com-
ment on it, either way.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Smith.
DELEGATE M. SMITH: What you
were really talking about, then, was not
having to do with the commissioners at all,
but something else?
DELEGATE JOHNSON: If you will ac-
cept the fact that either no judges or only
one even commented upon the subject of
commissioners, I would say that that is cor-
rect. My recollection is that there was no
specific request by the judiciary to have
this appointive power with respect to com-
missioners.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bradshaw,
do you have a question?
DELEGATE BRADSHAW: Yes, Mr.
Chairman.
I would like to ask Delegate Johnson this
question, which may in part be a repetition
of a question I asked yesterday.
I note that in his proposed suggestion for
change in 5.11 that he says, "The General
Assembly may provide for commissioners,"
et cetera, and "may provide for their ap-
pointment."
|
My question specifically is whether or
not, if his suggestion is adopted by this
Convention, that this would not permit the
General Assembly to retain the so-called
green bag method of appointment?
DELEGATE JOHNSON: I guess it
really depends on whether or not you want
to put the green bag — and that is your
term, Delegate Bradshaw — in the hands
of the judiciary. I do not think the transfer
of the appointive power is necessarily going
to lose the "green bag" aura. I would pre-
fer to see the judiciary insulated from this
type of appointment, and if it is going to
be done by way of green bag, so be it.
In my opinion, the new legislature will
create the professional office of commis-
sioner, and will provide for an appointive
system, and tenure under the merit system.
I have confidence in the new legislature.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any other
questions?
Delegate Hargrove.
DELEGATE HARGROVE: Delegate
Johnson, I am troubled in the minority re-
port by a term used on page 3. You say
that you call the function of the commis-
sioner a non-judicial function.
Is that you understanding of the func-
tion of the bailiff, to issue warrants of
arrest?
DELEGATE JOHNSON: I do not have
that before me.
DELEGATE HARGROVE: The end of
the first paragraph.
DELEGATE JOHNSON: We say the
appointment of the commissioner, the selec-
tion and appointment of the commissioner,
is a non-judicial function in our opinion.
In other words, we would prefer to see the
judges not get involved in selecting, inter-
viewing, appointing, having to deal with
this number of applications for the posi-
tion of commissioner. We consider the
manner of selection and appointment, of in-
terviewing job applicants non-judicial in
nature.
DELEGATE HARGROVE: In regard to
the commissioners, do you anticipate that
there would be commissioners in Baltimore
City, Montgomery County, Prince George's
and perhaps Anne Arundel County, in all
these instances where they do have county
magistrates today?
DELEGATE JOHNSON: In our view it
would be clearly up to the legislature.
|
