1290                                      VETOES

to the old method of appointment by the County Commissioners in
1959, after the lapse of four years. This temporary change in the
method of appointment of clerical assistants is certainly no argument
for its desirability, and I have found no valid reason to overturn the
existing system for a limited period of time.

The County Commissioners of Allegany County who are charged
with the responsibility of raising local tax revenues are opposed to
this bill. They maintain the position that they are providing adequate
clerical assistants. While under this bill, the Trial Magistrates, who
are my appointees, would have the power of appointing the additional
clerks and have submitted data to support the need therefor, I am
constrained to the belief that this is entirely a local matter. It can
adequately be determined and satisfied under existing legislation and
should not be made the basis of temporary legislation such as this.
Accordingly, I have vetoed Senate Bill 528.

Respectfully,

(s) Theodore R. McKeldin,

Governor
TRMcK:mg

Senate Bill No. 533—Retirement System

AN ACT to add Section 3A to Article 73B of the Annotated Code of
Maryland (1951 Edition), title "Pensions", said new section to
follow immediately after Section 3 thereof, relating to the member-
ship in the State Employees' Retirement System of certain elected
or appointed officials.

May 9, 1955

Honorable Louis L. Goldstein
President of the Senate
State House
Annapolis, Maryland

Dear Mr. President:

Senate Bill 533 would permit an elected or appointed official to
continue membership in the State Retirement System after conclusion
of his service, upon making all the payments which would have been
made by him and also by the State, had he remained in the service.

The Board of Trustees of the Employees Retirement System has
disapproved this bill as discriminatory and unfair to other employees
of the System. It would permit one select group (elected and ap-
pointed officials) to continue as members of the System while deny-
ing this right to all other former State employees. The Retirement
System Trustees inform me that an inequity would be created because
this favored group would receive greater benefits at less cost. In
addition, the actuary of the System advises that serious administrative
problems would be involved.

Proponents of this measure have advanced strong arguments in
rebuttal of the position taken by the Trustees, contending with much
logic that there is a sound basis for differentiating between elected
and appointed officials as compared with State employees who enjoy
continuing tenure of office. While there is some doubt in my mind,