MARVIN MANDEL, Governor                       1815

1969. For the reasons set out in the attached letter from the Chair-
man of the State Roads Commission, which is to be considered a part
of this message, I am compelled to veto House Bill 1323.

Sincerely,

/s/ Marvin Mandel,

Governor.

Letter from State Roads Commission—H.B. 1323.

April 17, 1969.
The Honorable Marvin Mandel
Governor of Maryland
Executive Department
Annapolis, Maryland 21401

Attention: Mr. John C. Eldridge

Chief Legislative Officer

Dear Governor Mandel:

The State Roads Commission, by unanimous resolution, has re-
quested that you veto House Bill 1323 introduced by Delegate Hinkel.

In general, this bill provides that the total reductions made in
the budget of the State Roads Commission and Department of Motor
Vehicles by the General Assembly will revert to General Funds. In
the past, reductions in the State Roads Commission budget reverted
to the State Roads Commission Construction Fund and such sums
could be used for the Commission's Highway Construction Program.

The Legislature, in considering the 1970 fiscal State budget,
made reductions amounting to $1,468,529 in the State Roads Com-
mission budget. These reductions came about by increasing the
"turnover expectancy" in the salary account from 2% to approxi-
mately 6% which amounts to $1,344,807. The Legislature then re-
duced proportionately the Social Security, Retirement and Health
Benefits in the State Roads Commission budget amounting to an
additional $123,722, making a total of $1,468,529.

If House Bill 1323 becomes law, this sum will not revert to the
Commission's Construction Fund, but will revert to the General Fund
of the State. We might point out that as far as we know, this sum is
not needed to balance the State's General Fund budget.

We would also like to bring the following to your attention. The
general salary increase to state employees, ranging from 5% to 9%,
will cost the Commission approximately $2,300,000 in fiscal 1970.
Insofar as General Fund agencies of the State are concerned, this
increase was budgeted in the Supplemental Budget. In the case of
the State Roads Commission, however, this additional expenditure
will come from the State Roads Commission's Construction fund. In
addition thereto, the Legislature passed an overtime bill which the
Accounting Division of the Commission estimates will cost $1,000,000.
There was, of course, no supplemental budget appropriation to cover
this sum.

It can be seen that the additional cost to the Commission from
its Construction Fund from the above-mentioned salary increase and
the overtime bill will amount to approximately $3,300,000. As