1969]                  OF THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES                       43

Commission, which is to be considered a part of this message, I am com-
pelled to veto House Bill 1323.

Sincerely,

/s/ Marvin Mandel,

Governor.
Read and journalized.

STATE ROADS COMMISSION

Baltimore, Md., 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 requested
that you veto House Bill 1823 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 Assemby will revert to General Funds. In the past, reduc-
tions in the State Roads Commission budget reverted to the State Roads
Commission Construction Fund and such sums could be used for the Com-
mission's Highway Construction Program.

The Legislature, in considering the 1970 fiscal State budget, made
reductions amounting to $1,468,529 in the State Roads Commission budget.
These reductions came about by increasing the "turnover expectancy" in
the salary account from 2% to approximately 6% which amounts to
$1,344,807. The Legislature then reduced proportionately the Social Secur-
ity, 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 Com-
mission'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 gen-
eral salary increase to state employees, ranging from 5% to 9%, will cost
the Commission approximately $2,300,000 in fiscal 1970. Insofar as Gen-
eral 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 Com-
mission's Construction Fund. In addition thereto, the Legislature passed
an overtime bill which the Accounting Division of the Commission esti-
mates 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 over-