Attention

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent our advertisers

Friday, October 15, 2010

Ballot Questions To Be Decided November 2nd

QUESTION 1: STATEWIDE QUESTION
Maryland Constitutional Convention – Sense of the Voters
Chapter 9 of 2010 (Senate Bill 26)

Summary
This question asks Maryland voters whether a convention for the purpose of changing the Maryland Constitution should be called.

Section 2 of Article XIV of the Maryland Constitution requires the General Assembly every twenty years to ask the voters whether a constitutional convention should be called.
If a majority of voters voting at the 2010 general election vote for calling a constitutional
convention, the General Assembly, at its next session, would be required to provide by law for
the assembling of the convention and the elections for delegates to the convention.

If a constitutional convention is called by Maryland voters, any new constitution or
change or amendment to the current Maryland Constitution that may be adopted by the
constitutional convention would be submitted to the voters of the State for adoption or rejection
at a later election.

QUESTION 2: CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
Civil Jury Trials – Amount in Controversy
Chapter 480 of 2010 (Senate Bill 119)

Summary
This constitutional amendment would provide that legislation may be enacted to limit the right to
a jury trial in a civil proceeding in which the amount in controversy is not more than $15,000 instead of
not more than $10,000, as currently specified in the Maryland Constitution. The dollar amount specified
in the constitutional amendment excludes attorney’s fees that may be recoverable in the civil proceeding.

Legislation passed in the 2010 session of the General Assembly, contingent on the approval of
this constitutional amendment by the voters, would provide that a party may not demand a jury trial in a civil proceeding if the amount in controversy does not exceed $15,000, excluding attorney’s fees if
attorney’s fees are recoverable in the proceeding. In that case, a judge, rather than a jury, would determine
the verdict.

QUESTION 3: CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
Baltimore City – Orphans’ Court Judges – Qualifications
Chapter 481 of 2010 (House Bill 417)

Summary
This constitutional amendment would require that, in addition to the current eligibility
requirements, each of the three judges of the Orphans’ Court for Baltimore City be a member in
good standing of the Maryland Bar who is admitted to practice law in Maryland.

An orphans’ court hears all contested matters regarding a decedent’s estate, including
validity of wills and legal questions involving transfers of property. The orphans’ court also
supervises estates that are probated judicially; approves accounts, awards of personal
representatives’ commissions, and attorney’s fees in all estates; and has concurrent jurisdiction
with the circuit courts in the guardianship of minors and their property.

Currently, the Maryland Constitution provides that, in Baltimore City and in each county
(except Harford and Montgomery counties) three orphans’ court judges be elected. The only
requirements to qualify for election as an orphans’ court judge are that an individual be a citizen
of the Maryland and reside for the prior 12 months in the jurisdiction from which the individual
is elected.

Currently, in Harford and Montgomery counties only, the circuit court for the county
also serves as the orphans’ court for the county. Because circuit court judges must be attorneys,
only in Harford and Montgomery counties are the judges who sit as orphans’ court judges
currently required to be attorneys.

For this constitutional amendment to be implemented, it must be approved by both a
majority of the statewide voters and a majority of the voters in Baltimore City.

LOCAL QUESTIONS:

Wicomico County
Question A
Charter Amendment
Modify Qualifications of Internal Auditor

To amend the Wicomico County Charter Section 305 to include Certified Auditors and Certified Fraud Examiners as qualified for the position of Internal Auditor and to permit a Certified Public Accountant with inactive status to be hired on condition of regaining qualifications.

Question B
Charter Amendment
Monthly Report to County Council

To amend the Wicomico County Charter Section 505 to require that a monthly statement of the receipts and expenditures of the county be provided to the County Council.

Question C
Charter Amendment
Capital Program, Budget Submittal Dates

To amend Sections 702, 704 and 705 of the Wicomico County Charter to define the period of the Capital Program as the fiscal year covered by the Capital Budget and the next four fiscal years and to establish the dates for submission of the capital program and expense budget to coincide with a council meeting date.

Question D
Charter Amendment
Public Ethics - Conflicts of Interest

To amend the Wicomico County Charter Section 605 to authorize the Ethics Commission to determine whether a conflict of interest exists when a person governed by the section holds or benefits from an agreement or contract with the county, or has a claim against the County as described in the section.
(Local questions for other counties, along with more detailed language on the above questions can be found at this website)

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Is it just me or does question A sound like it creates a loophole for another good ole boy to be able to come in that will only audit what they are told to and tell what they are told to. Yea I dont have my licence any more BUT if you will hire me I promise to get it and "wink wink" we will show them what they want to see.


Hmmmm

Anonymous said...

Question A is so obvious. They had an experienced qualified CPA on staff that they fired because they did not want to follow the standards required of a CPA and she knew too much from working with the forensic auditors. They spit on the profession when they were bound and determined to violate the indedence of the auditor by making the auditor report to The administrator and the county attorney on special audits. There is a reason for stringent standards....its called corruption and fraud.

https://www.dllr.state.md.us/cgi-bin/ElectronicLicensing/OP_Search/OP_search.cgi

The reality is, the word is out in the profession and noone will apply for the job that's qualified because of the fact that the position being an at will position is a material risk. Use all of your smoke and mirrors you can get but word is out.

Ironshire said...

My vote will be NO on all questions simply because Democrats proposed them.

Craig Theobald
Ironshire

Orsonwells said...

10:08, my thoughts exactly. It's worded as if they already have a person in mind for the position who currently doesn't qualify!

Anonymous said...

They want someone in the position that will sit and twirl their thumbs and give the presentation that there is an auditor on staff. Sorry guys......you can change the charter all you want, but a real CPA who honors their profession(unlike some people in government) won't play government robot.

Anonymous said...

I think the public should change the charter to require all management to get EEO training by my good friend Karen Michaels. Especially the current Director of Human Resources.

Anonymous said...

Word of the day "Cyclone".