20150423 388mportfolio copy

388M MGA Internship Portfolio

By Kevin LaFrancis

iii.ii. Table of Contentsi-iii. Preliminary Information -- ii-vi.i. Memo of Submittal -- ii. ii. Table of Contents -- iii. iii. Updated Resume -- v.I-VII. Work Reports -- 1-17I. Learning Objectives -- 1II. Letter of Understanding -- 3III. Fact Sheet -- 4IV. Biweekly Reports -- 5-10 a. Report 1 -- 5 b. Report 2 -- 6 c. Report 3 -- 7 d. Report 4 -- 8 e. Report 5 -- 9 f. Report 6 -- 10V. Site Visit Memo -- 11VI. Progress Report -- 12VII. Analysis of Placement -- 13VIII-XIV. Work Samples -- 18-38VIII. Work Samples - Constituent Letters -- 18 a. Death with Dignity Letter --19 b. Cost of Living Adjustment Letter -- 20 c. Hydraulic Fracturing Letter -- 21 d. Medicaid Letter -- 22 e. Sex Offender Laws Letter -- 23 f. Transit Authority Support Letter -- 24 g. Watershed Letter -- 25 h. First-time Homebuyer Letter -- 26 i. Cost of Animal Care Letter -- 27 j. Sterile Compounding Units Letter -- 28 k. Home Birth Safety Act Letter -- 29 l. Transit Authority Opposition Letter -- 30 m. Hogan Education Budget Cuts Letter -- 31 n. Use of Tanning Beds by Minors Prohibition Letter -- 32 o. Maryland Health Exchange Letter -- 33 p. SB747 Hearing Letter -- 34

q. Foreign Student American School Visit Letter -- 35 r. Cost of Health Care Letter -- 36 s. Paid Sick Leave Letter -- 37 t. Open Meetings Law Letter -- 38IX. Work Samples – Newsletters -- 39-46 a. Beginning of Session E-Mail Blast -- 39 b. End of Session E-Mail Blast Excerpts -- 44X. Work Samples – Press Release -- 47-49 a. Achieving a Better Life Experiences Act -- 48XI. Work Samples – Research Proposals -- 50-54

a. Possible Pepco Solutions -- 51

iv. b. SB168 Amendment Proposals -- 52 c. Fracking Pros/Cons -- 53XII. Work Samples – Hearing Notes -- 55-58 a. HB158 -- 56 b. SB165 -- 57 c. HB469 -- 58XIII. Work Samples – Thank You Notes -- 59-66 a. Chen Artwork -- 60 b. Gleason Artwork -- 61 c. Jackson Policy Analyst -- 62

d. Gross/Holland Print Shop -- 63 e. Taylor Custodial Services -- 64 f. Stone Administrative Assistant -- 65 g. Owens Facilities Clerk -- 66XIV. Policy Analysis -- 67-88 a. List of Illustrations -- 69 b. Executive Summary -- 72 c. Bill Summary -- 73 d. Background -- 74 e. Current Law -- 75 f. Issues Raised By Current Law -- 76 g. Bills Proposed to Address Current Law -- 77 h. Review of How Other States Address Issue -- 79 i. Legal Concerns Bill Addresses -- 81 j. Opponents of Bill -- 82 k. Proponents of Bill -- 83 l. Conclusions and Recommendations -- 85 m. Works Cited -- 87

v.

i. Memo of Submittal

I am pleased to submit this portfolio of my work and accomplishments throughout the 2015

legislative session. The following is a compilation of information about my office staff, reports about

my responsibilities and assignments and a policy analysis on the expungement of criminal records.

The information about my office staff will give you a background on the types of bills I dealt

with this session. Knowing about my Senator's Senate committee, the Finance Committee, will give

you a better perspective of the biggest conflicts in our office as the year progressed. The bi-weekly

reports will supplement your awareness of my responsibilities from week to week, helping to provide a

vivid picture of my work this session. The reports capture how busy I was at the beginning of the

session, which differs from most other interns' experiences.

Next, I will include clips of my assignments. My supervisor trusted me with a wide range of

assignments, and it empowered me to develop a variety of legislative writing and research skills. The

most common assignment was dealing with constituent responses. This endeavor gave me an insight to

grassroots advocacy, which is fundamental to our democracy in this country. I spent a balanced amount

of time drafting thank you notes, congratulatory letters, issue research and handling the office phone.

Last, it is with great pride that I submit to you a policy analysis on the expungement of records

for offenses that were charged criminally but are no longer criminal. The main reason for the

expungement bill is for the marijuana decriminalization bill that passed through the legislature and was

signed by the governor in 2014. The bill will target thousands of Maryland residents who were unable

to expunge their records for this law change under previous statute.

vi.iii. Updated Resume Kevin LaFrancis 213 High St., Acton, MA 01720 (Home) 4330 Hartwick Rd. Apt. 215, College Park, MD 20740 (School) Cell #: (978)-987-4460; Home #: (978)-461-2023; [email protected]___________________________________________________________________________________EDUCATIONBachelor of Arts, Government & Politics; Bachelor of Arts, Journalism (Expected Spring 2016)University of Maryland, College Park (GPA: 3.64) Media, Self, and Society Scholars Program – An active-learning program in communicationsHonors: National Society of Collegiate Scholars – A philanthropic organization for accomplished studentsDean’s List (Fall 2012; Spring 2013; Spring 2014; Fall 2014)___________________________________________________________________________________EXPERIENCEMaryland General Assembly (Spring 2015)Intern, Office of Senator Brian J. Feldman– Annapolis, MD • Addressed constituent concerns through more than 100 phone conversations and letters • Comprehended complex legislation to help draft bill amendments and solicit co-sponsorships from other Senators • Created monthly newsletters and several position letters for the SenatorMolina Healthcare (Summer 2014)Policy, Government and Advocacy Intern - Washington, D.C. • Prepared 25 summaries for Molina associates on House and Senate meetings • Compiled 40-50 page reports on the 2014 mid-terms and Hobby Lobby Supreme Court case • Introduced Congressmen and staff assistants to Molina and the company's policy goalsUnwind Magazine, Stories Beneath the Shell, and Public Asian (September 2013 to Present) Contributing Writer - College Park, MD • Interviewed town officials and polled community members to assemble supporting details • Composed 12 articles and met time deadlines for three different campus publications • Developed professional relationships with the town manager and associates in Mt. Rainier • Analyzed and clarified complex topics for a general audience Stow Acres Golf School (June 2011 to August 2013) Teaching Assistant - Stow, MA • Revitalized junior camp with aesthetic improvements and creation of new activities • Educated golfers of all ages and abilities • Instructed young students in course etiquette and techniques • Supervised groups of campers ages 6-15 Wachusett Dirt Dawgs Baseball Team (Summers 2012-2013) Public Address and Radio Announcer - Leominster, MA • Broadened fan relations through personable in-game announcing • Researched player information and statistics to prepare for nightly broadcasts • Fostered improvisation skills and ability to adjust quickly to last minute changes

mailto:[email protected]

vi.Landscaping (May 2010 to August 2013) Self-Employed - Acton, MA • Maintained weekly improvements to customers’ yards • Fulfilled requests for additional tasks • Expanded client base through referrals • Provided a consistent and reliable service ___________________________________________________________________________________ACTIVITIES2014-2016 University of Maryland, College Park University SenatorUniversity Senate Student Affairs Committee MemberUniversity of Maryland Club Basketball Captain University of Maryland Business Golf Club MemberWMUC Sports Radio Show Host, The Kevin + Evan ShowMiracle League Volunteer

1I. Learning ObjectivesJanuary 22, 2015

I. To gain expertise in how to successfully navigate legislative process and turn bills into law a. Objectives: 1. Assisting host office with obtaining bill co-sponsorships 2. Informing constituents of the purpose of bills through newsletters, briefs and other notification methods 3. Learning about why some bills receive more attention than others b. End of session questions to assess progress: 1. Have I solicited co-sponsorships without host office supervision? 2. Have I tracked bills throughout the session to look for patterns in legislation? 3. Have I talked to people with experience in the bill drafting process about what has allowed bills to be signed into law in the past? II. To problem-solve and handle concerns for constituents: a. Objectives: 1. Answering phone calls and knowing how to help constituents with problems and how to respond professionally as a representative for the Senator 2. Establishing a rapport with constituents about issues they are passionate about through phone calls and constituent letters 3. Providing timely and accurate responses to constituent e-mail inquiries b. End of session questions to assess progress: 1. Have I learned to consistently leave the constituent without further questions? 2. Have I solved problems without the constituent needing to call back? 3. Have I been able to craft constituent letters with minimal supervision? III. To research 3-4 bills in-depth and track them throughout the session a. Objectives: 1. Developing an advanced understanding of the historical context and potential effects for 3-4 pieces of legislation 2. Testifying or submitting issue statements that outline the Senator's position on the legislation 3. Consulting stakeholders to learn more about the consequences of the legislation b. End of session questions to assess progress: 1. Have I helped represent the Senator's interests on bills? 2. Have I been able to answer questions and discuss main consequences of bills to the Senator and legislative staff? 3. Have I reached out to stakeholders to learn more information about bills? IV. To perform fundamental management activities for the Senator a. Objectives: 1. Becoming adept at managing the constituent database system at the host office 2. Editing and sending out blasts of the Senator's position on bills in session 3. Checking availability and setting up appointments for Senator with legislative staff b. End of session questions to assess progress: 1. Have I mastered the Commence database system? 2. Have I informed constituents of the Senator's position on bills to increase transparency between legislator and constituent?

2 3. Have I helped with the host office staff to manage the Senator's schedule? V. To understand the process of committee hearings and compare them to federal committee meetings a. Objectives: 1. Attending Finance Committee meetings weekly and actively taking notes 2. Reporting information about meetings to legislative staff and constituents b. End of session questions to assess progress: 1. Have I learned the procedures of state committees? 2. Have I alerted host office staff and constituents about major events in committee?

__________________________________ _______________________________________

Signature of Senator/Legislative Assistant Signature of Intern

3II. Letter of UnderstandingJanuary 22, 2015

To contribute to Senator Feldman's office this session, the legislative staff will expect me to: I. Aid Senator with developing support for his primary-sponsored bills a. Expectations: 1. Drafting constituent and dear colleague letters to aware constituents and fellowSenators about the positive effects of bills 2. Pitching bills and soliciting co-sponsorships from Senators through office visits II. Provide insights on a handful of bills to Senator and track bills through Committee: a. Expectations: 1. Understanding details of the bills and the possible implications and repercussions of their passage 2. Consulting legislative library for records and statistics that relate to bills of interest 3. Discussing the bill with stakeholders and people who are interested in the bills to best understand all sides of the issue III. Perform secretarial duties for Senator a. Expectations: 1. Answering phone calls and e-mails from constituents and acting as a resource for their concerns 2. Updating database when constituents contact Senator to track each citizen's advocacy 3. Organizing bill folders so Senator can quickly access files he needs for Committee meetings 4. Filtering mail/responding to organizations about opportunities to meet with theSenator IV. Aid Senator with constituent outreach a. Expectations: 1. Notifying constituents about opportunities to testify at hearings in their field ofinterest using information from Commence 2. Drafting newsletter blasts to constituents in the district outlining the Senator's goals throughout the session 3. Creating position letters to inform constituents about the Senator's stance on a piece of legislation

__________________________________ _______________________________________

Signature of Senator/Legislative Assistant Signature of Intern

4

III. Senator Feldman Fact Sheet February 2, 2015

Senator Brian J. Feldman was born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on February 4, 1961. He attended the same high school as notable alumni Red Sox President & CEO Larry Lucchino and actor Jeff Goldblum at Taylor Allerdice in Squirrel Hill, Pittsburgh. He went on to Pennsylvania State University, where he graduated as an accounting major in 1983. Feldman made the decision to continueon to the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, where he received his J.D. in 1986.

Following his graduation, he worked for two years at Price Waterhouse as a CPA. The United States Department of Justice then hired him to be a tax attorney, where he worked for 13 years until he wanted to pursue public office as a state delegate. Near the end of his tenure with the Department of Justice, Feldman went back to school part-time and earned his M.A. at Johns Hopkins in 2000.

He first began work as an elected official in 2003 with the House of Delegates. During his eleven years in the House, Feldman worked on the Economic Matters Committee as well as multiple joint technology committees. He also served locally on several Montgomery County Committees in addition to his service in state government.

Feldman currently serves on the Senate Finance Committee, where he chairs the Transportation Subcommittee and is a member of the Property and Casualty Subcommittee. As a promoter of his district's significant biotechnology and cyber security sector, Feldman also serves on the Joint Committee on Cybersecurity, Information Technology and Biotechnology. He has been a member of the Joint Committee on Federal Relations since last year as well. When the Senate is not in session, Feldman works at the law firm Kundra & Associates.

Feldman's major goals for the session include passing a new renewable power standard for Maryland over the next ten years and expunging criminal records for individuals who were charged for possession of less than ten grams of marijuana.

Feldman has had a number of successes in the MGA, but his main pride has been the legislationhe has passed to expand investment in the I270 Corridor technology firms. The influx of high income and high skill jobs to the area has led to a wealthier and more educated district.

Feldman likes to maintain his focus on completing his current job as effectively as possible. He does not want to focus on his political future when there are problems he wants to solve now. However,he is the only CPA in the legislature. This unique qualification combined with his proficiency in technology-based legislation sets him apart in the MGA and allows him to have opportunities in state politics in the future that many other delegates do not.

5IV. Bi-Weekly Reports a. Report 1 - January 29, 2015

The following summaries provide a brief overview of my work in the first five days of the internship.

Thursday, January 15 (Day 1) – Working with my legislative assistant, Frederica Struse, I spent a significant portion of the day drafting a constituent letter in support of the “Death With Dignity,” or euthanization, bill. Additionally, I helped sync the new printer to the office computers by downloading software on their computer and aligning their settings. Frederica also asked me to solicit four co-sponsorships for a bill to establish a task force to review interest-free loans to STEM students. Most importantly, attending an introductory Finance Committee meeting was a privilege for me as I got to meet all of the committee's members.

Tuesday, January 20 (Day 2) – I attended an introductory meeting on how to navigate the Commenceprogram, the database Senator Feldman uses to track the advocacy of constituents in his district. Organizing folders for the first few bills took up the middle portion of my day. The last few hours werespent filling out paperwork (initial payment, anti-harassment, photo identification permission and moral code of conduct forms). The most interesting part of my day was an informative meeting on future careers in public policy. The conference informed a large group of interns about options after graduation in public policy. However, meeting Tommy Landers, the policy director for the ChesapeakeClimate Action Committee, was a privilege. I am certain I will seek his advice over the course of the session as I track the progress of my Senator’s Clean Energy Act RPS bill.

Thursday, January 22 (Day 3) – Pepco, an electric company that has a monopoly in my Senator’s district, had a conflict with homeowners regarding trees falling down on power lines. After storms knocked trees onto power lines, there were long lasting power outages. Legislation mandated Pepco cutdown trees within a certain radius of power lines to prevent this from happening as much as possible in the future. However, the homeowners have complained about deforestation and expenses they were forced to incur as a result of Pepco’s procedures. I wrote a summary of my suggestions for the Senator. I also began work on an e-mail blast newsletter that the Senator sends out to constituents at the start of each session. The draft at the end of the day included everything except notes about the Governor's budget. I also filed more bills, responded to event requests for the Senator, took phone calls and responded to e-mails.

Tuesday, January 27 (Day 4) – The main priority was to finish the Senator’s newsletter. I included statistics and observations from Hogan’s budget and cleared the draft with Frederica. Before lunch, I worked on a hydraulic fracturing position letter for the Senator. He had briefly talked to Frederica and Iabout his stance and our job was to put that into words for his constituents. I also solicited co-sponsorships on three more bills, answered phones and e-mails, and delivered and picked-up bills.

Thursday, January 29 (Day 5) – I solicited another round of co-sponsorships for a bill. Most of my day was spent drafting constituent letters. I wrote a constituent letter on Sex Offender Laws, the Watershed Protection and Restoration Program, Medicaid and Wages for University System of Maryland employees. Both of the legislative assistants in the office were gone for most of the day and they put me in charge of all the phone lines and e-mails. Frederica wanted me to help her with problems with her spreadsheet and I transposed and updated the spreadsheet of all the bills the Senator planned to sponsor in the 2015 session.

6

b. Report 2 – February 13, 2015

The following summaries provide a brief overview of my work in the past four days of the internship.

Tuesday, February 3 (Day 6) – I began the day by labeling new bills in my Senator's committee and bills where my Senator is a primary sponsor. Then, I researched and wrote two constituent letters to people in support of and against a Montgomery County transit authority system. I also wrote a letter to people who supported increased rights for midwives. After lunch, I RSVP'd to multiple events for the Senator. I also worked with the Office of Information Systems on fixing a printer in the Senator's office; the staff has put me in charge of device management. I finished the day with two more constituent letters, one about the cost of health care and another on a cross-filed bill, and a dear colleague letter.

Thursday, February 5 (Day 7) – I picked up bills from the Department of Legislative Services and put together more bill folders. I started my work on my first two bills of interest, one on marijuana expungement bill and the other on the forfeiture of benefits for constitutional officers. I read the legislative language and familiarized myself with the stakeholders of both laws. Researching the laws in nearby states and others across the country took up a large portion of my day. I RSVP'd for more events for the Senator in the afternoon.

Tuesday, February 10 (Day 8) – I prepared remarks for the Senator about changing the language in the marijuana bill. I suggested that language in the bill about a limit on marijuana possession needed to be taken out because it could not apply to people who were arrested before the law decriminalizing marijuana passed the legislature. He agreed and put me in charge of talking to the amendment office and my supervisor about new language to insert into the document. I also called other stakeholders to hear suggestions about the appropriate changes to make. In the latter part of the day, I began composing a list of possible people to testify in favor of the bill at the hearing on February 19. I finished my day by talking to the library about acquiring documents of previous marijuana legislation.

Thursday, February 12 (Day 9) – My supervisor told me to see if the language for the amendment to the marijuana legislation matched another Senate bill being introduced this session. Once again, I talked to stakeholders about the bill and about testifying for the Senator. While waiting to hear back from the amendment office, I solicited co-sponsorships for a bill to reform disability trust accounts and solved a unique problem for a constituent. The constituent had a friend who lives in Holland that had a daughter that wanted to visit an American school to see what it was like during a visit to this country inlate April. I started with the Department of Education and was transferred pig-pong style through members of the department. I finally found a contact that the constituent could talk to in more detail. Atthe end of the day, I wrote a constituent letter on problems with the state's health care exchange.

7 c. Report 3 – February 27, 2015

The following summaries provide a brief overview of my work in the past two weeks of the internship.

Tuesday, February 17 – I did not attend work in Annapolis due to the snow.

Thursday, February 19 (Day 10) – I labeled new bills in my Senator's committee and bills where my Senator is a primary sponsor for multiple hours. The Senator's committee is receiving an overload of bills this session and hearing between six to ten a day. Ensuring that each bill folder is prepared correctly for the Senator is important and time-consuming. I also helped a constituent find references tocontact in hopes of helping find a solution to her problem. The constituent had an 88-year-old mother who lived in a condominium complex. She owned the condominium and had experienced leaking in her house. However, the condo association had not helped her with expenses. The insurance company has sided with the condo association and the mother was forced to pay thousands to deal with the issue.I gave her several options on people to call: lawyers and other associations that may be able to help. I also wrote a constituent letter on Medicaid.

Tuesday, February 24 (Day 11) – A delegate from Montgomery County contacted the office looking for video testimony of a bill that the Senator introduced from last session. The delegate had a hearing on a similar bill this session and wanted to use it as support for his legislation. I looked back through the Senator's records and was able to find the link for the video. I was on the phone with the Office of Information Systems for multiple hours aligning the Senator's database system with the supporting e-mailing program so that the Senator and staff can send out e-mail blasts to constituents based on the issues that are important to them. I also wrote constituent letters and did early research on a fracking bill.

Thursday, February 26 (Day 12) – I entered several constituents into the Senator's database system and categorized them based on the issues that led to their writing. Then, I wrote e-mails to stakeholders about a change in the hearing date of one of the Senator's bills. I spent the remaining time before lunch writing e-mails to two students in the Senator's district that submitted artwork to the Maryland General Assembly. The artwork is hung from the walls of the tunnel between the Department of Legislative Services and the Senate building. A representative from Pennsylvania wrote to the Senator to ask for help putting together a Grand History Trail commission that would be formed within the region. I found out more information about the commission for the Senator. I finished putting together a list of pros and cons for the fracking bill. At the end of the day, I wrote two constituent letters about the risingcosts for health care deductibles in the State.

8 d. Report 4 – March 12, 2015


Tuesday, March 3 (Day 13) – It was reading day at the Senate, celebrating the importance of children's access to books. My Senator invited me onto the floor to see what proceedings in the Senate look like. I was introduced and gave a brief bio for the Senators. After introductions, most of the meeting went by normally. There was a quick debate between Senator Pugh and the other Senators about not running an idea by the Baltimore City Council regarding a bill establishing procedures for theBaltimore City prison. However, due to the countless recent problems in the prison, the state took over administration of the facility. Therefore, the city council is not expected to be aware of every bill going through the legislature. It was interesting to see the Senator get angry over a fairly systematic procedure. When I got back from the floor, I spent multiple hours preparing a fracking briefing for my Senator. The briefing outlined all the fracking bills going through the House and Senate. It also included research conducted on fracking's effects as well as the most important issues of the fracking process. At the end of the day, I followed up on a new constituent tip on the electric utility deforestation bill. An arborist that lives in Montgomery County wrote about a chemical that could be applied to trees to stunt the growth of branches. This would not harm the tree and would be able to be used on trees that may fall onto power lines in the future. It is something our staff brought to the attention of the Senator for future legislation on this topic.

Thursday, March 5 (Day 14) – I did not attend work in Annapolis due to the snow. I listened to a hearing in the House on electric utility deforestation and wrote a cost of health care constituent letter.

Tuesday, March 10 (Day 15) – I began by putting together a list of written testimonies and articles forthe bill hearing in the Senate on electric utility deforestation. I contacted constituents to confirm they could testify at the Senate hearing. In the late morning, I wrote a state representative's office from Pennsylvania for more information about a mailer he sent to our office regarding a Heritage Trail in themid-Atlantic. I also compiled testimony for a housing bill. The day finished with three hours of updating the contact information of our constituents in our database system, Commence.

Thursday, March 12 (Day 16) – My morning was spent putting together more than 30 bill folders for hearings over the coming week. My Senator's committee was hearing 10-12 bills daily and had to have criticisms and other information accessible to him in order to ask educated questions to the panels. The process is detailed and becomes more important as session goes on because the bills that are still around often gain traction. After filing these bills, I began preparing notes for a speech the Senator had at Sugarloaf Mountain in Montgomery County about environmental legislation. I covered fracking as well as the Senator's renewable portfolio standard bill for Maryland. Analyzing these bills concisely required me to make a difficult decision about what parts to emphasize. At the end of the day, I attended a bill hearing on campaign financing in the Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee sponsored by the Senator fellow intern Luke Pinton is interning for, Senator Raskin.

9 e. Report 5 – March 26, 2015


Tuesday, March 17 (Day 17) – Compiling testimony for the Senator's bills eased me into the workday. Unfortunately, our staff found out the Economic Matters Committee gave the electric utility deforestation bill an unfavorable report. I had to contact the constituents to relay to them that the hearing was cancelled. It was disappointing to put a lot of work into preparing for a meeting that never happened, but it was a good experience nonetheless. Then, I replied to constituent letters on paid sick leave and the cost of health care. I also went to the President of the Senate's office to pick a picture for the Senator to post on his social media pages. In the afternoon, I went to a Finance Committee hearing on qualified health plans under the Maryland health exchange. The bill required any health plans that wanted to qualify to have a clear benefit design and comply with state regulations.

Thursday, March 19 (Day 18) – I started out the morning composing more bill folders for the Senator. March 19 was one of my first days House bills started passing through committees and the fullchamber and were sent to the Senate. The Finance Committee received a large number of bills. It took me a long time to coordinate cross-filed bills and prepare the crossovers. In the afternoon, I began composing the Senator's press release for the ABLE bill. The bill sets up tax-advantaged savings accounts for people with disabilities. The hearing took place in the Senate on March 18 and was well received. The two disabled individuals who testified provided amazing accounts of the difficulties in their lives, and I quoted a couple of their statements in the release. At the end of the day, I continued work updating contact information in Commence.

Tuesday, March 24 (Day 19) – The first e-mail in the office account when I logged in was a constituent who was wondering about marijuana growing licenses in the district for educational purposes. He was a researcher and was wondering if Montgomery County had already given away theirallotted licenses for the year. I tracked down the office in Montgomery County that deals with marijuana growing permits and relayed the contact information to the constituent. I also spent about two hours researching Open Meetings Laws in every state in the country to see if Maryland's law is too strict. A constituent e-mailed the office saying that the law was stricter than almost every other state in the country because it did not require government meetings to allow citizen participation. However, Maryland's law aligns with the laws in the majority of other states. I spent the afternoon in a four-hour hearing on allowing transportation service apps to operate under regulations in the State. There were several panels that came to testify in one of the most crowded hearings I've attended in both a federal orstate committee. Uber and Lyft have provided thousands of part-time jobs for drivers in the region and prompted many people to show their support in front of the Finance Committee.

Thursday, March 26 (Day 20) – I attended House hearings for three of the Senator's bills that passed through the Senate. The first hearing was about establishing a task force to review the establishment of a platform to expand STEM scholarship funding for Maryland public universities, which the Ways and Means Committee heard. Senator Feldman presented his disability insurance bill next in the Health andGovernment Operations Committee. The committee had already had a hearing for the cross-file of the Senator's bill and therefore had no questions for the Senator. Last, we walked over to the Environment and Transportation Committee. The bill the Senator presented would extend the sunset date for a council reporting on electric vehicle infrastructure to 2020. To finish the day off, I wrote thank you notes to one of the bill drafters, the workers at the print shop and a secretary from the Comptroller's office.

10

f. Report 6 – April 9, 2015


Tuesday, March 31 (Day 21) – When I came in, I immediately composed bill folders on the latest House bills to come over to the Senate. Many of the House bills took longer than usual to receive a vote on the floor, and therefore the bills came over in chunks over the past week. After I finished putting together bill files, I finished up the press release on the ABLE act. The Senate and House bills both unanimously passed versions of the bill. Once the amendment differences are ironed out in conference, the governor has said he will likely sign the bill into law.

Thursday, April 2 (Day 22) – I wrote two more thank you letters for the Senator. The first was to a worker at the office of the Comptroller who our office relied on to help constituents with their problems. She was always responsive to our office's concerns, and our staff received multiple compliments about her diligence answering their questions. The other letter was to a facility services employee who was dependable and frequently dealt with printer failures and other cleanliness issues in the community kitchen and office room of our wing. For the next few hours, I reviewed every bill that was put through session to find the most important topics to include in the Senator's end of the year e-mail blast. The biggest issues were fracking, the expungement of criminal records bills and the report of the Augustine commission on Maryland's economy. The fiscal year 2016 budget was also set aside to be talked about separately in the letter. I spent the afternoon answering questions for a constituent who had problems with her employment termination and her health care. I referred her to local channels where her questions could be answered.

Tuesday, April 7 (Day 23) – I spent the entire session on the end of the year e-mail blast. I reviewed all of the Senator's bills and found seven important pieces of legislation he sponsored. The summary I provided on each of the bills was a lengthy paragraph. Our staff also socialized with other offices; we attended a going away and a retirement party. For lunch, our staff went out to eat with the Senator. I was able to ask him several questions about the political landscape in the State for the next few years.

Thursday, April 9 (Day 24) – The last day was spent summarizing my experience in the office. Fillingout the internship evaluation form and a separate evaluation my legislative assistant provided me took up most of my morning. I also returned my identification badge. I put together two citations and ran other errands for the office. Our office then had lunch with Adam Votta, Adam Goldfarb and his office's legislative assistant. In the afternoon, my legislative assistant and I put together the education portion of the final newsletter.

11V. Site Visit MemoFebruary 25, 2015 A. People 1. Senator Feldman (Optional) 2. Frederica Struse – Legislative Assistant and my Supervisor – The Senator's legislative assistant in charge of the Senator's policy 3. Diane Yaeger – Legislative Assistant - The Senator's legislative assistant in charge of reception, scheduling and handling citizens’ concerns

B. Possible Topics 1. Pepco Deforestation Bill – Diane and Freddie have had to deal with several constituent complaints about Pepco cutting down trees near their property 2. SB168 – The expungement of criminal records for people previously arrested for possession of marijuana and marijuana paraphernalia – My work talking to stakeholders to help draft amendment language for the Senator's bill 3. SB165 – Forfeiture of State retirement and benefits for Constitutional officers who commit crimes related to the office they hold when they hold it Hydraulic fracturing – I am going down to the Senate floor for a bill hearing on fracking.

12VI. Progress Report I. Overview The days at the office are quite busy, especially when there are a number of phone calls from constituents and legislative assistants. It is a tiring job, but the experiences I have already had in the first seven weeks have been insightful. They have given me a much clearer vision of the Maryland General Assembly's process and heightened my awareness of state government in action. This internship experience has also been beneficial for my journalism pursuit because my task list is writing-intensive. II. Successes a. The internship has given me exposure to countless advocacy groups and workers b. The internship has challenged me to complete assignments I had never before done c. The relationship I have with the office staff is extraordinary d. The Senator is a college basketball fan and I have developed a rapport with him by conversing about recent games e. I have learned about political strategy, political compromise and the feasibility of select bills getting through the legislature f. I have learned about what type of questions legislators are likely to ask at bill hearings g. I have learned several little tips, such as the importance of including honoraries when writing letters to an elected official III. Failures a. I would like to spend less time composing bill folders because the process gets tiresome b. I have not had the opportunity to prepare testimony c. I have not been able to attend many hearings on bills of interest to me IV. Questions a. Is there anything missing from my first few bi-weekly reports that I should explore in the final month of my internship? b. What are your expectations for me during the site visit? c. The Senator does not let interns write testimony. Will my portfolio be penalized for failing to include sample testimony? d. How should I go about selecting my policy analysis?

13

VII. Analysis of Placement

Professor Lowderbaugh and Eric's sound advice about getting ahead early on doing research

about legislators was a main driver of the success of my placement. To narrow down the list of

legislators this past fall, I tracked down all of the legislators who had experience in health care,

education and budget. Because I started the process promptly, I knew I could be picky when ranking

my choices.

The first was a Democrat named Peter Murphy. Murphy had an illustrious record as a health

care legislator, serving on four committees on health and government operations since 2011. He passed

bills causing health care improvements for Maryland residents, streamlined the state's distribution of

prescriptions with the Maryland Pharmacy Act and helped provide employment assistance for

rehabilitated mental illness patients. Although Murphy had been in the legislature since 2007, he had

little legislation regarding education and the budget. I was looking for someone who would have more

of a balance of my three main interests.

Andrew A. Serafini, a Republican senator, had a polar opposite record of Murphy. Serafini was

a leading Republican on budget conversations and helped manage corporate tax rates to promote

business growth. Unfortunately, Serafini had little influence in health care. Like Murphy, Serafini was

accomplished since his time in office and became the minority parliamentarian in 2015.

Wendell Beitzel, a Republican delegate, had served in the House since 2007. Just as Serafini

has gained a reputation among his peers in the Senate, Beitzel has a positive reputation among

delegates on both sides of the aisle. Beitzel would have been my first choice if my main priority were

education. He was a champion for education funding even when many fellow Republicans wanted to

spend more conservatively on education. He managed his budget around education because he realizes

it is a fundamental issue to fund to better the community in the future. Beitzel is once again one of the

politicians that did not balance enough of my other interests to be on my first list of legislators.

14

These three candidates would have likely been satisfactory secondary placements for me. When

the interview process came around, I had two offices at the top of my list. The first was Senator

Klausmeier. She has had a long and distinguished career in the Senate, accomplishing legislative

reform in budget, health care and education. I had the interview with their legislative assistants over the

phone. It went well and I could see myself as a good fit in their office. However, as Professor

Lowderbaugh and Eric advised, I did not want to rush my decision. The following day, I met with the

legislative assistants for Senator Feldman's office and immediately made a connection with the staff.

They could tell from my resume that I could help them with their workload, and they had a

responsibility sheet outlined for me during the interview. After leaving the office, I had a difficult

decision to make. Because I would be happy to work for either of these two Senators, I went with the

legislative assistants who I thought would entrust me with more assignments: Senator Feldman's office.

The staff expected me to be at the office roughly 15 minutes before 9 a.m. Tuesday and

Thursday. They expected me to stay 10-20 minutes after 5 p.m. depending on how busy I was

completing office assignments that day. The dress code was formal (suit and tie) every workday. When

I was not eating with my peer interns, I would often have a working lunch to get as much done as

possible. The legislative assistants had faith in my ability to meet deadlines and I wanted to prove to

them that their initial judgments were accurate.

The typical daily duties were often structured assignments in the early morning followed by

more open-ended tasks in the afternoon. When I first came in each morning, I checked a bin for a list of

assignments the legislative assistants wanted me to start. There was almost always some sort of

straightforward writing assignment, such as constituent letters or position letters. I also looked at the

Senator's district e-mail to see if there were any inquiries that merited a response. The middle of the

day often was where I would compile bill folders or run errands. The afternoon was largely spent on

research, helping fix technological issues in the office and attending hearings.

15

It would not be accurate to say that I did one task significantly more often than all of the others.

The legislative assistants gave me a balanced workload. Instead of describing a couple of my main

tasks in vivid detail, I will briefly cover all of the tasks I performed during my internship.

My first responsibility was to answer phones. I was the secondary receiver of the office's phone

calls. Diane, one of the Senator's legislative assistants, took the vast majority of the calls. When Diane

stepped out of the office, became busy with work or office guests, or became busy on another call, I

answered the office phone. I picked up roughly five phone calls a day. Most of them were members of

other office's that had questions about the Senator's bills. Sometimes, there were lobbyists and policy

advocates who were looking to schedule a face-to-face meeting with the Senator. The minority of the

calls was from constituents. Constituents often contacted the office via e-mail or letter.

I was in charge of responding to any letter involving an issue that had multiple people write into

the office. For example, I created the template for people supporting paid sick leave and against

increases in tuition rates at state universities. For individual letter comments, Diane was usually

responsible for handling their concerns. The difference was that these constituents needed extra

attention that required more background experience of Montgomery County and the jurisdiction's rules

and regulations.

Early in the session, I spent a significant amount of time writing position letters for the Senator.

These were sent out to every office in the Senate. These were sent out for the important legislation

proposed in the Senate, such as a fracking moratorium. The majority of the position letters were sent

out regarding bills the Senator was sponsoring. These statements briefly explained the bill to the

members of the Senate and asked for their co-sponsorship.

Our office staff generated three newsletter drafts for the Senator this session. There was a

beginning of session, mid-session and end of session newsletter. The first notice introduced the

constituents to the governor's budget proposal, especially in regard to his cuts on education, as well as

16

outline some of the bills the Senator was proposing. The second letter tracked the progress of the

Senator's bills and addressed concerns many constituents had raised since session began. It also

detailed how the legislature was reacting to the governor's recommendations. The final later was

largely result-based. It recapped the session and gave insight to the progress made in the past few

months. It informs the constituents of the legislature's final budget and a concise overview of the

outcomes of the Senator's main bills. It oulined his accomplishments, but also provided information on

why a couple of his did not pass.

Another general role of my internship was to represent the office at meetings, get-togethers and

running errands. There were a few times throughout the session where I took notes at a hearing to

report back to the office. Most often, it was our office's version of a scouting report. I would attend the

House cross-filed bill of the Senator's proposed legislation to give the staff a heads up of the

testimonies against the bill and the questions Delegates asked. Near the end of the session, the

legislative assistants allowed me to attend a couple hearings that were of interest to me. The first was

on legislation that would allow Uber, Lyft and other carpool transportation services to operate under

regulations independent of cab companies. There were still strict regulations these services would have

to comply with in order to protect against harmful drivers. The other was one of Senator Feldman's

bills on the improvement of maternal mental health. It was interesting to watch him testify in another

Senate committee as the Education, Health and Environmental Matters Committee reviewed the bill.

I represented the Senator at luncheons and was an ambassador for the office at various inter-

office gatherings. Most of these events had complimentary food or snacks, but it was also part of the

job to meet as many people as possible. The experience at luncheons were invaluable as I obtained

several business cards and met a lot of people in advocacy positions in which I am interested. The

inter-office gatherings were often a more informal way of developing connections with office staff and

other interns. In addition, I introduced myself to countless people who came into the office for

17

scheduled meetings with the Senator.

Meeting people while running errands was a lot less frequent. For instance, while picking up

bill files from the House Judiciary Committee, I often communicated with the Judiciary Committee

office staff. Furthermore, when soliciting co-sponsorships, I developed connections with office staff

members that I would not see at any of the informal gatherings.

My most important task in the office was composing bill folders for the Senator. Once the initial

month of inputting bills passed, the Senator had several hearings a day for his committee. I had to

ensure that the bill folder contained a copy of the bill and any relevant information the Senator needed

to know going into the hearings. Occasionally, I brainstormed questions that the Senator could ask

about certain aspects of the bill.

My most notable flaw during my time in the office would probably be attributed to

miscommunication. There were times when I misunderstood directions because I failed to extensively

clarify the process my legislative assistants wanted assignments done. One part of this process that I am

proud of is that the majority of my mistakes were made in the beginning of the session. It reveals that I

was able to adjust to the Senator's specific style in writing assignments and learned to clarify directions

I did not fully understand. I realized that even if there is a doubt about the correct method for

completing work, make sure to clarify it in advance to avoid critical errors.

18

VIII. Work Samples - Constituent Letters

This section details the formal constituent responses that I produced. It does not include all of my e-mail interactions with residents of the Senator's district. The topics include bill explanations, issue awareness and other general concerns.

19 a. Death with Dignity Letter – January 27

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for contacting my office about the possibility of submitting a bill that would permit Marylanders the right to choose death with dignity.

There is a bill being introduced this session regarding this matter and it would be my pleasure toco-sponsor it. If enacted, this bill would allow adult patients with six months or less to live to consent to receive fatal doses of medication from doctors.

I will continue to keep this subject on the top of my list and I hope to call on you for your support.

Thank you for your advocacy on this topic.

Sincerely,

Senator Brian J. Feldman, District 15 James Senate Office Building 11 Bladen Street, Room 104 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 301-858-3169

20

b. Cost of Living Adjustment Letter – January 27

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for sharing your concerns regarding University Systems of Maryland salaries with me.

In 2014, the legislature granted a 2% increase to University System of Maryland employees to help offset the cost-of-living adjustment. The Governor rescinded this raise.

Like you, I am concerned about the Governor’s action and I urge you to share your sentiments with his office.

Once again, I appreciate your taking the time to write to me and please do not hesitate to contactme with any other questions in the future.

Sincerely,

Senator Brian J. Feldman District 15 Montgomery County James Senate Office Building, Room 104 11 Bladen St.

Annapolis, MD 21401 301-858-3169

21

c. Hydraulic Fracturing Letter – January 27

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for taking the time to write in regard to imposing a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing in Maryland. There is a bill this session that addresses this issue, Senate Bill 29 - Environment – Hydraulic Fracturing – Prohibitions, that has been assigned to the Committee on Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs. If passed, the bill would indefinitely suspend all activityrelating to the institution of hydraulic fracturing in the state.

A public hearing will be held on the bill. If you would like to find out the date of this hearing or track the progress of this legislation, you may log on to the Maryland General Assembly website: wwww.mgaleg.maryland.gov, type in the bill number and you will be able to follow the bill through the legislative process.

As a member of the Senate Finance Committee, I do not attend the hearings in the Committee on Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs, but I look forward to reviewing the Committee's recommendations and will keep your concerns in mind should the bill come to a vote in the Senate.

Please do not hesitate to contact me with any other questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

Senator Brian J. Feldman District 15 Montgomery County James Senate Office Building, Room 104 11 Bladen St., Annapolis, MD 21401 301-858-3169

22 d. Medicaid Letter – January 29

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for your correspondence regarding the reduction in Medicaid doctor fees.

Like you, I am concerned lower provider fees may cause a reduction in the number of Medicaidphysicians practicing in Maryland and about the overall implications of this action on Maryland citizens that rely on Medicaid.

The Governor’s action on this matter is worrisome and I urge you to share your sentiments with his office.


Sincerely,

Senator Brian J. Feldman District 15 Montgomery County James Senate Office Building, Room 104 11 Bladen St. Annapolis, MD 21401 301-858-3169

23

e. Sex Offender Laws Letter – January 29

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for taking the time to write to me regarding a reform on current sex offender laws.

The Judicial Proceedings Committee hears legislation on sex offender laws. As a member of theSenate Finance Committee, I do not attend the hearings in the Judicial Proceedings Committee, but I look forward to reviewing the Committee's recommendations and will keep your concerns in mind should the bill come to a vote in the Senate.

If you would like to track the progress of legislation on sex offender laws, you may log on to the Maryland General Assembly website: wwww.mgaleg.maryland.gov, search for sex offender laws, and you will be able to follow bills on this topic through the legislative process.

Once again, I appreciate your correspondence and please do not hesitate to contact me with any other questions or concerns.

Sincerely,


24

f. Transit Authority Support Letter – January 29

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for taking the time to write to me regarding the Montgomery County proposal to establish an agency that would have the ability to collect local taxes to fund transportation projects.

There was a local hearing held on this issue in Rockville last Friday and you will be pleased to learn that the bill has subsequently been withdrawn. It is my understanding that County Executive Leggett is interested in considering alternative methods for financing and building transportation projects in the County.


Sincerely,


25

g. Watershed Letter – January 29, 2015

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for your correspondence regarding the preservation of Maryland’s Watershed Protection and Restoration Program and the implementation of the Phosphorus Management Tool.

Like you, I support both of these initiatives as they are crucial to the health of the Chesapeake Bay and nearby watersheds.

However, in his first day in office, the Governor not only rescinded the Phosphorus Management Tool, but also pulled restrictions on State coal plants that now require new regulations to comply with the Federal mandate and national air quality standards.

I am concerned about the Governor’s actions and I urge you to refer your concerns to his office.


Sincerely,


26

h. First-time Homebuyer Letter – February 3

Dear [Colleague]:

As you may know, the current economic climate and stricter lending requirements have led to a decreased percentage of first-time homebuyers in Maryland, who are crucial to the health of the state’s real estate market.

I am introducing a bill, which was modeled after legislation enacted in Virginia in 2014, that would allow prospective first-time homebuyers to establish a tax-deferred account that could be used tofinance down payments, closing costs and related fees.

The legislation is similar to a bill passed in the Virginia legislature last year that established tax-free accounts for first-time homebuyers.

If you are interested in co-sponsoring the bill, please do not hesitate to call me at x3169.

Thank you for your consideration.

Senator Brian J. Feldman District 15

27 i. Cost of Animal Care Letter – February 3

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for taking the time to write to me about proposed cost of animal care legislation that is being introduced this session. During my tenure in the Maryland General Assembly, I have worked to prevent animal cruelty, exploitation and neglect and I will continue to do so.

As a member of the Senate Finance Committee, I will not take part in the hearing for the bill because it will most likely be assigned to the Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs Committee.However, I wanted to thank you for bringing this issue to my attention and let you know that I am co-sponsoring Senator Raskin’s Cost of Animal Care bill on the issue this year.

Again, I appreciate your advocacy on this important issue and please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions, comments, or concerns about this or any other issue.

Sincerely,

Brian J. Feldman District 15 Montgomery County James Senate Office Building, Room 104 11 Bladen St. Annapolis, MD 21401 301-858-3169

28 j. Sterile Compounding Units Letter – February 3

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for taking the time to write to me about proposed cost of animal care legislation that is being introduced this session. During my tenure in the Maryland General Assembly, I have worked to prevent animal cruelty, exploitation and neglect and I will continue to do so.

As a member of the Senate Finance Committee, I will not take part in the hearing for the bill because it will most likely be assigned to the Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs Committee.However, I wanted to thank you for bringing this issue to my attention and let you know that I am co-sponsoring Senator Raskin’s Cost of Animal Care bill on the issue this year.

Again, I appreciate your advocacy on this important issue and please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions, comments, or concerns about this or any other issue.

Sincerely,

Brian J. Feldman District 15 Montgomery County James Senate Office Building, Room 104 11 Bladen St. Annapolis, MD 21401 301-858-3169

29

k. Home Birth Safety Act Letter – February 3

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for writing to me in regard to loosening restrictions for Maryland residents on accessto a midwife. There is a bill that addresses this issue being introduced this session, Senate Bill 105 - The Maryland Home Birth Safety Act, that has been assigned to the Committee on Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs. If passed, the bill would create a licensing and regulatory system for the practice of direct-entry midwifery.

As a member of the Senate Finance Committee, I do not attend the hearings in the Committee on Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs, but I look forward to reviewing the Committee's recommendations and will keep your concerns in mind should the bill come to a vote in the Senate.

If you would like to find out the date of this hearing or track the progress of this legislation, youmay log on to the Maryland General Assembly website: wwww.mgaleg.maryland.gov, type in the bill number and you will be able to follow the bill through the legislative process.

Congratulations on the birth of your son, Lucas. Once again, I appreciate your correspondence and please do not hesitate to contact me with any other questions or concerns.

Sincerely,


30

l. Transit Authority Opposition Letter – February 3

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for taking the time to write to me regarding the Montgomery County proposal to establish an agency that would have the ability to collect local taxes to fund transportation projects.

There was a local hearing held on this issue in Rockville last Friday and you may be disappointed to learn that the bill has subsequently been withdrawn. It is my understanding that CountyExecutive Leggett is interested in considering alternative methods for financing and building transportation projects in the County.


Sincerely,


31

m. Hogan Education Budget Cuts Letter – February 10

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for your correspondence regarding the Governor’s reduction in education spending in the fiscal year 2016 budget.

The Governor’s budget cuts $17 million from schools in our County, the State’s fastest growingschool system.

Investment in our nationally recognized programs has long been a priority of mine. Like you, I think that preserving adequate funding for our public education system is essential as it is the foundation for our children’s future.

I urge you to share your sentiments with the Governor’s office and will keep your concerns in mind as the legislature considers how to address the consequences of the Governor’s proposal.

Once again, I appreciate your taking the time to write to me and please do not hesitate to contactme with your concerns in the future.

Sincerely,


32

n. Use of Tanning Bed by Minors Prohibition Letter – February 10

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for writing to me in regard to the prohibition of indoor tanning beds for minors. There is a bill being introduced this session, Senate Bill 152 – Tanning Devices – Use by Minors - Prohibition, that has been assigned to the Finance Committee. If passed, the bill would fine tanning facility owners and employers up to $1,000 for allowing minors to use sunbathing devices.

As a member of this Committee, I will attend hearings on this bill and look forward to reviewing the documents and testimonies on this matter. Like you, I am concerned about the heightened risk of skin cancer for teenagers exposed to ultraviolet radiation from tanning machines. Although a similar bill received an unfavorable report from the Committee last year, I voted in support of the legislation.

There will be a public hearing on this bill. If you would like to find out the date of this hearing or track the progress of Senate Bill 152, you may log on to the Maryland General Assembly website: wwww.mgaleg.maryland.gov, type in the bill number and you will be able to follow the bill through the legislative process.

Once again, I appreciate your advocacy and please do not hesitate to contact me with any other concerns.

Sincerely,


33

o. Maryland Health Exchange Letter – February 12

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for your correspondence regarding Affordable Care Act health care exchanges in Maryland. I appreciate your taking the time to share your concerns with me.

I have asked Kevin LaFrancis from my office to contact Maryland Health Benefit Exchange’s Executive Director Carolyn Quattrocki regarding the topics you addressed in your letter. As soon as he hears from Ms. Quattrocki, he will inform you about her response.

Once again, I appreciate your advocacy on this matter and please do not hesitate to contact me with any other questions or concerns.

Sincerely,


34

p. Foreign Student American School Visit Letter – February 12

Dear [Constituent],

This is Kevin LaFrancis from Senator Feldman’s office. I wanted to provide you with information regarding temporary school visits for your friend’s daughter from April 27th to May 8th.

I contacted the Maryland Department of Education’s office and they directed me to Bill Cappe, the ombudsman for school programs in the state. He would like information from you about whether you have children in the Montgomery County school system and whether or not your friend’s daughter would like to attend middle school or high school. Mr. Cappe said he thinks that the Montgomery County school district would approve the request quicker if your friend’s daughter had someone she knew to shadow. Mr. Cappe’s phone number is 410-767-0480 and his e-mail address is [email protected]. If you mention my name, he will know about your initial request.

Thank you again for writing to the Senator and please do not hesitate to contact him again with any other questions or concerns.

Sincerely, Kevin


35q. SB747 Hearing Letter – February 24

Dear [Constituents],

I wanted to inform you that the hearing for Senate Bill 747: Public Utilities – Electric Companies – Vegetation Management has been moved from March 3 to March 17. The House of Delegates hearing will still be held on March 5 in the Economic Matters Committee.

Sincerely,

Senator Feldman

36

r. Cost of Health Care Letter – February 26

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for your correspondence regarding legislation to protect vulnerable patients in the State. You will be pleased to hear that there is a bill introduced this session, Senate Bill 513 – Hospitals – Rate-Setting – Participation in 340B Program Under the Federal Public Service Act, that addresses your concern. If passed, the bill would align a number of health outpatient services serving low-income individuals to qualify for a program to buy drugs at discounted prices.

Like you, I am concerned about the high costs of care many Marylanders have to pay to get the coverage they need. Senate Bill 513 would lower prescription costs for consumers and is a significant factor in affordable health care for Maryland’s vulnerable patients.

I have always been committed to improving health care rates for Maryland residents and I will continue to support legislation that aims to accomplish this purpose.


Sincerely,


37

s. Paid Sick Leave Letter – March 17

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for corresponding with me regarding Senate Bill 40 – Maryland Healthy WorkingFamilies Act. The public hearing for this bill took place in my committee, the Senate Finance Committee, on February 3rd.

If you would like to track the bill’s progress, you may log on to the Maryland General Assembly website: www.mgaleg.maryland.gov, type in the bill number and you will be able to follow the bill through the legislative process.

Like you, I support this bill and understand the importance of providing earned sick and safe leave for workers in Maryland.

Once again, I appreciate your taking the time to write to me. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any other questions or concerns.

Sincerely,


http://www.mgaleg.maryland.gov/

38

t. Open Meetings Law Letter – March 19

Dear [Constituent],

Thank you for addressing your concern with me regarding legislation to amend the State of Maryland’s Open Meetings Law. I looked into the State’s law compared to the other states using the Open Government Guide, which can be found at http://www.rcfp.org/open-government-guide.

The Open Meetings Law of Maryland does not restrict the right, but rather does not provide the right to participate in the discussion. The majority of states have the same legislation. I classified state’srights into four groups: 1) Those that specifically grant the right of public participation 2) Those that authorize local governments/statutes to make decision 3) Those that grant a public participation right only in certain circumstances 4) Those that do not address or grant a right, but do not prohibit it. Maryland’s law is in the most common classification. Please consult this basic guide for public participation in each state’s unique Open Meetings law:

1) Open Meetings Law Grants Reasonable Right to be Heard >Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Louisiana, Montana, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Vermont,

2) Right Not Granted in State Public Records Laws, but Allows Local Governments to Permit Public Participation >Arkansas, Idaho, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin

3) Right Granted Situationally >Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, Wisconsin

4) Right Not Addressed/Granted >Connecticut, District of Columbia, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Dakota*, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming* *Right for public participation is presumed.

Once again, I appreciate you taking the time to address your concerns with me and please feel free to contact me with any other questions. Sincerely.


http://www.rcfp.org/open-government-guide

39

IX. Work Samples – Newsletters

Because the newsletters were done in conjunction with other members of the office staff, this section is an overview of my contributions to the beginning and end of session letters. This section doesnot include the mid-session letter because my contributions on it were minimal.

40

a. Beginning of Session E-Mail Blast – January 27

Dear Friend,

January 14th marked the opening day of the 435th Session of the Maryland General Assembly

and a week later Governor Larry Hogan was sworn-in as Maryland’s 62nd Governor. I look forward to

working together with our new Governor to grow and diversify Maryland’s economy, create good jobs,

and protect priority programs and services critical to Maryland’s future.

I serve on the Senate Finance Committee and Chair its Transportation Subcommittee and will

continue to serve on the Joint Committee on Cybersecurity, Biotechnology and Information

Technology. Most recently, I have been appointed the new Senate Chair of the Joint Committee on

Federal Relations, a House-Senate joint committee that interacts with Maryland’s Congressional

delegation on federal-state issues impacting our state.

Please take a moment to review the highlights below and, as always, do not hesitate to contact

me with your comments, questions or concerns at [email protected].

Maryland Economy

Maryland’s economy remains solid, growing at around 3.5% annually. Maryland has restored

100% of the jobs lost during the Great Recession, and our revenues continue to grow. The state

unemployment rate was 5.6% in December, down from 6.0% in November. For the third consecutive

year, the U.S. Chamber of Congress named Maryland #1 in the Nation for Entrepreneurship and

Innovation. Maryland maintains its coveted AAA bond rating from all three credit rating agencies, an

endorsement from Wall Street that the State has effectively managed its fiscal affairs. Maryland is one

of only 7 states to maintain that top rating throughout the recession.

Governor Hogan Proposes Fiscal Year 2016 Budget - Budget Overview

Last week, Governor Hogan introduced a proposed $ 39.3 billion State operating budget for the

fiscal year 2016 (FY 16) that the General Assembly is currently reviewing. The Governor proposes an

additional $4 billion for the capital budget. The budget is projected to close a current $ 421 million

deficit by 2017 without incurring any new fees or taxes by reducing the size of the executive branch

and implementing additional cuts in State spending. It also builds the State’s Rainy Day Fund up to $

800 million and leaves a $ 37 million balance in the general fund reserve.


41

The proposed budget includes cuts that will greatly impact education, health care and State

employees. Although education spending for K-12 increases, several jurisdictions where it costs more

to provide education, including Montgomery County, will lose millions of dollars in anticipated funds.

Specifically, the proposed budget cuts $135 million (50%) from the Geographic Cost of Education

Index, an education funding formula that benefits counties where education costs are highest. This

translates into a $17 million cut for Montgomery County, the State’s fastest growing school system

(2,300 student increase in 2014, the equivalent of a new high school). The budget also proposes lower

reimbursement rates for doctors who participate in Medicaid, the State health insurance program for the

poor. This will likely result in fewer doctors serving poor populations. As for State employees, the

Governor proposes to cancel a 2% cost-of-living raise for State employees that had gone into effect on

January 1.

Education

Notwithstanding the challenges associated with the proposed budget cuts, Education Week, the

Nation’s leading education newspaper, ranked Maryland #3 in the Nation among state school systems.

Maryland moved up to #2 in the Nation in student achievement. Education Week’s report is compiled

from detailed data and analysis of the Editorial Projects in the Education Research Center.

Additionally, the Maryland high school graduation rate has also been steadily rising over the past four

years.

The Governor’s proposed plan includes $ 6.1 billion in spending for K – 12 education, including $ 4.3

million to fund full-day universal pre-Kindergarten by 2018 and $ 291 million for school construction.

Montgomery County is slated to receive $ 885.3 million, a $ 23.38 million increase over the current

fiscal year.

The Governor’s proposed budget does include a record $ 6.1 billion for K – 12 education, including $

4.3 million to fund full-day universal pre-Kindergarten by 2018 and $ 289 million for school

construction. Montgomery County is slated to receive $ 885.3 million, a $ 23.38 million increase over

the current fiscal year.

Education is one of my highest priorities. We must continue to invest in our educational system and I

will always advocate for our children’s future and ensure that the monies we need to fund our

nationally recognized public education programs are protected.

42

Environment

As the recipient of the 2014 Legislative Leadership Senate Energy Award, I will continue to

champion clean energy, energy efficiency and the reduction of greenhouse gas emission.

Maryland has surged from 47th in Nation in energy efficiency less than a decade ago into the top ten,

according to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, a non-profit focused on

improving energy policies. This session, I am sponsoring the Clean Energy Act of 2015, which will

mandate the use of renewable energy in Maryland over the coming decade through a graduated process.

If passed, this bill would require a higher percentage of the State’s total energy usage to come from

renewable sources such as solar and wind power. This legislation not only provides environmental and

health benefits for Maryland but growing our clean energy sector will result in the creation thousands

of high paying jobs.

I was disappointed to learn last week that Governor Hogan scrapped a key environmental

regulation enacted to comply with a Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) mandate for

Chesapeake Bay cleanup using the proposed “Phosphorous Management Tool” (PMT). Therefore,

Maryland is left with the previous regulations that do not address the Federal mandate, necessitating

new regulations to be crafted in compliance with Federal law.

Biotech and Cyber Security Sectors

As a member of the Joint Committee on Cybersecurity, Information Technology, and

Biotechnology, I look forward to advancing our State’s emerging technology sector and to develop

policies that will promote those sectors. Montgomery County is home to almost 225 biotech

businesses and more than 11,000 employees work along the I-270 Technology Corridor. The State,

particularly Montgomery County, is on track to become a national leader in the growing cybersecurity

industry with the presence of the new National Cybersecurity Center of Excellence located in my

legislative district. The focus on biotechnology and cybersecurity provides significant economic

opportunities for Montgomery County and our entire State.

The proposed FY 2016 budget includes $12 million for the Biotech Tax Credit (a program I

created with legislation), $9.4 million for the Stem Cell fund and $2.5 million for the Cybersecurity

Tax Credit.

43

Tax Policy

There was a great deal of discussion about tax reform during last year’s political campaign. As

the only tax lawyer/CPA in the Maryland General Assembly, I plan to focus my attention on this

important topic. Because Maryland has not undertaken a comprehensive review of the tax code since

the late 1980’s, I am sponsoring a bill entitled the Commission on Tax Policy, Reform and Fairness.

This legislation would establish a task force to comprehensively examine the State’s tax code and make

recommendations to the General Assembly regarding Maryland’s tax structure.

With a new Governor and 69 newly elected legislators, the 2015 Session is shaping up to be

very interesting. I look forward to keeping you abreast of developments from Annapolis by sending

you regular updates. As always, I value your input and if you have any questions or comments, please

do not hesitate to contact me at [email protected] or call me at 301-858-3169.

Sincerely,

Brian J. Feldman

44

b. End of Session E-Mail Blast Excerpts – April 7

Dear Friend,

The 2015 Session of the Maryland General Assembly concluded on April 13. This letter

summarizes important topics from this session and may be of interest to you. If you have any questions

or concerns about these or any other issues, please do not hesitate to contact me at

[email protected].

Significant 2015 Bills

Two criminal record expungement bills passed through the legislature this session. The first

piece of legislation, Criminal Procedure – Expungement – Conviction of a Crime that is No

Longer a Crime, allows people to clear conviction records for charges that are no longer criminal. The

most common crime this bill applies to is an arrest record for the possession of marijuana, which was

downgraded from a misdemeanor to a criminal offense in 2014. The bill would allow almost 4,000

people unable to petition for expungement under current law an opportunity to clear their records.

The other legislation, Criminal Procedure – Transfer to Juvenile Court – Petition for

Expungement, will allow children who were charged in adult criminal court the ability to transfer

court jurisdiction to juvenile court to petition the expungement of their charges. The juvenile court may

have a better understanding of the potential decision to handle young offenders. The criminal court will

consider age, mental and physical health, potential to be rehabilitated and the individual’s threat to

public safety when deciding whether to transfer jurisdiction.

The Maryland Economic Development and Business Climate Commission, chaired by Norman

Augustine, reviewed the State’s economic structure and produced interim findings recommending

options for private sector growth in the future. The report found that Maryland citizens enjoy the

highest median income and has the third highest percentage of individuals with advanced degrees. The

success of Maryland businesses will create healthy jobs and in turn provide increased revenues for the

45

State, according to the commission. The report indicated that to increase the work force, the GDP must

grow. The commission cites a Nobel Prize winning study that says between 50% and 85% of modern

day GDP growth is accounted for in science and technology development. With federal revenue for the

State projected to decline, it is imperative to pursue options to expand these fields.

Senator Feldman’s 2015 Legislation

It is an honor to advocate for people with disabilities in Maryland. Working with Delegate

Craig Zucker (D-14), I was able to unanimously pass an unprecedented piece of financial legislation for

the disability community. The bill, Disabled Individuals – Task Force on the Maryland Achieving

A Better Life Experience (ABLE) Program, creates a task force to explore options for tax-

advantaged savings accounts for Marylanders with disabilities. The task force will discuss criteria for

the people who qualify for the bill and what types of expenses will be included under the program. The

account will cover employment training and assistance, educational expenses, transportation, and

medical expenses without affecting Social Security and Medicaid funds. The bill follows bi-partisan

federal ABLE legislation authorizing states to implement their own tax-deferred program.

I was also able to secure unanimous passage in the Senate of the Task Force to Study

Maternal Mental Health, which will revolutionize our understanding of mental health in new

mothers. The charge for the committee is to make recommendations about the treatment for women

who experience mental health disorders during pregnancy until a year of giving birth.

As you may know, advocating for the improvement of education in science and technology

sectors is a priority of mine. I am pleased to inform you that my legislation, The Task Force to Study

a Program for Interest-Free Loans to STEM College Students in Maryland, received bipartisan

support and passed unanimously through the Senate. The bill creates a task force to consider the

development of financing programs for university students who are pursuing a degree in science and

46

engineering. This bill is a crucial component to growing Maryland’s future economy.

I am dedicated to passing legislation that promotes clean, renewable energy sources in

Maryland. This session, I sponsored Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard – Revisions, also known

as the Maryland Clean Energy Advancement Act of 2015. It is a groundbreaking initiative for the

environmental community. Although this did not pass, the bill helps diversify Maryland’s energy

portfolio by increasing the percentage of the State’s electricity that comes from renewable energy

sources from 20% to 40% by 2025.

Relatedly, I sponsored three bills that promote energy efficiency in the electric vehicle industry.

The Maryland Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Council – Reporting and Sunset Extensions extends

the Council until 2020. The Council will continue to investigate advancements to the

commercialization of electric vehicles and explore options to upgrade Maryland’s network for charging

electric cars. I also worked on two bills that would alter rule changes. The first, Electric Vehicles –

Use of High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes – Alignment with Virginia, allows electric vehicles with

clean fuel license plates to use carpool lanes on Maryland roads. Furthermore, I drafted Real Property

– Installation and Use of Electric Vehicle Recharging Equipment, which limits barriers to install

recharging stations for electric vehicles. The bill establishes explicit standards to follow to obtain this

equipment. Although these bills did not pass, I remain committed to enacting policies like these pieces

of legislation.

In closing, I want to thank you for contacting me during this Session with your thoughts and

comments. It is an honor for me to represent you in the Maryland State Senate.

Sincerely,

Brian J. Feldman

47

X. Work Samples – Press Release

This section details the only press release the Senator wanted to send out during a quiet legislative session. It was on a bill that would set up a task force to study the implementation of tax-advantaged savings accounts for Marylanders with disabilities.

48

a. Achieving a Better Life Experiences Act – March 31

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Frederica Struse: 410-841-3169 [email protected]

Date: March 31, 2015

The Senate and House Unanimously Approve Senator Brian Feldman’s and Delegate Zucker’s Groundbreaking Financial Legislation For the Disability Community – The ABLE Bill

ABLE legislation, Senate Bill 761 and House Bill 1105, received votes of 47-0 and 137-0 respectively.

Annapolis, Md. – The Senate and House of Delegates voted unanimously in favor of Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) bills, which would examine options for Marylanders with special needsto set up tax-advantaged savings accounts.

The account would be classified under 529A tax laws, which is in the same section in the tax code as college savings programs. It would be used to cover employment training and assistance, educational expenses, transportation, and medical expenses without affecting Social Security and Medicaid funds.

The bill follows bi-partisan legislation that the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate overwhelmingly passed in December. The federal legislation authorizes each state to implement their own program to provide tax-deferred accounts for special needs.

About 30 states have quickly moved forward creating their bills. Several have already passed legislation, including Virginia on March 17.

“It’s a fantastic piece of legislation at the federal level, and it calls for states to implement their own version of the program. We wanted to do something concrete as other jurisdictions are moving forward,” said Senator Brian J. Feldman (D-15).

Feldman provided the Budget and Taxation Committee with flexible amendment options during the Committee’s March 18 hearing. The Budget and Taxation Committee unanimously passed the bill on March 27 with the amendment to set up a task force.

Some primary details the task force would discuss include establishing criteria for the people who would qualify for the bill and what types of expenses would be included under the program. Establishing a task force also allows time for the U.S. Treasury to solidify their regulations for the new subsection of the tax code.

Delegate Zucker (D-14) presented the House bill to the Appropriations Committee on March 19. The Committee and the House of Delegates both voted unanimously that day to approve the House bill.

“The ABLE act will help make sure individuals with disabilities have the resources they need to be successful,” Zucker said.

Matt Rice, an advocate for People on the Go Maryland, said during the March 18 Senate hearing the bill would “allow us to explore more competitive opportunities and give us a hand-up, not a hand out.”

49After Rice’s testimony, Daniel Briggs of the Maryland Development and Disability Council offered a specific example of the expense of extra assistance.

“The cost of the [Maryland Development and Disability Council] was $77 for my personal transportation to get to Annapolis to testify before you today. Many of you could pay $20 to fill your car and get here, while we have to take specialized vehicles,” said Briggs.

Senator Feldman, a member of the Finance Committee, also chairs the Transportation Subcommittee ofthe Finance Committee. Additionally, he is the Senate Chair of the Joint Committee on Federal Relations and serves on the Joint Committee on Cybersecurity, Information Technology and Biotechnology.

Delegate Zucker, a member of the Appropriations Committee, also chairs the Subcommittee on Health and Human Resources. He is also House Chair of the Joint Audit Committee.

50

XI. Work Samples – Research Proposals

I chose a variety of research samples to include in my portfolio. The first is on suggestions of how to foster a compromise with an electric company that cut down trees near power lines in Montgomery County. This procedure was the result of a 2011 law to improve the quality of electric service in the area. Unfortunately, many citizens were complaining that the company was engaging in deforestation and ruining the value of their real estate. The second shows the amendment proposals made to the Senator's bill on marijuana expungement after extensive communication with stakeholders and bill drafters. The final research outlined the pros and cons of fracking for the Senator.

51

a. Possible Pepco Solutions – January 22

Potential Solutions Brief Outline 1. Require Pepco to provide further notice/engage in consultations with homeowners about upcoming procedures

>Facilitate conversations and open communication between stakeholders >Remedy problem constituents have that Pepco is not hearing their complaints >Allow homeowners to understand Pepco's reasoning and process behind any tree treatment that will affect them 2. Require Pepco be in charge of stump removal

Statement Pepco's process may seem unfair to constituents, but it is legal. However, despite the court's ruling in favor of Pepco, I do think there are a couple legislative ways to justly address the homeowners' concerns. The company says that it is not thoughtlessly and hastily cutting down trees, but that it goes through a deliberative process. The company says it plans far in advance before they start any construction. It surveys trees closely and seeks the advice of independent arborists to determine where to cut. On the other hand, Pepco has given homeowners in the neighborhood little notice before it proceeds with jobs. It would be in the best interest of Pepco and the homeowners if Pepco were more transparent about their process. The company has expressed its advanced planning with the project and should let homeowners know about its intentions. This extra time gives constituents in the neighborhood more time to adjust to the indirect effects it will have on their property. Pepco should also be responsive to constituent questions and be prepared to have a meaningful dialogue about the procedure with people in the neighborhood who may be affected. I don't think constituents have too much of a right to have a say over the actions of work on Pepco property, but because it is a business that serves the neighborhood, Pepco should be subject to providing more transparency and notice to customers than a private citizen. Constituents have expressed their frustration with the company because it has largely avoided their concerns as part of theprocess. The most common complaint from constituents is that Pepco is apathetic to the consequences of its actions. This probably comes from a perspective of believing the process is unfairly sprung upon them and that Pepco workers are not responsive before beginning to work. I think it is important for Pepco to remember that it is a business that profits off of customers. Despite being a monopoly, it is still a business first that must treat their clients as a priority. It should not be ignored that Pepco has taken the step of providing vouchers of up to $200 per tree cut down that affects a homeowner's property. This is a meaningful start. I also think that it should be a requirement that Pepco be in charge of stump removal. It is not fair for consumers to have to shoulder the burden of these costs, which can be between $400-$600 per stump. There is precedent in other states, such as Massachusetts, with this mandate in similar situations. These are two relatively minor changes that could help change the perception of the company and help mitigate some of the current conflict. These are not the only changes that should be made, but they are two of the most important to help begin creating a solution to this complex and sensitive community issue.

52

b. SB168 Amendment Proposals – February 10

Amendment Proposals

In Article 10-105-a (11) THE PERSON WAS CONVICTED OF A VIOLATION OF § 5–601 OF THE 9 CRIMINALLAW ARTICLE INVOLVING THE USE OR POSSESSION OF LESS THAN 10 GRAMS OF MARIJUANA.

Strike “possession of less than 10 grams of marijuana”; Insert “CDS possession charge”

In Article 10-107-a(3) A CHARGE INVOLVING THE USE OR POSSESSION OF LESS THAN 10 GRAMS OF MARIJUANA OR A CHARGE INVOLVING THE USE OR POSSESSION OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA RELATED TO LESS THAN 10 GRAMS OF MARIJUANA THAT ARISES FROM THE SAME INCIDENT, TRANSACTION, OR SET OF FACTS AS A CHARGE IN THE UNIT IS NOT A PART OF THE UNIT.

Strike “possession of less than 10 grams of marijuana” in line 25-26; Insert “CDS possession charge”

53

c. Fracking Pros/Cons – February 26

Senate Bill 409: Protect Our Health and Communities ActPurpose: Imposing a moratorium on fracking until 2023 and establishing a panel to analyze scientific research in 2022 and pass its findings along to the Governor in 2023

I. Background Hydraulic fracturing is the pressurized drilling of underground shale to access natural gas and oil reserves. Because exposure to chemicals used and released during well stimulation may pose a public health risk, the bill seeks to hold off on drilling until more information about its effects are known. II. For A Moratorium a. Overall health outcomes 1. 96% of all papers indicate potential health risks or adverse effects (PSE Healthy Energy 2014, which studied peer-reviewed literature) 2. Research findings: >Rural Colorado: Strong association between congenital heart defects and neurological defects and proximity to gas wells >Uintah Basin, Utah: Steep increase in infant mortality and stillborn rates 3. There is a change in the quality of life for communities who have dealt with noise, transportation overload and odors from fracking 4. Marcellus Shale Risk Assessment results indicate a moderate to high risk of damage to roads and issues with forest fragmentation b. Water quality 1. 72% of all papers indicate some instance of water contamination (PSE Healthy Energy 2014) 2. PA reported 243 wells were contaminated across state related to oil and gas activity (Also reported in CO, PA, WY) 3. Underground migration of methane can cause severe contamination to well water (New York State Department of Health) c. Air quality 1. 95% of all papers indicate elevated levels of air pollutants (PSE Healthy Energy 2014) 2. Drilling releases contaminants in the air such as benzene, formaldehyde and hydrogensulfide, which are known to cause cancers, neurologic diseases and birth defects 3. Many experiments underestimate impact of air quality because they do not look at short-term air quality effects 4. Increased levels of particulate matter, diesel and organic chemicals likely could lead to respiratory problems (New York State Department of Health) 5. Marcellus Shale Risk Assessment indicates a moderate to high air emissions risk d. Well Structures > 40% of wells become damaged within 15 years of hydraulic fracturing in sites surrounding the wells e. Seismic Effects > Ohio and Oklahoma studies cite fracking as a possible cause of minor earthquakes (New York State Department of Health) f. Recency of publication > There have been 22x as many publications in 2014 as there was in 2009 (6 to 154), indicating that there have been very few longitudinal studies of fracking effects.

54III. Against A Moratorium a. Overstated environmental effects 1. The environmental impacts are not substantial and the potential economic benefits outweigh any resulting problems 2. Marcellus Shale Risk Assessment results indicate a low risk of many environmental effects, most importantly of water contamination b. Purposeless delay 1. Maryland will never be scientifically certain whether fracking will be harmful to the environment or not 2. Gov. O’Malley already approved drilling with heavy regulations in western Maryland in late 2014 c. Economic opportunity 1. Maryland has reserves that would lower the demand for natural gas and oil 2. Drilling will create jobs and help improve Maryland’s employment rate d. Nationwide public opinion > A Pew Research (2012) poll reported that more people are in favor of fracking than against it; Polls in Pennsylvania and Ohio also showed substantially more people in favor than against the procedure----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------IV. Regulations in Other States For six states that have permitted hydraulic fracturing, here is a breakdown of the regulations that the states have imposed to limit negative fracking externalities (Courtesy ALS Global) a. Pre-drilling baseline level regulations – Required samples three months after fracking to determine its effects on water quality Alkalinity – CO, OH, PA pH – CO, PA Chlorine – CO, OH, PA Fluorine – CO Metals – CO, OH, PA, WY None – ND, TX, WV b. Water well regulations Nearby water wells sampling – CO Well operation requirements – ND None – OH,PA,TX,WV c. Solid waste regulations State facility monitoring – CO None – ND,OH,PA,TX,WV Takeaway: No consensus on hot-button regulation issues because the best practice is not known. Colorado has implemented significant tests to study the effects of fracking and has produced compelling evidence of water and air contamination.

55

XII. Work Samples – Hearing Notes

The first and third documents from this section are samples of the reports I completed on cross-filed bill hearings. These would help the Senator prepare for his bill hearings in the Senate. The first provided an overview of a bill on auditing requirements for service contracts of state workers. The thirddocument outlined the testimonies against and PSC comments of the Senator's cross-filed bill on overhead transmission lines. The second hearing notes document was a sample bill summary that was sent out to other offices outlining the bill as part of the process to solicit co-sponsorships.

56

a. HB158 – February 10

Notes from the HB158 (Cross-file) Hearing

Appropriations Committee

Testimonies For Passage:Teresa Healey-Conway - American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)Debbie Michaels - Professor; University of Maryland, Baltimore CountyChris Ryon - Attorney; Kahn, Smith and Collins

Testimonies Against Passage:None

Main Points of Testimonies:1. If management first came to state employees before contracting out, these employees would have a chance to fix these issues, saving time and money.

2. Being proactive with informing state employees is more efficient. Outside agencies can come in without knowing full problem and may not fix everything, forcing state employees to come back to finish jobs.

3. Service deteriorates when contracting out because outside contractors do not care about the job. Stateemployees have more of a vested interest.

Questions:1. Delegate Gaines – What types of contracts were talked about in school contract testimonies – serviceor construction contracts – because service contracts usually have guarantees? Testimony Response > This is not always the case, but more importantly, the bigger issue with the outside contractors is the lack of urgency to repair the problem. When the contractors from out of state are contacted, they can take hours or days to respond. This forces the state employees to deal with the issue because the problems are often time-sensitive. For instance, a sorority running with faulty lights needs them to work as soon as possible. They cannot wait days for a repair without power. The bill simply holds these outside contractors accountable when they don’t respond in a timely manner.

2. Delegate McConkey – Are there other reasons to hire contract workers? Testimony Response > Once again, bill is limited to when state employees are working to beginwith and contractors are hired in an attempt to save money. It is asking to provide state employees with 60-day notice and amend auditing system for outside contractors.

57

b. SB165 – February 12

Notes on SB165 – State Retirement and Pension System – Constitutional Officers – Forfeiture of Retirement Benefits

Committee: Budget and Taxation

-Law applies to Constitutional officers (State’s Attorney General, Comptroller, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary, and Treasurer) -To qualify for a forfeiture of benefits, an officer must plead no contest or be found guilty of a felonious crime that is related to the officer’s public duties and responsibilities

- If a conviction is overturned, his or her benefits must be restored back to the date when they were revoked

58

c. HB469 – March 3

Notes from the HB469 (Cross-file) Hearing – Overhead Transmission Lines

Economic Matters Committee

Testimonies For Passage:David Davis – NextEra EnergyMason Emnet – NextEra EnergySharon Segner – LS Power Development, LLC

Main Points of Testimonies For:1. New infrastructure is required to meet energy demands of homes and businesses2. Existing Maryland statute impairs competition and the savings it can bring for customers3. Existing statute impairs creative solutions to transmission issues

Testimonies Against Passage:Tom Dennison – SMECODan Thompkins - FirstEnergy

Main Points of Testimonies Against: 1. The bill allows a person rather than an electric company to build a transmission line; if the goal is to permit interstate transmission lines, then it should be clearly stated that that is the intent2. The topic needs more time to review whether sufficient requirements are in place to protect public interest in construction of overhead transmission lines by people3. The bill jeopardizes the safety and reliability of the transmission system; there isn’t the proper oversight of independent people

Public Service Commission Comments:1. The bill allows independent transmission companies to provide new facilities that could enhance reliability, operations and affordability for consumers2. The enhancements to facilities in other states in the region may provide better service to Maryland, and new facilities in Maryland could enhance service to other states in the region3. The merchant transmission plans benefit regional stakeholders

59

XIII. Work Samples – Thank You Notes

Throughout the course of the session, the office staff wanted to express their gratitude for people who assisted them in a major way. The following work samples include thanking middle school students for submitting artwork to the Maryland General Assembly, a policy analyst for his work drafting the Senator's bill language to meet his requests, two print shop workers who were more than willing to produce testimony in special forms, an administrative assistant in the Comptroller's office who helped handle concerns from constituents in the Senator's district and a facilities clerk and custodian who kept the office environment clean.

60 a. Chen Artwork – February 26

Dear Ms. Chen,

Thank you for submitting your artwork to the Maryland General Assembly buildings in Annapolis. I look at the art every day on my way to the State House and your talent impresses me. It is a beautiful watercolor portrait and your work helps liven up the hallways. Thank you again and I wish you luck with the rest of your school year. Keep up the good work and enjoy your graduation!

If you ever have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact my office.

Sincerely,


61

b. Gleason Artwork – February 26

Dear Ms. Gleason,

Thank you for submitting your artwork to the Maryland General Assembly buildings in Annapolis. I look at the art every day on my way to the State House and your talent impresses me. It is a beautiful collage/photo and your work helps liven up the hallways. Thank you again and I wish you luck with the rest of your school year. Keep up the good work!

If you ever have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact my office.

Sincerely,


62

c. Jackson Policy Analyst – March 26

Dear Mr. Deschenaux,

I wanted to recognize one of your Policy Analysts, Matt Jackson, for his outstanding work during the 2015 session. He put forth exceptional effort helping compose my bond bills. Although I amcertain he had other responsibilities, he always made our requests seem like a priority. He went above and beyond fulfilling our requests and should serve as an example of excellence to the staff and legislators in Annapolis.

Mr. Jackson is an asset to the Maryland General Assembly and I extend him my deepest appreciation and recommendation.

Sincerely,

Senator Brian J. Feldman District 15 Montgomery County James Senate Office Building, Room 104 11 Bladen St., Annapolis, MD 21401

Cc: Nancy C. Skaggs

63

d. Gross/Holland Print Shop – March 26

Dear Mr. Lissau,

I want to recognize your Customer Service Coordinators, Carla Gross and Brenda Holland, for their exceptional work throughout the 2015 session. They were tremendous assets to helping me prepare important testimonies for bill hearings. Our office staff speaks highly of them and appreciates the assistance they have provided with a variety of jobs. I view Carla and Brenda as sources of pride forboth your office and the State of Maryland.

I also want to extend my gratitude to the rest of the print shop staff for their outstanding work throughout the session.

Sincerely,


Cc: Barbara C. Brandford

64

e. Taylor Custodial Services – March 26

Dear Ms. Thomas,

I am writing to commend one of your staff members, Joseph Taylor, for his outstanding work this session. Mr. Thomas consistently provides unparalleled customer service. Our entire office staff appreciates his friendliness, and his diligence helped keep our working space clean. He goes above and beyond to ensure all of our needs are met.

Mr. Thomas should serve as a model for professionalism among all members of the General Assembly, staff and legislators alike.

Sincerely,

Senator Brian J. Feldman District 15 Montgomery County James Senate Office Building, Room 104 11 Bladen St. Annapolis, MD 21401

65

f. Stone Administrative Assistant – March 31

Dear The Honorable Peter Franchot,

I wanted to recognize your Administrative Assistant, Kathie Stone, for her outstanding work during the 2015 session. She went above and beyond addressing the questions of my constituents and directing them to the office where their concerns could be met. My constituents have contacted me complimenting her for the help she provided, and I consider her a valuable resource. She should serve as a model of excellence to the staff and legislators in Annapolis.

I extend Ms. Stone my deepest appreciation and recommendation.

Sincerely,


Cc: Kathie Stone

66

g. Owens Facilities Clerk – April 2

Dear Ms. Tumminello-Feeley,

I want to recognize your Facilities Clerk, Vickie Owens, for her outstanding work during the 2015 legislative session. She was responsive to all of our staff’s requests and concerns. Her work was critical to maintaining the cleanliness and functionality of our office environment. Our staff depended on her and she always kept our needs a priority. I view Ms. Owens as a source of pride for both your office and the State of Maryland.

I extend Ms. Owens my deepest appreciation and recommendation.

Sincerely,


Cc: Vickie Owens

67XIV. Policy Analysis i. Overview of Issue

The following policy analysis will detail an expansion of expungement law in Maryland. Expungement allows for the revocation of certain records based on good conduct over time or changes to the law. This issue is at the forefront of policy in the 2015 legislative session following the groundbreaking decision at the end of the 2014 session to decriminalize possession of less than 10 grams of marijuana. It is a possible next step in the process to reconcile a War on Drugs that lasted more than three decades and was an avenue for severe discrimination. However, critics have said they are concerned that it is not the correct step. Others have said that rushing the process along may not lead to the best long-term outcomes for marijuana legislation. There are also people advocating that thisis a wrong next step because there are flaws in the fundamental concept of expungement.

The main question that the early part of the analysis seeks to answer is what is the best way to legislate expungement. There are people that advocate against the entire process, but the majority of people support the intent of expungement. Many states have a limited expungement process, yet they have a fairly forgiving sealing process. Basic research suggests that because Maryland has been liberal about creating expungement measures, the state has established precedent for applying it to more extensive situations in the future.

Because the initial question suggests expungement law in Maryland could be expanded, the follow-up question will address whether Maryland will maintain their current expungement law or expand it to include people with prior convictions. The analysis of the issues and legal concerns with the current law will have a significant effect on the final decision. For instance, the analysis will look atthe shortcomings of the current system and whether new legislation would solve most or all of these problems. When considering new legislation, it is also important to evaluate the unintended consequences that could arise from the bill. Therefore, the examination of expert testimonies from advocates on both sides is essential. In the end, I will evaluate the merits of all the arguments to come up with a final recommendation on this perhaps critical expungement legislation.

68ii. Research Summary and Preliminary Findings

My work on expungement legislation began in early February with Senator Feldman's bill, Senate Bill 168, which permitted petitions for expungement for possession of marijuana charges. My supervising legislative assistant charged me with coming up with amendments to the original bill because advocates that called the office were concerned it would not cover anybody convicted before 2012. After reading the bill, I telephoned Tom Williams at the Attorney General's office. He explained that, in order for the bill to apply to all citizens who had a criminal record for marijuana possession, it could not involve a specified weight (listed in the bill as 10 grams). This was because there was no weighting system in place before 2012 for people who were arrested on a possession charge. The determination between a possession and distribution charge was arbitrary. Before 2012, people were either convicted of a Controlled Dangerous Substance (CDS) possession charge or a CDS distribution charge. Even though he was against the intent of the bill, he advised me to make sure the language was broader.

I also talked with the Marijuana Policy Coalition's advocate for legislation in Maryland. She informed me about the extent that employers and schools can track arrest records for marijuana possession crimes and deny applicants on the basis of a criminal violation. When I talked to Sara Love of the American Civil Liberties Union, she wanted me to examine the appeals process. She wanted to know if a drug abuse program or 3 year supervision were the only supervision measure options the legislature would consider before granting a petition for expungement. Eventually, I confirmed with Ameejill Whitlock of the National Association of Social Workers that the best method for getting the legislation passed was to ensure individuals who were guilty of a marijuana misdemeanor charge were not guilty of a subsequent charge in the ensuing three years. She also confirmed Mr. Williams' input to change the amendment from possession of ten grams or less to include anybody convicted of a CDS possession charge. After Senator Feldman realized Senator Muse had inputted a more comprehensive bill, he decided he would not pursue the bill after he made the amendments. The bill died in committee in March.

Because the most important part of Senator Muse's Senate Bill 651 was helping Marylanders with prior criminal convictions clear their records, there was not too much more research that I had to do to develop an understanding of the policy. Most of the ensuing research was on the judicial procedure and the exact specifications the bill outlines. Through this research, I was able to develop an understanding of the issues in the current law and the effects of a change in existing law. The testimonyfrom the hearings on Senate Bill 168, Senate Bill 651, and Senate Bill 652 all gave me a keen understanding of the proponents and opponents of the policy.

I found out there were several other bills introduced this session that dealt with expungement law. However, many were given unfavorable reports when Senator Muse's bills gained traction. Muse's bills were more overarching of the smaller bills other legislators proposed. For instance, Senate Bill 130 dealt with expunging records when law enforcement stacked charges in a conviction. It received anunfavorable report early in session from the Judicial Proceedings Committee. There was also Senate Bill 16, which dealt with the expungement of specified misdemeanor and felony convictions, that was given an unfavorable report by the Judicial Proceedings Committee a week before Senate Bill 130.

69

a. List of Illustrations Figures A and B display tables of the number of criminal cases that occurred in fiscal year 2013. These rulings on criminal cases were made under the existing statute in 2012 when the state only permitted expungements for non-convictions. The vast majority of expungement cases for criminal records are reviewed in the District Courts. It must be noted that just because individuals could apply toget their records expunged does not meet that they would meet all the qualifications necessary to have their application approved.

Figure A displays a table of the total state convictions in District Court, classified by the court's ruling on each case. Of the nearly 230,000 criminal cases in Maryland in fiscal year 2013, only 42,500 individuals were found guilty. A massive 92,191 cases were classified as nolle prosequi and the individual’s charges were dropped. Almost 28,000 other cases were filed into stet, meaning the prosecution put an indefinite suspension on pursuing charges. Close to 18,000 cases were given probation before judgment, which is often a waiver of charges pending the individual does not re-offend within a certain period of time. More than 1,500 had their charges dismissed. Overall, this means that just more than 64% of people with arrest records in the District Court could apply for expungement under existing statute.

Figure B displays a table of the cases reviewed in District Court in fiscal year 2013 in Montgomery County, the constituency Senator Feldman represents. Montgomery County had a total of more than 23,000 criminal cases sent to the District Court. More than 6,500 people were found guilty and 351 individuals were determined to be not guilty. Almost half of these cases, 11,435, had their charges dropped under nolle prosequi. In addition, more than 1,500 individuals each received probationbefore judgment and stet determinations on their cases. Thirty-nine more individuals had their charges dismissed. In total, just more than 65% of citizens of Montgomery County could apply for expungement for arrest records in District Court at that time.

Figure C displays a table of the number of expungements filed for criminal records between 2004 and 2014. In all, 270,612 people filed to have their records expunged in this time frame. Over the span of this decade, filing for expungement of criminal records became much more popular. There were more than twice as many petitions filed in 2014 as in 2004. The number of expungements increased every year as more people became aware of the law. The number likely decreased between 2013 and 2014 due to a change in the law for how marijuana possession crimes were tried between 2012 and 2014.

72

b. Executive Summary

Although there were several crimes this bill is intended to address, the main target of Senate Bill 651: Criminal Procedure – Expungement – Conviction of a Crime That is No Longer a Crime is meant to legislate an appeals process following the decriminalization of marijuana possessionof 10 grams or less. Police officers must issue citations to offenders if the officer has probable cause. Citations and related public court record are not public and the Maryland Judiciary cannot post these records on its website.

The punishment for marijuana possession before 2012 was often a misdemeanor punished through incarceration of at most 12 months or a fine of no more than $1000. In 2012, the state code changed the maximum days an individual found guilty of possession of 10 grams or less of marijuana could spend in jail to 90 days. It also adjusted the maximum fine to $500.

Last year, the state reclassified the use or possession of 10 grams or less of marijuana from a criminal offense to a civil offense. The progressively higher minimum fines were listed as $100 for first-time offenders, $250 for a second conviction and $500 for any subsequent violations. The state code also instituted a mandatory rehabilitation measure into the updated statute. A court must order offenders who violate the statute three or more times to attend a Department of Health and Mental Hygiene drug education and awareness program. The courts must also test the individual for a substance abuse disorder and refer he or she to a substance abuse treatment facility depending on the evaluation.

73

c. Bill Summary

Senate Bill 651 allows Maryland residents to file expungement petitions to the District Court for the conviction of crimes that have since been downgraded to civil infractions or have been legalized.

There are conditions to the elimination of these records under the new bill. Individuals may not have ever been convicted of a separate offense that is ineligible for expungement. Also, if the individuals were charged with “public nuisance” crimes and another former crime in a unit, and they are not eligible for expungement for one of the crimes in the unit, then they are ineligible to get their records expunged for all other crimes in that unit.

The expungement of a criminal record means that the records are either: obliterated; moved to a separate clearance level, where only qualified individuals with a legitimate reason are granted access; or relocated to a place where the charge can only be accessed if the courts or police investigate a similar record.

During fiscal year 2014, 35,757 petitions for expungement were filed in the District Court. Montgomery County, the county Senator Feldman represents, filed 207 expungements. The passage of the bill would significantly expand the number of Maryland residents who would be eligible to have their records expunged, although the Maryland Judiciary does not have an estimation of the number of increased applications. There is no assessment because the people who may have been charged with possession of marijuana may have other prior offenses or fail to meet other petition requirements.

Expungement petitions have become more frequent since 2004. There were more than double the petitions filed in 2014 compared to 2004, as Figure C of the Illustrations section shows. This increase is likely due to the Internet providing easier and more convenient methods for employers to check backgrounds. This contributed to a rise in people that seeked to have their records expunged so they had a better chance at landing employment.

The District Court assesses a $30 fee for expungement petitions. This roughly has led to $1 million in annual revenue over the past three years for state and local governments. This revenue could be put toward the total expenses of processing and filing expungements to make the process more affordable for governments. An increased number of petitions causes a rise in state expenditures. Therefore, this policy will cost the government money.

74

d. Background

The bill comes on the heels of a legislative to establish a corrective process for marijuana possession. There were a couple progressive measures in the federal government that failed. However, it shed light on the topic and established a framework for state legislation.

In 2011, Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., created the Second Chance Act to allow individuals to attempt to eliminate a previous non-violent offense from their record. The initiative gained little traction because it did not have bi-partisan support. Last year, Congressmen Rand Paul, R-Ky., and Corey Booker, D-N.J., proposed the REDEEM Act. The bill would institute an expungement process for federal offenses for one-time, non-violent convictions. Both of these pieces of legislation have stalled because revolutionizing criminal procedure in the federal government faces a firestorm of opposition and is nearly impossible to pass.

Nevertheless, the states took notice. As public opinion has shifted and the majority of United States citizens are in favor of marijuana decriminalization, more state governments have brought the expungement issue into focus through the lens of people convicted of marijuana possession. Many statelegislators have acknowledged that the War on Drugs since 1980 has led to immense discrimination and has increased crime instead of lowering it. The dilemma has led to the United States having the highest incarceration rate of any country in the world.

In response, the country has had to pour money into the justice system, which has been targeting vulnerable defendants to secure funding. The number of trials for marijuana possession cases also pushes back cases for more serious crimes. Legislators have also begun to notice that employers, academic institutions and financial institutions have passed on giving jobs, university admission and home loans. Even if they are for non-violent offense, these institutions see the applicant as a potential risk. Now that governments have seen the enduring problems of a record of marijuana possession, they have begun to legislate expungement petitions.

75

e. Current Law

The current statute explains in detail the types of cases where people are able to petition for an expungement of their records. The most well known grounds for petition include acquittal of charges and dismissal of charges, but the vast majority of people qualify for expungement under more complicated rulings of the court. It is acceptable under an entry of probation before judgment, which is when a first-time offender can be tried for the crime if they reoffend within a given period of time.

There is also the entry of nolle prosequi, which is similar to dismissal. It is when a district attorney decides it will no longer prosecute because of lack of evidence, lack of witness cooperation, pursuing a guilty verdict was not in the state's interest or the charges were dropped in exchange for a fine or community service.

Another qualification for expungement in current statute is a stet of charge, which simply meansthe decision to prosecute the crime was indefinitely put on hold. This happens often because the crime is not severe and is placed on an inactive docket in order to prevent further backup of more important trial dates in the District Court. The defendant will usually not be prosecuted in the future unless the prosecution comes up with a compelling reason to reopen the case and it is within the framework for a “speedy trial,” as laid out in the sixth amendment of the federal constitution.

The last type of record that is eligible for a petition for expungement is the gubernatorial pardon. If the governor waives the pursuit of charges for the crimes of an individual or group of individuals, they can erase their arrest records. Maryland residents can also apply for an expungement for a variety of “public nuisance” crimes.

76

f. Issues Raised By Current Law

Maryland has relatively expansive expungement qualifications, but it does lag behind other states that have decriminalized marijuana. Of the states that have legalized or decriminalized marijuana, it is one of the minority of states that does not permit records for marijuana possession to be expunged. The problem with establishing decriminalization or legalization of marijuana in the states is that it contradicts federal laws for possession of marijuana, which is a misdemeanor and can be enforced through jail time of up to one year and an initial offense minimum fee of $1000. However, since Maryland has already taken the step to violate federal law, following the path of other states, it makes sense to align policy for abolishing criminal records for marijuana accordingly with those states.Otherwise, it seems like Maryland is hedging its position on marijuana policy, which makes little sense.

There is also a more general inconsistency, as Senator Muse noted in his testimony for Senate Bill 651. If the legislature physically changes the law because they think an old law is antiquated, then this problem should not continue to burden people who were charged at the wrong time. In fact, one could go so far as to say it is a violation of the 14th amendment. If somebody is arrested for a violation in 2015 and they have the same aggravating and mitigating circumstances as an individual charged in 2009, but they receive vastly different sentencing, one could make the argument that it violates the Constitutional right to equal protection under the law. An individual charged criminally in previous years should not have to live with the constant reminder of an infraction that is ruled differently on in the present.

77g. Bills Proposed to Address Current Law

There were three major bills proposed this session that all related to amending the problems in the current expungement law. The first dealt only with the biggest problem, which was clearing the records of those convicted criminally of marijuana possession charges. It was a bill from Senator Feldman, Senate Bill 168, that would allow individuals to file for expungement in cases where they were convicted of marijuana possession of 10 grams or less. He brought forth this legislation in response to the decriminalization of marijuana in the state in 2014. However, the first bill failed to address a problem with the system with which law enforcement officers inputted records for marijuana possession before 2012. In 2012, legislators changed the maximum fines and sentencing for marijuana possession of 10 grams or less. Before 2012, there was no numerical determination of marijuana possession. When police charged individuals with marijuana possession, it would be listed in the arrest record as CDS marijuana possession. There was no way to determine retrospectively whether an individual who was arrested prior to 2012 had possessed more than 10 grams of marijuana at the time because it was not weighed. Therefore, no individuals would be able to file for expungement under Feldman's original bill.

Working with advocates from the ACLU and Marijuana Policy Projects, Senator Feldman's office staff offered amendments to change the language so the new law would meet the requirements ofthe statute before 2012. Feldman's amended draft changed the language from possession of 10 grams orless to any CDS possession charge. Once initial deadlines for inputting bills was over and bill hearings started, the Senator realized that there was a more comprehensive bill, Senate Bill 651, in the Judicial Proceedings Committee. He was going to withdraw the bill when the Judicial Proceedings Committee offered their unfavorable report because he was going to support Senator Muse's bill.

Senate Bill 651, Senator Muse's bill, captured the broader issue of expungement records for crimes that are no longer crimes. The legislature's decision to decriminalize marijuana in 2014 was his main inspiration for the bill, but he wanted to establish the principle that a person should be able to eliminate their records if their offense is determined to no longer be criminal.

Senator Muse comes from Prince George's County, a diverse district of Maryland. His constituency has a lot of minorities and, as a result, he is keenly aware of issues with discrimination in the legal system. He has been progressive at making the process fairer. The Senator understands the collateral consequences of the justice system's effect on minorities who were targeted, including but notlimited to housing, employment and academic opportunities as well as the effects on minorities' recidivism rate.

Muse also made the common sense application of flexibility in the justice system. Because the legislature adjusts its writing of the laws, the justice system will naturally adjust its application of the law in these instances. Consequently, there should be a corrective system in place for people who were previously convicted that would not be convicted for the same offense today.

The bill was cross-filed with House Bill 124. Both bills passed through their respective houses without amendments. The bill was well drafted and faced little opposition in committee.

The last related bill was also from Senator Muse. This bill was much more minor and overlapped with his other expungement bill. Both bills advocated for the ability to expunge records if the charges were dropped via nolle prosequi. However, this bill also advocated for the expungement of

78records even if the offender was guilty of a more serious subsequent violation. This provision would allow some people to get rid of a nonviolent offense that made them a re-offending criminal.

The bill was cross-filed with House Bill 304. Both bills went through the House and Senate. Although this bill was a less significant piece of legislation than his other bill, it went through much more deliberation. The House offered amendments that the Senate disagreed with implementing, and vice versa. The sections of the bill related to amending the process for subsequent offenders likely led to disagreements over the details. Eventually, the House passed a version on April 10 that the Senate agreed with, and the bill was sent to the governor on sine die.

79

h. Review of How Other States Address Issue

One important quality of comparing legislation to other states is that it is most important look atstates that are close ideologically and geographically. When testifying for the passage of a bill, it is not as persuasive to committees if the precedent state for legislation is in a different region or has a different political makeup, unless the state has had radical success since implementation. In most cases,it is more influential to compare similar states. For the state of Maryland, Virginia, Washington D.C. and West Virginia are ideal geographical states to look at for comparing bills. Ideologically, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois and Massachusetts operate have a similar legislative composition. Below are the brief expungement laws for every one of these comparative states.

California – Residents are able to apply for post-conviction expungements. They are filed through the court of conviction. It passed because California wanted to expand employment opportunities and understood this law would prevent employers from considering someone negatively in the application process based on records of former crimes.

Colorado – The current statute allows individuals to make drug conviction records confidential. The applicant for expungement must have no restitution with the state and must not be involved in another criminal investigation.

Connecticut – The only individuals who are able to get their criminal records expunged are people who were juvenile offenders. There is currently no process for adults to get their criminal records expunged.

Delaware – Under Title 10 of the Delaware State Code, juvenile offenders can expunge their criminal records. However, they must meet several requirements. The procedure is much more difficultand longer than the procedure in Connecticut. There is currently no process for adults to get their criminal records expunged.

Illinois – In 2013, the Illinois legislature amended their state code to allow felony offenders of marijuana and controlled substance convictions to apply to have their criminal records expunged. People who file must undergo six months to two years of supervision as well as comply with the technical requirements to have their application granted. Massachusetts – Expungement of criminal records is rare. However, sealing of criminal records is relatively common. Many of the expungement records are expunged after a 5-year period for misdemeanors and a 10-year period for felonies. However, with cases of drug possession, this period without criminal activity can be flexibly lowered. Virginia – The state does not allow any expungement opportunities for criminal records. The only way you can have your record expunged in Virginia is for cases where the charges were dropped, cases of nolle prosequi, or cases of gubernatorial pardon.

Washington, D.C. - There is no method for expunging a record, but there is an option to seal records. Offenders who use controlled substances may qualify to have their records sealed after an 8-year waiting period.

80 West Virginia – Individuals who were convicted of a criminal record for a controlled substance under the age of 18 may qualify for expungement. The state does not afford adults any opportunities forexpungement of criminal records.

81

i. Legal Concerns Bill Addresses

One of the main legal concerns is eligibility for expungement of records based on years without a conviction after the first nonviolent offense. Maryland lawmakers were torn over whether to issue a supervision period to deter re-offenders. The law is intended to help people who made an isolated mistake in the past avoid discrimination in application processes. However, there are people who will be eligible for expungement who have re-offended in the recent past. There is a debate about whether maintaining this criminal record until they do not offend for a certain period of time may help offendersstay motivated to becoming rehabilitated.

This provision would also differentiate individuals with isolated incidents from those that have repeatedly re-offended. Employers and other institutions could argue that they should have the right to know if their applicant was a habitual offender instead of an individual just made a mistake.

Another important consideration is the imposition of cost caps clerks can charge people filing toget their restrictions dropped. The bill has set the amount they can charge each application at $30. In past legislation, the Maryland Judiciary has authorized court clerks to charge additional fees for labor. However, there is no cap on the amount court clerks can charge. This could lead to excessive fees for individuals that deserve expungements at an affordable rate. It could end up deterring people that cannot afford or do not want to pay the up-front cost to get the expungement, which could lead to long-term economic loss.

Some critics of the bill still argue that the new measures are not comprehensive enough becausethey do not address a two-year period for people charged with more than 10 grams of marijuana. There were nearly 4,000 criminal convictions for marijuana possession of more than 10 grams after the numerical weight rule went into effect between 2012-2014. In 2014, marijuana possession was decriminalized. Despite some of these individuals being ineligible for expungement due to unit exclusion or subsequent conviction, there are still a vast majority of these people who will still be ineligible for expungement under the new statute.

A primary concern is that most of these people were uneducated or of a low socioeconomic status and did not know they could negotiate the offense down at the time. They likely could have negotiated the offense from a possession of more than 10 grams to the possession charge before 2012, the CDS possession charge. They might have taken bad deals that will cause their record to be permanent for life, even though they have the same possession of marijuana charge that many people prior to 2012 could have had, simply because they were charged with possession of more than 10 grams of marijuana during this 2 year time period.

82 j. Opponents of Bill

Growth in State ExpendituresOpponents say the bill is largely unnecessary and would lead to wasteful expenses. In testimony, they say that if the crime is no longer a crime today, businesses will likely discount those records when reviewing applicants. It is not worth putting money into a system that has minimal payoff. People in support cite the growth in state revenues, but the cost to process the expenditures results in much largerexpenditures than revenue. Even though court clerks can charge individual rates for labor, the cap the state receives for each expungement is $30. However, the state has to support the increased cost of more clerks to review applicants. The cost of additional clerks to cover the increased number of expungement petitions is significant. The cost to support one clerk could cost more than $50,000 a yearin the future.

The disparity between income and expenditures is worst in local governments. The Montgomery County Sheriff's Office said the bill could have a significant effect on finances, particularly if marijuana is legalized in the future.

Overstepping of Legislative BoundariesThe Maryland Judicial Conference cites the separate code for marijuana possession for 2012. It says that the problem with the new law is that some of the prior offenders may have had more than 10 gramsof marijuana when they were arrested before 2012. However, every person charged with possession would still qualify for expungement under the new bill. The bill groups offenders who may have possessed more than 10 grams as civil offenders. In other words, their may be some people who would have still been tried criminally today who would be able to get their records cleared.

The Maryland Chiefs of Police Association and Maryland Sheriffs' Association jointly concurred in their testimony. They think that passing this legislation would contradict judicial rulings. They think that a piece of legislation of this magnitude should “require participation and input from the judiciary, prosecutors and law enforcement to have a balance of stakeholders” carefully evaluating the merits of each section.

The Maryland Network Against Domestic Violence opposes the expungement process for any individual who has been convicted of criminal records in the past. They said they think there is a pattern between a person who has been convicted of a crime and one who is willing to commit future crimes.

83

k. Proponents of Bill

Elimination of Barriers to Employment Proponents said that the bill would allow countless Maryland residents to attain employment opportunities that were not attainable with a criminal record. Welfare Advocates, a statewide coalition of community-based organizations, testified that an individual with a criminal record has to overcome asignificant barrier to getting a job. Eliminating criminal convictions that are now civil infractions or legal greatly improves the chances an individual secures an interview, land a job and develop economicsecurity. Govans Ecumenical Develop Corporation, a Baltimore-based institution that offers employmentassistance, provided statistical evidence in its testimonial support of Senate Bill 651. It said that among their clients those without criminal records are more than twice as likely to get jobs as those with a criminal record. Elimination of Barriers to Housing Under current statute, individuals with a prior criminal record have had immense trouble trying to secure a loan to purchase a house from a financial institution. Proponents said the bill offers an opportunity for many citizens to qualify for a home loan. The Maryland Interfaith Legislative Committee said in its testimony that the bill drastically improves the real estate market, which could help facilitate an economic boom in local communities. Many organizations that testified did not make as radical statements, but they did agree that the bill would lead to more housing and apartment transactions. Elimination of Barriers to Academic Institutions Supporters of this bill think the legislation would help people out in two ways. For one, it wouldhelp individuals who expunge their records to get into an academic institution where they may not otherwise be admitted. At the same time, it would expand low-income individuals' ability to qualify forfinancial aid at colleges and other educational institutions. The Safe and Sound Campaign is an advocacy group for low-income children. The association works to support better lives for children. It said in its testimony that the bill would increase the number of low-income children who get a quality education. In turn, this leads to a stronger economy. Other “Ripple Effects” on Revenue and Community Safety Marian House, a halfway house for low-income families, said there are a significant number of women and children who run into barriers in society after an initial criminal record. Many women and children who are not a threat to the community end up committing more crimes out of necessity. Improving the ability for them to receive employment will reduce recidivism and lead to lower crime. Maryland Working Families concurs with Marian House's testimony. It said the bill would allow for more constructive members of society and unclog the drain of prison expenses on the economy. HOPE Restored, a nonprofit organization that provides economic assistance to low-income families, cited the significance of the legislation on human morality. The legislation would promote tolerance, limit discrimination, and lead to an overall more tolerant society. Former U.S. Chief Deputy Marshal Matthew Fogg agreed, testifying that the policy would gradually small step in the gradual improvement of racial bias. Power Inside is a nonprofit that serves Baltimore City women hoping to reintegrate into the community after incarceration. Power Inside said the legislation would help combat the enduring problems women face post-conviction in Maryland.

84 Health Care for the Homeless agrees with these other groups. They say that passage of the legislation would mean that the state government recognizes changing times call for changing laws, and it helps begin to repay the debts owed to racial and ethnic minorities after a long history of discrimination in the state.

85

l. Conclusions and Recommendations

I carefully weighed the opposition's statements about the bill. I think each of the opposition's statements has either categorization or interpretation flaws. The opponents who argue there is too enormous of a fiscal effect are not looking carefully enough into the long-term financial gains of lower incarceration rates and more tax-paying citizens. Instead of looking at the potential long-term revenue streams, they are too focused on the short-term application fees, which I would agree are relatively insignificant. They also say they are concerned about up-front costs, but these gradually decline over time while the percentage of taxpaying residents is likely to have the inverse trend.

In regard to the law enforcement agencies and other individuals that think the legislature is overstepping their boundaries, I assure you they are not. This is simply a reactionary measure of the law they passed in 2014 to decriminalize marijuana. There is no valid argument that can be made to justify the maintenance of a criminal record that is no longer charged in this manner. I agree with the argument that people who were charged too severely in the past should be able to file a motion to align the justice given to them to be comparative to others who were found to have done the same incident today.

There would be a significant effect on the amount of money states would have to invest in the judicial system. There would be significantly less incarcerations and the caseload backup would not be nearly as substantial. Less incarcerated citizens translates to less money spent on taxpayer money to provide food, clothing, medical assistance and other necessities for inmates. In addition, there would bemore taxpaying residents because there would be fewer barriers for these individuals to get jobs. In conclusion, the bill would help lead to a better integrated community and lead to less crimes being committed out of necessity, which improves overall public safety in the state.

This session legislators have been cautious to a fault. It could possibly be because there was such a high number of freshman legislators in both chambers. Too many bills this session were heavily negotiated until they were less effective or radical or delayed for further evaluation. Even two of Senator Feldman's own bills, which were viewed as “can't miss” policy measures from both sides of theaisle, ended up being delayed in favor of creating a task force of stakeholders to review and provide insight on a bill that would be put into effect the following year.

The highly anticipated program to provide a unique funding mechanism that would allow students seeking financing pursuing Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) fieldsto receive interest-free loans had overwhelming support. By the end of session, the Senator had to be content with establishing a task force. There was also the Achieving a Better Life Experiences (ABLE) Act, which would allow members of the Maryland disability community a unique opportunity to set up tax-deferred accounts to pay for medical expenses, transportation, employment benefits and other costs.Assistants from the governor's office contacted the Senator expressing their support and urging him to get the bill passed through the legislature. Nevertheless, the Senator was led to believe that the bill would be better off delayed a year to iron out the details. This bill also ended with a task force being commissioned to examine the best possible establishment procedure.

Both of these bills had already undergone extensive review at the beginning of session and werea sign of the legislature's hesitation to pass significant bills. By no means was this isolated to Senator Feldman's office, as there were an abnormally high number of task force bills this session. This conservatism could not carry over to the expungement bill. This bill was too important and the

86current statute leaves Maryland insensibly hedging between supporting federal precedent and followingstates amendments to marijuana possession laws.

Moreover, every day discrimination is prolonged in Maryland because of the longstanding effects of legal policies targeting minorities and the poor. Law enforcement targeted these groups because they would be easier convictions. As a result, a disproportionate number of minorities were incarcerated. Upon re-entrance into the community, these victims of the system could not get adequate jobs to provide for themselves or their families because they were denied competitive employment and admittance into institutions of higher education that would qualify the for higher paying jobs. Consequently, there was an extremely high recidivism rate in the state. There has been a vicious cycling of minorities through the District Court to maintain federal funding because the number of convictions determined how much money they would be granted. There have been a few adjustments that have commenced the amelioration of this system, such as a loosening of the tie on federal funding to the number of convictions and the decriminalization of marijuana.

For Maryland, this bill represents a significant opportunity to help former offenders, who may be the victims of cycling through the system on marijuana possession charges, to re-establish themselves as productive members of society. Allowing them to expunge past injustices on their criminal records relieves the disadvantage of receiving denials of housing, employment and academic admittance due to background checks. For these reasons, I strongly favor the passage of this bill, Senate Bill 651.

87 m. Works Cited

Research Anonymous. Baltimore News. MD Senator Muse Expungement Bill Will Give Thousands A

Second Chance. Retrieved from: http://www.bmorenews.com/politics/md-senator-muse-expungement-bill-will-give-thousan~print.shtml.

California State Statute. Cleaning Your Record. Retrieved from: http://www.courts.ca.gov/1070.htm

Cohen, Steve. Fresh Start Act of 2011. Retrieved from: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr2449

Colorado State Statute. House Bill 11-1167. Retrieved from: http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2011a/csl.nsf/billcontainers/4635214456F0B7388725780800804135/$FILE/1167_enr.pdf. Connecticut State Statute. Chapter 960a: Youthful Offenders. Retrieved from:

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/pub/chap960a.htm#Sec54-76o.htm Delaware State Statute. Title 10 - Chapter 9 – Subchapter 3 – Records – Expunging Evidence.

Retrieved from: http://delcode.delaware.gov/title10/c009/sc03/index.shtml Illinois State Statute. Expungement and Sealing A Record: Overview. Retrieved from:

https://www.illinois.gov/osad/Expungement/Documents/Crinminal%20Exp %20Guide/ExpungementSealingOverview.pdf

Mukherji, Raj. Seton Hall Law. In Search of Redemption: Expungement of Federal Criminal Records. Retrieved from: http://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?

article=1163&context=student_scholarship&sei-redir=1&referer=http%3A%2F %2Fwww.google.com%2Fsearch%3Fclient%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den%26q%3Dfederal %2Bexpungement%2Brecords%2Bproposals%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF- 8#search=%22federal%20expungement%20records%20proposals%22

Peretti, Christopher. Nolle Prosequi in Maryland. Retrieved from: http://www.perettillc.com/2012/02/nolle-prosequi-in-maryland-what-it-is-and-what-it- means-to-your-criminal-case/

Senate Bill 651. Fiscal Note. Retrieved from: http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2015RS/fnotes/bil_0001/sb0651.pdf

Virginia State Statute. Expunging or Sealing State Records in Virginia. Retrieved from: http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal- defense/expungement/virginia.htm

Volpe, Trisha. Gannett Minneapolis. New Expungement Law Takes Effect in 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.kare11.com/story/news/local/2014/12/31/new-expungement-law- takes-effect-in-2015/21119849/

Washington, DC State Statute. Criminal Record Expungement: Misdemeanor & Felony. Retrieved from: http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal- defense/criminal-records-expungement/washington-dc.htm

West Virginia State Statute. WV Code 26. Retrieved from: http://www.legis.state.wv.us/wvcode/ChapterEntire.cfm?chap=61&art=11&section=26

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal-d

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal-

http://www.kare11.com/story/news/local/2014/12/31/new-expungement-law-

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal-

http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2015RS/fnotes/bil_0001/sb0651.pdf

http://www.perettillc.com/2012/02/nolle-prosequi-in-maryland-what-it-is-and-what-it-means-to-your-criminal-case/

http://www.perettillc.com/2012/02/nolle-prosequi-in-maryland-what-it-is-and-what-it-

http://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi

https://www.illinois.gov/osad/Expungement/Documents/Crinminal%20Exp

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/pub/chap960a.htm#Sec54-76o.htm

http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2011a/csl.nsf/billcontainers/4635214456F0B7388725780800804135/$FILE/1167_enr.pdf

http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2011a/csl.nsf/billcontainers/4635214456F0B7388725780800804135/$FILE/1167_enr.pdf

http://www.courts.ca.gov/1070.htm

http://www.bmorenews.com/politics/md-senator-muse-expungement-bill-will-give-thousan~print.shtml

http://www.bmorenews.com/politics/md-senator-muse-

88Testimonies

Allen, Corey Chris. Williams Executive Cut. February 19 Testimony. Allston, Katie. Marian House. February 18 Testimony. Aslan, Caryn. Job Opportunities Task Force. February 19 Testimony. Avotins, D'Anne. Govans Ecumenical Development Corporation. February 19 Testimony. Barbera, Mary Ellen. Maryland Judicial Conference. Feburary 19 Testimony. Brown, Diamonte. Out For Justice, Inc. February 18 Testimony. Channing, Michael; Morris, David; Scott, Michael. Maryland Chiefs of Police

Association. February 19 Testimony. Cameron, Timothy; Channing, Michael; Lewis, Michael. Maryland Sheriffs'

Association. February 19 Testimony. Dacey, Philip and Weiss, Kristen. Maryland Department of Transportation. February 19

Testimony. Ferebee, Hathaway. Baltimore Safe and Sound Campaign. February 19 Testimony. Fogg, Matthew. Chief Deputy U.S. Marshal, RET. February 19 Testimony. Howell, Laura. Maryland Association of Community Services. February 19 Testimony. Johnson, Carolyn. Homeless Persons Representation Project, Inc. February 19

Testimony. Joint Submittal. American Civil Liberties Union. February 19 Testimony. Joint Submittal. Health Care for the Homeless. February 19 Testimony. Joint Submittal. Maryland Center on Economic Policy. February 19 Testimony. Joint Submittal. Maryland Interfaith Legislative Committee. February 19 Testimony. Joint Submittal. Maryland Working Families. February 19 Testimony. Joint Submittal. Welfare Advocates. February 19 Testimony. Lifson, Cynthia. Maryland Network Against Domestic Violence. February 19

Testimony. Matthews, Mark. Clean Slate America, Inc. February 19 Testimony. McLeod, Branden. Center for Urban Families. February 19 Testimony. Robarge, Jacqueline. Power Inside. February 19 Testimony. Roberson, Camilla. Public Justice Center. February 19 Testimony. Shahinian, Kathy. The Episcopal Diocese of Maryland. February 19 Testimony. Thames, Jeffrey. Hope Restored. February 19 Testimony. Wallington, Keith. Justice Policy Institute. February 19 Testimony.