Maryland 2023 Regular Session

Maryland House Bill HB368

Introduced
1/26/23  
Refer
1/26/23  
Report Pass
2/27/23  
Engrossed
3/2/23  

Caption

State Personnel - Executive Branch Service Contracts - Notification

Impact

This legislative change is poised to significantly impact how state functions operate, particularly regarding contracts exceeding an annual cost of $100,000. By removing the mandatory use of state employees for these services, the bill facilitates increased reliance on private contractors. This shift might enhance efficiency and potentially access specialized expertise, but it also raises concerns about job security for state employees and the quality of services performed by contractors as compared to those completed by state workers.

Summary

House Bill 368 focuses on altering the policy regarding the use of service contracts within the Executive Branch of the State of Maryland. The bill aims to change the preference for employing state employees to perform functions in state-operated facilities by repealing the existing requirement that those tasks must be carried out by state employees. Instead, the bill empowers the Board of Public Works to approve service contracts based on certifications from the Department of Budget and Management, indicating that state employees could not be feasibly utilized for certain services.

Sentiment

General sentiment surrounding HB 368 appears mixed. Supporters argue that the bill will streamline procurement and allow state agencies to engage the most qualified service providers, thereby improving service delivery. Conversely, critics fear it undermines the job security of state employees and may lead to a decrease in standards, as private contractors might prioritize profit over public service. This division reflects a broader debate on the balance between efficiency and public accountability in government operations.

Contention

Noteworthy points of contention include the implications of removing the requirement for state employees to perform specific functions and the associated notification process for affected employees. Critics express concern over the lack of input from employees who might be impacted by the transition to private contractors, potentially diminishing employee rights and the transparency of procurement processes. As the bill moves through the legislative process, these issues may provoke further debate and scrutiny among stakeholders.

Companion Bills

MD SB9

Crossfiled State Personnel – Executive Branch Service Contracts – Policy, Certification, and Notification

Previously Filed As

MD SB9

State Personnel – Executive Branch Service Contracts – Policy, Certification, and Notification

MD SB278

Tax Relief and State Personnel Equality for Service Members Act

MD HB691

Tax Relief and State Personnel Equality for Service Members Act

MD SB1

Legally Protected Health Care - Reproductive, Fertility Preservation, and Contraceptive Treatment and Services (IVF and Contraception Shield Act of 2025)

MD HB1434

Procurement - Ballot Printing Services Contracts - Board of Public Works Approval

MD SB794

State Department of Education - Procurement and Personnel Actions

MD HB661

State Personnel - Collective Bargaining - Faculty

MD SB850

State Personnel - Line-of-Duty Death and Funeral Benefits

MD HB1028

State Personnel - Professional Service and Grievances - Baltimore City Community College - Faculty

MD SB750

State Personnel - Collective Bargaining - Part-Time Faculty

Similar Bills

CA AB954

Dental services: third-party network access.

DC B25-0265

Contract No. GAGA-2022-C-0259 with SodexoMagic, LLC Approval and Payment Authorization Emergency Act of 2023

TX SB543

Relating to oversight of and requirements applicable to state contracts and other state financial and accounting issues; authorizing fees.

TX HB1426

Relating to certain requirements applicable to contracts entered into by, and the contract management process of, state agencies.

MS HB934

Healthcare Contracting Simplification Act; create.

NJ S3443

Requires State Contract Managers to monitor work conducted by subcontractors on State contracts.

NJ A4487

Requires State Contract Managers to monitor work conducted by subcontractors on State contracts.

CA SB681

Public employees’ retirement: contracting agencies: termination.