the Public Safety and Planning Housing and Parks Joint Committee work session of Wednesday April 23rd, 2025. Today we have one topic on the agenda for the FY 26 operating budget and amendments to the FY 25-30 CAP improvements program. As we begin, I'd like to thank Ms. Farog for preparing the staff report for the topic today and for once again and always assembling a most informed packet for us. I'm going to ask Council Member Freizin, who was co-chairing today, if he has any opening comments. And then I'm going to ask, have any other committee members have any opening comments? And then I'm going to ask the panel to please introduce themselves. I think it should be noted, Chief McSwayne is virtual and we see him on there right now. And then we're all as Ms. Faragoli to stream the pack. Council Member Freetz. Thank you, everybody. Being here, look forward to a good conversation. Thank our park police for all of your efforts in keeping our community safe. Obviously our parks are a critical gathering space for our community and I really appreciate it all with that. I'll yield back to you, Mr. Cochair. Any money? No? Yes. If the panel could please introduce themselves. Yes. Good afternoon. Hardy here is Chair of the Montgomery County planning board delighted to be here today. Thank you. May be figured out director Montgomery Parks. Captain Bryce Nevin's chief of the support brains for park police. Good afternoon. Please. You know, when they do. Chair to see Lieberman assistant Chief Park Police Montgomery County Division. Laquisha Robinson, Assistant Chief Park Police, Operations Branch. Thank you. Chief McSwayne, did you win a weigh-in on this? First of all, I want to thank you all for allowing me this accommodation to join you today. Obviously, this is always an important time of the year. And I'm grateful for all the work that Susan Farak does so consistently and again, allow me this opportunity. And also want to thank my staff and director of Tengarero and others who have assembled and their continued support. So thank you very much and look forward to this discussion. And again, we, to agree with Councilmember Freason, we thank you and your entire staff and everyone else for everything you do for keeping us safe. And with that, Ms. Farah, please. Good afternoon, everyone. For the park police today, the county executive is recommending about 21 and a half million for FY26. That's an increase of $325,000 or 1.5% from last year's approved budget. It includes about 325,000 increase in compensation adjustments, including overtime, and required operating expenses, and those items reflect continuation of current staffing and service levels. I did not identify any potential reductions for committee consideration. So I'm gonna work through the proposed budget changes for you. I just did wanna note in terms of the operating budget equity tool analysis. The parks are not subject to that. So there is none. However, the park police does engage in those types of racial equity and social justice efforts. And there's a list free on page two. course Chief McSwing can talk to them in more detail if you'd like to. But I did want to note that the park police do have 30% of its sworn complement are women, which mirrors at 30 by 30 initiatives. So they've done it more quickly than that. And 46% of total staff are people of color. They indicate that the department remains committed to recruiting a diverse agency and ethnicity, gender, life experiences and thought. They also department with various professional, they also partner with various professional and community stakeholders to engage in programs for individuals with autism and they participate in other functions around the community as well as provide security for various events such as the drag queen story events, which requires a heightened level of cultural competence as well to do it the right way. So in terms of budget changes this year, I'm going to start on page three with item 1.1. The first is an increase in overtime for about $74,000. Last year their department's total budget was $785,000, but it's actual year-to-date use of overtime has already totaled 864,000. So the total recommended overtime budget for FY26 will be about 860,000. And the department advises that the increased overtime is from a growing number of park events that require dedicated park police presence to ensure public safety and event security. Many of those assignments have been at high attendance events at Brookside Gardens, but Montgomery Parks in general has also expanded its large scale and neighborhood focus programming and that also requires additional park police security presence. The department also advises that this increases partially offset by a reduction in about $19,000 of shift differential cost, which is based on trend. The next item is increasing in supplies and materials, about 38,000. This supports critical upgrades to technology across the park system, including the purchase and installation of upgraded surveillance cameras to enhance public safety and situational awareness. It also provides higher resolution imaging, increased system reliability, and better integration for existing security and monitoring platforms. The funds also support badging supplies to support the park system's access control program, and the upgrade of 55 Panasonic laptops currently used by officers and administrative personnel. The recommended budget shifts about 15,000 to another pot of funding for services, and that shift will help cover associated costs for software licensing, technical support, contracted services for property installation and configuration of the security focused upgrades. The next increases for other services and charges for a total of 107,000. This increases in this category, $92,000 to fund costs associated with mandated police reform changes, increases in various maintenance and software licenses, contractual services, veterinary services, and $25,000 for security care remodernization. It also adds 15,000 in funding for contractual services transferred from supplies. There's a list on table three, in table three on page four, associated with the Maryland Police Accountability Act. There were some non-recommended reductions and I was hoping to get a little bit more clarification on this because I wasn't able to clarify it in time for this work session today. But the park police had worked with OMB on agreed cuts to three items including taser lease contract for 2500 fire alarms for 10,000 and badging supplies for 2000. The department also advises any reduction in resources could also impact compliance with the Maryland Police Accountability Act and retired K-9 care requirements. The joint committee may wish to ask the department to elaborate a little bit on these cuts, including whether it can compensate for this reduced funding. Thank you very much. I have just two quick questions. I'm going to turn to Councillor Member Freedson, and then I know Councillor Mar a larger item than impacts the entire agency. Who can answer? The question just while council staff is coming up. The questions are from the council. I'm going to have to defer to parks and Pamela done on update on that as you know the kind of executive sent over a memo that he's intending to send over a budget update that acknowledges that they screwed up and that he made a mistake and that he did not cover the negotiated agreements for park and planning and that would be included in this. We're going to take that up next because it's related to both, but I'll turn it over to Miss Dunsons. That's part of our parks department conversation that we're going to have as well but this relates to the park police so it's an important point. When you're saying next it's for the PHP is maybe the next media and it's not the next state not the government please miss done. Yeah the chair of the PHP committee is correct the budget as submitted by the county executive didn't provide sufficient funding for the park fund as a whole. That would have required parts to have not been able to fully fund the compensation increases that they expected for this year. But the county executive recognized that and as expected to send an amendment that would cover that compensation. A new one to this could be a negotiated part with the different unions. I don't know where that stands. That's kind of a different piece and that's typically handled at a much more macro level. But as far as the base funding for compensation, that should get corrected. All right. So, and I guess maybe you all can work with us at 2 o'clock but how do we deal with that for this part of the park and planning budget? Parks police budget. And this is called musical chairs if you all can please sing while you're walking around. And I apologize for not having that type of negotiated compensation increase information that you're looking for. However, the Public Safety Committee portion of this joint committee can recommend its intent that ensures that the park police negotiated agreement is fully funded. And you can make that recommendation to the planning and that's probably Dwayne I think which should be done and the only other question I have $10,000 for a fire alarms What what is that for The non-negotiated the non-recommended reductions of $10,000 for fire alarms. Does anybody know? I believe the chief is getting ready to answer. Is that the reduction from it used to be 20 I believe and we reduced it to 10 from not mistaken is that for the fire alarms? Yes. I couldn't hear your question. It's my understanding, initially, was 20. They negotiated down to 10. They believe that we can make it through this respective fiscal year at the 10,000 market cell. I was not a part of those discussions. Kate, I don't know she's there. President, yes, she ran across the room. She does happen to be here and she's just advised me that that number that that cost is for inspecting the fire alarm. So this would be a reduction in the number of inspections. You know, candidly, I mean, we were talking about parks and park buildings, etc. And for $10,000, not for the inspections or whatever that, you talk about PENELISE and PENCH FOLISH, that's what that is. So as far as I'm concerned on that, and other members of the Joint Committee are concerned way in on this. I think that $10,000 should certainly be on a reconciliation list for the least. And with that I want to turn to Councilmember Freetz. Yeah, I have two follow-ups. I was going to make a couple other comments. I'm going to shell those and just comment on a couple things to the co-chair. I mentioned the first to this point, the 10,000 reduction to inspect the fire law. I mean, if there's a more basic function of government, it's to make sure that our buildings and our properties are safe. Is that cutting in half the number of inspections that can take place or is that a more realistic expectation of how many inspections will happen and what the cost will be? You know, is that a budgeted to actual adjustment? Or is that cutting in half the number of inspections? Because if it's cutting in half the number of inspections, I don't even think we should put it on the reconciliation list. It's a public safety maintenance of service, keeping the buildings that we already have safe. It's not an enhancement or an addition. Yeah, that's not what was this share with me as far as a 50% production. Perhaps Captain Meavens, if he's had conversation with the alarm shop and speak to that lesson, why else can it's present there? For the record, Kate Bentley, I'm the budget manager for the Department of Parks. So what we ended up doing is we were sort of trying to backfill, we found money in different places to fund this, the fire alarm inspections that we've been required to do. We asked for $20,000, but we think we could probably defer enough and move them into a following fiscal year continue to do them at a regular interval. So you'll still be able to do the same number of inspections you've just found other resources in order to make that happen? Yes, but you're saying we think rather than we know, and that's the concern that I have. We, as far as I'm concerned, we should know whether or not we can do fire inspections for, you know, whatever inspecting. So, all right. No matter what, I think the expectation is that you meet the needs to ensure the safety of your staff and of our residents and of all patrons in our parks and our park facilities. So that goes without saying. I think the question is, whether or not you find other resources to fulfill that or not it's a nominal amount of money at $10,000. Some happy proposal. And it is a non-recommended reduction. It's a non-recommended reduction. Yeah. Okay. Second question on the compensation that was mentioned earlier. In the parks budget, we're going to be taking up the $1,072,826, which is the cost of compensation that was not covered by the county executive that he's now acknowledged as of yesterday, five weeks after the budget was submitted that they made a mistake and he's going to send over an adjustment to that mistake, which is delayed, but welcome news, which I think we're happy about. Does that number cover the park police compensation as well? That would be all encompassing. I just want to make sure that we have this covered or do we have to take that? I think that is the second part of the question that Chair Katz was mentioning. Yes, the marker covers all departmental staff including park police. Okay, great. So we will take that up that we'll be able to handle that. I just wanted to make sure that we didn't leave this meeting without a fine point on that. I will yield back and allow the co-chair to call on college. Thank you. I'm sorry, we're juando. All right, let's, anyone tell you, we don't care about every bit of dollar here at the County Council. And good to see you, Chief McSlayne. Thank you for joining. Thank you to the team and our staff. I would just say I don't think we should take any of the guts. They are non-recognitive reductions that, as in my reading, they're not required to take. Let me just make sure I read the packet correctly that the county executive funded the budget. Most of the items, what was the need for these non-recommended cuts? What was the back and forth on that? I'm not sure. That was where I was unclear in the process, whether this was negotiated with OMB before it was submitted to the council, or whether it comes across as part of the tier reductions that you normally consider tier one, tier two, tier three. Yes, so as a part of the larger parks department budget, this would have been in tier one. We were just trying to, we generally try to hold Park Police budget sac or sanct because of the importance of their work, but we wanted to go through every single division and see what we possibly could move around just to try. This is based on the overall parks cuts. Correct. You tried to do your part. Correct. OK. So my recommendation is that we did not take any of them. And given the role of, and it's not a huge amount, and the work that you all do I'm in my experience having always had taken up your budget every year we've been here. The Parks Police is always doing what we ask them to do under budget and over over exceeding expectations so so I I don't think we should accept any of them. I did have one question. Can I just interrupt and ask one question on that? Or the non-regority with you, we should include them back. But are they already subtracted from this budget or were they non-recommended to take all from this budget? So they wouldn't have been covered by the county executives recommended but they're in tier one. Okay,. Good. Right. And so I'm saying we're still. No, I agree with you. I just know how it's going to reconciliation. So amending your what you said, but with everything. Yeah. The one question I did have just on the overtime. Great that we have high attendance at Brooks, I gardens undersore is the how awesome our parks are and and attendance and other things. It would seem that these are regular events though that we could factor into the the budget just normally. And so is there something that I'm missing? Is there just been an unexpected spike or do we not? Is it just a staffing issue? Because I think you all you are decently staffed. So'm expecting that. I'm expecting that. I'm expecting that. I'm expecting that. I'm expecting that. I'm expecting that. I'm expecting that. increased overtime costs for staffing those events. Okay. Well, I guess what I would ask, and we don't have to, I think that's totally reasonable response. But if it's something that it's going to stay, we're going to be doing more events over the last several years. We should factor that into the, do we need more parkfully staffing just in general, so it's not an overtime issue. I just think the, the gay necessitates a discussion. Maybe the answer is no, it's not enough to justify overtime, but I just would ask that you think about that. You don't have to answer today if you want answer you can but I'm looking I'm looking that way to see if the chief has something he wants to add on I'm sorry I do I did not want to interrupt no please chief yes yeah well councilmember rajuando again thank you for your comments and also to the entire county council We do take very seriously the funding that you will give us. Can we turn it around? Make sure. Go ahead. No, make sure there you go. Okay. We want thank you for your comment here. It was a court but that also extends to the entire County Council. You guys have been very, very supportive and we don't take a grant it. The fellow that you do provide to us, and we're always committed to make sure there's a significant return on investment that you give us. So we are also sensitive to not only the federal environment, but also the state environment when it comes to funding and budgets and everything else, realizing that those also affect the local governments as well. So we're looking to also find some additional efficiencies, if you will. And we can implement to help, you know, kind of meet this issue halfway. We'll do welcome more events within our park system. I think that's what our constituents want. The community wants and I think it's the betterment for the entire community itself. But things such as, for example, the programed events. We're going to be looking at adjusting hours, especially for the larger events of certain units, not only control members, but also some of our specialty unit members, if you will, to help adjust some of those numbers down, if you will, in Reduced Team. New for additional overtime, some of our special operations group as well. And we're also training very well with staffing. We expect to put as many as four members in this coming academy. We just graduated too. We've got a couple of laterals coming over. We recently just hired one. We got another in a hopper so to speak. So we're expected to fully staff by the summer, which will also help to reduce the need for over time. So do expect that number to come down. And just know that we'll be utilizing every efficiency we can find to make that number manageable and also continue to deliver our high service to our community members and also utilization of our volunteers as well to include the deal management program. We continue to find that that's a program in demand, if you will, throughout the county itself. I'm very proud of members who participate in that, but I do believe we can also utilize volunteers even at much more and more so on the outer perimeter where we set up to prevent people from just simply walking into the designated location. Those are responsibilities that can be handled by volunteer as opposed to a sworn officer. Thank you so much. That makes a sense. Thank you Mr. Chair. Thank you, Councilmember Phoenix. Thank you so much. When I start by saying thank you to by police. You guys were, you know, great, great job and I hear a lot of positive things from constituents about your work. So thank you. I'm going to take a different take for the fire alarm system. That should be based. That is not part of the reconciliation list. That is an item that should not be touched. It should be included in the budget period. And we talk about parks facility, think about all the summer programs that we have coming up, all those little kids including my children that spend hours in all the different facilities that we have across the county for summer camps. That's what we're talking about here. So I don't know I'm sure about the Taserleast contract in the Badging Supplies, but for sure I think that the fire alarms should be part of the base and not part of any reconciliation. So I guess I can move. I'm going to move to move that to the to the base. Thank you. Anyone who's second? Only few. Yeah, without a jacket. Beautiful. That's all I want. Oh, and speaking of new events, one of those new events coming up the chief mentions. Slighall Creek Park Festival or make third. I'll be there. Thank you. So you'll be there too. Go ahead. Well, I was there last year. It's a great event. Highly recommend. I would be there, but I will be at a wedding at the same time or else I 100% would have been there but I just want to point out Because it's it's important to note based on the prior conversation that we were having which I agree with This budget is different The parks budget is different the Merrill National Capital Park and Planning budget is different the park police budget is different, the Merrill National Capital Park and Planning budget is different, the park police budget is different. It doesn't matter if the park police or the parks department bases into their expectations that things are ongoing expenses, if they're not funded by the county executive and included in our budget. So that's the challenge that we get each and every year and we have to fight so hard to include things. It's a different type of budget where the county executive is included. That's where you got a little bit over a million dollar mistake that has now been finally acknowledged that didn't even cover the compensation agreements. That is not normally part of the question when the county executive's budget comes over and any other department is a question here. So I just want to acknowledge the uniqueness of this budget. We're going to take it up in our committee next, but it is different in that sense. And I think we just need to really set those expectations. I appreciate acknowledging that because it is important. There are things that we're just expecting to happen, but they only happen if we fund them. So I just think it's important to note that. Okay, are we good? So right now the 10,000 is back or ever added to I guess is the right. And then the other taser contract for 2500 and badging supplies, that would be on the reconciliation list. And whatever, and I know you all are gonna solve all these problems in five minutes from your next meeting. But whatever the wording needs to be that the negotiated agreements for the salaries Will be a part of this budget. I don't know that we know a number at this moment, but yeah Okay, are we mark this for the record? Are we all in agreement and with that I think we have a 6 to 0 and we get to go upstairs to the somewhere kicked upstairs. You all have to stay here. So you're better off here. All right, the joint committee is now adjourned and the Planning Housing and Parks Committee will take up the MNC PPC budgets at 2 p.m. in formats. Thank you all.