Leopold Uses Line Item Veto on Binding Arbitration Compromise

In an attempt to return Bill 4-11 to its original form, County Executive John R. Leopold has issued a veto memorandum striking two amendments that were critical to securing bi-partisan support for the legislation.

In a veto memorandum sent out to the County Council late Wednesday afternoon, Leopold informed council members of his intention to veto the two important amendments , as well as a third housekeeping amendment.

In an effort to find compromise on Monday night, Councilman Jerry Walker (R-7th District) of Gambrills introduced two key amendments, which he said put questions of the bill's legality to rest.

"We are obligated to follow the charter, and this amendment will put this bill in harmony with the charter and constitution, not in conflict, as the bill currently stands,” Walker said on Monday night.

The first of the repealed amendments would have made an independent arbitrator's ruling binding on the County Executive, meaning Leopold would have to include an award in his proposed budget. If an arbitrator had not reached a ruling before the budget was due, the County Executive would then be required to include the union's final offer within the budget, according to the amendment.

But in the memo, Leopold suggests that "such a requirement would cause havoc with the budget process."

The second amendment addressed Section 3 of the legislation. According to council members and union leaders, the section mandates that if unions were to challenge the new law's legality, and overturn any part of it, then the county's system of binding arbitration would be repealed in its entirety.

To justify the repeal of this amendment [as written in the memo], Leopold turned to the county's legal office in an effort "to preserve the role of the County Council as the final authority on the appropriation of public funds."

The third amendment repealed was a simple "housekeeping" amendment that was passed to satisfy technical requirements.

Calls to officials in the County Executive's office were not immediately returned.

While the veto memorandum may come as a surprise to much of the public, Councilman Jamie Benoit (D-4th District) of Crownsville said he saw it coming.

"I expected it," said Benoit in a phone interview. "It's no surprise that this County Executive is quick to veto a hard earned bi-partisan compromise."

Originally, the bill was opposed by all three Democratic council members. However, once the amendments introduced by Walker passed, the council voted unanimously to approve the legislation.

"He's doing what he can to hurt our public sector employees," said Benoit.

However, Derek Fink (R-District 3) of Pasadena, said he is pleased by the County Executive's move to veto the amendments.

"I voted against both amendments," Fink said in a phone interview. "I think Bill 4-11 [as originally introduced] is a good thing for the council to do ... it ensures the County Council has the final say over how taxpayers' money is spent."

The decision to veto the amendments will most likely energize public sector unions, who, before the announcement, were considering abandoning a legal challenge.

“In light of Councilman Walker’s amendments, the public safety unions were concerned that a lengthy and costly court battle may not have been the best use of member dues or taxpayer dollars,” said O'Brien Atkinson, president of the Anne Arundel County chapter of the Fraternal Order of Police in an e-mail interview.

Now that those fixes are out the window, Atkinson said all bets are off.

“He has pushed us all into arbitration and now he is pushing us all into court, against our will and against the will of the voters,” said Atkinson.