(a) The Executive Director may not certify that the Montgomery Commission has complied with the requirements of this subtitle unless the Montgomery Commission: (1) has taken steps to consider alternatives to the service contract, including reorganization, reevaluation of service, and reevaluation of performance; (2) has consulted with the certified representative of any Montgomery Commission employees who will be adversely affected if the Montgomery Commission enters into the service contract; and (3) has demonstrated, based on a cost comparison analysis utilizing good faith estimates, that the Montgomery Commission will save, by entering into a service contract, at least an amount equal to the lesser of $200,000 or 20% of the estimated net present value of the cost of the service contract. (b) The Montgomery Commission shall estimate and compare at least the following in the cost comparison analysis: (1) direct costs, including fringe benefits and the assumption that the contractor will pay employees who perform work under the service contract, at a minimum, the county living wage rate for Montgomery County; (2) indirect overhead costs properly allocable to the bargaining unit will pay employees who perform work under the service contract, at a minimum, the county living wage rate for Montgomery County; (2) indirect overhead costs properly allocable to the bargaining unit work or service contract according to generally accepted accounting principles; and (3) any costs associated with unemployment compensation or outplacement assistance for displaced employees.
Maryland Legal Code