I like how with the Furlough days state employees had to take he saved $60 million, then the goes and builds a new $50 million dollar new Fort McHenry visitors center. Why can't employees making under 40k a year get raises? O'Malley wonders why foreclosures in the state are so high, maybe if he gave raises to the lower income workers and not so many to higher income workers things might be better.

I think the buyout should be offered to all state employees. Some agencies are exempt and many employees in those agencies would participate. This would give some unemployed people a chance to get a job.

I'm a state employee, and the Director of the (rather large) department where i work has stated that she will not approve any of the VSPs that she receives. I'm sure this is standard across the state, because no Director wants to lose a worker whose position cannot then be replaced. If the state wanted more employees to participate they should have given more employees the opportunity, as there is a long list of positions that aren't eligible as well.

Deborah, the buyout will not leave open positions to be filled by unemployed people. This is why agencies would not want employees to participate, they would lose position funding.

Andrew - The Fort McHenry Visitors Center is a federal project. The State of Maryland is not paying for it.

I believe that a lot of the applications will be rejected because some agencies just can't afford to lose the positions. The terms of the buy-out mean that the agency will lose the position, so the employee cannot be replaced. A lot of agencies are already dealing with more work and fewer resources, and they just can't afford to lose certain positions. This is going to cause resentment and unfairness in that some applications will be approved and others denied just based on the type of job that you do. There has to be a better and fairer way to do this.

Perhaps, I am mistaken but I beleive the new visitor's center at Fort McHenry was financed by federal dollars. It is federal property.

The question Deborah is if they will fill those open jobs. Most of the government jobs are being left open or eliminated without being filled. That is how they will save money.

Upper management at DHMH (Susan Tucker) told employees not to apply because the request would no be granted.

@Deborah, I believe that the 1500 positions would be eliminated to reduce the overall budget, as there is a hiring freeze. I can see why some department heads are hesitant to allow people to take the buyouts, because the positions will not be filled and they will be "under-staffed." We'll see how it works out in the end. I'm usually a big fan of smaller gov't, and I extend thanks to those who are willing to take a chance and retired early or find other employment.

I have been a contractual state employee for four years. I make under $35,000 a year, haven't been giving a step or cost of living raise, do not receive health benefits, vacation, holiday or sick days. I am subject to 3 furlough days and 5 reduction days. I am also not allowed to work on state holidays following state reduction days. That is 12 days without pay a year. My position is 100% federally funded. What is the state doing with the money they are saving by furloughing others like myself and keeping the federal government funding? Contractual employees could be hired full time by the state for at least 1/2 of what many of the aging state employee workforce makes. It should be opened to all state agencies and those positions allowed being re-filled.

Too bad the 3 Stooges Miller Busch and MOM aren't taking the buyout. That would save the state potentially billions of dollars!

Some state workers are in positions funded by federal grants. Their buy out will not result in savings to the state. In some instances, the money may need to be returned to the feds. Where is the logic?

Actually most state agencies are being persuaded to accept the applications. Why would you want to stop and employee from leaving that obviously wants out? I think the $$ was too low to get anyone except those that have 30+yrs and are considering retirement anyhow. Only giving the employees a couple weeks to decide also purposefully limited the pool of possible applicants.

Why is everyone pointing the figure at executive branch employees? Judicial and legislative branch employees are exempt from the furloughs. I understand wanting to keep higher salaries for teachers (it's all for the children) but the local BOEs cannot continue to give raises to their staff and pass the pension bill along to the state. The state should have the right to set a pool amount for teacher salary increases that allows the local BOE to determine how to spend the money. Otherwise, how do you budget for an unknown variable each year?

Maybe Shaun Adamec, a spokesman for the governor, who said "eligibility vetting will begin after Friday and will take a few weeks" should be considerd for the buyout. The people approved are supposed to be gone by 1-31 and he says it will take a few weeks to make a decision. Sure hope that he does not have anything to do with the State Treasurers Office.

$200 per year? So does that mean if you have 20 years it is 20 X $200. That is $4000 a month in retirement pension.

If you had 30 years.. wow!! $6000/month no wonder the state can't balance there budget with this much money going out.

Jason - that's a one time payout of $15,000 plus $200 for each year of service. That's not the pension amount. The pension is based on the total years of service and the 3 highest years of salary. The average pension after 30 years of service is probably around $2,000 a month. And keep in mind that employees contribute 5% of their salary to that pension plan as well.

@Jason: No, not per month, just in addition to the $15,000 lump sum. So, someone with 20 years service would get a $19,000 buyout and someone with 30 years service would get a $21,000 buyout.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! READ THE FACTS BEFORE LEAVING STUPID COMMENTS....The buyout is $15000 and $200 per year of service...so if you were there 20 years the one time payment would be$15000 plus $4000 (20 years x $200 = $4000) for a total one time payment ,for volunteering to leave ,would be $19000.....it has nothing to do with a monthly pension they may or may not be entitled to......

If none of the department heads are allowing their people to take the buy out (I can't figure out how they can stop someone) where are the 1400 coming from?

reader203: This is how a Department Head may stop someone from participating (from DBM web-site):
All Voluntary Separation Program Applications are subject to the State’s approval. Each organizational unit’s Appointing Authority shall make a recommendation regarding whether to accept or reject each application for participation in the VSP. Recommendations shall be based on whether the eligible employee’s position may be eliminated on February 1, 2011. If more eligible employees in a classification in a unit apply to participate in the VSP than the number of positions in that classification able to be eliminated, applications for eligible employees in that classification in that unit will be considered and approved based on seniority.

Those of us in our agency who applied for VSP were notified at 6:22 PM on January 27 that we would not be retiring on 2/1 - we were never told what the eligibility criteria were - good thing I didn't buy that place in Key West - totally misrepresented and mishandled!

The state tricks the employees and taxpayers again. We all should know by now the state does not offer anything beneficial to it's employees. The individual agencies should not have been involved in the selection of employees. Which finger or toe would you sacrifice?