What initially began as a Facebook comment and a question about whether a new uniform policy was actually being implemented has now developed into a much larger investigation involving telephone calls, emails, conversations with current and former Maryland Defense Force personnel, outreach to senior leadership, and a formal Maryland Public Information Act request.
And we are beginning to develop a much clearer picture of what happened.
Where This Started
Our attention was initially drawn to comments from Maryland Defense Force personnel indicating that the organization will be no longer wearing OCP uniforms and will instead be moving toward black polo shirts, khaki trousers and baseball caps.
Those statements alerted us and so our Office of Government & Legislative Affairs began an investigation. First we reached out to The Commanding General of The Maryland Defense Force, who we contacted numerous times via phone:
And email:
Unfortunately we also received no response from The General nor Major (MD) Rice, The Public Affairs Officer of The Maryland Defense Force.
We have previously had a very good relationship with Maryland Defense Force Leadership and its Public Affairs Office, which is one reason we would much rather obtain an explanation directly from MDDF leadership than speculate about their reasoning.
We are continuing to provide Maryland officials an opportunity to explain the decision.
At the same time, we cannot allow the absence of an immediate response to prevent us from investigating a policy that could significantly affect the organization and its troops.
A Member of MDDF Senior Leadership Confirmed the New Policy
We subsequently received correspondence from a member of the senior leadership of the Maryland Defense Force.
That individual told us that he could support the statement that the decision to take the Maryland Defense Force out of OCP uniforms was made by the Adjutant General during the fall of 2025. The current Adjutant General of Major General Janeen L. Birkhead.
He further indicated that he expressed support for examining what could be done regarding the Maryland Defense Force’s OCP uniform situation.
That communication is important.
We now have information from someone who serves within MDDF senior leadership indicating that this was not simply a rumor circulating among troops.
According to this highly reliable source, a decision was made at the Adjutant General level last fall to remove the Maryland Defense Force from OCPs.
However that does not answer every question.
In many ways, it creates more of them.
Who proposed the change?
What problem was the policy intended to solve?
Was an operational risk assessment completed?
Were MDDF commanders consulted?
Were the troops consulted?
Was recruiting considered?
Was retention considered?
Were morale consequences considered?
Was public recognizability considered?
Was the ability of MDDF personnel to operate beside Maryland National Guard soldiers considered?
Most importantly:
Was the safety of Maryland Defense Force personnel considered before the decision to switching to a civilian uniform made?
Filing a Maryland Public Information Act Request
After the information we received, our Office of Government & Legislative Affairs formally contacted the Maryland Military Department under the Maryland Public Information Act.
Our records request is extensive because we want to reconstruct exactly how this policy developed.
Among the records we requested are:
- Orders, directives, memoranda, policy letters and command guidance concerning MDDF uniform changes;
- Records proposing or approving polo shirts, khaki pants, civilian-style attire or alternate uniforms;
- Communications involving the Adjutant General, Maryland Military Department leadership, MDDF leadership, Maryland National Guard personnel and relevant National Guard Bureau communications;
- Records involving CNGBI 5500.01A or other federal or state guidance concerning distinctive State Defense Force uniforms;
- Documentation explaining why the uniform policy was changed;
- Records concerning recruiting and retention;
- Records concerning member morale;
- Operational-effectiveness assessments;
- Personnel-identification and safety assessments;
- Cost analyses;
- Public-perception considerations;
- Interoperability assessments involving the National Guard, emergency management, law enforcement and other agencies;
- Records identifying who proposed, recommended and ultimately approved the policy;
- Current and superseded MDDF uniform regulations; and
- Surveys, complaints, correspondence or other records documenting the reaction of Maryland Defense Force members.
Here is our email:
We also requested MDDF personnel-strength information from 2023 to now.
That last portion is particularly important.
If the Maryland Defense Force has experienced significant losses in personnel surrounding these policy changes, we want to know.
Correlation by itself would not prove that uniforms caused personnel losses, but recruiting and retention data could help determine whether there is a problem worthy of further examination.
Maryland Military Department Directs Us to the National Guard PAO
Our outreach also led us to Maryland Military Department Public Affairs Manager Chazz Kibler.
His out-of-office message states that he will be unavailable until September 18 and instructs those with pressing communication matters to contact the Maryland National Guard Public Affairs Office and copy him on the correspondence.
We followed that direction.
Our Public Information Act request will therefore submitted to the Maryland National Guard Public Affairs address identified by the Maryland Military Department.
We now await the records.
And what those records contain may determine where this investigation goes next.
Why We Believe the Polo-and-Khaki Question Is Bigger Than Clothing
One misconception we want to address is that this is not simply an argument about whether soldiers “look good” in camouflage. Nor do we accept the argument people like former SGAUS President Lt. Colonel Barry Greene’s stated ‘It doesnt matter what uniform you wear, thats not why we serve.
Uniforms perform an operational function.
Our State Guard & Defense Force Council policy specifically emphasizes that State Defense Force personnel conducting domestic missions should be recognizable to civilians and partner agencies as legitimate members of a state military organization.
Our policy describes this as a Zero-Hesitation Recognition Standard.
During a normal day, whether someone wears a polo or an OCP uniform may not seem consequential.
A disaster is different.
Consider one example we are examining closely:
Shelter Security
Maryland has suffered a major hurricane or another widespread natural disaster.
Hundreds of displaced civilians have been moved into an emergency shelter.
Food, bottled water, medicine and other supplies are being stored inside part of the facility.
Maryland Defense Force troops may be assigned to shelter operations, logistics, Points of Distribution, or where authorized internal or exterior security.
Now as supplies dwindle a group of angry shelter occupants, or people arriving from the surrounding area, decides that they want access to those supplies.
They approach the restricted area.
Standing between them and that storage area are Maryland Defense Force personnel.
There is an enormous psychological and visual distinction between approaching a formation of recognizable military personnel and approaching several individuals wearing polo shirts and khaki pants.
That does not mean a military uniform will automatically prevent violence.
What it may provide is another layer of deterrence, authority and immediate recognition.
A person looking at troops in a military uniform immediately understands:
These people belong to an organized government military force.
They have a chain of command.
They have authority.
They have training.
They are here for a reason.
A polo shirt may require a civilian to read an embroidered logo, identification badge or credential before reaching the same conclusion.
During a disaster, those extra seconds of uncertainty matter.
And for a hostile or angry individual, the perception that the people standing in front of them possess less authority may make that individual more willing to challenge them.
An argument can become pushing.
Pushing can become a fight.
A fight involving several people in a crowded emergency shelter can result in civilians and troops being injured.
The question we are investigating is not whether this hypothetical situation will occur.
The question is whether removing the recognizable military appearance of the Maryland Defense Force increases that risk, and whether Maryland officials studied that possibility before approving the change.
Our existing uniform policy specifically warns that excessive visual separation from established military appearance can increase confusion and misidentification during hurricanes, floods, evacuations, shelter operations, traffic-control missions and Points of Distribution.
Our organizational policy likewise identifies shelter operations, internal and exterior shelter security, Points of Distribution, disaster response, logistics, search & rescue, infrastructure protection and related civil-support missions as appropriate functions for modern State Defense Forces.
And we agree with the sentiment expressed by Major General Anthony Woods, an Army National Guard Combat Veteran, that regarding the proposed transition to polo shirts and khaki trousers: that the people who make up The State Guard are volunteers that come from all walks of life, they are engineers, doctors, nurses, police officers, correctional officers, store clerks, lawyers, and countless other professions and every month, they sacrifice valuable time with their families, to go train with their fellow soldiers so if a disaster or emergency ever arises The Governor can call on them to serve. And many dedicate additional weeks each year to Annual Training and state missions, all unpaid and out of their own pocket. The very least we can do for these men and women is provide them with a military uniform they can be proud to wear.
Recruiting and Retention May Be an Even Bigger Problem
Another element we are examining is what this does to the identity of the Maryland Defense Force.
State Defense Force members are volunteers.
They do not have to be there.
They surrender weekends, evenings and sometimes extended periods away from their families and civilian employment because they want to serve their state as members of the military.
Many spend significant amounts of their own money on uniforms and equipment.
Some are retired or former members of the U.S. Armed Forces who want to continue serving.
The senior-leadership source who contacted us expressed this personally. He described having served in the Regular Army and having been an enlisted soldier, NCO and officer, and wrote about the importance to him of continuing to serve in the same OCP uniform in which he retired from the Army.
That sentiment should not simply be dismissed as nostalgia.
Military identity is an important part of recruiting, morale, cohesion and retention.
If a prospective volunteer sees an organization wearing military uniforms, operating under military rank, military discipline and a military chain of command, that communicates something very different from seeing an organization wearing polos and khakis.
We therefore intend to examine whether Maryland officials studied the recruiting and retention implications before making this decision.
We Are Developing an Expert Analysis
While we wait for Maryland’s records, another part of this investigation is already moving forward.
We are working to develop a detailed expert analysis examining how a transition away from recognizable military uniforms may affect:
Safety
Whether reduced visual authority makes confrontations or challenges to MDDF personnel more likely.
Public Compliance
Whether civilians are more likely to immediately comply with directions from recognizable military personnel.
Shelter and POD Security
Whether military appearance contributes to deterrence and control in high-stress environments involving scarce resources.
Recruiting
Whether removing military appearance makes individuals less interested in joining.
Retention
Whether existing members leave because they believe the organization is losing its military identity.
Morale and Cohesion
Whether troops perceive the change as diminishing their role or professionalism.
Interoperability
Whether MDDF personnel remain immediately identifiable when working alongside the Maryland Army National Guard, Maryland Air National Guard, police, fire, EMS and emergency-management personnel.
Operational Identification
Whether civilians and other responders can instantly determine who MDDF personnel are during a rapidly evolving emergency.
We ultimately want this analysis to become something that can be placed in front of Maryland legislators, state officials and military leadership alongside the documentary record we obtain through the Public Information Act.
What Happens Next
Right now, several tracks are moving simultaneously.
We are waiting for Maryland’s response to our records request.
We are continuing outreach.
We are collecting information from current and former personnel.
We are examining the applicable policies.
We are developing the expert analysis.
And We are reaching out and are bringing in many Senior leaders of The Army National Guard, State Guard, a Professor from The US Army War College, a lifelong journalist, and assistance from a Big Homeland Defense NGO based in DC. All of whom will help author this expert analysis document.
And depending upon what the documentary record reveals, our Office of Government & Legislative Affairs will begin discussing the matter with members of the Maryland General Assembly who oversee The Maryland Military Department, particularly
Sen. Brian Feldman – Chair
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 410-841-3169
- Sen. Cheryl Kagan – Vice Chair
- Email: [email protected]: 410-841-3134
- Sen. Benjamin Brooks
- Email: [email protected]: 410-841-3606
- Sen. Bryan Simonaire
- Email: [email protected]: 410-841-3658
If records show that a comprehensive safety, recruiting and retention analysis was conducted before this decision, we will examine that evidence fairly.
But if the records reveal that no meaningful operational analysis was performed before removing a state military force from its established military duty uniform, that raises a very different set of questions.
And we intend to pursue those questions.
This Is What Your Donation or Patreon Membership Supports
This is the type of work that happens behind the articles you see on StateDefenseForce.com.
A public article may take several hours to research and publish.
An investigation can take weeks or months.
It means making calls.
Calling again when nobody answers.
Writing emails.
Following up.
Finding another contact.
Talking with troops.
Talking with former commanders.
Drafting public-records requests.
Reviewing hundreds or potentially thousands of pages of government records.
Researching statutes and regulations.
Developing policy analysis.
Speaking with subject-matter experts.
Contacting legislators.
Following up with legislative staff.
And continuing until we either obtain an explanation or exhaust the avenues available to us.
That is why your donation or Patreon membership is so important to what we are building.
Your financial support gives our staff the time and resources to fight on behalf of State Defense Force troops who often do not have an independent voice outside their own chain of command.
We believe the men and women volunteering to serve Maryland deserve the military uniform their organization has worn for over a century. That they are recognized for who they are, a strong, professional, properly equipped and respected military organization.
And when a policy may affect their safety, recruiting, retention, morale or ability to accomplish their mission, someone needs to ask the questions.
That is what we intend to do.
We will continue sharing the deeper, behind-the-scenes developments of this investigation with our Patreon members as they happen, including updates on our records request, additional correspondence, telephone calls, legislative outreach and development of the expert analysis.
Thank you for making this work possible.
Donate What You Can So We Can Roll Back This Policy
Thank you
Mr. Jean Marciniak
Director, The State Guard & Defense Force Council
SGDFC.org | StateDefenseForce.com | LegislativeAdvocacy.org
