|
sion is to forbid what New York State did
within the last few years; that is, pass a
series of redistricting plans, each of them
a little bit less obnoxious than the next
one, in the hopes that the court might take
one out of the series. You have given the
legislature one crack and only one?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: That is
right: The Maryland General Assembly
passed two redistricting plans at one time,
chapter 1 and chapter 8, and sent them
both to the Court of Appeals simultane-
ously. You could not do that with this plan.
DELEGATE CHABOT: Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Carson.
DELEGATE CARSON: I would like to
ask you several questions in regard to
3.17a, "special legislation."
Will you define for us what your Com-
mittee thought "special legislation" was?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I think the
best way to answer that is to take the 1867
Constitution.
Section 33 of the present Constitution
says,
"The General Assembly shall not pass
local or special laws in any of the fol-
lowing enumerated cases: for extending
the time for collection of taxes, granting
divorces, changing the name of any per-
son; providing for the sale of real es-
tate, belonging to minors, or other per-
sons laboring under legal disabilities, by
executors, administrators, guardians or
trustees; giving effect to informal or in-
valid deed or wills, refunding money paid
into the State treasury or releasing per-
sons from their debts or obligations to
the state, unless recommended by the
Governor, or officers of the Treasury De-
partment. And the General Assembly
shall pass no special law for any case
for which provision has been made by
an existing general law. The General
Assembly at its first session after the
adoption of this constitution shall pass
general laws providing for the cases
enumerated in this section, which are
not already adequately provided for, and
for all other cases where a general law
can be made applicable."
I think you have to provide the definition
on the basis of what the 1867 Constitution
applied. It seemed to apply, I think, that
those laws which were passed for the relief
of special cases and particular individuals
were special laws.
|
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Carson.
DELEGATE CARSON: What you are
saying in this section is that, for example,
if you had a statewide divorce law that
the General Assembly may not divorce "A"
and "B", for example. Also, if you do pass
in the future a state tort claim, you may
not pass a law to reimburse "A" because
"B" harmed him?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: That is my
understanding.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: Mr. Chairman
and Mr. Gallagher, if I might direct your
attention to section 3.02, in your answer
a few moments ago to Delegate Schloeder
about the sentence contained in lines 18-20
you indicated that that was a suggestion
to the persons who would be doing the dis-
tricting.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: If I said
"suggestion," it probably carries less than
what I meant. It is not a mandate, but it
is certainly a guideline, or a test.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: If there were a
choice to be made as to whether to follow
the language of that sentence or to follow
the language of the sentence which follows
it, which would take precedence?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Well, I
think you must endeavor to get substan-
tially equal population. Now, what consti-
tutes substantially equal : we have suggested
fifteen percent, but we have also said that
there may be isolated cases where one would
depart from this maximum deviation.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: Does the com-
mand about the following of natural bound-
aries, the boundaries of political subdivi-
sions, open up to challenge for a variety
of reasons any districting plan which may
be divided, and perhaps unnecessarily so?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Well, cer-
tainly it does provide the grounds for
challenging, otherwise it would not make
much sense to include it, and to that ex-
tent it may be said to be a litigation
breeder.
DELEGATE MARION: In the report on
suffrage and elections they recommended
that there be a general election for county
officials beginning in 1971, and every fourth
year thereafter. Does the language in your
section 3.07 referring to the next statewide
|
