|
these terms municipalities could define resi-
dence in terms of one day. Therefore I
would say the argument that Delegate
Storm makes with reference to Garrett
County and its non-residents from Penn-
sylvania or people from the District of
Columbia or wherever, as to the locality in
which they may desire to spend their vaca-
tions is not usurped by the provisions of
section 2.
The Committee felt very strongly that
there should be certain minimum or stand-
ard elements that every municipality had to
be limited to in terms of establishing the
qualifications for voting.
I suggest that these are principles that
should be in a constitution, that should be
imposed, and that this Convention should
also consider not only necessary, but ex-
tremely valuable.
I suggest and urge that you vote against
the amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: For what purpose
does Delegate Storm rise?
DELEGATE STORM: I would like to
ask Delegate Koss if she would yield to a
question.
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you yield to a
question?
DELEGATE KOSS: Certainly.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Storm.
DELEGATE STORM: The first section
of section 2 appears to say in order to
vote in a municipality, a municipal elec-
tion, you must be qualified to vote in state
elections. Then this refers back to section
1, where we have a requirement that you
must be a resident for six months and I
believe the resident in the first section in-
cludes the concept of domicile.
I wonder if this does not limit the
ability of the town to prescribe anything
which would restrict or which would limit
them from being more liberal than section
1 requires them to be.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Koss.
DELEGATE KOSS: Delegate Storm,
the intent of the Committee was that the
qualifications for voting in terms of resi-
dence in municipal elections was up to the
municipality to establish, that the require-
ment in section 1 is in terms of citizen-
ship in the United States. For the purpose
of municipal elections, the municipality
could say they were eligible if they had
lived there for one day even without meet-
|
ing the requirements for state and county
elections. This was within their power.
Now I admit that your question is very
valid, but the intent of the Committee, and
let me make it clear here, was that the
municipality could set their residence re-
quirements as they wished.
TPIE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Storm, do
you have a further question?
DELEGATE STORM: Yes. I would like
to preface it by a remark. I just thought
that we were aiming at the same thing.
I am just asking then if anyone else can
give a more valid answer to our question.
I think you and I want to get to the same
place but I am afraid that we have not,
and I am wondering if you agree with me,
that we do have a little difficulty here
since some people might say that domicile
is a part of residence as required in sec-
tion 1.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Koss.
DELEGATE KOSS: Mr. Chairman, I
would like to first of all make one addi-
tional statement, that the provisions of sec-
tion 2 would limit a municipality. They
could not impose more than a one year's
residence.
Secondly, in other sections, I think in
section 6, that the definition of residence
for the purposes of municipalities is de-
termined by the municipality.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gullett, do
you desire to submit your amendment B
as a substitute for Amendment No. 7?
DELEGATE GULLETT: Yes, I do. Am
I in order to speak on that, sir?
THE CHAIRMAN: Just a minute. The
amendment has been distributed, it will be
numbered 7-A to Amendment 7.
The Clerk will read the amendment.
READING CLERK: Amendment No. 7-A
to Committee Recommendation S&E-2, by
Delegate Gullett:
On page 2 section 2, Eligible Voters in
Municipal Elections strike out all of lines
4 through 9, inclusive, and insert in lieu
thereof the following:
"may be established by law by munici-
pal corporations subject to such pro-
cedures and standards as the General As-
sembly may provide by public general
laws. No municipal corporation may es-
tablish a voting age requirement of more
than nineteen years nor a residency re-
|
