|
cipal departments do so serve and serve at
the pleasure of the governor. So I take it
from what you are saying that the heads
of those departments would not be affected
by this section. Is that not true of section
4.22?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: That is correct,
they are already covered by the constitution.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Case.
DELEGATE CASE: Section 4.23, Dele-
gate Grant, deals with all other personnel
in the executive branch and it says that
those whose method of appointment or re-
moval is not specifically dealt with in this
article shall be appointed and may be re-
moved as prescribed by law. Are not all of
the rest of the people in the executive
branch covered by provisions that the Com-
mittee of the Whole has already adopted?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: I point out to you
first of all that it would have to be con-
strued whether he were in the executive
brand under that narrow definition in that
section. However, I point out to you that
it does not include the comptroller who is
specifically provided for in the constitution.
It does not include the state's attorneys. It
probably does not include the clerks of the
court who are elected officers, and it cer-
tainly does not include any officials of local
governments.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Case.
DELEGATE CASE: Can I take it from
that, then, that your proposed section does
intend to deal with the state's attorneys
and with local officials of all kinds? Is this
the purport of it?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: The purpose of
this section is to give to the General As-
sembly a sovereign power, the power to
take care of the removal of officers where
it is not otherwise provided for in the
constitution.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Case.
DELEGATE CASE: I take it the an-
swer to my question is a sort of round-
about yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: Yes, that is
correct.
|
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Case.
DELEGATE CASE: The one other thing
which I wish to suggest to you is that the
provisions in section 4.22, 4.21, and 4.23
which we have already approved exempts
from their provisions the president of the
University of Maryland, the state superin-
tendent of schools and the head of the
state college system and I assume that this
suggested provision intends to take care of
them, is this correct?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: This provision
could probably be best construed as the
rest and residue.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Case.
DELEGATE CASE: Very well.
THE CHAIRMAN: For what purpose
does Delegate Gallagher rise?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Your con-
tinued indulgence for one question, Mr.
Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN: Very well.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Delegate
Grant, the Baltimore City Charter has
specific provisions whereby the mayor or
the city council can remove certain officials
upon trial and a required vote. Would it
be the intention of you as the sponsor of
this amendment to have the General As-
sembly pass laws covering the identical
officers so that there would be possibly two
avenues of removal ; or would you expect
that the legislature would prevail over the
charter?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: The problem here
is a constitutional one. Without some
grant of authority to the General Assembly
to provide for the removal of officers, it is
doubtful that they could in turn delegate
to anybody the power to remove officers.
Now, if under the shared powers concept
they have already delegated this power in a
charter to Baltimore City, this would make
the delegation lawful.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bamberger,
do you still have one further question?
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: No, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any delegate
desire to speak in opposition to the amend-
ment?
Delegate Boyer.
|
