clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 3120   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

3120 CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF MARYLAND [Jan. 3]

THE PRESIDENT: Has every delegate
voted? Does any delegate want to change
his vote?

(There was no response.)
The Clerk will record the vote.

There being 62 votes in the affirmative
and 49 votes in the negative, the motion is
adopted.

The question arises on the adoption of
Amendment No. 20. A vote Aye is a vote
in favor of the adoption and a vote No is
a vote against.

(Whereupon, a roll call vote was taken.)

THE PRESIDENT: Does any delegate
desire to change his vote?

The Clerk will record the vote.

There being 46 votes in the affirmative
and 65 in the negative, the motion is lost
and the amendment is rejected.

Delegate Freedlander, do you desire to
offer Amendment F?

DELEGATE FREEDLANDER: Yes,
sir.

THE PRESIDENT: Pages will please
distribute Amendment F. This will be
Amendment No. 21. The Clerk will read
the amendment.

READING CLERK: Amendment No. 21
to Committee Recommendation LB-1, LB-2,
and LB-3 as amended by Report S&E-16,
by Delegates Wagandt, Borom, Boyles,
Bradshaw, Bryson, Fox, Freedlander, Glea-
son, Macdonald, Marion, Mitchell, Needle,
J. H. Smith, Sollins and Ulrich: On page 9,
section 3.23, General Application of Laws,
in line 2 strike out the following words:
'pertaining to public education;'.

THE PRESIDENT: The amendment
having been submitted by Delegate Freed-
lander and seconded by the other cospon-
sors, the Chair recognizes Delegate Freed-
lander.

DELEGATE FREEDLANDER: Would
you add Delegate Raley as a co-sponsor?

THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Raley is
added as a co-sponsor.

DELEGATE FREEDLANDER:
Throughout this Convention we have heard
much about education as a statewide func-
tion. We provided "that the State shall
provide by law for a statewide system of
pre-public schools." This did not mean
twenty-four different systems, one for each
county, but a statewide system with op-

tional variations by the county according
to the desire of the citizens of each county
as provided in section 3.23.

Under the proposal as now stated in the
section on general application of laws, the
General Assembly could require Baltimore
City to have an elective school board and
Montgomery County to switch to an ap-
pointive board. This is contrary to the in-
tent of the local government article which
envisioned the General Assembly acting by
public general law in the field of educa-
tion, by law which in its terms and effects
was applicable throughout the State. The
local government article did provide that
in special situations the General Assembly
could empower specific counties to enact
their own local laws.

Let me read a couple of sentences from
page 27 of Committee Memorandum LG-1:

"This local option method would per-
mit the General Assembly to recognize
special problems and institutions exist-
ing in some counties but not in others.
We intend, for example," I am continu-
ing to quote from the memorandum,
"that it permit the General Assembly to
authorize Montgomery County to have
an elective school board and Baltimore
City to appoint its own school board
even though providing that boards in
other counties be appointed by the gov-
ernor."

If I may carry this a little further, I do
not believe that it was intended that the
General Assembly be given the power to
dictate to Montgomery County by local
law, that it must have a local school board
nor that it must have a local school board
nor that the General Assembly must dic-
tate to another county that it must have
an elective school board. If education is
retained as a general application of gen-
eral law provisions, that is exactly what
we are permitting. If education is removed
from the section on general application of
laws, the subject of education will have to
be treated, as we have consistently held
during this Convention, as a statewide
function. Local variations can be permitted
under the local options which allow the
General Assembly to empower a county to
exercise any power or perform any func-
tion which has been denied to other coun-
ties. Also, since education is one of the
major departments of the State, the pro-
vision of this section will authorize the
General Assembly to enact laws "providing
for" or "regulating the powers of depart-
ments or agencies of instrumentalities of



 

clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 3120   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  Cannot perform flastmod(): Win32 Error Code = 2

Maryland State Archives