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 779   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

[Nov. 14] DEBATES 779

multi-county governments, no, it would not
be true, because we are retaining the re-
quirement of an express grant of powers
for them.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Boileau.

DELEGATE BOILEAU: If in fact it is
reversed, perhaps when it is reversed for
cities it will be reversed for counties in
providing uniform rule. Is that not cor-
rect, or would you be providing uniform
rule?

DELEGATE MOSER: Except for these
new creatures Delegate Case was asking
me about multi-county governments. In
that area it would not be uniform but with
respect to municipalities, assuming your
premise is correct, and counties, what you
just said would be true.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Sollins.

DELEGATE SOLLINS: Chairman
Moser, with regard to sections 7.03 and
7.04, am I correct in understanding that
in the future each county, both those hav-
ing instruments of government, as you now
call them, and those that will get them in
the future, will have the right to select
their members of their legislative branch
or county councils, as they are called, in
a manner that each county chooses?

DELEGATE MOSER: That would be
the combined effect of sections 7.03 and
7.05.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Henderson.

DELEGATE HENDERSON: Mr. Chair-
man, my question may be one of draftsman-
ship, but I find myself very confused about
section 7.10. You start off with the head-
ing, "Establishment of Multi-county gov-
ernmental units." Then you speak of four
different sorts. There is multi-county gov-
ernmental units; intergovernmental au-
thority; popularly elected representative
regional governments; other units of local
government — four titles. However, the ref-
erendum provision only refers to the popu-
larly elected one.

The provision concerning financing inter-
governmental units only deals with one
class of the four which have been men-
tioned before.

Is it the intention that these finance pro-
visions should be limited to one of the
four types, or is the reference number to
be limited to one of the four types?

DELEGATE MOSER: I think the an-
swer to your first question is probably that

the title to 7.10 is a little inappropriate.
It is absolutely clear that the intention of
the Committee is that a permissive refer-
endum be allowed only with respect to the
popularly elected representative regional
government, which I already defined I for
the record, not to the other units in the
sentence.

With respect to 7.11, financing of inter-
governmental authorities, we may get to
some problems there, as you point out.

Intergovernmental authorities, as used
there, are intended to include the types of
agencies I tried to describe in answer to
Delegate Case's question. It would relate
to authorities. If they have a popularly
elected representative government, they
could tax; otherwise they could not.

THE CHAIRMAN: I take it the answer
to the question is yes, if I understand you
correctly, Delegate Moser?

DELEGATE MOSER: The answer to
part of the question is yes.

THE CHAIRMAN: I understood Dele-
gate Henderson's second question was
whether section 7.11 was intended to be
limited to intergovernmental authorities.

I understand you just now to say that is
correct.

DELEGATE MOSER: That would be
true, except the major point is that a gov-
erning board has to be a popularly elected
representative government before it can
tax.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Pascal.

DELEGATE PASCAL: Delegate Moser,
in 7.11, lines 3 and 4, it is the Committee's
intention to give the General Assembly the
opportunity to create regional government
on authority or by popular election.

Would the imposing of the service
charges and benefit charges be subject to
referendum after they are imposed by any
of these classifications?

The Maryland Port Authority imposes,
as I understand, certain charges and bene-
fit assessments on use of port facilities.
This is the type of service charge we are
speaking of. That would not be subject to
referendum. There would not be any defi-
nite area within which to submit the
charge to referendum. Something like the
Washington Suburban Sanitary Commis-
sion is also an authority. It imposes bene-
fit charges but these charges are created
either by county law or by law of the Gen-

 

 

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 779   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  August 16, 2024
Maryland State Archives