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

794 CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF MARYLAND [Nov. 14]

ment, by which Charles County would op-
erate in its base as it does now, and the
same in St. Mary's, but in certain cate-
gories they would work together as a sepa-
rate and dual system of government?

DELEGATE MOSER: Yes, sir, that is,
I suppose, a fair statement. In a dual sys-
tem, there can be a number of different
means. It could be as I said, Maryland
Port Authority. It could be a regional
planning council; it could be almost any-
thing, it could be a mass transit authority.
It could be very limited.

DELEGATE PULLEN: Does it involve
possibly change of boundaries?

DELEGATE MOSER: No, it does not.

DELEGATE PULLEN: Then, in other
words, it is a dual system of government
between two or more counties. If you go
to 7.11, is that government by functions?
If so, in what respect does it differ from
7.10? Let me illustrate what I mean. For
instance, for years we have had provisions
for regional public libraries. We have had
on the Eastern Shore provisions for a com-
munity college operated as far back as
1912, and three counties have operated a
high school, Talbot, Caroline and Queen
Anne's County at Queen Anne's.

Is this an extension of that principle?

DELEGATE MOSER: When you say
7.11, are you referring to 8.06?

DELEGATE PULLEN: I refer to 7.11,
financing by intergovernmental authorities.

DELEGATE MOSER: This would refer
to what it says, it is a limitation on their
method of financing. It makes clear there
are exceptions to the limitations.

THE CHAIRMAN: I think if you re-
state your question we will make more
time.

DELEGATE PULLEN: I am trying to
figure out if 7.11 is a different form of
cooperation, intergovernmental actions or
whether it is subsidiary to 7.10? In other
words, does it refer only to the method of
financing in the cases you cited?

DELEGATE MOSER: I think your
question is whether the term "intergovern-
mental authorities" used there is limited
to the intergovernmental authorities re-
ferred to in 7.10.

DELEGATE PULLEN: Yes.

DELEGATE MOSER: I suppose the
answer is no, because technically an inter-
governmental authority could be set up

under 8.06 by agreement between two
counties.

DELEGATE PULLEN: Something in
the form of a compact?

DELEGATE MOSER: Yes.

DELEGATE PULLEN: By what means
would you differentiate between the coop-
erative functions of the dual government in
7.10 and the compact government under
7.11?

DELEGATE MOSER: Under 7.10 this
would be a matter that the state legislature
would establish. Under 8.06 it would be by
simple agreement, like for instance, the
agreement between Baltimore City and
Baltimore County to have a joint incinera-
tor facility if this has been agreed on by
now. This is an example of so-called in-
tergovernmental cooperative agreements.
That would be jointly financed and would
not be run by an authority. Probably one
of the counties would run it.

DELEGATE PULLEN: One final ques-
tion. I am not asking these to be antag-
onistic to the point of view; I am merely
trying to understand. Under 7.10, for in-
stance, would St. Mary's County continue
to have its governmental agency with all
of the things now done, Charles the same,
but in other respects they would have an-
other governmental agency created by the
joint vote of the two counties?

DELEGATE MOSER: That is correct
up to the reference to the joint vote. Under
7.10 there would be some other kind of
body, it might be an authority of some
kind that would be performing something
that the counties are performing now. Pre-
sumably, that function, water, sewage or
whatever, would be removed from the
county and handled by this other group. I
don't think there would be a duplication.

DELEGATE PULLEN: In other words,
this is a government of cooperative func-
tions that transcends a county.

DELEGATE MOSER: It would be that,
I suppose.

DELEGATE PULLEN: I break it down
to a very commonplace level, but would it
mean the abolition of the government of
St. Charles and St. Mary's County?

DELEGATE MOSER: Absolutely not.
The abolition must be accomplished under
7.02, and there would have to be a county-
by-county referendum.

THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair has a
few questions to clarify for the Committee
on Style.

 

 

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 794   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  November 18, 2025
Maryland State Archives