municipalities in the State. Its bound-
aries are today substantially "fixed";
urban service and other problems must
be resolved by intergovernmental and
other techniques rather than by geo-
graphic change.
All municipal annexation in Mary-
land, for Baltimore City as well as the
smaller municipalities, could be accom-
plished prior to 1955 only with specific
legislative authorization. No general
procedures or criteria for annexation
existed in law; each proposal which was
approved required separate considera-
tion and enactment. In this respect,
annexation procedures were much the
same as those for incorporation prior to
1953: the authority to approve or deny
municipal growth rested exclusively with
the General Assembly.
In 1955, a substantial change in the
annexation procedures was instituted
with the enactment of the first general
annexation provision in Maryland.
Under Article 23A, prior and specific
legislative authorization was no longer
required. Instead, the successful com-
pletion of an annexation proposal was
made dependent upon local initiative
and local consent. Reliance upon local
consent, however, did not constitute a
major departure from past Maryland
practice. Under the preceding system,
legislative consent was most often made
contingent upon the consent either of
the residents or property owners in the
area to be annexed, of the residents of
the municipality involved, or both, de-
pending upon local circumstances. In
other words, referenda requirements
were in most instances made a specific
part of the annexation legislation.
Specifically, Article 23A provides that
a proposal to extend municipal bound-
aries may be initiated either by the
250
|
municipal governing body or by petition
of those residing and owning property
in the area to be annexed. However
initiated, the proposal must have the
written consent of at least twenty-five
per cent of those residing in the proposed
area and registered to vote in county
elections, together with the written con-
sent of those owning not less than
twenty-five per cent of the assessed valu-
ation of real property in the area. When
these requirements are met, the munic-
ipal governing body must then publish
a public notice of the proposal, hold a
public hearing, and may then enact
the proposal. If, however, during the
forty-five days which must lapse before
it can become effective, the proposal is
petitioned to referendum by either
twenty per cent of those living in the
proposed area or in the municipality
itself, a referendum must be scheduled
and held in the area or areas petitioning.
The boundary change then becomes
effective only if a majority of those vot-
ing on the question approve. In the case
of two referenda--one in the proposed
area and one in the municipality — the
proposal becomes effective only if a
majority of those voting in each area
approve.
In effect, procedures for annexation
in Maryland require, in the initial stages,
the substantial approval of those living
and owning property in the proposed
area; in the final stages, such procedures
permit petition and referenda on the
question, initiated either by residents of
the proposed area, the municipality, or
both. By giving residents of both areas
the opportunity to exercise a conclusive
veto over an annexation proposal,
Maryland law in effect requires that
there be substantial community concur-
rence in any expansion proposal.
In recent years, annexation has be-
|
