WM. PRESTON LANE, JR., GOVERNOR. 2253
BALTIMORE CITY AND MONTGOMERY COUNTY

SENATE BILL 371

AN ACT to add a new sub-section to Section 6 of Article 4
of the Code of Public Local Laws of Maryland and Balti-
more City Charter, title "Baltimore City", sub-title "Gen-
eral Powers", sub-heading "Taxes", as said section and
charter were amended by Chapter 548 Laws of Maryland,
1945, authorizing the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore
to have and exercise within the limits of Baltimore City
the power to tax to the same extent as the State has or
could exercise said power within the limits of said City,
and to provide the procedure for the exercise of said power.

SENATE BILL 465

AN ACT to add a new section to the Montgomery County
Code (1939 Edition), title "Montgomery County", sub-title
"County Commissioners", said new section to be known as
Section 186A and to follow immediately after Section 186
of said Article, conferring certain powers upon the County
Commissioners of Montgomery County as to taxation.

These two bills would give to Baltimore City, in one in-
stance, and Montgomery County in the other, all the power
to tax within those political sub-divisions to the same extent
as the State. Their approval would undoubtedly be fol-
lowed by similar legislation in future sessions for other
counties. The Sherbow Report made recommendations de-
signed to avoid such a situation. My administration has
adopted those recommendations and a policy of using the
State's taxing powers to raise revenue for the political sub-
divisions. We are, for the next State fiscal year, distributing
more than $8,250,000.00 to Baltimore City, and approximately
$12,000,000.00 to the counties. There does not seem to be
any good reason why the sub-divisions should receive $20,-
000,000.00 and at the same time, be granted taxing powers,
the exercise of which would aggravate local tax disparities,
instead of promoting a desirable uniformity of tax charges
throughout the State. In addition, such blanket authority
could be used to interfere with and impair the sources of
revenues now relied upon by the State. The effort, in the
Montgomery County bill, to give the State a veto power by
making county action subject to the approval of the Board
of Revenue Estimates of the State does not remove the ground
for objections to this broad grant of power.

It does not appear that Baltimore City, the recipient of
large additional funds from the State, will need any such