Marvin Mandel, Governor                       2147

In a letter by Professor Russell R. Reno on behalf of the Section
on Real Property, Planning and Zoning of the Maryland State Bar
Association, which is attached herewith and should be considered part
of this message, the Section of the Bar Association has urged that I
veto House Bill 112 because of its inadvertent effect upon commercial
leases. Other attorneys on behalf of various local bar associations
have similarly requested that the bill be vetoed.

For the above reasons, I believe that House Bill 112 must be
vetoed.

Sincerely,

/s/ Marvin Mandel,

Governor.

Letter from State Bar Association on House Bill 112

April 13, 1970.

The Honorable Marvin Mandel
Office of the Governor
State House
Annapolis, Maryland 21404

Dear Governor Mandel:

I am writing you as vice-chairman of the Section on Real Prop-
erty, Planning and Zoning of the Maryland State Bar Association
charged with acting as liaison member of the Committee on Laws
of the Association.

It is the recommendation of the Section Council that House Bill
#112 also known as Pre Filed Bill #92 be vetoed because of the am-
biguity that may result as to its effect on commercial leases in excess
of fifteen years. This bill was introduced for the purpose of reducing
the five-year redemption period in cases of redeemable ground rent
leases on residential property to three years. The bill as enacted re-
peals the present Section 104 of Article 21 of the Maryland Code and
re-enacts its provisions with the word "three" substituted for the
word "five." Unfortunately Section 108 of Article 21 of the Maryland
Code, which exempts business leases exceeding fifteen years from this
redemption statute, does not refer to Section 108 by that description
but refers to Chapter 485 of the Acts of 1884, Chapter 395 of the Acts
of 1888 and Chapter 207 of the Acts of 1900. These are the legislative
acts which constitute the present Section 104 of Article 21 of the
Maryland Code. The effect of this bill will be to repeal these original
acts and substitute a new chapter reference to the Acts of 1970. As a
result Section 108 of Article 21 will literally appear to be an exception
to legislative acts that have been repealed and appear to have no ap-
plication to the new Act of 1970. This raises the question as to
whether commercial leases exceeding fifteen years will become re-
deemable at 6% after July 1, 1970.

To avoid this ambiguity the Section Council recommends that the
bill be vetoed at this time and that in the 1971 legislative session both
Sections 104 and 108 be repealed and re-enacted as one single section,
so as to make the present Section 108 an exception to Section 104 as
re-enacted.