MARVIN MANDEL, Governor                       3171

impediment to the signing of House Bill 1785.

While the scope of the uses prohibited by House
Bill 1785 and Senate Bill 389 is generally the same (thus
subjecting House Bill 1785 to many of the same arguments
of overbreadth and unreasonableness discussed in our
letter of May 10, 1974), House Bill 1785 is distinguished
by its somewhat more elaborately specified exceptions for
existing uses and by the fact that it will remain in
effect for only one year. Accordingly, these arguments,
which did not lead us to conclude that Senate Bill 389
was clearly unconstitutional, are even less persuasive
here.

One question is raised by House Bill 1785 which was
not involved in the St. Mary's County bills and which
causes us grave concern in light of the fact that Anne
Arundel County is a charter county. Section 4 of Article
XI—A of the Constitution of Maryland provides as follows:

"From and after the adoption of a charter
under the provisions of this Article by the City of
Baltimore or any County of this State, no public
local law shall be enacted by the General Assembly
for said City or County on any subject covered by
the express powers granted as above provided. Any
law so drawn as to apply to two or more of the
geographic sub—divisions of this State shall not be
deemed a Local Law, within the meaning of this Act.
The terra 'geographical sub—division' herein used
shall be taken to mean the City of Baltimore or any
of the Counties of this State."

In order to determine whether House Bill 1785 violates
this prohibition, it is first necessary to decide whether
House Bill 1785 pertains to a subject within the express
powers granted to Anne Arundel County as a charter county
and then, if it does, to decide whether it is a public
local law.

With respect to the first question, there can be
little doubt, in our view, that House Bill 1785 pertains
to a subject covered by the Express Powers Act (Article
25A of the Annotated Code of Maryland (1973 Rep. Vol.,
1973 Supp.)). Section 5(J) of Article 25A confers upon
charter counties the authority to "regulate... factories,
workshops ... manufacturing plants and any and all places
where offensive trades may be carried on or which may
involve or give rise to unsanitary conditions or
conditions detrimental to health". Without suggesting
that all of the various land uses prohibited by House
Bill 1785 constitute or may constitute "offensive trades"
or will give rise to conditions detrimental to health, it
is clear that House Bill 1785 invades at least to a
significant degree the authority conferred upon charter