ROBERT L. EHRLICH, JR., Governor                            S.B. 694

even when viable alternatives exist elsewhere on the parcel, may constitute a taking
of property without just compensation, and the General Assembly profoundly
disagrees with this suggestion; and

WHEREAS, A recent decision by Moreover, in its Lewis ruling, the Court of
Appeals, Lewis v. Department of Natural Resources, has: rejected the finding of the
General Assembly that the cumulative impact of development is harmful to the
critical area; shifted the burdens of proof and persuasion to local jurisdictions with
respect to the denial of a critical area variance application, thus adding burdensome
requirements and unnecessary expenses to their consideration of variance
applications; and opened the door for citizens to view unpermitted development
activity in the critical area as viable due to the lack of detrimental consequence; and

WHEREAS, The Although the Lewis ruling is holding and its associated dicta
are clearly contrary to the intent of the General Assembly's enactment of both the
Chesapeake Bay Critical Area Protection Act and the Atlantic Coastal Bays
Protection Act, these erroneous understandings have already been cited by lower
courts and administrative decision makers as binding precedent or at least as
persuasive authority, and it is the goal of the General Assembly to put an end to this
developing trend as soon as possible; and

WHEREAS, Over the past two decades, despite the vigilant efforts of the State
and local critical area programs and the ongoing focus of the General Assembly, State
agencies, advocacy groups, and private citizens, the health of the Chesapeake Bay has
continued to deteriorate, as has water quality overall, and this fact has been
substantiated in dozens of studies by a variety of government and private interest
groups; and

WHEREAS, It has become readily apparent that local jurisdictions must have
more viable enforcement options available to them if their critical area programs are
to be implemented as intended by the General Assembly; and

WHEREAS, Acting out of this long-standing and consistent commitment to the
preservation of the Chesapeake and Atlantic Coastal Bays and their ecosystems,
which are among Maryland's most precious resources, it is the intent of the General
Assembly that this Act shall overrule the Lewis decision and re-establish critical area
variance standards, particularly the historic understanding of unwarranted hardship,
that existed until weakened by the Court of Appeals, as well as enhance the
enforcement mechanisms available to local programs in the administration of their
critical area programs; now, therefore,

SECTION 1. BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF
MARYLAND, That the Laws of Maryland read as follows:

Article - Natural Resources

8-1801.

(a) The General Assembly finds and declares that:

(1) The Chesapeake and the Atlantic Coastal Bays and their tributaries
are natural resources of great significance to the State and the nation;

- 2847 -