|
own charters. It seems so to me and to the
Committee, which specifically considered
this after a meeting with a subcommittee
of your committee, as you know.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Raley.
DELEGATE RALEY: On section 7.11
there have been questions that might leave
some confusion. I think we ought to re-
member what the State Finance and Taxa-
tion Committee is going to recommend.
First I am going to say that taxes can
only be imposed by the elected representa-
tives of the people exercising legislative
powers.
My question to you, Mr. Chairman, is
that 7.1I says only that elected representa-
tives can put a tax into effect. It does allow
elected representatives of any type of gov-
ernmental authority to collect taxes or ad-
minister them. Is that not correct? Is that
not all that says?
DELEGATE MOSER: Yes, it makes
clear something that may be clear in the
case law but is not so clear in the Consti-
tution, that is, that these bodies can also
impose benefit charges and service charges.
The answer is, it is not intended to run
afoul in any way of the provision, with
which I am familiar, which you said the
Committee on State Finance and Taxation
is proposing.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Weide-
meyer.
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: Mr.
Chairman, do you have in this recommenda-
tion any clear-cut grant of authority for
referendum to the local subdivision, or any
clear-cut provision mandating the legisla-
ture to set forth a referendum provision
for each local subdivision?
DELEGATE MOSER: I understand the
last part of the question. If I can restate
it, do we say to the legislature, "set forth
referenda procedures that must be adopted
by the counties" is that correct?
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: That is
right.
DELEGATE MOSER: The answer to
that question is no. We do not. The reason,
we do not, is that there is no present pro-
vision to that effect in the Constitution.
With all the words in the present constitu-
tion with respect to home rule, Articles
XI (A) and XI (E), where charters are in-
volved, there is no requirement of local
referenda.
|
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Weide-
meyer.
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: In that
instance Article XI-A did not require that
charter governments permit a referendum,
but Baltimore County, Anne Arundel and,
I assume, Montgomery County adopted it
in their charters. There has always been
doubt as to whether or not this was cor-
rect.
DELEGATE MOSER: I see your point.
The categorical answer is that it is clear
that a county may adopt a referendum pro-
cedure in its charter. That is absolutely
clear.
I think it is also clear that the legislature
could pass a law requiring all counties to
have a referendum procedure. If the matter
affected all counties, the General Assembly
could require the same procedure in all
counties.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Weide-
meyer.
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: With
such a provision is it possible that the Gen-
eral Assembly could likewise withhold the
right of referendum from the newly formed
counties; whereas, under expressed provi-
sions of your recommendation, the General
Assembly might not be able to do so for
the counties and municipalities already in
existence?
DELEGATE MOSER: I do not follow
that question.
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: The
question is, is it possible under the pro-
posal for the legislature to withhold from
these newly organized subdivisions the
right of referendum and prohibit them
from having referendum on local legisla-
tion?
DELEGATE MOSER: The answer as to
local legislation is "yes." In the case of
change of structure of county government,
requiring charter amendments, section 7.04
would present the prohibition of a refer-
endum to amend. The Charter referendum
and initiative procedures must be permitted.
I suppose if the legislature in its wisdom
were to say that no counties may have
referenda of any kind for local ordinances,
then this would be a valid law.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MOSER: They could do
just that under present law, I believe.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Marion.
|
