7 6 [8 8 O p
. A tt ’y
M UNI CI PALI TI ES
B UD GE T AR Y A DM INI STR ATIO N

– A PPRO PRI ATI ONS

– A PPL I CA T I ON OF A S UPE RMAJ ORI T Y R E QUI RE MEN T I N T HE P UB L I C G ENERAL L A W C ONC E RN I NG M UNI CI PAL F I NA NC E

M ar ch 31, 2003

L an ce W

. B i l l i ngsl ey, Esquir e Li v i ngs t on , Li v i ngs t on , Le v i t an & Si l v e r, LLC

O n behal f of the C i t yo f H y at t s vi l l e, y ou have r eques t ed our opi ni on w het her S tat e l aw r equi r es t he C i t yC ounci l t o appr ove a p arti cu lar bu d g etaryac ti o n b ya su p erm ajorit yv o te. Y o u r i n q u iry ari s e s ou tof

a pr op os a l du r i ng t he c ou r s e of t he fi s c a l y e a rt o use m oneyfr om t he C it y ’ s gener al fund t o coverunant i ci pat ed ex p en d itu res o f th e m u n ici p al po li ce d ep artm en t. Y o u r i n q u iry ra ise s tw o re late d q u e stio n s, w h ich w e su m m a riz e a s f o llo w s: ( 1) D oes a s uper m aj o ri ty p rov isi o n i n A nnot at ed C ode of M ar y l and, A r t i cl e 23A , §2( b) ( 2) , appl y t o t hi s t ype of pr opos al and t hus m ake a ppr oval cont i ngenton a t w o- t hi r ds vot e? ( 2 ) A s s um i ng t hat A r t i cl e 2 3 A, § 2 ( b ) ( 2 ) a p p l i e s a n d t h at H y a ttsv ill e ’s c h a rte r itse lf d o e s n o t re q u ir e a su p e rm a jo rityto appr ove t hi s t ype of a ct i on, does t he s uperm ajor i t yr equi r ement vi ol at e t he muni ci pal hom e rul e amendm ent , A r t i cle X I- E of t he St a t e Con s t i tu t i o n ? In our op i nion, t he an sw ers t o these quest i on s ar e as foll ow s: (1) B ecause the C ou ncil ’s act i on i s b e st c h a ra c ter i zed as a su p p lem e n tal a p p ro p ria tio n , t h e s u p e r m a jo r it y re q u ir e m e n t in A rticle 2 3 A , § 2 (b )( 2 ) a p p lie s
. (2 ) A rticle 2 3 A , § 2 (b )(2 ) is a p u b lic g e n e ra l law , ap p lica b le t o everym uni ci pal i t ygover ned byA r t i cl e X I

- E of t he C ons t i tut i on, a n d th e re f

o re d o e s n o t v io late th e m u n icip a l h o m e ru le a m e n d m e n t. I n anyevent , t he m uni ci pal char t er and t he s t atut e ca n be cons t rued harm on i ou sl yso t hat no co nfli ctexis t s.G en. 76] 77

The Hyattsville Charter a nd Code is av ai l ab le on the 1 mun ic ipality ’s web s ite , http :// www. hyatts vil le .o rg/in de x.htm l.
Fo r mer Arti c le 2 3 B w a s r ep e a le d b y Ch a p ter 2 2 8 , L aws of 2 Maryland 1994. I Backg r ound
H y att sv il le is a m u n ici p al co rpo rati o n su b ject t o A rt icl e X I-E of t he St at e C ons t i tut i on, comm onl yr efe r r ed t o as t he muni ci pal h o m e ru le a m e n d m e n t. T h e g o v e rn in g b o d yo f H y a ttsv ill e c o n sis ts of t he may orand 10 counc i l m ember s
. H y at t s vi l l e C har t er , §C 2- 1, 4 Mu n i c i

p a lCha r t e rs o

f Ma r y l and , ch. 78. L i ke cha r t er s of 1
num ero u s m uni ci pal corpor at i ons t hr oughoutt he St at e, t he H y at t s vi l l e C har t erw as m odel ed aft er fo rm erA r t i cl e 23B of t he A n n o ta te d C o d e o f

M a ryla n d

. 2
W hen i tadopt ed t he muni ci pal budgetfort he curr entfi s cal y ear , t he H y at t s vi l l e C i t y C ounci l appr opr i at ed s peci fi c fundi ng for eac h depar t m entof t he m uni ci pal gover nm ent , i ncl udi ng t he pol i ce d ep artm ent

. D ur i ng t he cour s e of the fi s cal y ear , a pr opos al w as m ade t o us e par tof t he unr es er ved fund bal ance avai l abl e i n t he C ity ’s g e n e ra l f

u n d to a c q u ire a d d iti o n a l v e h icle s a n d a re b u ilt engine f ort he pol i ce de par t m ent

. A m aj or i t yof t he C ounci l , but f e w e r t h a n tw o -t h ir d s o f th e m e m b e rs , s u p p o rt e d th e p ro p o s a l.
Y ou pr ovi ded us w i t h a det ai l ed ana l y s i s ar gui ng t hatt he C ounci l coul d appr ove t he fund t r ans fer bya s i m pl e maj or i t yvot e. Y ou not ed t hat §C 5- 8 of t he H y at t s vi l l e C har t erpr ovi des t hat“any t r ans ferof funds bet w ee n m aj orappr opr i at i ons fordi ffe r ent p u rp o se s s h a ll b e a p p ro v e d b yth e C o u n c il.

.. .” Y o u a lso re f e rre d to §C 2- 3( k) as t he C har t erproc ed ur al pr ovi s i on gover ni ng s uch t r ans fer s
. T hats ect i on r equi r es “[a ] tl eas ts i x ( 6) aff i r m at i ve vot es

. . . fo r t he pas s age of

. . . or di nance s , r es ol ut i ons , orl aw s , ” i

. e. , a s i m p l e m a

j o r i t y o f t h e b o d y. A t lea st on e C o u n c il m e m b e r arg u e d th a t a tw o -th ird s m a jo rity vot e w as r equi r ed t o appr ove t he t r ans fer

. Y ou i ncl uded w i t h y our in q u irya lette r fro m th e c o u n c ilm a n , e x p lain in g h is p o sitio n in d e tail and ci t i ng A rt i cl e 23 A , §2 (b) (2)

. T hat s t at ute pr ov i des:7 8 [8 8 O p
. A tt ’y
I n addi t i on t o, butnoti n s ubs t i tut i on of, t he pow er s w hi ch have been, orm ayher eaf t er be, gr ant ed t o i t , [a m uni ci pal ] l egi s l at i ve body al so shal l hav e t he fo l l ow i ng exp res s ordi nan ce-m aking po w ers :

... ( 2) T o expend muni ci pal funds forany purpos e deemed t o be publ i c and t o aff ectt he s afe t y , heal t h, and gene r al w el far e of the m u n ic ip a lity a n d its o c c u p a n ts , pr ovi ded that f unds notappr opr i at ed a t t he t i m e of the a n n u a l lev

y , sh a ll n o t b e ex

p e n d e d , n o r s h a ll any f unds appr opr i at ed be expende d f orany pur pos e o t h e r t han t hat f or w hi ch appr opr i at ed, exce

ptby a tw o- thi r ds vot e of al lm em bers el ect ed t o s ai d l egis l at i ve body

. A rt icl e 2 3 A , § 2 (b)(2 ) (em p h asis su p p li ed ).
I n y ourl et t er , y ou ar gued t hatt he s uper m aj or i t yr equi r ement p resc ri b ed in A rt icl e 2 3 A , § 2 (b)(2 ) did n o t pertain to th e C o u n cil ’s act i on , becau se t he fund s had previ ou sl y been app ropri at ed – t hat i s, fo r u n an t i ci pat ed expe ndi tur es – and the t r ans feri n ques t i on w as cons i s t entw i t h t hatpurpos e. Fur t her m or e, y ou s ugges t ed t hat , t o t he ex tent A rt icl e 2 3 A , § 2 (b)(2 ) co n fli cts w ith the H y att sv il le C h arter, i t i s i n c o n s i s t e n t wi t h t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f mun i c i p a l h o me r ul e. Y ou asked w hetherw e agree w i t h thatanaly si s.

II
W het her t he Sup erm aj ori t y R equi rem ent A ppl i es W e fi r s taddr es s w het herornot the C ounci l ’ s fund t r ans fer c o m e s w ith in th e sc o p e o f th e su p e rm a

jo rityp ro v isio n o f

A rticle 2 3 A , § 2 (b)(2 ). T h at pro v isi o n ap p li es if the fu n d s in q u esti o n w ere “not appr opr i at ed at t he t i m e of t he annual l evy ” ori f t he pr opos ed expendi tur e i s “forany purpos e ot her t han t hatforw hi ch [the funds w er e] appr opr i at ed. ”
A
. H yatt svil le B u dg et

P rocess T he H y at t s vi l l e C har t er s et s outdet ai l ed pr ocedur es gover ni ng m uni ci pal fi nance s
. A tl eas t32 day s befor e the s t ar tof t he fi s cal y ear , t he M ay or , ort he Fi nance C om m i t t ee Chai r m an ac t i ng att heG en. 76] 79

We u nd e rs tand that no rm a lly

theCity ha s f ound it n e c e ssa

ry to 3 re du c e proje c te d e xpe nditure s at thi s stag e to a rriveat a ba lanc e d b udg e t. di r ect i on of t he M ay or, m u st s ubm i tt o t he C ounci l a pr opos ed bal ance d budget , pr ovi di ng a compl et e fi nanci al pl an fort he m u n icip a l g o v e rn m e n t f o r th e f o llo w in g f

isc a l y e a r. T h e C o u n c il m u st h o ld a p u b li c h e a rin g o n th e p ro p o se d b u d g e t, af ter w h ich it m a ye ith e r in c re a se o r red u c e p ro p o se d e x p e n d itu re s. If th e C o u n c il i ncr eas es s pendi ng, i tm us tal s o pr ovi de fori ncr eas ed r evenue s
. T he budgetm us tbe pr epar ed and adopt ed i n t he form of an or di nance by a t le a s t a m a

jo ri ty o f th e C o u n c il. See H y att sv il le C h arter, § § C 5 -4 th ro u g h C 5 -6 . A b se n t an a p p ro p ria tio n b y th e C o u n c il, p u b lic m o n e ym a yn o t b e s p e n t. I d. , §C 5- 7. U ndert he C har t er , any t r ans fer o f m oneybet w een maj orappr opr i at i ons fordi ffe r ent p u rp o s e s re q u ir e s C o u n c il a p p ro v a l. I d. , §C 5- 8.
Y ou i ndi cat e t hatt he C ounci l al l ocates exces s ant i ci pat ed r evenue , i ncl udi ng s urpl us funds avai l abl e att he cl os e of the pr i or

3 fi s cal y ear , t o t he unr es er ved fund ba l ance i n t he C i t y ’ s gener al fund. W e und e r s t a n d t h a tt h i s b a l a n c e i s t r e a t e d a s a r e s e r v e f und, avai l abl e t o coverunant i ci pat ed expe ndi tur es dur ing the cour s e of the f iscal y ea r. In o th e r w o rd s , su rplu s rev en u es a p p are n tl yare t r eat ed as a r ai ny dayacc ount

. H ow ever , unl i ke a nonl aps i ng r es er ve fund, i f r evenue i n t he gene r al fund i s nots pent d u ri ng t he fi s cal y ear , i ti s i ncl uded as ant i ci p ated r evenue fort he s ubs equentfi s cal y ear
. C har t er , §C 5- 10.
Y ou s ugges tt hat , t o t he ext entt hatt he C ounci l al l ocat es t o t he gener al fund a s peci fi c l evel of ant i ci pat ed r evenue earm ar ked for unant i ci pat ed expe ndi tur es att he t i m e t he budgetis a dopt ed, t he C ounci l has i n fac t“appr opr i at ed t he m o n ey ” fora des i gnat ed p urpos e – i

. e. , u n a n t i c i p a t e d e x p e n d i tu r e s
. Th u s , y o u r e a s o n, t he s uper m aj or i t y r equi r ement of A r t i cl e 23A , §2( b) ( 2) s i m pl ydoes not a p p lyto th e C o u n c il’s a c tio n to d e v o te th o se f u n d s to a sp e c if

ic unant i ci pat ed expendi tur e, beca us e t he funds have a l r eadybeen appr opr i at ed fort hatpurpos e. W e r es pect ful l ydi s agre e w i t h t hatconcl us i on beca us e w e do notbel i eve thatt he al l ocat i on of funds t o t he unre s er ved bal ance of th e C ity’s g e n e ra l f

u n d is its e lf

a n a p p ro p ri a tio n
.8 0 [8 8 O p
. A tt ’y

15 McQuillin, The Law of Municipal Corporations §39.60 (3d 4 ed. re v. 1995).
4 Sands & L ibonati, Local Governm ent Law§26.07. 5
Mo st m un ic ipalit ies inMary

la nd us e a hy brid f or m of bu dg e t, 6 e mpl oying c ha

ra c te ri sti c s of a line -i te m bu dg e t a s w e ll a s o ther f or mats, namely , program or perfor mancebudg eti n g. Handbook for Mary land Mu nic ipa l O

ffi c ial s , pp. 63-65 (1991)

. The State budg et ea ch year designates moneys for a

conting ent 7 fu nd to b e us e d b y theB oa

rd of Pub lic Wor

ks fo r e xpe nditure s r e late d to unfore seen c ircumstance s. See, e.g., Chapter 102, Item DE01.02 ($ 75 0, 00 0) , L aws of Mary land 20 01

. Ho we ve r, the c re ation o f thi s conting ent fund is explicitl y sanctioned

b y th eConstitution. See Mary land Con sti tution , Artic leI I I , § 32 ; se eals o 73 Opinions of the Attorney Gene ral 43, 54 (1988). B
. W hat C onsti tutes an Appr opr i ati on T he C our tof A ppeal s has des cr i bed an “appr opr i at i on” as an a u th o ri z a tio n to d is b u rs e f u n d s
. C i t

y of A nnapol is v. A nne Arundel C o u n ty , 347 M d. 1, 12, 698 A

. 2d 523 ( 1997)

. L eadi ng t r eat i s es on m uni ci p a l l a w d e f

i n e a n “ a p p r o p r i a t i o n ” a s “ t h e s e t t i n g a p a r tof a des i g n ated s um fora par t i cul arpurpos e orpurpos es ” and “a n 4 aut hor i zat i on gr ant ed bya l egi s l at i ve bodyt o m ake e xpendi tur es and t o i ncurobl i gat i ons fora s peci fi c purpos e. ” E s s ent ial l y , an 5 ap p rop ri atio n p erm it s the ex p en d itu re o f p u b li c m o n eyfo r a le g is la tiv e ly-a u th o ri z e d p u b lic p u rp o s e
. O f c o u rse, th e lev el of d etail in an ap p rop ri a ti o n m ayv ary dependi ng on t he budget s y s t em t hata muni ci pal i t yempl oy s
. T he 6 l evel of det ai l i n t he budget , i n tur n, w i l l aff ect t he appl i cat i on of t he s uper m aj or i t yr equi r ement

. B ut an “appr opr i at i on” under anyt ype of budget ar yfor m atr equi r es s om e l evel of s peci fi ci t ybey ond “unant i ci pat ed expe ndi tur es
. ” I n ourvi ew , the sett i ng as i de of 7 ant i ci pat ed r evenue s forno purp os e ot hert han “una nt i ci pat ed expendi tur es ” l acks t he nec es s ar ys peci fi ci t yt o cons t i tut e an appr opr i at i on. R at her , t he C ounci l ’ s act i on i n s et t i ng as i de s urpl us r evenue att he t i m e t he bud g et w as adopt ed i s bet t erdes cr i bed as appor t i onm entof r evenue t o a speci fi ed fund f orunant i ci pat ed expendi tur es , s hor tof an “ appr opr i at i on. ” See 1 5 M c Q u illin , The Law of Muni ci palC or por at i ons , § 3 9 .6 5

.G en. 76] 81

This is not t o say

that a munici pal budg et could not include a n 8 appropriation for a c ontinge ncy fund within some specific cate g ory of e xpe nditure s c on sis te nt w iththemun ic ipality ’s bu dg e tary fo rm at.
Ar tic leXI -E , § 1, of

theCon sti tution

re a ds : 9
Ex cept a s provided else where in this Article, the Gene ral Assembly

shall not pass any

law re lating

(continued...) T h u s, in o u r op inion , the u n rese rve d fu n d b alan ce in the C ity ’s gener al fund w as not“a p pr opr i at ed” a tt he t i m e of a dopt i on of t he m uni ci pal budget , even i f i tw as earm ar ked gene r al l yfor un anti ci pated e x pen ditures. A l at er aut ho ri zat i on t o spen d those funds forpol i ce e qui pm entw as t h er efor e a mi d- y ears uppl ement al appr opr i at i on that t r i gger ed t he s uper m aj or i t yr equi r ement under A rt icl e 2 3 A , § 2 (b)(2 ). 8
W e n e x t c o n s id e r w h e th e r a p p lica tio n o f th e su p e rm a

jo rity re q u ire m e n t o f

A rticle 2 3 A , § 2 (b )(2 ) in th e se c irc u m sta n c e s w o u ld vi ol at e t he cons t i tut i onal pr i nci pl e of muni ci pal hom e rul e.

III
C ons t i t ut i ona l i t y of

Supe r m aj or i t y R e qui r e m e nt

A
. Mu n icip a l H

o m e R u le
T he m uni ci pal hom e rul e amendm ent t o t he St at e C ons t i tut i on, r at i fi ed by t he vot er s i n 1954, w as i nt ended t o al l ow m uni ci pal i t i es to g o v e rn th e m s e lv e s in lo c a l m a tte rs
. I nl et A s s oci at es v. A s s at eague H ous e C ondom i ni um A s s oci at i on , 313 M d. 413, 425, 545 A

. 2d 1296 ( 1988)

. T he home rule amendm entgr ant s a muni ci pal i t yt he aut hor i t y“t o amend .

. . an exi sti ng char t er
. . . r el at i ng t o t he i ncorpor at i on, or gani za t i o n , g o v e rn me nt , oraff ai r s of s ai d m uni ci pal c o rp o r a tio n ” in a c c o rd a n c e w ith th e C o n stitu tio n a n d its im p lem e n tin g leg isla tio n
. A rticle X I-E , § § 3 a n d 4 ; s ee al s o A rticle 23A , §§11- 18. Subj ectt o l i m i t ed exc ept i ons not per t i nent her e, t he G ener al A s s embl yi s pr ohi bi t ed fr om enac t i ng l egi s l at i on for m u n ici p ali ti es ex ce p t b y p u b li c ge n era l law ap p li ca b le to e v ery m u n icip a lityin a p e rm iss ib le c las s. A rticle X I-E , § 1 ; see al so 58 O pi ni ons of

the At t or ney G ener al1 5 3 (19 7 3 ). 98 2 [8 8 O p
. A tt ’y

(...continued) 9 to the incorporation, org anization, g overnme nt, or aff airs of those municipal corporations which are not authorized by

Article 11-A of the Constitution to h avea c ha rt e r f or m of g ov e rnment whic h w ill be spec ial or l ocal in its terms or in its eff ect, but the Gener al Assembly

shall act in re lation to the incorpora tion, org ani z at i o n , go vernment, or aff airs of any such municipal cor

poration only

by g eneral laws which shall in their t erms and in their eff ect apply alike to all municipal corporations in one or more of theclasse s provided for in Section 2 of this Article. It shall be the duty of th e General Assembly to provide by law the method by which new municipal c orporations shall be formed. Although theConstitution allows theL e g is la tu re to classify

municipalities by population into not m ore tha n four c las s es , Article X I -E, §2, the Ge ne ral A sse mbly

ha s d e c lare d th at a ll mun ic ipal c or po ratio ns su

bje c t to Article X I -E constitute a sing le class. Ar ticle 23A, §10.
Whil e Article 23A, §2, itself predated municipal hom e rule, the 10 Ho meRul e Am e ndme nt c ontinued pr e -e xistin glaws in e ff e c t until amende d or repeale d. Maryland Constitut ion, Article XI -E, §6. I n A r t i cl e 23A of t he A nnot at ed C ode of M ary l and, t he G e n e ra l A ss e m b lyh a s im p lem e n ted th e h o m e ru le a m e n d m e n t. A r t i cl e 23A , §1 gr ant s the governi ng bodyof a muni ci pal corporat i on t he p ow er t o “p ass and ad op t

. . . ordi nan ces, res olut i on s, orby l aw s nece s s ar yorpr opert o exer ci s e t he pow er s [gr anted t he m uni ci pal i t y ] , ” w hi l e §2 i m pl ement s A rt icl e X I

- E bya gr antof exp res s pow ers
. I

nl et A s s oci at es , 313 M d. at425. 10
T h u s, th e g o v e rn in g b o d yo f a m u n icip a lityd e riv e s its l egi s l at i ve aut hor i t y fr om t w o di s t i nct s our ces – ( 1) t h e m uni ci pal c h a r t e r , a n d ( 2 ) p u b l i c g e n e r a l l a w e n a c t e d b y t h e G e n e r a l A s s e m b l y. See, e. g. , McR ob i e v. T

ow n of W est ernpo rt , 260 M d. 464, 470, 272 A .2 d 6 5 5 (1 9 7 1 ) (m u n icip a l co rp o ra tio n m a yo b tain a u th o rityto di s pos e of pr oper t yhel d i n gover nm ent al capa ci t yt hr o u g h ei t her p u b lic g e n e ra l law o r c h a rte r a m e n d m e n t); see al so 80 O pi ni ons ofG en. 76] 83

In proposingthe municipal home ruleamendment, the dra fters 11 rec ognized that th e final dete rmination of the scopeof a municipa l c or po ratio n’ s a

uth ority under theCon sti tution

is b e st l e ft

to t hec ourt s. See Commi ssion on Adminis trative Org anization of the State , Second Repo rt : Local Legislat ion is Maryland, p. 32 (1952) ( “Sobeloff Commi ssion”). the At t or ney G ener al 2 2 7 , 2 2 9 (1 9 9 5 ). T h e tw o so u rc e s o f a u th o rity m ayi n s om e ci r cumst ance s over l ap. 11
If th e re is a c o n f

lict b e tw e e n a m u n icip a l c h a rte r a n d a p u b lic gener al l aw , t he publ i c gener al l aw cont r ol s
. I n par t i cul ar, the C ons t i tut i on pr ovi des t hat “[a ] l l char t er pr ovi s i ons
. . . adopt ed under [A r t i cl e X I

- E ] s hal l be subj ect t o al l appl i cabl e l aw s enac t ed byt he G e n e ra l A ss e m b ly ;” M a r yla n d C o n stitu tio n , A rticle X I-E , § 6 ; s ee als o C oal i t i on f

orO pen D oors v. A nnapol is Lodge N o. 622, 333 M d. 359, 379, 635 A

. 2d 412 ( 1994) ( i f publ i c gene r al l aw and muni ci pal o rd in a n c e c o n f

lic t, la tte r i s p re e m p te d a n d th u s in v a lid ).
D i ffe r ence s bet w een a publ i c gene r al l aw and a mu n ic i pal c h a rte r d o n o t n e c e ss a rily c o n stitu te a c o n f lict. S tan d a rd s s e t f

o rth i n a publ i c gene r al l aw s uch as A r ti cl e 23A ar e vi ew ed as

“‘ m i ni m um r equi r ement s w i t h resp ect t o t he af fai r s of m uni ci p ali t i es , [but ]

. . . m uni ci pal i t i es ar e notpr ohi bi t ed byt he [M uni ci pal H om e R ul e] A m endment ort he s t atute f rom pr ovi di ng s uch addi t i onal s t andar ds and saf eg uar ds as t o t hem see m appr opr i at e. ’ ” I

nl et A s s oci at es , 3 1 3 M d . a t 4 2 9 , quot i ng R eed v

. P resi den t an d C om m ’r

s of N ort h E ast , 226 M d. 229, 249, 172 A

. 2d 536 ( 1961)

. T hus , pr ovi s i ons of publ i c gene r al l aw and l ocal char t er p rov isi o n s g o v ern ing m u n ici p al f inan ce m u st be co n stru ed tog ethe r. B
. State R egulati on of Muni ci pal Finance A m uni ci pal i t yhas br oad s pendi ng aut hor i t y
. I n cons t rui ng th a t a u th o rityu n d e r a m u n icip a l ch a rte r sim ilar in sc o p e to H y at t s vi l l e’ s , t he C our tof A ppeal s not ed:

[ T ]h e T o w n is e x p re ss lya u th o ri z e d “ to e x p e n d m u n ic ip a l f

u n d s f o r a n yp u rp o s e .” T hi s pow er i s ext ens i ve, l i m i t ed onl yb y the C o n stitu ti o n a l re stric tio n im p o se d b yA rticle 15 of t h e D ecl ar at i on of R i ght s t hatt axes m us tbe l ai d ( and publ i c m oney s pent ) “w i t h a8 4 [8 8 O p
. A tt ’y pol i t i cal vi ew fort he good governm entand b e n e f it o f th e c o m m u n ity.”
W i l l i am s por tv. Sani t ar

y D is t r i ct , 247 M d. 326, 331, 231 A

. 2d 40 ( 1967)

. Si m i l ar l y , A r t i cl e 23A , §2( b) ( 2) pr ovi des expans i vel yt hat a muni ci pal i t ym ayenac tor di nance s “[t ] o expend muni ci pal funds foranypurpos e deemed t o be publ i c and t o aff ectt he s afe t y , heal t h, and gene r al w el far e of the muni ci pal i t yand i t s occupa nt s
. . . . ”
T he p u b li c gener al l aw s et s for t h s om e pr ocedur es fort he exer ci s e of t h is br oad muni ci pal s pendi ng aut hor i t y
. For exampl e, St at e l aw pr es cr i bes t he fi s cal y ear t hat eac h m uni ci pal corpor at i on m us tus e. A nnot at ed C ode of M ar y l and, A r t i cl e 24, §1- 102. I tfi xes t he t i m e fr ame i n w hi ch t he m uni ci pal pr oper t y t ax ra t e mustbe s et and, i f t he cons t anty i el d r at e i s t o be exc eede d, i tpr es cr i bes t he pr ocedur es a t ow n m us t fol l ow t o s ett he l ocal pr oper t yt ax r at e. A nnot at ed C ode of M ar y l and, T ax- Pr oper t yA r t i cl e ( “TP ”) , §§6- 303 and 6-308

. U nd er cer t ai n cir cum st ances, S t at e l aw authori zes a m uni ci pal gover ni ng bodyt o alt er a ra t e pr es cr i bed i n a muni ci pal c h a rt e r. T P § 6 -3 0 3 (b ).
E ach t ow n m us tm ai nt ai n a uni for m s y s t em of fi n an ci al acc ount i ng det er m i ned byt he D epar t m entof Legi s l at i ve Ser vi ces and, aft ert he cl os e of the fi s cal y ear , fi l e a fi nanci al r epor t w i t h t he D epar t m entorr i sk loss of St at e funds

. A nnot at ed C ode of M ar y l and, A r t i cl e 19, §§36- 39. A m uni ci pal corpor at i on m us thave its f in a n c e s a u d ited in a c c o rd a n c e w ith S tate law a n d f ile a n a u d it r epor tw i t h t he St at e A udi t or
. A r t i cl e 19, § 4 0

. E ach muni ci pal c o rp o ra tio n m u st a d o p t in v e stm e n t g u id e lin e s in a c c o rd a n c e w ith t hos e es t abl i s hed byt he St at e T r eas ur er for i nves t m entof m uni ci pal funds

. A nnot at ed C ode of M ary land , A r t i cl e 95, §22F. O t her p ro v isio n s o f

S tat e law g o v e rn th e iss u a n c e o f m u n icip a l d e b t. A rt ic le 2 3 A , § § 3 1 -3 9 ; A rt ic le 3 1 , § 1 2

. T hi s l i s ti s s i m pl yi l l us t r at i ve of St at e r egul at i on of m uni ci pal f i n a n c e
. T h e s u p e r ma

j o r i t y r e q u i r e me n t s e t f o r t h i n Ar t i c l e 2 3 A, §2( b) ( 2) i s anot herpubl i c gene r al law t hates t abl i s hes m i ni m um pr ocedur al r equi r ement s forcer t ai n act i ons r elated t o m uni ci pal fi nance
. A nychar t erpr ovi s i on gover ni ng s uppl ement al appr opr i at i ons orbudg et a m endment s m us tbe cons trued t oget her w ith the s u p erm ajorit yreq u ir em en t i n A rt icl e 2 3 A , § 2 (b)(2 ).G en. 76] 85

F o r m e r Art i c l e 2 3 B w a s n e v e r

a c tu a l l y l aw
. Itw a s m e r e l y a 12 model availablefor use by any community

desiringto adopt it. Cam pb e ll v . M ay or an d A lde rm e n of A nn ap oli s , 289 Md. 300, 310, 424 A. 2d 738 (1981). Theeditor’s note a ccomp an ying Article 23B in the 1990 repla c e me nt v olume of the Anno tate d Cod e sta te d th at “ [Ar

tic le23 B ] is not an ef fec tive char

ter for all towns and it does not actually apply to any municipal corporation. Its sole f unction is to serve a s a guide or model for municipal corporations if and whe n they revise the ir cha

rters.” C. W he the rTher e is a Conf li c t be twee n State Law and t he Mu n i ci pa l Ch arter A s y ou not e, t he fi nance pr ovi s i ons i n t he H y at t s vi l l e C har t er w er e appa r ent l y pat t er ned af t erfor m erA r t i cl e 23B – a model char t er enac t ed byt he G ene ral A s s embl ys hor t l yaft ert he adopt i on of m uni ci pal hom e rul e. N ei ther fo r m erA r t i cl e 23B nort he 12 H y a ttsv ill e C h a rte r i n c lu d e s a su p e rm a jo rity re q u ire m e n t sim ilar to th e o n e in A rt ic le 2 3 A , § 2 (b )( 2 ).
A s s t at e d a b o v e , i f

p u b l i c g e n e r a l l a w an d a l o c a l c h a r t er pr ovi s i on confl i ct , t he publ ic g ener al l aw cont r ol s
. T hus , i f a m u n icip a l co rp o ra tio n a d o p ted th e m o d e l ch a rte r in f o rm e r A rticle 23B verbat i m , t o t he ext enti tconfl i ct ed w i t h A r t i cl e 23A , t he p ro v is io n s o f

th e la tte r a rt ic le w o u ld c o n tr o l. I nl et A s s oci at es , 313 M d . at 4 3 0 n . 4 . H o w e v e r, in c o n stru in g a lo c a l law , a n yre a so n a b le d o u b t a s to its v a lid ity sh o u ld b e re s o lv e d in its f a v o r. R eed v

. P resi den tan d C om m ’r

s of N ort h E ast , 2 2 6 M d . at 2 4 8 ; see al so 1A S in g e r, St at ut es and St at ut or y C ons t r uct i on § 3 0 :5 (6 e d

. 2 0 0 2 re v .) th (“ T h e re is ... a p re su m p tio n th a t .. . tw o law s c a n o p e ra te harm o n iou sly

. . . . [S ]pe cific o rdin an ce s are p resu m ed to b e consi s t ent w ith

.. . g e n e ra l sta te la w
. . .. A sta tu te a n d o rd in a n c e w ill n o t b e h e ld t o be r epugnantt o one anotheri f anyr easo n abl e cons t ruct i on u p h o ld in g b o th c a n b e re a c h e d .” ).
I n o u rv i e w, t h e s u p e r ma j o r i t yr e q u i r e me n to f

Ar t i c l e 2 3 A, § 2 (b )(2 ) a n d th e p ro c e d u re s in th e H y a ttsv ill e C h a r te r a re e a sily r econc i l ed. T he s u p e rma j o r i t yr equi r ement i s a mi ni m um pr ocedur al r equi r ement gover ni ng s uppl ement al appr opr i at i ons and al t er nat i ve u se o f f u n d s d u rin g th e c o u rse o f th e f is c a l y e a r. T h e a p p lica b le proced ure u nd er t he H y at t svi l l e C hart er r equ i res “ [ a] tl east s i x ( 6) aff i r m at i ve vot es
. . . fort he pas s age of al l or di nance s , r es ol ut i ons or l aw s , ” ori n ot herw or ds , a s i m pl e majorit y
. C har t er , §C 2- 3( k) ( emphasi s s uppl i ed)

. T hus , as a gene r al rul e, a s i m pl e maj or i t yof8 6 [8 8 O p
. A tt ’y

Article 23B , §11 provided, i n p art , that “no ordina nce shall be 13 approve d nor any

other a ction taken without the fa v o rab l e votes of a majority of the wholenumber of me mbers ele cted to the c ouncil.”
Of c ours e , s inc e Ar

tic le23 A p re sc ribe s mi nim um re qu ir e me nts , 14 a municipal c h art er could re quire that the g overningbody approvea s u p p l e m e nt a la

p p r o p ri at i o n b y a

gr e at e r m a j o ri ty, e.g. , by

a thre e-qua

rters vo te. B ut i f t

hec ha rt e r s pe c if

ic a lly a uth orize d s uc h a c tio ns by a sim ple maj ority , th e tw o- thi rd s r e qu ir e me nt u nd e r Artic le23 A, §2 (b )( 2) wo uld tr ump thec ha

rt e r p ro vis ion

and thepu bli c g e ne ral la

w w ou ld c ontrol.
In your l etter, you state that the town might avoid trig g eringthe 15 supermajority

require ment in Article 23A, §2(b)(2) by makingmore g eneral appropriations, although such a move would be contra ry t o the intent o f G o v e r nmental A c c o unti n gSt an d ar d B o ar d gu id e lin e s
. We decline to e xpress a

n opinion on specific budg etar y formats or the ir impact on financ ial repor

ting require ments. We simpl y note that any

action under Article 23A , §2(b)( 2) should be re flec ted in the municipal g overnme nt’s fi na nc ia l st ate me nts

. t he ful l m ember s hi p of t he C ounci l i s adequa te f o r the a dopt i on of a n o rd in a n c e o r re so lu tio n , in c lu d in g a d o p tio n o f th e a n n u a l b u d g e t. Ne i t h e rt h i s p r o v i s i o n , n o rs i mi l a r l a n g u a g e u n d e rAr t i c l e 2 3 B, 13
w o u ld c o n f

lict w ith a p ro v isio n th a t re q u ire s a su p e rm a jo rityv o te to tak e a sp e c if

ic typ e o f

a c tio n
. A r ti c le 2 3 A , § 2 (b )(2 ) sim p ly del i neat es an exc ept i on, and i m pos es a s t r i ct err equi r em ent for cert ai n types of

bu dg et aryact i on s. 14
In o u r view , the p roc ed u ral p rov isi o n s o f §C 2 -3(k ) an d § C 5 -8 of t he H y at t s vi l l e C har t er , gover ni ng t r ans fer of fu n d s bet w een m aj orap p rop r i at i ons , can be i nt erpr et ed i n har m onyw i t h t he su p erm ajorit yreq u ir em en t of A rt icl e 2 3 A , § 2 (b)(2 ). 15

IV
C oncl usi on A r t i cl e 23A , §2( b) ( 2) r equi r es t hatanys uppl ement al appr opr i at i on dur i ng t he cour s e of t he fi s cal y earbe appr oved byat lea st a tw o -th ird s m a

jo rityo f th e m u n icip a l g o v e r n in g b o d y . T h is r equi r ement i s a publ i c gen er al l aw appl i cabl e t o everym uni ci pal co rpo rati o n an d there fo re d o es n o t of fe n d m u n ici p al ho m e ru le. In ou r opi nion, t he C ou ncil ’s act i on descri bed i n y ou r l et ter w as a s uppl ement al appr opr i at i on, t o w hi ch t he s uper m aj or i t yr equi r ementG en. 76] 87 appl i ed. T h atr equi r ement can be cons t rued cons i s t ent l yw i t h t he C ityC h a rte r p ro v isio n th a t r e q u ire s a n a f f irm a tiv e v o te o f

“ a t lea st” a m a jo rityo f th e C ityC o u n c il.

J. Jo sep h C u rran , Jr. A t t or ney G ener al
W i l l i am R

. V ar ga A ssista n t A tt o rn ey G eneral
R o b e rt N . M c D o n a ld C hi ef C ouns el O pi ni ons and A dvi ce