232 [80 O p. Att’y

1 We a re not here referring to municipalities that might have revised their charter s to incorporate by reference ur ban renewal provisions enacted by the General Assembly. See, e.g. , City of Hagerstown Charter Amendment

No. 1990-1. We see no legal problem arising from such incorporation by reference. M UNICIPALITIES

) U RBAN R ENEWAL C HARTER A MENDMEN TS

September 21, 1995

The Ho norable Louise V. Snodgrass House of D elegates

You have req uested ou r opinion on the status of c er tain l ocal laws, enac ted by the G enera l Ass em bly, tha t autho rize sp ecific municipa lit ies to carry out urban renewal projects. Most of these urban re ne wall aws ame nd edmun i cipa l ch art er s andso me municipalities have purp ortedly exerc ised the ir hom e rule p ow ers to amend o r repealthese l aws. In l ight of these ac tions by t h e municipalities, the question has arisen as to the status of t hese laws.

Our opinion is as fo llows: Although allmunicipal c orporat ions in the Stat e have hom e ru le, an express provisi on of the Maryland Constit utionreser

ves to t he General Assembly al on e t he po we r to
enac t, amend, and repealurban ren ew al law s for sp ecific
mu n icipali ties. In our op inion, therefore, the law s in question are still va lid as ena cted by t he G ene ral A ssem bly

. W here the urban r enewal provi sions of a municipalcharte r have been revi sed ordelet ed by the municipa l authoriti es, t he chart er shou ld be republi shed with t he provis ions as e nacted by t he General Assembly. 1 To a void confusi on in the f uture, the Ge neral A ssem bly could enact spe c ifi c urban re new al authorizations as p art of a county’s locallaws ora standard authori zati on as part of the gene ral la ws. Another approac h would be to enact an authori zati on as an appen dix to a m unicipal charter.Gen. 232] 233

2 Ar tic le XI-E, §3 provides that municipalities “shall have the power and authority, (a) to amend or repea l an exis ting charter or local laws relating to the incorporation, organization, government, or affairsof said municipal corporation heretof o re enac ted by the Genera l Assembly of Maryland, and (b) to adopt a new char ter, and to amend or repeal any charter adopted under the provisions of this Article.” I

Urb an R enew al Au thority

Un til the 1954 adopt ion of the Munici pal Home Rule Articl e, Article XI-E of the M arylan d C onstitu tion, the Ge neral A ssem bly had the au thority to gran t, amend, and repeal indivi dual charters for municipal cor por ation s. See Articl e III , §48 of t he Constit

ution. The Municipal Home R u le Arti cle granted municipa l corpor ations broad pow er to am end th eir existin g cha rters or lo cal laws and to adopta n ew c ha rt er . A rtic le XI -E, §3. 2 Moreover, the Municipal Ho me Ru le Ar ticle general ly prohibits the GeneralAssembly from enacti ng local laws fo r p articular mu nicipa l corpo rations . Article XI -E, § 1.

How ever, this general prohibi tionis expr essly qua lif ied by the Urban Ren ew al Am endm ent, A rticle III, §61, which was adopte d as part of th e C ons titutio n in 196 0. See Chapter 444 of t he Laws of Maryland 1959; Law s of Mar yland 1961 at 1782. Arti cle II I, §61 provides that “ [t] he Ge neral A ssem bly may authorize and empower any cou nty or a ny m uni cipa l cor por ation , by publiclocal law

. . .” to carry out u rban renew al proje cts an d to co ndem n pro perty f or this pur pos e. (E m pha sis ad ded .)

This amendment, as suggested by the MarylandMu nicipa l League and recommende d by th e Legisl ative Council, would have simp ly authori zed counti es with char ter home rule underArticle XIA and m unicip al corp oration s with hom e rule und er A rticle XI-E to carry out urb an r ene wa l pro jects

. See Legislative C oun cil of Maryland, Report to t

he General Assembly of 1959 at 83- 85, 1 29, and 133-134. However, a s amended a nd passe d by the General Assembly, the pro pose d am endm ent pro vided for au thoriz ationby pub lic locallaw. Indee d, the bill wa s am ende d to p rovid e exp ressly that the L egislatu re’s po we r to ena ct loca l laws in this m atte r prevail ed over A rt i cles XI -A and XI -E. See Chapter 444 of t he Laws of Maryland 1959 at 576 and 578.234 [80 O p. Att’y

3 Although th

is office has stated tha

t the sole power to amend a municipal charte

r is rese rved to the mu

ni cipality, 58 Opinions of the AttorneyGeneral

153, 157 (1973), t

his rule is clearly qualified where the GeneralAssembly is acting pursuant to Article III, §61, aswas pre viously recognized

in a 1962 opinion. See47 O pinions of the Attorney General 40, 43 (1962). In your let

ter, you advised t

hat, since t

he adopti on of the Urban Renewal Amendm ent in 1960, the GeneralAssembly has enact ed 46 sepa rate public l ocal l aws authori zing individual municipal
co rpora tions to carry out urban renewal projects. Most of these
enac tme nts simply amended the mun icipa l cha rter. See, e. g. , Ch apte r 75 5 of

the L aw s of M ary land 196 1.

In som e instan ces, m unicip al auth oritie s h ave p urpo rtedly exerci sed their home rule powers u nder A rti cle XI-E by amending their ch art ers t o amend or repeal the urban r enewal provi sions enactedby the GeneralAssembly. The stat us of the se locallaws has
co me into ques tion, because the GeneralAssembly recent ly enact ed legis lati on that gra nts certa in additional powers of cond em nation to those municipal c orporat ions aut horized by publ ic loc al law to carry out urba n ren ew al project s. Chapte r 519 of the Laws of Maryland 199 5. T his la w w ill tak e effect O ctob er 1 , 199 5.

II

The Prob lem o f Cha rter A me ndm ents Municipal cor

porati ons previ ously aut horized by t

he General Ass em bly by p ublic lo cal law to carry out u rban renew al proje cts continue to have this aut horit y. The au thority under which these law s we re ena cted, the Urb an R enew al Am endm ent, ex pressly provides that it prevai ls over Articl e XI-E. Theref

ore, a municipal corporation may no t, in purport ed exercise its home rule powers, amend or repealthrough char ter amendment the u rb an renewal provisi ons enacte d by the GeneralAssembly. 3

To the ex tent tha t mu nicipa l charte rs hav e bee n am ende d in this respe ct, these charte rs sho uld b e repu bli shed by the municipalities to restore the urban r enewal provi sions ena cted by the General Assembly. Likewis e, the chart ers publ ished byt he Department of Leg islative Refe rence shou ld re flect t hese provisions.Gen. 232] 235

In you r lette r, you asked about t he codi fication of

future enactments. To a void the confus ion that results w hen a State la w is added to a m uni cipa l cha rter, th e Ge neral Asse mbly could enact future urban renewal authori zati ons as part of the pu blic lo ca l l aws forth e c ounty. A vari ation of this approach would be f or the General Ass em bly to enac t a stand ard au thoriza tion as p art of A rticle 23A of the Maryland Code and t hen lis t the names of municipal corporations to w hich th is autho rity is granted. If the convenience of having the authorization w ith a mu nicipal corpora tions’s fu nd amental law is t

he principal consi derati on, thi s author izat ion could be ad ded a s an a ppen dix to the c har ter. As a n app endix , this provisi on could be di sti nguished f ro m those added by the
m uni cipa lity.

III

Conclusion

In summary, it i s our opini on that th e l oc al ur

ba n r en ewa l l aws enactedby the G eneral A ssemb ly fo r pa rti cular municipal corporations remain vali d. This is so even where the law was added to a m unicip al cha rter and mu nicipa l autho rities hav e pur ported ly amended or repeal ed the char ter pr ovisi on.

J. Joseph C urran, Jr. AttorneyGeneral

Richard E. I srael Assist ant Attorney General

Jack Sch wa rtz Chief Counsel Opinions & Advice