232 [80 Op. Att’y

1

 We are not here referring to municipalities that might have

revised their charters to incorporate by reference urban 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.

MUNICIPALITIES ) URBAN RENEWAL CHARTER AMENDMENTS

September 21, 1995

The Honorable Louise V. Snodgrass

House of Delegates 

You have requested our opinion on the status of certain local

laws, enacted by the General Assembly, that authorize specific

municipalities to carry out urban renewal projects. Most of these

urban renewal laws amended municipal charters and some

municipalities have purportedly exercised their home rule powers to

amend or repeal these laws. In light of these actions by the

municipalities, the question has arisen as to the status of these laws.

Our opinion is as follows: Although all municipal corporations

in the State have home rule, an express provision of the Maryland

Constitution reserves to the General Assembly alone the power to

enact, amend, and repeal urban renewal laws for specific

municipalities. In our opinion, therefore, the laws in question are

still valid as enacted by the General Assembly. 

Where the urban renewal provisions of a municipal charter

have been revised or deleted by the municipal authorities, the charter

should be republished with the provisions as enacted by the General

Assembly.1 To avoid confusion in the future, the General Assembly

could enact specific urban renewal authorizations as part of a

county’s local laws or a standard authorization as part of the general

laws. Another approach would be to enact an authorization as an

appendix to a municipal charter.
Gen. 232] 233

2

 Article XI-E, §3 provides that municipalities “shall have the

power and authority, (a) to amend or repeal an existing charter or local

laws relating to the incorporation, organization, government, or affairs of

said municipal corporation heretofore enacted by the General Assembly

of Maryland, and (b) to adopt a new charter, and to amend or repeal any

charter adopted under the provisions of this Article.”

I

Urban Renewal Authority

Until the 1954 adoption of the Municipal Home Rule Article,

Article XI-E of the Maryland Constitution, the General Assembly

had the authority to grant, amend, and repeal individual charters for

municipal corporations. See Article III, §48 of the Constitution.

The Municipal Home Rule Article granted municipal corporations

broad power to amend their existing charters or local laws and to

adopt a new charter. Article XI-E, §3.2

 Moreover, the Municipal

Home Rule Article generally prohibits the General Assembly from

enacting local laws for particular municipal corporations. Article

XI-E, §1. 

However, this general prohibition is expressly qualified by the

Urban Renewal Amendment, Article III, §61, which was adopted as

part of the Constitution in 1960. See Chapter 444 of the Laws of

Maryland 1959; Laws of Maryland 1961 at 1782. Article III, §61

provides that “[t]he General Assembly may authorize and empower

any county or any municipal corporation, by public local law . . .” to

carry out urban renewal projects and to condemn property for this

purpose. (Emphasis added.)

This amendment, as suggested by the Maryland Municipal

League and recommended by the Legislative Council, would have

simply authorized counties with charter home rule under Article XIA and municipal corporations with home rule under Article XI-E to

carry out urban renewal projects. See Legislative Council of

Maryland, Report to the General Assembly of 1959 at 83-85, 129,

and 133-134. However, as amended and passed by the General

Assembly, the proposed amendment provided for authorization by

public local law. Indeed, the bill was amended to provide expressly

that the Legislature’s power to enact local laws in this matter

prevailed over Articles XI-A and XI-E. See Chapter 444 of the

Laws of Maryland 1959 at 576 and 578.
234 [80 Op. Att’y

3

 Although this office has stated that the sole power to amend a

municipal charter is reserved to the municipality, 58 Opinions of the

Attorney General 153, 157 (1973), this rule is clearly qualified where the

General Assembly is acting pursuant to Article III, §61, as was previously

recognized in a 1962 opinion. See 47 Opinions of the Attorney General

40, 43 (1962). 

In your letter, you advised that, since the adoption of the Urban

Renewal Amendment in 1960, the General Assembly has enacted 46

separate public local laws authorizing individual municipal

corporations to carry out urban renewal projects. Most of these

enactments simply amended the municipal charter. See, e.g.,

Chapter 755 of the Laws of Maryland 1961. 

In some instances, municipal authorities have purportedly

exercised their home rule powers under Article XI-E by amending

their charters to amend or repeal the urban renewal provisions

enacted by the General Assembly. The status of these local laws has

come into question, because the General Assembly recently enacted

legislation that grants certain additional powers of condemnation to

those municipal corporations authorized by public local law to carry

out urban renewal projects. Chapter 519 of the Laws of Maryland

1995. This law will take effect October 1, 1995. 

II

The Problem of Charter Amendments

Municipal corporations previously authorized by the General

Assembly by public local law to carry out urban renewal projects

continue to have this authority. The authority under which these

laws were enacted, the Urban Renewal Amendment, expressly

provides that it prevails over Article XI-E. Therefore, a municipal

corporation may not, in purported exercise its home rule powers,

amend or repeal through charter amendment the urban renewal

provisions enacted by the General Assembly.3

To the extent that municipal charters have been amended in

this respect, these charters should be republished by the

municipalities to restore the urban renewal provisions enacted by the

General Assembly. Likewise, the charters published by the

Department of Legislative Reference should reflect these provisions.
Gen. 232] 235

In your letter, you asked about the codification of future

enactments. To avoid the confusion that results when a State law is

added to a municipal charter, the General Assembly could enact

future urban renewal authorizations as part of the public local laws

for the county. A variation of this approach would be for the

General Assembly to enact a standard authorization as part of Article

23A of the Maryland Code and then list the names of municipal

corporations to which this authority is granted. If the convenience

of having the authorization with a municipal corporations’s

fundamental law is the principal consideration, this authorization

could be added as an appendix to the charter. As an appendix, this

provision could be distinguished from those added by the

municipality. 

III

Conclusion

In summary, it is our opinion that the local urban renewal laws

enacted by the General Assembly for particular municipal

corporations remain valid. This is so even where the law was added

to a municipal charter and municipal authorities have purportedly

amended or repealed the charter provision.

J. Joseph Curran, Jr.

Attorney General

Richard E. Israel

Assistant Attorney General

Jack Schwartz

Chief Counsel

 Opinions & Advice