Cheeks v. Cedlair Corp., 114

Decision Date03 June 1980
Docket NumberNo. 114,114
Citation287 Md. 595,415 A.2d 255
PartiesBobby CHEEKS et al. v. The CEDLAIR CORPORATION et al.
CourtMaryland Court of Appeals

Lawrence B. Coshnear and Harold Buchman, Baltimore (Jane Pilliod and Phillip G. Dantes, Baltimore, on the brief), for appellants.

Richard L. Andrews, amicus curiae brief, pro se.

Eugene P. Smith and Judith D. O'Neill, Baltimore (Stuart R. Wilcox and Dana N. Pescosolido, Baltimore, on the brief), for The Cedlair Corp. and William and Lucia Goodhart, part of appellees.

Ira C. Cooke, Baltimore (M. Albert Figinski and Melnicove, Kaufman & Weiner, P. A., Baltimore, on the brief), for M. Albert Figinski, appellee.

Stephen

H. Sachs, Atty. Gen., Mary N. Humphries and Diana G. Motz, Asst. Attys. Gen., Baltimore, for Board of Supervisors of Elections of Baltimore City, other appellee.

Argued before MURPHY, C. J., SMITH, DIGGES, ELDRIDGE, COLE and DAVIDSON, JJ., and JAMES F. COUCH, Jr., Specially Assigned Judge.

MURPHY, Chief Judge.

This appeal draws into question the legality under Article XI-A of the Constitution of Maryland of a citizen-initiated proposal to amend the Charter of Baltimore City (1964 revision). The proposed amendment (the amendment) would add a new article to the charter by establishing a comprehensive system of rent control for the City's residential housing market under the control of a new City agency to be known as the Tenant-Landlord Commission. The primary issues for determination are:

(a) Whether Article XI-A, §§ 1, 5 and 6 grant to the voters of Baltimore City the power to enact a system of rent control through initiation of a charter amendment;

(b) Whether the proposed amendment enlarges or extends the express powers granted to Baltimore City by the General Assembly, and thereby violates § 2 of Article XI-A;

(c) Whether the proposed amendment vests the primary lawmaking power in the field of rent control in a body other than the Baltimore City Council in violation of § 3 of Article XI-A.

(1)

Ratified by the voters in 1915, Art. XI-A, popularly known as the Home Rule Amendment, provides for the distribution of powers between the State Legislature and the political subdivisions of the State; the underlying purpose of the Article is to share with the counties and Baltimore City, within well-defined limits, powers formerly reserved to the General Assembly so as to afford the subdivisions certain powers of self-government. Ritchmount Partnership v. Board, 283 Md. 48, 388 A.2d 523 (1978); City of Baltimore v. Sitnick & Firey, 254 Md. 303, 255 A.2d 376 (1969); Mont Citizens League v. Greenhalgh, 253 Md. 151, 252 A.2d 242 (1969).

Section 1 of Art. XI-A provides for the election of a charter board in Baltimore City or any county to prepare "a charter or form of government," which, if adopted by the voters, "shall become the law of said City or County, subject only to the Constitution and Public General Laws of this State." Section 2 of Art. XI-A requires the adoption by the General Assembly of "a grant of express powers" for those counties adopting a charter and provides that the express powers so granted to the counties and "the powers heretofore granted to the City of Baltimore, as set forth in Article 4, Section 6, Public Local Laws of Maryland, shall not be enlarged or extended by any charter formed under the provisions of this Article, but such powers may be extended, modified, amended or repealed by the General Assembly."

Section 3 of Art. XI-A provides that any charter adopted under § 1 of Art. XI-A "shall provide for an elective legislative body in which shall be vested the law-making power of said City or County." This section further provides that, in the City of Baltimore, the lawmaking power shall be vested in the City Council of the City of Baltimore, and that after the adoption of a charter by the City, the Mayor of Baltimore and the Baltimore City Council

"subject to the Constitution and Public General Laws of this State, shall have full power to enact local laws . . . including the power to repeal or amend local laws of said City . . . enacted by the General Assembly, upon all matters covered by the express powers granted as above provided."

Section 4 of Art. XI-A provides that after the adoption of a charter by the City or any county "no public local law shall be enacted by the General Assembly for said City or County on any subject covered by the express powers granted as above provided." Section 5 sets forth the procedure for proposing amendments to a charter; it authorizes charter amendment proposals by resolution of the Mayor of Baltimore and the City Council, or by a petition executed by a specified number of registered voters. This section provides that the proposed amendment, if adopted by the voters, shall "become a part of the charter of said City or County." 1 Section 6 of Art. XI-A provides, in part:

"(T)he power to make changes in Sections 1 to 6 inclusive, Article XI of this Constitution (entitled 'City of Baltimore'), when expressly granted as hereinbefore provided, are hereby transferred to the voters . . . of (the) City of Baltimore . . . provided that said powers so transferred shall be exercised only by the adoption or amendment of a charter as hereinbefore provided; and provided further that this Article shall not be construed to authorize the exercise of any powers in excess of those conferred by the Legislature upon said . . . City as this Article sets forth."

In pursuance of the provisions of Art. XI-A, the voters of Baltimore City adopted a charter in 1918. It superseded the City's earlier legislative charter, enacted by ch. 123 of the Acts of 1898. The 1918 charter, like the 1898 charter, declared that the "inhabitants of the City of Baltimore are a corporation by the name of the 'Mayor and City Council of Baltimore.' "

The express powers granted to the City in the 1898 charter were codified as Art. 4, § 6 of the Public Local Laws of Maryland, and it was these powers which constituted the grant of express charter powers to the City under § 2 of Art. XI-A. 2 The grant vested "full power and authority" in the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore (the City) to "pass ordinances . . . (exercising) within the limits of the City of Baltimore all the power commonly known as the Police Power to the same extent as the State has or could exercise said power within said limits." Also granted to the City was "full power and authority" to pass ordinances deemed expedient "in maintaining the peace, good government, health and welfare of the City of Baltimore."

By chapter 555 of the Acts of 1920, the Legislature expressly granted to the voters of the City, as authorized by § 6 of Art. XI-A, the power, by charter amendment, "to make such changes in Sections 1 to 6, inclusive, of Article XI of the Constitution . . . , as they may deem best." The Act provided "that nothing in this section contained shall be construed to authorize the exercise of any powers in excess of those conferred by the Legislature upon said City . . . as set forth in Article XI-A of said Constitution." 3

Chapter 555 of the Acts of 1920 also provided:

"(N)othing contained in this Act shall give to the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore or to the inhabitants thereof the right to initiate any legislation, laws, or ordinances relating to the classification and taxation of real and personal property within the limits of the said City . . . ."

By § 3 of ch. 555, it was provided that "nothing herein shall be construed to take away or limit any power which is now vested in the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, under the laws as existed prior to the passage of this Act." 4

The General Assembly, by chapter 548 of the Acts of 1945, amended the grant of express powers to the City set forth in Article 4, § 6 of the Public Local Laws of Maryland. The amendment provided, among other things, that the "full power and authority" vested in the City to exercise the express powers granted to it is "power by ordinance, or such other method as may be provided for in its Charter."

The present City Charter provides in Article III, § 15 that "Every legislative act of the City shall be by ordinance or resolution."

(2)

The proposed charter amendment here involved was initiated by a number of individuals and organizations who were dissatisfied with the refusal of the Baltimore City Council to enact continuing rent control legislation. 5 The amendment proposes that new Article 6A, entitled "Tenant-Landlord Relations," be added to the Baltimore City Charter, and it recites, in a "Statement of Purpose" provision, that:

"The prevailing conditions in the Baltimore City residential rental housing market, including low vacancy rates in standard rental housing, speculation, rapidly increasing rents and a large number of substandard rental units, adversely affect the health and welfare and safety of a substantial portion of Baltimore City residents. The purpose of this Article is to alleviate the hardship caused by this serious housing problem."

The amendment creates a five-member Tenant-Landlord Commission to be appointed by the City Council. It prescribes, in lengthy detail, the powers and duties of the Commission in administering the system of rent control. The amendment calls for the imposition by the Commission of an annual rental unit registration fee to be paid by landlords to defray the cost of operating the system. It requires that landlords file a "registration statement" with the Commission for each rental unit owned and provide designated information pertaining to the rent to be charged, together with a list of violations outstanding against the property. The amendment contains provisions authorizing the Commission to restrict the removal of certain rental units from the rental market. It sets forth a detailed system whereby the Commission may limit rent increases above an established base ceiling level. It empowers the Commission to fix allowable ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
50 cases
  • Board of Trustees of Employees' Retirement System of City of Baltimore v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore City
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • September 1, 1989
    ... ... See also Anne Arundel County v. Fraternal Order, 313 Md. 98, 111, 114-115, 543 A.2d 841 (1988); Maryland Cl. Emp Ass'n v. Anderson, 281 Md ... Cheeks v. Cedlair Corp., 287 Md. 595, ... 608-609, 415 A.2d 255 (1980). 22 ... ...
  • Sugarloaf Citizens Ass'n, Inc. v. Gudis
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • May 30, 1990
    ...470 A.2d 345, 347 (1984); Town of Forest Heights v. Frank, 291 Md. 331, 341-342, 435 A.2d 425, 431 (1981); Cheeks v. Cedlair Corp., 287 Md. 595, 597, 415 A.2d 255, 256 (1980). But powers the General Assembly does not itself possess cannot be transferred to or shared with counties. Since the......
  • Mayor and Council of Forest Heights v. Frank
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • October 7, 1981
    ...power to enact local laws on all matters covered by the grant of express powers under Art. XI-A, § 2. Cheeks v. Cedlair Corp., 287 Md. 595, 608-609, 415 A.2d 255 (1980); Mont. Citizens League v. Greenhalgh, supra, 253 Md. at 160, 252 A.2d 242. Subsequent to a county's organization under Art......
  • Beretta U.S.A. Corp. v. Santos
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • September 1, 1997
    ...of legislative and administrative powers over local affairs." Ritchmount, 283 Md. at 57, 388 A.2d 523; see Cheeks v. Cedlair Corp., 287 Md. 595, 610-11, 415 A.2d 255 (1980). The scope of a charter county's general welfare power is considered as broad at the local level as that of the Genera......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT