Wicomico County v. Todd, No. 260

CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland
Writing for the CourtBefore HAMMOND; HAMMOND; Travers
Citation260 A.2d 328,256 Md. 459
PartiesWICOMICO COUNTY, Maryland v. Robert Millard TODD et al.
Docket NumberNo. 260
Decision Date09 January 1970

Page 459

256 Md. 459
260 A.2d 328
WICOMICO COUNTY, Maryland
v.
Robert Millard TODD et al.
No. 260.
Court of Appeals of Maryland.
Jan. 9, 1970.

Page 460

[260 A.2d 329] David H. Clark, County Atty., Salisbury, and William C. Stifler, III, Baltimore (William O. Doub and Niles, Barton & Wilmer, Baltimore, on the brief), for appellant.

Patrick L. Rogan, Jr., Salisbury (Richardson, Rogan & Anderson, Salisbury, on the brief), for appellees.

Before HAMMOND, C. J., and BARNES, McWILLIAMS, SMITH and DIGGES, JJ.

HAMMOND, Chief Judge.

This appeal exists because Wicomico County, a charter county, is having difficulty in enacting a bond bill which will satisfy bond counsel, to provide funds for its five year Capital Improvement Budget, consisting of twelve projects including an office building, schools, a mental retardation center, playgrounds and airport estimated to require, above State and Federal contributions, $3,402,018. In the February 1969 legislative session, the County Council enacted Chapter 1, Bill 1 (Bill 1), which authorized the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $3,402,018. Section 309(a) of the Wicomico County Charter provides that:

'The people of Wicomico County reserve to

Page 461

themselves the power, by petition, to have submitted to the registered voters of the County, for approval or rejection by them by a majority vote, at the next regular or special election in Wicomico County for any state or federal office, any public local law or any part of any public local law hereafter passed, including any public local law or any part of any public local law authorizing any issue of bonds, certificates[260 A.2d 330] of indebtedness, notes, or other obligations of the County, or renewal thereof.'

Section 309(b) provides that:

'Any referendum petition hereunder shall be filed with the Board of Supervisors of Elections within forty-five days after the close of the Legislative Session at which the subject of the referendum was passed, and shall bear the signatures of ten per centum of the registered voters of the County.'

(Section 308(g) directs that generally laws shall take effect forty-five days after the close of the Legislative Session.) Sections 309(c), (d) and (e) provide the mechanics of the referendum process, and paragraph (d) provides that if a proper petition containing the signatures of at least 10% of the registered voters of the County is duly filed within forty-five days after the close of the legislative session at which the subject of the referendum was passed: 'said public local law shall not become effective until thirty days after its approval by a majority of the qualified voters voting thereon.'

A taxpayers' group identified as the National Taxpayer Coordinating Committee (NTCC) circulated petitions to put Bill 1 to referendum. At 9:30 a. m. on March 31, 1969, the last day of the forty-five day period following the February 1969 legislative session, the referendum petitions were filed with the Board of Election Supervisors of Wicomico County. At 4:00 p. m. that same day the County

Page 462

Council in executive session vetoed Bill 1 pursuant to § 404 of the Charter, reading:

'To guard against hasty legislation and afford the people of the County adequate opportunity to express their will, no bill, except emergency measures as provided in Article III, Sec. 308(g) of this Charter, shall become law until 45 days following the close of the Legislative Session. Within the 45 days aforesaid any person shall have the right to petition the County Council, or on written application to appear in person before it in Executive Session, and state his reasons why the bill should not become law. Prior to the expiration of said 45 day period, the County Council in Executive Session shall have the right, as the chief executive authority of the County, by the affirmative vote of four members, to veto a bill; and if vetoed, the bill shall not become law. If not vetoed, the bill shall become law on said 45th day next following the last day of the Legislative Session in which passed, unless the bill is subjected to a valid referendum under this Charter. In the latter event, the bill shall become law on the 30th day following approval by the voters at the election, but not otherwise. Emergency measures may be vetoed in the same manner as hereinbefore provided, except such laws shall be effective until the date of veto, and subject to referendum as provided in Article III, Sec. 309.'

The Council also issued a veto message addressed to the citizens of the County and later published, which read:

'Pursuant to Article IV, Section 404 of the Charter of Wicomico County, Maryland, we have today vetoed Chapter No. 1, Bill No. 1 of the First Legislative Session of 1969. Due to the unique nature of this act, we offer to you,

Page 463

the citizens of Wicomico County, the following in explanation of this course of action.

'The Capital Budget for fiscal year 1970-71 was passed by this Council on January 14, 1969. The Council, after long deliberation and due public hearing and notice, deleted in excess of $850,000.00 from the budget as originally submitted for 1970-71. It was and is the considered judgment of the Council that the programs provided for in the Capital Budget are necessary for the continued progress of this County. At no time during our deliberations was there an indication that any portion of this Legislation[260 A.2d 331] would be brought to referendum. We cannot, now, in good conscience, allow the consequences of the delay this referendum would cause to all of the citizens of the County for the desires of a number to vote their wishes, when the major concern seems to be $49,000.00 out of a $3,400,000.00 capital...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • State Of Md. v. Holton, No. 861
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • July 1, 2010
    ...a member of a local city council.” According to the State, this is because the Court of Appeals clearly held, in Wicomico County v. Todd, 256 Md. 459, 464-65, 260 A.2d 328 (1970), that separation of powers, provided for in Article 8 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights, does not apply to l......
  • Fraternal Order of Police, Montgomery Cnty. Lodge 35 v. Montgomery Cnty. Exec., No. 0722
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • March 4, 2013
    ...2011, the circuit court conducted a hearing and issued an oral ruling. The circuit court stated that it relied on Wicomico County v. Todd, 256 Md. 459, 260 A.2d 328 (1970) for “a number of legal points [to] guide [its] decision.” Citing the Wicomico case, the trial court stated, “the [62 A.......
  • North Bellmore Teachers Ass'n v. Board of Ed. of Union Free School Dist. No. 4
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • November 15, 1971
    ...288 N.Y. 1, 41 N.E.2d 153; [68 Misc.2d 242] Mariposa County v. Merced Irr. Dist., 32 Cal.2d 467, 196 P.2d 920; Wicomico County v. Todd, 256 Md. 459, 260 A.2d 328. That doctrine, therefore, does not make the mingling of executive and legislative functions at the school board level constituti......
  • Wesley Chapel Bluemount Ass'n v. Baltimore County, No. 90
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Maryland
    • September 1, 1996
    ...of Article 8 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights have been held inapplicable to local government (see Wicomico County v. Todd, 256 Md. 459, 260 A.2d 328 (1970); Pressman v. D'Alesandro, 193 Md. 672, 69 A.2d 453 (1949)), the purported vesting of judicial power in any Executive branch agenc......
  • 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