Two bills introduced and heard in the House of Delegates dealing with “structure of local government” matters appear to have been passed over for the 2024 session. One would have required all counties to adopt full executive/council charter government, and the other would have removed county review/approval of proposed municipal incorporations.
With the “crossover” deadline now behind us, legislation that has not received approval from its original committee appears more likely to be defeated this session, even without a final vote yet being recorded.
HB 81 would have required each county to adopt a full charter government, and establish “home rule” under an executive/council structure – the model currently adopted by 10 of Maryland’s 24 jurisdictions. MACo had opposed the State mandate on this matter, noting that current law affords the residents of each county to guide and sculpt their own form of representation.
From the MACo testimony:
The advent of “home rule,” adopted by popular vote of county residents, grants multiple pathways to more independent self-governance, through either adoption of Code Home Rule powers, or through the formation and voter approval of a county charter, which serves a role analogous to a constitution. 18 of Maryland’s 24 subdivisions have adopted home rule through these processes, with the guidance and approval of their voters – resulting in multiple structures and styles to serve local needs. Guidance by local voters is the hallmark of this structure – but is upended by HB 81.
HB 1436 would have altered the process for residents of an area to advance toward municipal incorporation, but would do by removing the current approval of the county governing body. MACo’s concerns focused on numerous areas where current law rewards a municipal area, at the expense of the surrounding county or other local governments.
From the MACo testimony:
From the fiscal perspective, wide-open incorporation could pose comparable concerns. Under Maryland law, county income tax receipts from municipal residents are shared with the city or town. Residents in select enclaves in virtually any county could incorporate merely to receive this allocation of county resources – regardless of their desire for any municipal services. This curiosity already exists in certain current municipalities, but could become rampant if legislation like HB 1436 were to pass.
Along similar lines, state law governing Highway User Revenues would be another artificial inducement to incorporate. This is because state law currently rewards municipal road miles more generously than county road miles (and even more so with the current phase-in of substantially higher municipal road funding passed during the 2022 session), under a heavily distorted allocation, patchworked since the “great recession” cuts over a decade ago. While this financial incentive is not dramatic, it illustrates yet another distortion arising from a wide-open incorporation law.
Both bills remain in the House Environment and Transportation Committee, which has domain over general local government matters, without a final vote.
