Maryland case law › Biggs v. Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission

Biggs v. Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission

269 Md. 352 (1973) · Court of Appeals of Maryland
Court of Appeals of MarylandDisposition: ModifiedSingley✓ Good law
HoldingBiggs and fellow citizens and property owners filed a bill of complaint in equity in the Circuit Court for Prince George's County against the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (Commission), Washington National Arena Limited Partnership (Partnership), Prince…

Singley, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This case is a frontal attack by Mr. Biggs and a group of his fellow citizens and property owners against the construction of a sports arena by Washington National Arena Limited Partnership (the Partnership) on a 75-acre tract at Largo, Prince George’s County, Maryland, purchased for park purposes by Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (the Commission), which had been leased by the Commission to a corporation which then assigned its lease to the Partnership. The attack was mounted by the filing in the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County of a bill of complaint in equity against the Commission, the Partnership, Prince George’s County (the County) and others for injunctive and declaratory relief. While the bill of complaint, as originally filed, utilized what was characterized by the chancellor as a 354 “scatter-gun” approach, the amended bill of complaint brought only against the Commission and the Partnership sharpened the issues only slightly.

By leave of court, the County was permitted to intervene. In any event, the matter came on for hearing in the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County on the demurrer of the County, or alternatively, on the motion of the County for summary judgment. From an order sustaining the County’s demurrer and from an order and a decree declaring the lease and the ordinances enacted to implement the lease to be valid, the complainants have appealed. At argument before us, the issues have been narrowed to two questions, stated by the appellants, however, in a more prolix fashion.

Basically, the questions are these: (i) Is County Bill 167-72, approved on 12 October 1972, an emergency bill which amended the text of the Prince George’s County zoning ordinance, and permitted commercial recreational facilities on land leased from a public agency in an R-R (rural residential) zone invalid as an emergency measure and subject to referendum? (ii) Is County Bill 160-72, approved on 19 October 1972 as an emergency measure, which purported to transfer capital funds of $2,000,000.00 from a proposed administrative office building to the construction of roads and a sewage treatment plant at Largo invalid as an emergency measure and subject to referendum? (i) We regard our opinion in Prince George’s County, Maryland v. Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission, 269 Md. 202 , 306 A. 2d 223 (1973) as clearly dispositive of the attack on County Bill 167-72. Here, the County Council of Prince George’s County was sitting as the district council under the Regional District Act, Ch. 780 of the Laws of 1959, as amended, a public general law which

This is a preview of Biggs v. Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission. About 50% of the opinion remains. Read the complete opinion in RecordCite.