ÿWPC•$ ºNw\\¤•ˆ¯¦š#ã WÏ<Ë[¤ð@?i^ðÓês ‰‡¨¯…nqŠ:ýÅ ‚¾ž0´Ô\?!Ìk´Ä0²Ï‡˜Ø¬A{ßB ¹²çç;Ïþ©®*ó4ùöɆ…²·d¡…ç!½-ÁŽþ"Þ>¶•QÈÿQ&Aìx6îO¯ ê¤‡Cßõ…vF ˜X¦¸—!Hr\¿âƒÔáAÊaxòýÇÀ?™Â/X}tà®$SŸÐù:&ÅÛŠ\Õ¸e(ÁœGa¹òï˜øÝ ŸhLF»-‰O¸¬öz”iï› ]ã–¾ØÓøIº:} œí‘&è°õ5wUö†Ó3!ÄvLÁcž/ûØaH] °;Þ1ù”lÞ_£4FÞ›S ›² ë9D• ðåT];…4ZkÁç¼gÄé_ÁŸ‹Ö§u ×”G´uÌ-?!lœCÒåô¸L€E>Uûë P>²”P²iãmÜ¢kc¤?á¤üA°sØú(ü"¯Ù_ÈZ¦!N¿xá×õ˜+:üF‹hËr§Ï7)Njt¼ ‹¢Õ«¸%û¤M"I´Ó,he\;7£ñ*óJqjTF-Ötcœ6B„bšI˜K HÈ\{Û´¸· 0:V—@#!€UhN¡ %ï 0(õU\>U.[UF‰ 0 eÏ~4w@² 4ò  ’  Ƨ 0 em 0DÒ  Æ mäØû ÓbÙáéÿîîíí-ôT!&u››F£££££ Bé !###################### 0l)$˜HP LaserJet 5MP,ð,,,,,ð0(ÈhH  Z6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡´¤ìl9Z+&Courier Regular<þ6X9`(Courier<¾½Q 9Z ‹.Courier New Regular4#+Ö2Quick A.ÚƒÚÚ  Ú.à0 àÛ€Û tÝ ƒ?,µ$ÝÑ @ ÑÔ€XE>XXXÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ݛԀXÖaXXXE>Ô€We€note€that€appellant€failed€to€include€a€table€of€contentsÐ ° Ðwith€the€Record€Extract,€as€required€by€Md.€Rule€8„504(a)(1).€ÏInstead,€we€have€been€provided€with€an€ð ðIndexðð€that€has€page€numbersÐ @ Ðthat€do€not€correspond€to€the€documents€in€the€Record€Extract.€€TheÏCounty,€too,€has€failed€to€include€a€table€of€contents€for€theÏappendix€included€with€its€brief.€€œòòSeeóó›€Md.€Rules€8„501(h)€and€8„Ð ˜è Ð504(a)(1). D  D  D E«Mq)pene¨€3|x ˆÝ ƒ?,µ$ÝÑ @ ÑÔ€XE>XXXÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ݛԀXÖaXXXE>Ô€Maryland€Code€(1998€Repl.€Vol.,€1999€Supp.),€ðð€12„303€of€theÐ ° ÐCourts€and€Judicial€Proceedings€Article€(ð ðC.J.ðð),€authorizes€anÐ xÈ Ðinterlocutory€appeal€from€the€denial€of€an€injunction€request.€I., II.,Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 54#*n2Quick I.ÚƒÚÚ  Ú.à0 àÛ€Û(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó üÝ ƒ?,µ$ÝÑ @ ÑÔ€XE>XXXÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ݛԇX\×XXXE>ÔÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔÔ#†XE>XXX\×{#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔCOMARÔ_Ô€26.03.03.02(A)€provides:€€ð ðEach€county€shall€maintainÐ ° Ða€current,€comprehensive,€[Ô_ÔSWMPÔ_Ô]€which€covers€at€least€theÏsucceeding€10-year€period.ððÔ#†XE>XXXÖaÞ#Ô!A, B,Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ ÎÝ ƒ?,µ$ÝÑ @ ÑÔ€XE>XXXÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý›€òòÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔSee€Halle€Cos.€v.€Crofton€Civic€¢Assððn£óó,€339€Md.€131€(1995);Ð ° ÐòòAnne€¢Arundel£€County€v.€National€Waste€Managers,€Inc.óó,€No.€810,Ð œì ÐSept.€Term€1997€(filed€Mar.€25,€1998),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€350€Md.€275Ð d´ Ð(1998);€òòNational€Waste€Managers,€Inc.€v.€Anne€Ô_Ô¢Arundel£Ô_Ô€Countyóó,€No.Ð ,| Ð365,€Sept.€Term€1998€(July€16,€1998),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€351€Md.€286Ð ôD Ð(1998);Ô#†XE>XXXÖa#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô€òòAnne€¢Arundel£€County€v.€National€Waste€Managersóó,€òòInc.óó,€No.Ð ¼  Ð96,€Sept.€Term€1998€(filed€Sept.€29,€1998),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€352€Md.Ð „ Ô Ð336€(1998);€òòNational€Waste€Managers,€Inc.€v.€Anne€Ô_Ô¢Arundel£Ô_Ô€Countyóó,Ð L œ ÐNo.€365,€Sept.€Term€1998€(July€16,€1998),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€351€Md.€286Ð  d Ð(1998)Ô#†XE>XXXÖa­#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô.€Ô#†XE>XXXÖaŠ#ÔH- ù- þÝ ƒ?,µ$ÝÑ @ ÑÔ€XE>XXXÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  ݛԇXÖaXXXE>Ô€Unless€otherwise€noted,€all€references€to€¢A.A.C.C.£€are€toÐ ° ÐArticle€28,€zoning. ûÝ ƒ?,µ$ÝÑ @ ÑÔ€XE>XXXÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  ݛԀXÖaXXXE>Ô€Its€first€answer€was€filed€one€day€earlier€and€was€notÐ ° Ðmaterially€different. õÝ ƒ?,µ$ÝÑ @ ÑÔ€XE>XXXÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý›Ô_Ô€Ô‡XÖaXXXE>ÔòòSeeóó€Footnote€œ10,›€òòsupraóó.€Ô#†XE>XXXÖa#Ô ýÝ ƒ?üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ݛԇXÞëXXXÔ€Our€opinion€in€this€appeal€was€originally€filed€as€anÐ ° Ðunreported€decision.€€We€have€published€it€pursuant€to€theÏCountyððs€request. #Ý ƒ?,µ$ÝÑ @ ÑÔ€XE>XXXÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý›€Ô‡XÖaXXXE>ÔCuriously,€in€the€factual€summary€of€its€brief,€appellantÐ ° Ðonly€mentions€the€letter€of€November€19,€1997.€€We€also€note€thatÏthe€County€advised€¢MDE£€that€the€special€exception€expired€on€AugustÏ23,€1997.€€The€County€later€corrected€that€assertion,€stating€thatÐ ,| Ðð ðthe€actual€expiration€date€was€August€17,€1997.ððÔ#†XE>XXXÖa|#Ô€ JÝ ƒ?,µ$ÝÑ @ ÑÔ€XE>XXXÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý›Ô_ÔÔ‡X\×XXXE>Ô€It€is€unclear€from€the€record€if€an€earlier€notice€of€appealÐ ° Ðwas€filed€as€to€these€specific€complaints.Ô#†XE>XXX\׌#Ô Ý ƒ?,µ$ÝÑ @ ÑÔ€XE>XXXÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  ݛԀXÖaXXXE>Ô€We€note€that€it€was€the€Court€of€Appeals€that€deniedÐ ° Ðreconsideration€in€òòNational€Ióó€on€August€17,€1995.  <Ý ƒ?üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý›Ô_ÔÔ‡XÜÁXXXÔ€Ô#†X.‚XXXÜÁT#ÔÔ‡XÞëXXX.‚ÔNational,€a€wholly„owned€subsidiary€of€the€Halle€CompaniesÔ#†X.‚XXXÞë—#ÔÔ‡XÞëXXX.‚ÔÐ ° Ð(ð ðHalleðð),€was€formerly€known€as€Chesapeake€Terrace,€Inc.Ð †Ö Ð(ð ðChesapeakeðð).€€We€shall€refer€to€Halle,€Chesapeake,€andÐ Nž ÐNational€collectively€as€ð ðNational.ððÔ#†X.‚XXXÞë#Ô d öÝ ƒ?,µ$ÝÑ @ ÑÔ€XE>XXXÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  ݛԀXÖaXXXE>Ô€Although€the€mandate€is€in€the€record€with€respect€to€theÐ ° Ðdismissal,€we€are€unable€to€locate€in€the€record€our€OrderÏdismissing€the€appeal,€the€Countyððs€motion€to€dismiss€the€appeal,Ïor€Nationalððs€opposition€to€it.€€Therefore,€we€do€not€know€theÏbasis€for€the€motion€or€the€reason€for€our€decision€to€dismiss€theÏappeal. Ý ƒ?,µ$ÝÑ @ ÑÔ€XE>XXXÔÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý›€Ô‡X\×XXXE>ÔAppellant€did€not€mention€the€Countyððs€letter€of€December€10,Ð ° Ð1997.Ô#†XE>XXX\×}#Ô((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý›ò òÔ‡XÞÍXXXÔÓ  ÓññHEADNOTE:Ð ° ÐÌòòNational€Waste€Managers,€Inc.€v.€Anne€¢Arundel£€County,€No.€1717,Ð @ ÐSeptember€Term€1999ññó óññóóÐ X ÐÌRUBBLE€LANDFILL€PERMIT;€SPECIAL€EXCEPTION;€TOLLING.€€Although€AnneÏ¢Arundel£€County€Code€provided€that€special€exception€would€expire€byÏoperation€of€law€if€the€use€was€not€completed€and€in€operationÏwithin€two€years€after€issuance,€that€time€was€tolled€by€theÏlitigation€arising€directly€from€the€grant€of€the€special€exceptionÏand€by€subsequent€litigation€regarding€claims€for€mandamus€andÏdeclaratory€judgment;€no€claims€were€made€that€applicant€failed€toÏact€diligently€or€in€good€faith€in€its€unsuccessful€effort€to€useÏthe€special€exception.€ññÔ#†X.ÎXXXÞÍ#ÔññÐ  ° ÐññÓ>ÓÔ‡XÞÍXXX.ÎÔÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ€ÑÒ°ÒÒX°ÒØØÓ  ÓÑ8€ÞÍXXdÈdÈ8ÑÓÓÓÓÌÌÔ#†X.ÎXXXÞÍ{#ÔÔ‡X\»XXX.ÎÔÔ_ÔREPORTEDÔ_ÔÔ#†X.ÎXXX\»€#ÔÔ‡XÞÍXXX.ÎÔÐ @ ÐÌÌòòIN€THE€COURT€OF€SPECIAL€APPEALSÐ ¦ö ÐÌOF€MARYLANDóóÐ 6 † ÐÌNo.€1717ÌÌSEPTEMBER€TERM,€1999ÌÌ___________________________________ÌÌÌÌNATIONAL€WASTE€MANAGERS,€INC.ÌÌÌv.ÌÌÌANNE€Ô_Ô¢ARUNDEL£Ô_Ô€COUNTYñ ñ€,€MARYLANDñ ñÌ€ÌÌ___________________________________ÌÌÌÓ  Óà p àà È àMurphy,€C.J.Ìà p àà È àHollander,Ìà p àà È àÔ#†X.ÎXXXÞÍê#ÔÔ‡XÞÍXXX.ÎÔKenney,Ð öF Ðà p àà È àà  àà x àJJ.Ô#†X.ÎXXXÞÍë#ÔÔ‡XÞÍXXX.ÎÔÐ ¾  ÐÓ\ÓÌ___________________________________ÌÌÌOpinion€by€Hollander,€J.ÌÌ___________________________________ÌÌÌÓ  ÓFiled:€ññññdECññññññDecember€6,€2000ññÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÒ°ÒÒ°XÒÑ  ÑÐ  ^-®(4­ ÐÔ_ÔÓÀÓÑ  ÑÔ#†X.‚XXXÞëó#ÔÔ‡XÞëXXX.‚Ôà  àÔ_ÔThe€protracted€history׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô#†X.‚XXXÞëR #ÔÔ‡XÞëXXX.‚Ô€of€this€case€arises€from€the€tirelessÐ ° Ðefforts€of€National€Waste€Managers,€Inc.€(ð ðNationalðð),€appellant,Ð @ Ðto€establish€and€operate€a€rubble€landfill€in€Ô_ÔOdentonÔ_Ô€(theÐ Ð  Ðð ðLandfillðð),€and€the€equally€persistent€opposition€of€Anne€Ô_Ô¢Arundel£Ô_ÔÐ ` ° ÐCounty€(the€ð ðCountyðð),€appellee,€to€that€project.Ô#†X.‚XXXÞë #ÔÔ‡XÞëXXX.‚Ô׃#è×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô#†X.‚XXXÞë #ÔÔ‡XÞëXXX.‚Ô€€The€CountyððsÐ ð @ Ðopposition€to€the€Landfill€has€impeded€Nationalððs€effort€to€acquireÏthe€requisite€permit€from€the€Maryland€Department€of€theÏEnvironment€(ð ð¢MDE£ðð).€€Moreover,€the€seemingly€endless€disputeÐ  ð  Ðconcerning€the€proposed€Landfill€has€spawned€numerous€legal€battlesÏin€various€courts€of€this€State,€including€many€appellateÏproceedings.€€Ìà  àThe€current€appeal€concerns€the€denial€of€Nationalððs€requestsÏfor€injunctive€relief€and€an€appropriate€purging€provision.Ô#†X.‚XXXÞë¬ #ÔÔ‡XÞëXXX.‚ԀРpÀ ÐÔ#†X.‚XXXÞë#ÔÔ‡XÞëXXX.‚ÔNational€sought€to€require€the€County€to€take€the€necessary€stepsÐ P Ðto€enable€¢MDE£Ô_ÔÔ_Ô€to€process€Nationalððs€request€for€a€State€rubbleÏlandfill€permit,€which€National€must€procure€before€it€may€legallyÏoperate€the€Landfill.€€In€addition,€following€a€remand€from€thisÏCourt€in€connection€with€an€earlier€appeal,€National€asked€theÏtrial€court€to€set€an€appropriate€purge€provision€with€respect€toÏthe€trial€courtððs€finding€of€contempt€by€the€County.€€TheseÏrequests€resulted€in€two€orders€issued€by€the€Circuit€Court€forÏAnne€Ô_Ô¢Arundel£Ô_Ô€County,€both€dated€September€10,€1999Ô#†X.‚XXXÞë[#ÔÔ‡XÞëXXX.‚Ô.€€In€one,€theÐ €%Ð *F Ðtrial€court€declined€to€establish€a€purge€provision,€reasoning€thatÏit€was€ð ðunnecessaryðð€because€appellantððs€special€exception€expiredÐ @ Ðby€operation€of€law€on€œñ ñAugustñ ññ ñDecemberñ ñ›€17,€1997.€€In€the€other,€the€courtÏdenied€Nationalððs€related€requests€for€injunctive€relief.€ÏThereafter,€National€noted€this€appeal,׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€which€the€County€has€movedÐ ð @ Ðto€dismiss.€€Ìà  àAppellant€presents€four€rather€lengthy€questions€for€ourÏreview:ÌÝ‚*nÿÝÝ  ÝÓÓà8  àÝ‚*n›*ÝÚƒÚIÚ  Ú.à0` Ð Ð àÝ  ÝDid€the€trial€court€(Lerner,€J.)€err€in€denyingÐ 0€  Ðinjunctive€relief€on€the€ground€that€a€modificationÏto€purging€provisions€to€a€contempt€order€hadÏmodified€the€underlying€judgments€that€Anne€¢Arundel£ÏCounty€violated€State€law€by€deleting€all€referenceÏto€Chesapeake€Terrace€from€its€¢SWMP£,€where€theÏoriginal€judgments€had€become€law€of€the€case€byÏtheir€¢affirmance£€by€this€Court€and€the€denial€of€aÏwrit€of€certiorari€by€the€Court€of€Appeals,€andÏwhere€this€Court€specifically€rejected€the€argumentÏraised€in€the€Countyððs€prior€appeal,€holding€thatÏthe€underlying€writ€and€order€had€not€beenÏmodified?€Ýƒ*n›*Ô*ÝۀیР` Ð ` Ð  ÐŒÝ  Ýà8  àÐ Ð Ð  ÐÝ‚*nÿÝÝ  Ýà8  àÝ‚*n .ÝÚƒÚIIÚ  Ú.à0` Ð Ð àÝ  ÝDid€the€trial€court€improperly€deny€injunctiveÐ  p Ðrelief€on€the€ground€that€[National]€failed€toÏsafeguard€its€special€exception€approval€and€thatÏsuch€approval€expired€because€[National]€did€notÏopen€and€operate€its€rubble€landfill€within€twoÏyears€of€the€decision€of€the€ð ðapproving€authority,ððÐ  X# Ðas€set€forth€in€Section€12„107,€where€[National]Ïhas€spent€over€nine€years€in€litigation€with€theÏCounty€seeking€to€protect€its€special€exceptionÏrights€and€was€prevented,€as€a€matter€of€law,€fromÏopening€within€the€two€year€period€because€of€theÏCountyððs€adjudged€violation€of€State€law?€Ýƒ*n .3.ÝۀیР` Ð ` Ð  ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÝ‚*nÿÝÝ  Ýà8  àÝ‚*nL1ÝÚƒÚIIIÚ  Ú.à0` Ð Ð àÝ  ÝDid€the€two€year€period€set€forth€in€Section€12„107Ð H&˜!+ Ðstart€to€run,€where€Section€12„242(C)€of€the€CountyÏCode€explicitly€modified€the€term€of€rubble€landÏfill€special€exceptions€to€run€concurrent€with€theÐ  (ð#. Ðissuance€of€a€permit€by€¢MDE£?݃*nL1s1ÝۀیР` Ð ` Ð  ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÝ‚*nÿÝÝ  Ýà8  àÝ‚*n(3ÝÚƒÚIVÚ  Ú.à0` Ð Ð àÝ  ÝWas€the€two€year€period€of€Section€12„107€tolled€byÐ @ Ðthe€Countyððs€actions€and€¢NWM£ððs€resort€to€litigationÏto€protect€its€special€exception€rights?݃*n(3O3ÝۀیР` Ð ` Ð  ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÓ¶*Óà  àThe€County€offers€five€grounds€to€support€its€motion€toÏdismiss€the€appealÔ#†XE>XXXÖa(#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô:Ð ð @ ÐÝ‚+ÖÿÝÝ  ÝØ€ØÓÓà8  àÝ‚+Öa5ÝÚƒÚAÚ  Ú.à0` Ð Ð àÝ  ÝThe€Denial€of€Appellantððs€Motion€for€AppropriateÐ € Ð  ÐPurging€Provision€Does€Not€Constitute€An€AppealableÏOrder.€Ýƒ+Öa5¶5ÝۀیР` Ð ` Ð  ÐŒÝ  ÝÌà8  àB.à0` Ð Ð àEven€if€[National]€Is€Permitted€to€Raise€on€AppealÐ  ð  Ðthe€Issue€of€[the]€Purging€Provision€of€theÏContempt€Order€Issued€Finally€on€August€21,€1997,Ïthe€Appeal€is€Untimely.Ð ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌØ€ØÝ‚+ÖÿÝÝ  Ýà8  àÝ‚+Öì7ÝÚƒÚCÚ  Ú.à0` Ð Ð àÝ  Ý[National]€Is€Not€Entitled€to€Appellate€ReliefÐ ˆØ ÐBecause€It€Failed€to€Exhaust€AdministrativeÏRemedies.݃+Öì78ÝۀیР` Ð ` Ð  ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÝ‚+ÖÿÝÝ  Ýà8  àÝ‚+Ö,9ÝÚƒÚDÚ  Ú.à0` Ð Ð àÝ  ÝThe€Issues€Raised€by€This€Appeal€Have€Been€RenderedÐ ¨ø ÐMoot.݃+Ö,9S9ÝۀیР` Ð ` Ð  ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÝ‚+ÖÿÝÝ  Ýà8  àÝ‚+ÖA:ÝÚƒÚEÚ  Ú.à0` Ð Ð àÝ  ÝThe€Law€of€the€Case€Dictates€that€the€Appeal€BeÐ P ÐDismissed.݃+ÖA:h:ÝۀیР` Ð ` Ð  ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÓ˜5Óà  àFor€the€reasons€set€forth€below,€we€shall€vacate€the€courtððsÏorders€and€remand€for€further€proceedings.€Ô_ÔÌÌÓ  Óò òFACTUAL€BACKGROUNDó óœ×ƒ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  כР X# ÐÓ  Óà  àThe€issues€presented€on€appeal€do€not€require€a€Ô_ÔfullÏrecitation€of€the€long€and€complex€history€of€this€case.€€Instead,Ïwe€concentrate€on€the€facts€pertinent€to€the€issues€before€us,Ð ¸$ ) Ðgleaned€primarily€from€the€record€and€earlier€appellate€opinions.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р° Ðà  àIn€1990,€National€sought€administrative€approval€from€theÏCounty€for€a€special€exception€and€variance€to€operate€aÔ_ÔÔ_Ô€rubbleÏlandfill.€€After€a€County€hearing€officer€denied€Nationalððs€requestÏfor€a€special€exception€and€a€variance,€National€appealed€to€theÏCountyððs€Board€of€Appeals€(the€ð ðBoardðð).€€In€1993,€after€a€òòde€novoóóÐ € Ð  Ðreview€that€produced€2000€pages€of€testimony€and€numerousÏdocuments,€the€Board€granted€the€special€exception€and€varianceÏrequests,€subject€to€several€conditions.€€Thereafter,€numerousÏcommunity€associations€and€several€individual€property€ownersÏsought€judicial€review€of€the€Boardððs€decision€in€the€circuitÏcourt.€€The€County€became€a€party€to€the€proceeding€when€theÏcircuit€court€granted€its€motion€to€intervene.€€Ìà  àPrior€to€the€judicial€review€hearing€in€the€circuit€court€withÏregard€to€the€special€exception,€a€bill€was€introduced€before€theÏCounty€Council€that€included€the€Landfill€in€the€Countyððs€SolidÏWaste€Management€Plan€(ð ðÔ_Ô¢SWMP£Ô_Ôðð).Ô_Ô׃„ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€Subsequently,€the€legislation€wasÐ °  Ðamended€to€omit€any€reference€to€the€Landfill.€€Ô#†XE>XXXÖa,5#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔÐ @" Ðà  àAt€about€the€same€time€that€National€began€the€specialÏexception€process,€it€also€began€the€permit€application€processÏwith€¢MDE£.Ô_Ô€€òòSee€óóÔ_ÔCode€of€Maryland€Regulations€(ð ð¢COMAR£ðð)Ô_Ô€26.04.07.14„Ð Ð  Ð.16.Ô_Ô€€In€1991,€National€submitted€its€request€to€Ô_Ô¢MDE£Ô_Ô€for€approvalÏof€the€third€and€final€phase€of€its€application.€€Ô#†XE>XXXÖapC#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔBecause€theÐ ð @ ÐLandfill€was€not€included€in€the€Countyððs€Ô_Ô¢SWMP£€in€May€1994,Ô_Ô€Ô_Ô¢MDE£Ô_ÔÏsuspended€its€consideration€of€Nationalððs€permit€application,Ïpending€receipt€from€the€County€of€a€written€statement€(ð ðStatementÐ  ð  Ðof€Conformanceðð)€advising€that€the€proposed€Landfill€satisfied€theÐ 0€  Ðapplicable€County€zoning€and€land€use€requirements,€and€was€inÏconformity€with€the€Countyððs€Ô_Ô¢SWMP£Ô_Ô.€€òòSee€óóMd.€Code€(1982,€1996€Repl.Ð P  ÐVol.,€1999€Supp.),€ðð9„210(a)(3)€of€the€Environment€ArticleÏ(ð ðÔ_Ô¢E.A.£Ô_Ôðð).€€€Ð pÀ Ðà  àOn€judicial€review,€the€circuit€court€reversed€the€BoardððsÏapproval€of€the€special€exception€and€variance,€on€the€ground€thatÏthe€Board€exceeded€its€òòde€novo€óóauthority€by€imposing€a€certainÐ  p Ðcondition€to€its€approval.€€National€then€noted€an€appeal,€and€theÏmatter€proceeded€directly€to€the€Court€of€Appeals.€€In€an€opinionÏfiled€on€July€17,€1995,€that€Court€reversed,€upholding€the€BoardððsÏcondition€as€ð ðjustifiable,ðð€because€it€related€ð ðto€the€publicÐ `"°& Ðhealth,€safety€and€welfare.ðð€€òòSeeóó€òòHalle€Cos.€v.€Crofton€CivicÐ ð#@( ÐÔ_ÔAssððnÔ_Ôóó,€339€Md.€131,€149€(1995)€(òòð ðNational€Ióóðð).€€Reconsideration€wasÐ €%Ð * Ðdenied€on€August€17,€1995.€Ìà  àDespite€the€decision€in€òòNational€Ióó,€the€County€declined€toÐ  (ð#. Ðsend€a€statement€of€conformance€to€Ô_ÔMDEÔ_Ô.€€Accordingly,€on€October€9,Ï1996,€National€filed€a€seven„count€complaint€against€the€County€inÐ À+'2 Ðthe€Circuit€Court€for€Anne€Arundel€County.€€The€first€three€countsÏare€relevant€here.€€In€the€first€count,€National€sought€a€writ€ofÏmandamus€requiring€the€County€to€include€the€Landfill€in€its€Ô_ÔSWMPÔ_Ô.€ÏIn€the€second€count,€National€also€requested€a€writ€of€mandamus,Ïdirecting€the€County€to€issue€theÔ_ÔÔ_Ô€Statement€of€Conformance.€€TheÏthird€count€sought€a€declaratory€judgment€that:€€(1)€National€isÏentitled€to€have€the€Landfill€included€in€the€Ô_ÔSWMPÔ_Ô;€(2)€National€isÏentitled€to€delivery€of€the€Statement€of€Conformance€to€Ô_Ô¢MDE£Ô_Ô;€andÏ(3)€the€County€acted€unlawfully€in€failing€to€include€the€LandfillÏin€the€1994€amendments€to€the€Ô_Ô¢SWMP£Ô_Ô.Ìà  àOn€November€1,€1996,€National€filed€a€motion€for€partialÏsummary€judgment,€limited€to€counts€1€and€3,€in€which€it€asked€theÏcourt€to:€€(1)€issue€a€writ€of€mandamus€directing€the€County€toÏinclude€the€Landfill€in€its€Ô_Ô¢SWMP£Ô_Ô,€and€(2)€declare€that€the€CountyððsÏfailure€to€include€the€Landfill€in€its€Ô_Ô¢SWMP£Ô_Ô€was€unlawful.€€Ô#†XE>XXXÖa‡E#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔAlthoughÐ à ÐCount€3€asked€for€both€a€declaration€requiring€inclusion€of€theÏproject€in€the€¢SWMP£€òòandóó€a€Statement€of€œConformance,›€the€motionÐ °  Ðitself€only€sought,€based€on€Count€3,€a€declaration€ð ðthat€theÐ @" ÐCountyððs€failure€to€include€the€[Landfill]€in€its€[¢SWMP£]€violatesÏ[Nationalððs]€legal€rights€under€State€law€(Count€3).ðð€€The€CountyÐ `"°& Ðfiled€a€cross„motion€for€summary€judgment€on€all€counts.Ìà  àFollowing€a€hearing€on€February€28,€1997,€the€circuit€courtÏ(Greene,€J.)€denied€the€Countyððs€motion€but€granted€partial€summaryÏjudgment€to€National.€€In€its€ruling,€the€court€said€that€NationalÏwas€ð ðentitled€to€partial€summary€judgment€on€count€1,€mandamus,Ð 0*€%0 Ðordering€that€the€[National]€project€be€included€in€the€¢SWM£€Plan€.Ð À+'2 Ð.€.€.ðð€€It€also€ruled€that€National€was€entitled€to€a€declarationÐ ° Ðthat€the€County€had€violated€State€law€by€failing€to€include€theÏproposed€Landfill€in€the€¢SWMP£.€€Accordingly,€the€court€required€theÏCounty€to€amend€the€¢SWMP£€to€include€the€proposed€facility.€ÏNevertheless,€the€trial€court€recognized€that€ð ðfinal€authorityðð€forÐ ð @ Ðthe€project€rested€with€the€State,€and€that€the€courtððsÏdetermination€ð ðonly€gives€[National]€a€right€to€be€included€in€theÐ `  ÐPlan,ðð€but€ð ðdoes€not€.€.€.€require€the€¢MDE£€to€issue€a€permit.ðð€€InÐ  ð  Ðother€œwords,Ô#†XE>XXXÖa„Q#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô›€it€was€up€to€¢MDE£€to€determine€whether€to€issue€theÐ 0€  Ðpermit.€€The€courtððs€opinion€and€order€of€March€26,€1997,€furtherÏprovided,€in€part:ÌÓÓà8  àà ` àORDERED€and€DECLARED€that€the€[Landfill]€be€includedÏin€the€Anne€Ô_ÔArundelÔ_Ô€County€[Ô_ÔSWMPÔ_Ô];€and€it€is€furtherÐ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àORDERED€and€DECLARED€that€the€County€in€deleting€allÏreference€to€[the€Landfill]€as€a€proposed€facility€inÏBill€14„94€invaded€the€Stateððs€permit€review€prerogative;Ïand€it€is€furtherÐ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àORDERED€and€DECLARED€that€the€County€shall€amend€theÏ[Ô_ÔSWMPÔ_Ô]€to€include€[the€Landfill]€as€a€proposed€facilityÏconsistent€with€the€law.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌÓuXÓà  àOn€April€18,€1997,€the€County€filed€a€motion€to€revise€theÏorder€of€March€26,€1997,€as€well€as€a€motion€to€stay€enforcement€ofÏthe€judgment,€pending€resolution€of€the€motion.€€Less€than€a€weekÏlater,€while€the€Ô_ÔrevisoryÔ_Ô€motion€was€pending,€the€County€noted€anÏappeal€to€this€Court€from€the€order€of€March€26,€1997.€€òòSeeóó€òòAnneÐ ð#@( ÐÔ_ÔArundelÔ_Ô€County€v.€National€Waste€Managersóó,€òòInc.óó,€No.€810,€Sept.Ð €%Ð * ÐTerm€1997€(filed€Mar.€25,€1998)€(ð ðòòNational€IIóóðð),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€350Ð '`", ÐMd.€275€(1998).€€The€County€also€filed€a€second€motion€to€stayÏenforcement€of€the€March€26th€order,€based€on€the€pending€appeal.€ÏAfter€the€circuit€court€denied€the€motions,€the€County€petitionedÐ À+'2 Ðthis€Court€to€stay€the€order€of€March€26,€1997,€pending€dispositionÏof€the€appeal.€€We€denied€that€request€on€June€27,€1997.€€On€JulyÏ16,€1997,€the€Court€of€Appeals€imposed€a€brief€stay€of€enforcementÏpending€its€review€of€a€petition€for€certiorari.Ìà  àOn€June€3,€1997,€in€the€midst€of€the€Countyððs€unsuccessfulÏefforts€to€obtain€a€stay€of€judgment,€National€filed€its€firstÏpetition€for€contempt,€alleging€that€the€County€had€failed€toÏcomply€with€the€order€of€March€26,€1997.€€National€averred:€ÌÓÓà8  àIt€has€been€more€than€two€months€since€this€court€issuedÏits€order€declaring€that€the€County€violated€the€law€andÏrequiring€the€County€to€remedy€its€unlawful€action€byÏcomplying€with€the€law€immediately.€€The€County€has€doneÏnothing€to€comply.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌTherefore,€National€requested,€òòinter€aliaóó:Ô#†XE>XXXÖa³W#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔÐ à0 ÐÌà8  àThat€this€Court€pass€an€Order€requiring€the€Defendant€toÏcommence€action€within€24€hours€necessary€to€include€theÏProject€in€its€Solid€Waste€Management€Plan,€and€toÏdeliver€to€the€State€within€24€hours€the€writtenÏstatement€that€the€project€meets€all€applicable€CountyÏzoning€and€land€use€requirements€and€is€in€conformityÏwith€the€Countyððs€Solid€Waste€Management€Plan.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÔ#†XE>XXXÖa÷a#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔÌÓ{`Óà  àIn€its€answer,€the€County€defended€largely€on€the€grounds€thatÏit€had€appealed€the€circuit€court€decision,€and€it€had€obtained€aÏstay€of€enforcement€from€the€Court€of€Appeals€on€July€16,€1997,Ïrendering€the€circuit€court€without€jurisdiction€to€œtake›€furtherÏaction€until€resolution€of€the€appeal€in€this€Court.€€After€theÏCourt€of€Appeals€denied€the€Countyððs€request€for€stay,€the€CountyÏfiled€an€amended€answer€to€the€contempt€petition,€€denying€that€itÏwas€in€contempt.€Ìà  àFollowing€a€hearing,€the€circuit€court€found€the€County€inÏcontempt€of€its€order€of€March€26,€1997.€€In€an€oral€opinion,€theÐ À+'2 Ðcourt€reasoned:ÌÓÓà8  àIn€this€case,€it€has€been€a€long€struggle,€a€long€battleÏbetween€[National]€and€the€county€to€get€the€developmentÏof€[Nationalððs]€property.€€The€Court€drafted€an€OpinionÏin€March€of€1997€in€light€of€the€request€for€mandamus,€aÏwritten€Opinion,€which€in€reading€it€again,€it€is€veryÏclear€and€very€concise€as€to€what€the€Court€wasÏdirecting.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌÓ³fÓÔ#†XE>XXXÖaæc#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ôà  àOn€August€1,€1997,€the€circuit€court€issued€a€contempt€orderÐ € Ð  Ð(the€ð ðoriginal€contempt€orderðð)Ô#†XE>XXXÖayh#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô€stating,€in€part:Ð `  ÐÓÓà8  à1.€€[The€County]€is€hereby€adjudged€in€contempt€of€thisÏCourtððs€order€dated€March€26,€1997,€and€is€hereby€finedÏthe€sum€of€Two€Hundred€and€Fifty€Thousand€DollarsÏ($250,000)€for€its€contempt€of€the€Order€of€this€Court,ÏandÐ Ð Ð  Ðà8  à2.€€That€[the€County]€may€purge€itself€of€that€contemptÏby€taking€each€and€every€of€[sic]€the€following€actions:Ð Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àA.€€[The€County],€through€its€Department€of€PublicÏWorks€shall€provide€within€five€days€of€the€date€of€thisÏOrder,€its€written€statement€to€[Ô_ÔMDEÔ_Ô]€that€the€[Landfill]Ïmeets€all€applicable€county€zoning€and€land€useÏrequirements€and€is€in€conformity€with€the€CountyððsÏ[Ô_ÔSWMPÔ_Ô];€and€Ð Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àB.€€[The€County]€take€[sic]€all€steps€consistentÏwith€law€to€act€upon€an€ordinance€to€include€[theÏLandfill]€in€the€Plan€as€an€emergency€measure,€effectiveÏas€of€the€date€which€it€is€enacted;€and€Ð Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àC.€€[The€County]€shall€enact€that€measure€at€theÏearliest€possible€date,€represented€by€the€County€to€beÏSeptember€2,€1997;€and,Ð Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àD.€€[The€Countyððs]€role€in€landfill€regulation€hasÏbeen€limited€by€[Ô_ÔMDEÔ_Ô].€€Therefore,€[the€County]€may€addÏto€the€language€set€forth€in€the€proposed€ordinanceÏsubmitted€to€this€Court€a€statement€of€the€history€of€theÏproceedings€related€to€[the€Landfill],€but€shall€deleteÏthe€proposed€language,€cited€below:Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àDue€to€the€amount€of€time€that€has€passedÏsince€the€initial€application,€[Ô_ÔMDEÔ_Ô]€hasÏrequired€updated€technical€report€submissionsÏprior€to€scheduling€the€public€hearing€on€theÏproposed€plan.€€Many€of€the€site€specificÏinformation€such€as€facility€size,€designÏspecifications,€buffer€zones,€environmentalÏcontrols,€waste€types€and€quantities,€wasteÏsources,€facility€service€capacity€and€lifeÏprojects,€therefore€are€not€known€at€thisÏtime.€€Once€all€this€information€is€madeÐ ˆ,Ø'3 Ðavailable€to€the€County,€this€Plan€will€beÏamended€to€include€such€information€as€well€asÏthe€manner€by€which€the€facility€will€operate.Ð ` x` x ÐÌÓƒiÓ(Footnotes€omitted).Ìà  àThereafter,€the€County€complied€with€ðð€2.A€of€the€originalÏcontempt€order€when,€on€August€4,€1997,€the€Deputy€Director€of€theÏCountyððs€Department€of€Public€Works€sent€a€Statement€of€ConformanceÏto€Ô_Ô¢MDE£.€€It€saidÔ_Ô:ÌÓÓà8  àPursuant€to€the€enclosed€judicial€order,€the€Anne€Ô_ÔArundelÔ_ÔÏCounty€Department€of€Public€Works€informs€you€that€theÏ[Landfill]€meets€all€applicable€[¢C]ounty£€zoning€and€landÏuse€requirements€and€is€in€conformity€with€the€CountyÏ[Ô_ÔSWMPÔ_Ô].Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌÓÝsÓAs€we€shall€see,€òòinfraóó,€the€Countyððs€Statement€of€œConformance›€hadÐ P  Ða€rather€short€life€span.à À àÐ à0 Ðà  àOn€August€21,€1997,€the€circuit€court€amended€its€originalÏcontempt€order,€òòÔ_ÔsuaÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔsponteÔ_Ôóó€(the€ð ðamended€contempt€orderðð),€pursuantÐ P Ðto€C.J.€ðð€6„408Ô#†XE>XXXÖa=i#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô.€€The€amended€contempt€order€provided,€in€part:Ð à ÐÓÉ7Óà8  àà ` àThe€issue€here€is€not€the€process€by€which€theÏCounty€complies€with€State€law.€€That€matter€was€notÏpresented€to€the€Court.€€Therefore,€the€County€is€notÏrestricted€in€using€methods€available€to€it€to€accomplishÏits€legislative€mandate,€as€declared€in€the€order€of€thisÏCourt€dated€March€26,€1997.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àTherefore,€it€is€.€.€.Ð Ð Ð  ЀÌà8  àà ` àò òORDEREDó ó,€that€provisions€2.B,€C,€and€D,€of€theÐ (#x' Ð[original€contempt€order],€are,€hereby€deleted€as€thoseÏprovisions€are€unnecessary€in€view€of€the€CountyððsÏcertification€of€compliance€with€provision€2.A.Ð Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àò òORDEREDó ó,€that€[the€County]€shall€comply€with€StateÐ J&š!+ Ðlaw,€as€interpreted€above€by€the€Court,€so€that€Ô_ÔMDEÔ_Ô€mayÏconsider€whether€the€[Landfill]€is€needed.Ð Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àò òORDEREDó ó,€that€all€other€provisions€of€[the€originalÐ ¤(ô#. Ðcontempt€order]€remain€in€full€force€and€effect.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌÓqwÓà  àThe€trial€court€issued€the€amended€contempt€order,€whichÐ þ*N&1 Ðdeleted€paragraphs€2.B,€2.C,€and€2.D€of€the€original€contemptÏorder,€òòafteróó€it€became€aware€that€the€County€had€complied€with€ððÐ @ Ð2.A€of€the€original€contempt€order.€€Obviously,€the€court€did€notÏthen€know€that€the€County€would€later€withdraw€the€Statement€byÏConformance€by€advising€¢MDE£€that€the€special€exception€had€expired.€ÏIn€doing€so,€the€County,€in€effect,€rendered€the€Statement€ofÏConformance,€issued€to€satisfy€ðð€2.A,€of€no€help€with€regard€toÏNationalððs€effort€to€secure€the€necessary€¢MDE£€permit.à x àÐ  ð  Ðà  àOn€August€28,€1997,€during€the€pendency€of€the€Countyððs€appealÏfrom€the€Order€of€March€26,€1997,€the€County€noted€yet€anotherÏappeal€to€this€Court,€which€challenged€the€findings€of€contempt€inÏboth€the€original€and€amended€contempt€orders.€€òòAnne€Ô_ÔArundelÔ_Ô€CountyÐ à0 Ðv.€National€Waste€Managers,€Inc.óó,€No.€96,€Sept.€Term€1998€(filedÐ pÀ ÐSept.€29,€1998)€(ð ðòòNational€IIIóóðð),€òòcert.€deniedóó,òò€óó352€Md.€336€(1998).€Ð P Ðà  àWhile€both€of€the€Countyððs€appeals€were€pending,€the€CountyÏsent€two€letters€to€Ô_Ô¢MDE£,€one€on€November€19,€1997,€and€the€other€onÏDecember€10,€1997.€€Both€letters€advised€¢MDE£€that€NationalððsÏspecial€exception€had€expired€by€operation€of€law€in€August€1997.¢×ƒ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×£€Ð @" ÐIn€the€letter€of€November€19,€1997,€the€Countyððs€Department€ofÏPlanning€and€Code€Enforcement€wrote€to€¢MDE£€statingÔ_Ô€that,€pursuantÏâ âto€Anne€Ô_Ô¢Arundel£Ô_Ô€County€Code,€Art.€28,€ðð€12„107(a)€(1985€&€Supp.Ð ð#@( Ð1999)€(ð ðÔ_Ô¢A.A.C.C.£Ô_Ôðð),¢×ƒ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×£Ô#†XE>XXXÖa w#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔÔ_ÔÔ_Ô€Nationalððs€ð ðspecial€exception€approval€obtainedÐ ° Ðâ â.€.€.€on€December€12,€1993,€was€rescinded€by€operation€of€lawÏeffective€August€23,€1997€[sic].ðð€€Ð Ð  Ðà  àThus,€the€County€asserted€that€the€special€exception€expiredÏon€August€23,€1997,€even€though€it€had€written€to€¢MDE£€less€thanÏthree€weeks€earlier,€on€August€4,€1997,€advising€that€NationalððsÏproposed€landfill€ð ðis€in€conformity€with€the€County€[¢SWMP£].ðð€€TheÐ `  ÐCountyððs€letters€spawned€the€filing€by€National€in€December€1997€ofÏa€second€contempt€petition.€€In€that€petition,€National€complainedÏthat€the€County€had€failed€to€comply€with€either€the€original€orÏamended€contempt€order.Ìà  àA€few€months€later,€on€March€25,€1998,€this€Court€filed€itsÏopinion€in€òòNational€II,óó€affirming€the€Order€of€March€26,€1997.€Ð pÀ ÐThat€Order,€as€we€noted,€granted€partial€summary€judgment€toÏNational€with€respect€to€counts€1€and€3€of€its€complaint.€€TheÏCourt€of€Appeals€subsequently€denied€certiorari.€Ìà  àOn€April€17,€1998,€the€County€filed€an€amended€answer€toÏNationalððs€second€contempt€petition.׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€County€claimed,€òòinterÐ @" Ðaliaóó,€that€it€complied€with€the€purge€provision€when,€on€August€4,Ð Ð $ Ð1997,€it€notified€¢MDE£€that€National€was€in€conformity€with€theÏ¢SWMP£.€€The€County€also€noted€that€the€amended€contempt€orderÐ ð#@( Ðð ðdeleted€any€directive€that€the€[¢C]ounty£ððs€¢SWM£€Plan€be€amended€toÐ €%Ð * Ðincludeðð€the€Landfill.€€Further,€the€County€asserted€thatÐ '`", ÐNationalððs€special€exception€approval€expired€by€operation€of€lawÏon€August€17,€1997,€and€National€ð ðfailed€to€apply€for€extension€ofÐ @ Ðthe€approval.ðð€€Therefore,€it€claimed€that,€pursuant€to€¢A.A.C.C.£€ððÐ Ð  Ð12„107,€the€County€had€the€right€to€inform€¢MDE£€that€the€specialÏexception€had€expired,€which€it€did€by€letter€of€November€19,€1997.Ìà  àAccording€to€the€County,€National€was€required€by€¢A.A.C.C.£€ððÏ12„107€to€operate€the€Landfill€within€two€years€from€its€receipt€ofÏthe€special€exception.€€The€County€recognized€that€the€two„yearÏperiod€set€forth€in€ðð€12„107€ð ðwas€tolled€by€the€litigation€arisingÐ 0€  Ðdirectly€from€the€grant€of€special€exception€approval.€€SuchÏlitigation€concluded€with€the€issuance€of€the€court€of€specialÏappealsððs€[sic]€mandate€on€August€17,€1995.ðð׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Thus,€according€toÐ à0 Ðthe€County,€the€two„year€period€was€tolled€until€August€17,€1995,Ïand€expired€on€August€17,€1997.€€The€County€also€maintained€thatÏthe€lower€courtððs€orders€did€not€bar€the€County€from€notifying€¢MDE£Ïð ðof€the€current€status€of€an€applicantððs€special€exceptionÐ  p Ðapproval,ðð€nor€did€they€excuse€National€from€its€obligations€toÐ °  Ðcomply€with€local€law€and€ð ðsafeguardðð€its€special€exception.€€Ð @" Ðà  àA€hearing€was€held€on€Nationalððs€second€contempt€petition€onÏApril€20,€1998.€€In€a€memorandum€opinion€and€order€filed€on€AprilÏ22,€1998,€the€court€(Lerner,€J.)€denied€Nationalððs€second€contemptÏpetition,€reasoning,€in€part:ÌÓÓà8  àà ` àThe€County€cannot€be€held€in€contempt€of€JudgeÏGreeneððs€[original€contempt]€order€as€long€as€the€CountyÏhas€complied€with€the€order.€€The€order€specificallyÏrequired€that€the€County€take€the€steps€listed€[in€ðð€2€ofÐ h)¸$/ Ðthe€original€contempt€order]€in€order€to€purge€theÏ$250,000€fine€for€contempt.€€The€County€did€comply€withÏJudge€Greeneððs€order.€€The€County€sent€a€letter€to€Ô_ÔMDEÔ_Ô€onÏAugust€4,€1997,€stating€that€the€[Landfill]€ð ðmeets€allÐ X Ðapplicable€county€zoning€and€land€use€requirements€and€isÏin€conformity€with€the€County€[Ô_ÔSWMPÔ_Ô].ðð€€Ð˜èÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àMeanwhile€[Nationalððs]€special€exception€approvalÏwhich€was€granted€on€December€12,€1993€expired€on€AugustÏ17,€1997.€€The€applicable€section€of€the€Zoning€ArticleÏof€the€Anne€Ô_ÔArundelÔ_Ô€County€Code€specifically€states:Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àðð€12„107€RESCISSION.Ð ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à(a)€€Except€as€provided€in€subsection€(b)Ïor€subsection€(c)€of€this€section,€approval€ofÏa€special€exception€is€rescinded€by€operationÏof€law€if:Ð ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àà  à(1)€€action€to€implement€the€use€isÏnot€begun€within€one€year€after€the€decisionÏof€the€approving€authority;€andÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àà  à(2)€€the€use€is€not€completed€and€inÏoperation€within€two€years€after€the€decision.€ÏÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà ` àòòEven€though€[National]€received€its€specialÐ à0 Ðexception€approval€on€December€12,€1993,€and€was€toÏexpire€on€December€12,€1995,€due€to€the€two€year€timeÏframe€provided€by€the€County€Code,€the€approval€date€wasÏextended€until€August€17,€1995.€€The€approval€date€wasÏtolled€until€August€17,€1995,€because€that€was€the€dateÏof€the€Court€of€Special€Appeals€mandate€[sic]òò[óóœ×ƒ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×›òò]óó.€Ð à ÐTherefore,€the€special€exception€approval€was€to€expireÏon€August€17,€1997.óóÐ pÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àThe€County€cannot€be€held€in€contempt€of€a€courtÏorder€for€[Nationalððs]€failure€to€comply€with€specificÏprovisions€of€the€County€Code.€€The€County€was€wellÏwithin€its€right€to€notify€Ô_ÔMDEÔ_Ô€on€November€19,€1997,€ofÏthe€expiration€of€[Nationalððs]€special€exceptionsÏapproval.€€òòIt€was€óó[òòNationalððsóó]€òòresponsibility,€not€theÐ Ð $ ÐCountyððs,€to€safeguard€it€óó[sic]€òòspecial€exceptionÐ ˜!è% Ðapproval€by€requesting€an€extension€prior€to€itsÏexpiration€on€August€17,€1997óó.€€Therefore,€becauseÐ (#x' Ð[National]€did€not€seek€an€extension€of€its€specialÏexceptions€approval,€it€has€lost€the€approval.€€TheÏCounty€cannot€be€held€in€contempt€for€such€a€result.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌÓ¥‘Ó(Emphasis€added)€(citations€omitted).€Ìà  àOn€May€1,€1998,€National€filed€a€motion€to€alter,€amend,€andÐ  (ð#. Ðrevise€the€judgment€denying€its€second€petition€for€contempt,€whichÏwas€denied€on€May€19,€1998.€€As€a€result,€National€filed€anÐ @ Ðð ðamendedðð€notice€of€appeal׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô#†XE>XXXÖa„#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô€to€this€Court€on€May€28,€1998,Ð Ð  Ðchallenging€the€circuit€courtððs€denials€of€the€second€contemptÏpetition€and€the€¢revisory£€motion.€€Pursuant€to€the€Countyððs€motion,Ïwe€dismissed€that€appeal€on€July€16,€1998.׃)<×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р€ Ð  Ðà  àSubsequently,€on€September€29,€1998,€Ô#†XE>XXXÖaŸ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ôwe€issued€our€opinion€inÐ `  ÐòòNational€III,óó€Ô#†XE>XXXÖaU¡#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ôwhich€affirmed€the€finding€of€contempt€embodied€inÐ  ð  Ðthe€original€and€amended€contempt€orders.€€òòNational€IIIóó,€slip€op.Ð 0€  Ðat€15.€€Nevertheless,€we€vacated€the€purge€provision€set€forth€inÏðð€2.A€of€the€original€contempt€order.€€We€did€so€because€NationalÏonly€moved€for€summary€judgment€with€respect€to€Counts€1€and€3€ofÏits€initial€complaint,€and€the€Statement€of€Conformance€that€wasÏthe€essence€of€the€purge€provision€in€ðð€2.A€was€the€subject€ofÏCount€2.€€Although€Count€3€also€included€a€request€for€theÏStatement€of€Conformance,€National€did€not€ask€for€relief€pursuantÏto€that€count€in€its€summary€judgment€motion.€€Consequently,€weÏconcluded€that€ðð€2.A€of€the€original€contempt€order€exceeded€theÏscope€of€the€March€26th€order.€€Because€the€court€deleted€the€otherÏpurge€provisions€when€it€issued€its€Amended€Contempt€Order,€weÐ `"°& Ðremanded€ð ðto€the€circuit€court€for€reconsideration€of€anÐ ° Ðappropriate€purging€provision.ðð€€òòIdóó.,€slip€op.€at€18.€Ð @ ÐÔ% € Ôà  àOn€December€1,€1998,€appellant€moved€for€partial€summaryÏjudgment€as€to€Count€3(b)€of€its€complaint,€seeking€a€declaratoryÏjudgment€that€the€County€acted€unlawfully€by€refusing€to€issue€aÏwritten€Statement€of€Conformance€to€¢MDE£€pursuant€to€Ô_ÔE.A.Ô_Ô€ðð€9„210,Ïinforming€¢MDE£€that€the€Landfill€conforms€with€the€¢SWMP£€and€otherÏzoning€and€land€use€regulations.€€National€also€requested€anÏinjunction€directing€the€County€to€provide€the€statement€ofÏconformance.€€Ìà  àThereafter,€on€or€about€July€7,€1999,€National€filed€anÐ P  Ðð ðAmendment€by€Ô_Ô¢Interlineation£Ô_Ô,ðð€amending€Nationalððs€October€9,€1996,Ð à0 Ðcomplaint€by€adding€Count€8€as€well€as€several€new€factualÏaverments.€€Count€8€read,€in€pertinent€part:ÌÓÓà8  àà ` àThe€Countyððs€action€in€forwarding€the€November€19,Ï1998,€[sic]€letter€to€Ô_Ô¢MDE£Ô_Ô€notifying€Ô_Ô¢MDE£Ô_Ô€that€[Nationalððs]Ïspecial€exception€had€been€rescinded,€has€unlawfullyÏblocked€the€processing€of€[Nationalððs]€state€Ô_Ô¢rubblefill£Ô_ÔÏpermit€application€and€has€unlawfully€interfered€with€theÏpre„emptive€state€statutory€scheme€for€rubble€licensingÏ.€.€.€.€Ð Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àWherefore,€[National]€prays€that€this€Court:Ð Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(a)€Issue€an€injunction€directing€the€County€toÏforward€a€written€statement€to€Ô_Ô¢MDE£Ô_Ô€withdrawing€its€letterÏdated€November€19,€1998€[sic]€and€to€notify€Ô_Ô¢MDE£Ô_Ô€that€theÏ[Landfill]€meets€all€applicable€zoning€and€land€useÏrequirements€.€.€.€.òò[׃*×Ý ƒ#ÃÝò…òÚ  Ú14Ú  Úó…óÝ  Ý×  ×]óóÐð#@(Ð Ð  ÐÌÓo©Óà  àÔ#†XE>XXXÖaØ¡#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔNational€also€filed€a€ð ðRequest€for€the€Imposition€of€anÐ €%Ð * ÐAppropriate€Purging€Provisionðð€(the€ð ðpurge€motionðð)€and€two€separateÐ '`", Ðinjunction€requests,€each€styled€ð ðRequest€For€Injunction.ðð€€TheÐ  (ð#. Ðfirst€asked€the€court€to€issue€a€permanent€injunction€requiring€theÏCounty€to€place€the€Landfill€in€its€Ô_ÔSWMPÔ_Ô.€€The€second€sought€anÏinjunction€in€accordance€with€Count€8€of€Nationalððs€amendedÏcomplaint.€€Although€it€is€unclear€from€the€record,€it€appears€thatÏNationalððs€summary€judgment€motion€of€December€1,€1998,€itsÏrequests€for€injunction€of€July€7,€1999,€Ô#†XE>XXXÖaÖ­#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ôand€the€purge€motion,€wereÐ € Ð  Ðall€before€the€court€at€an€evidentiary€hearing€on€September€9,Ï1999.€€The€next€day,€the€court€(Lerner,€J.)€issued€the€two€ordersÏthat€are€at€issue€here.€€In€one,€the€court€refused€to€grantÏappellantððs€requests€for€injunctions.€€The€other€denied€the€purgeÏmotion.€€The€court€did€not€specifically€address€Nationalððs€DecemberÏ1,€1998,€summary€judgment€motion,€however.Ìà  àWith€respect€to€the€Order€denying€the€injunction€requests,€theÏcourt€explained€the€basis€of€its€decision€in€a€footnote,€stating:Ð P Ðð ðJudge€Greeneððs€Amendment€deleted€the€request€that€the€CountyÐ à Ðinclude€the€Chesapeake€Terrace€Facility€in€the€solid€wasteÏmanagement€plan€by€Order€dated€August€21,€1997.€€Judge€GreeneÏdeemed€the€plan€unnecessary.ðð€€The€court€did€not€address€theÐ @" Ðsignificance,€if€any,€of€Judge€Greeneððs€decision€to€issue€theÏAmended€Contempt€Order€after€he€was€informed€that€the€County€hadÏcomplied€on€August€4,€1997€with€ðð€2.A€of€the€original€contemptÏorder.€€With€respect€to€the€other€Order€denying€the€purge€motion,Ïthe€court€also€provided€its€reasoning€in€a€footnote.€€It€said:ÌÓÓà8  àThis€issue€is€moot.€€On€April€21,€1998,€there€was€aÏdenial€of€the€second€Petition€for€Contempt.€€This€courtÏfound€that€the€County€acted€properly€in€contacting€theÏMaryland€Department€of€Environment€that€the€specialÏexception€granted€[to€National]€expired€on€August€17,Ï1997€and€there€was€no€need€for€the€county€to€include€theÐ ˆ,Ø'3 Ðproperty€in€the€[¢SWMP£].€Ð Ð Ð  Ðà  àÌÓµÓà  àAppellant€noted€the€present€appeal€(ð ðòòNational€IVóóðð)€from€bothÐ @ Ðorders€of€September€10,€1999.Ô#†XE>XXXÖa²°#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô€€We€shall€include€additional€facts€inÐ Ð  Ðour€discussion.¹Ó  Óò òDISCUSSIONÐ ð @ Ðó óÓ  Óà  àWe€begin€our€analysis€with€consideration€of€a€thresholdÐ € Ð  Ðquestion:€Did€Nationalððs€special€exception€expire€by€operation€ofÏlaw€on€œñ ñAugustñ ññ ñDecemberñ ñ›€17,€1997,€as€the€County€contends€and€as€the€courtÏbelow€ruled.€€If€Nationalððs€special€exception€expired€in€DecemberÏ1997,€the€County€maintains€that€National€would€not€have€beenÏentitled€to€the€injunctive€relief€requested€at€the€hearing€inÏSeptember€1999,€or€to€a€revised€purge€order.Ô#†XE>XXXÖaô·#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔÐ à0 Ðà  à¢A.A.C.C.£,€Art.€28,€ðð€12„107€is€relevant€here.€€It€provides:ÌÓÓà8  àà ` à(a)€Except€as€provided€in€subsection€(b)€orÏsubsection€(c)€of€this€section,€òòapproval€of€a€specialÐ È Ðexception€is€rescinded€by€operation€of€law€ifóó:ÐàÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àà ¸ à(1)€action€to€implement€the€use€is€not€begunÏwithin€one€year€after€the€decision€of€the€approvingÏauthority;€andÐ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àà ¸ à(2)€òòthe€use€is€not€completed€and€in€operationÐ °  Ðwithin€two€years€after€the€decision.óóÐxÈ!Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(b)€A€special€exception€for€a€clay€and€borrow€pit€orÏsand€and€gravel€operation€is€rescinded€by€operation€ofÏlaw€if€action€to€implement€the€use€is€not€begun€withinÏone€year€after€approval€of€all€necessary€permits,€but€noÏlater€than€two€years€from€the€date€of€the€granting€of€theÏspecial€exception,€unless€the€applicant€has€diligentlyÏpursued€all€permits€and€not€received€them€despite€dueÏdiligence.Ð Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(c)€With€respect€to€a€special€exception€for€aÏsubstation,€the€approving€authority€may,€for€good€causeÏshown,€extend€the€time€periods€set€forth€in€subsectionsÏ(a)(1)€and€(2)€of€this€section€by€up€to€two€and€one-halfÏyears€each.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌÓ&»Ó(Emphasis€added).€Ô#†XE>XXXÖa¥º#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔÐ 0*€%0 Ðà  àÔ#†XE>XXXÖa‹À#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔNational€claims€that€¢A.A.C.C.£€ðð€12„107€must€be€read€inÐ À+'2 Ðconjunction€with€¢A.A.C.C.£€ðð€12„242.€€Section€12„242(b)€sets€forthÏspecific€criteria€applicable€to€rubble€landfills.òò€óóIn€addition,€ððÐ @ Ð12„242(c)€provides€that€ð ð[¢t]he£€term€of€a€special€exception€for€aÐ Ð  Ðsanitary€landfill€operated€solely€for€the€disposal€of€rubble€shallÏbe€concurrent€with€a€permit€or€any€extension€of€a€permit€for€theÏoperation€that€is€issued€by€the€State.ððÔ#†XE>XXXÖaîÀ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô€€Thus,€aÔ#†XE>XXXÖa-Ã#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ôppellant€contendsÐ € Ð  Ðthat,€through€the€enactment€of€ðð€12„242(c),€the€County€CouncilÏÔ#†XE>XXXÖaxÃ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ôð ðnecessarily€modified€the€operation€of€ðð€12„107(a)€to€run€òòfromóó€theÐ  ð  Ðissuanceðð€of€an€¢MDE£€rubble€landfill€permit.€€Because€National€doesÐ 0€  Ðnot€yet€have€a€permit€from€¢MDE£,€National€claims€that,€logically,Ïthe€term€of€its€special€exception€cannot€expire€under€ðð€12„107(a),Ïbefore€it€even€begins€under€ðð€12„242(c).€€National€argues:€ð ðAsÐ à0 Ðlandfills€cannot€open€as€a€matter€of€law€without€the€issuance€of€aÏpermit€from€¢MDE£,€it€can€hardly€be€concluded€that€the€specialÏexception€approval€will€expire€during€that€state€permit€process.ðð€Ð à ÐNational€also€maintains€that€ðð€12„242€ð ðbrings€rubble€fills€in€lineÐ  p Ðwith€the€law€addressing€those€sand€and€gravel€operations.ðð€Ð °  ÐTherefore,€aÔ#†XE>XXXÖa"Ä#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ôppellant€asks€us€to€conclude€that,€through€enactment€ofÐ @" Ððð€12„242(c),€the€County€Council€sought€to€treat€rubble€landfills€inÏthe€same€manner€as€other€land€uses€specified€in€ðð€12„107(b).€Ô#†XE>XXXÖaÇ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔÐ `"°& Ðà  àÔ#†XE>XXXÖa²È#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔAppellee€counters,€òòinter€aliaóó,€that€Nationalððs€contentionsÐ ð#@( Ðconcerning€ðððð€12„107€and€12„242€contravene€well€established€tenetsÏof€statutory€construction.€€The€County€contends€that€the€plainÏlanguage€of€ðð€12„107€clearly€provides€that€a€special€exceptionÏlapses€by€law€if€the€use€is€not€in€operation€within€two€years€afterÏissuance€of€the€special€exception.€€Moreover,€the€County€maintainsÐ À+'2 Ðthat€the€permit€process€provides€for€exceptions€to€the€two€yearÏlimit€only€in€limited€circumstances€that€do€not€apply€hereÔ#†XE>XXXÖaÅÈ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô.€€Ô#†XE>XXXÖa>Ë#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔForÐ @ Ðexample,€ðð€12„107(b)€provides€for€an€exception€only€for€clay€andÏborrow€pits€and€sand€and€gravel€operations.€€A€special€exceptionÏfor€these€operations€expires€ð ðone€year€after€approval€of€allÐ ð @ Ðnecessary€permits,ðð€or€two€years€after€the€date€of€the€granting€ofÐ € Ð  Ðthe€special€exception,€whichever€comes€first,€unless€ð ðthe€applicantÐ `  Ðhas€diligently€pursued€all€permits€and€not€received€them€despiteÏdue€diligence.ðð€€In€addition,€ðð€12„107(c)€only€provides€for€a€ð ðgoodÐ 0€  Ðcauseðð€extension€with€respect€to€substations,€which€are€notÐ À Ðinvolved€in€this€case.€€Ô#†XE>XXXÖaƒË#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔAs€the€statute€does€not€include€rubbleÐ P  Ðlandfills,€the€County€argues€that€the€limited€exception€provided€byÏðð€12„242€does€not€benefit€National.€€Ô#†XE>XXXÖaxÎ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔÐ pÀ Ðà  àWe€shall€focus€on€Nationalððs€contention€that€the€time€periodÏset€forth€in€ðð€12„107€was€tolled€by€the€entire€course€and€durationÏof€the€litigation,€as€well€as€the€Countyððs€conduct.€ÏNotwithstanding€the€zoning€approvalÔ#†XE>XXXÖaaÏ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô,€National€claims€that€theÐ °  ÐCounty€prevented€it€from€operating€the€Landfill€within€the€timeÏprescribed€by€ðð€12„107€and,€œtherefore,›€the€special€exception€didÏnot€lapse.€€Ô#†XE>XXXÖa¥Ð#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔÐ `"°& Ðà  àIt€is€undisputed€that€the€special€exception€alone€did€notÏentitle€National€to€operate€the€Landfill;€National€could€notÏlawfully€operate€the€Landfill€without€the€necessary€permit€fromÏ¢MDE£.€€According€to€National,€the€Countyððs€failure,€since€1994,€toÏinclude€the€Landfill€in€the€¢SWMP£€precluded€National€from€obtainingÏthe€requisite€permit€from€¢MDE£.€€Ô#†XE>XXXÖa¨Ñ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔMoreover,€although€the€Court€ofÐ À+'2 ÐAppeals€issued€its€decision€in€òòNational€Ióó€in€1995,€the€parties€haveÐ ° Ðbeen€engaged€in€ongoing€litigation,€since€1996,€by€which€NationalÏhas€attempted€to€force€the€County€to€place€the€proposed€Landfill€inÏthe€¢SWMP£.€€Ô#†XE>XXXÖapÓ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔGiven€the€facts€and€circumstances€attendant€here,€Ô#†XE>XXXÖa×Ô#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔwÔ#†XE>XXXÖaKÕ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ôe€areÐ ` ° Ðpersuaded€by€Nationalððs€claim€that€the€two„year€period€set€forth€inÏðð€12„107(a)€was€tolled€during€the€entire€course€of€the€litigationÏin€this€case.€€We€explain.€€Ìà  àWe€begin€by€noting€that€the€County€has€readily€acknowledgedÏthat€the€principle€of€tolling€has€some€application€in€this€case.€ÏAccording€to€the€County,€ð ðthe€two„year€period€set€forth€in€[ðð€12„Ð À Ð107€of]€the€[County]€code€was€tolled€by€the€litigation€arisingÏdirectly€from€the€grant€of€special€exception€approval.ðð€€Ô#†XE>XXXÖaŽÕ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔThus,€theÐ à0 ÐCounty€conceded€below,€as€it€does€here,€that€Nationalððs€specialÏexception,€which€was€granted€on€December€12,€1993,€did€not€expireÏtwo€years€later€on€December€12,€1995.€€Rather,€the€County€maintainsÏthat€the€special€exception€was€valid€until€August€17,€1997,€whichÏwas€two€years€from€the€date€on€which€the€Court€of€Appeals€deniedÏreconsideration€in€òòNational€Ióó.€€òòHalleóó,€339€Md.€131.€€But,€becauseÐ @" ÐNational€did€not€implement€the€special€exception€by€the€tolledÏdate,€the€County€contends€the€special€exception€expired€two€yearsÏlater,€on€August€17,€1997,€pursuant€to€ðð€12„107.€€Ìà  àThe€circuit€court€adopted€the€Countyððs€view€as€to€tolling.€€ItÏexpressly€determined€that€the€two„year€period€set€forth€in€ðð€12„¼107(a)€was€ð ðtolledðð€pending€resolution€of€òòNational€Ióó,€involving€theÐ  (ð#. Ðdirect€challenge€to€the€special€exception.Ô#†XE>XXXÖaô×#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô€Ô#†XE>XXXÖaÙÛ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ԀР0*€%0 Ðà  àBoth€the€County€and€the€trial€court€seemingly€ignored€theÐ À+'2 Ðhistory€of€extensive€litigation€involving€the€parties,€arising€fromÏthe€Countyððs€failure€or€refusal€to€take€the€appropriate€action€toÏenable€National€to€pursue€acquisition€of€the€permit€from€¢MDE£,€inÏorder€for€National€to€implement€the€special€exception.€€Moreover,Ïneither€the€County€nor€the€court€Ô#†XE>XXXÖaÜ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ôaddressed€why€the€continuedÐ ð @ Ðlitigation€in€this€case€does€not€have€the€same€tolling€effect€on€ððÏ12„107€as€did€the€first€round€of€litigation€in€òòNational€Ióó.Ô#†XE>XXXÖaýÝ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô€Ô#†XE>XXXÖaõÞ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔÐ `  Ðà  àÔ#†XE>XXXÖa8ß#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔIn€its€brief,€the€County€asserted€that€National€ð ðhad,€at€theÐ  ð  Ðvery€least,€between€August€1995€and€August€1997€to€implement€theÏuse€or€to€seek€an€extension,€[but]€it€failed€to€do€so.ðð€€Ô#†XE>XXXÖa›ß#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔThe€CountyÐ À Ðargues€that€National€could€have€and€should€have€sought€ð ða€varianceÐ P  Ðfrom€the€time€limitsðð€of€ðð€12„107,€pursuant€to€¢A.A.C.C.£€ðð€16„101.€Ð à0 ÐBecause€it€failed€to€do€so,€the€County€contends€that€the€specialÏexception€lapsed.€€Section€16„101€states:€€ÌÓÓà8  àò òðð€16„101.€€General€powers€and€duties€of€AdministrativeÐ à ÐHearing€Officer.ó óÐX¨Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` à(a)€The€Administrative€Hearing€Officer€shall€conductÏa€public€hearing€on€a€petition€filed€for€changes€orÏreclassification€of€the€use€of€property.€€TheÏAdministrative€Hearing€Officer€shall€grant€or€deny€theÏchange€or€reclassification€in€accordance€with€law.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` à(b)€The€Administrative€Hearing€Officer€may€grantÏvariances€from€and€make€special€exceptions€to€thisÏarticle,€subject€to€the€provisions€of€this€article.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` à(c)€The€Administrative€Hearing€Officer€may€imposeÏadditional€restrictions,€conditions,€or€limitationsÏapplying€to€a€zoning€map€amendment,€special€exception,€orÏvariance€as€may€be€considered€appropriate€to€preserve,Ïimprove,€or€protect€the€general€character€and€design€ofÏthe€land€or€improvements,€or€of€the€surrounding€orÏadjacent€land€and€improvements.€€After€the€zoning€orÏ¢rezoning£€of€land,€the€Administrative€Hearing€Officer€isÏauthorized€to€approve€or€disapprove€the€design€ofÏbuildings,€construction,€landscaping,€or€otherÏimprovements,€alterations,€or€changes€made€or€to€be€madeÐ ˆ,Ø'3 Ðon€the€subject€land€to€assure€conformity€with€the€intentÏand€purpose€of€this€article.Ð Ð Ð  Ѐ€€€ÌÓâÓà  àÔ#†XE>XXXÖa®à#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔThe€County€has€not€referred€us€to€any€authority€that€suggestsÐ X Ðthat€ðð€16„101€applies€under€the€particular€circumstances€of€thisÏcase.€€Cf.€òòCromwell€v.€Wardóó,€102€Md.€App.€691,€719€(1995)€(statingÐ ( x Ðthat€a€variance€must€be€based€on€uniqueness€of€difficulties€withÏrespect€to€the€particular€land).€€Indeed,€we€do€not€see€howÏNational€would€have€been€entitled€to€obtain€an€extension€of€theÏspecial€exception€pursuant€to€ðð€16„101.€€Alternatively,€in€aÏfootnote,€the€County€refers€us€to€two€New€York€cases€to€support€itsÏclaim€that,€even€if€ðð€16„101€does€not€apply€here,€ð ðan€approvingÐ ˆØ Ðauthority€has€the€discretion€to€extend€special€exception€approval.ðð€Ð h ÐWhether€such€discretionary€authority€exists€is€beside€the€point.€ÏThe€alleged€discretionary€authority€does€not€support€the€CountyððsÏposition€that€National€was€òòrequiredóó€to€seek€an€extension.€€€Ð È Ðà  àÔ#†XE>XXXÖaÛç#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔAdditionally,€the€County€asserts€that€appellantððs€ð ðcause€doesÐ X¨ Ðnot€warrant€the€application€of€equitable€relief.ðð€Ô#†XE>XXXÖañë#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô€It€could€onlyÐ è8 Ðreach€that€conclusion€by€overlooking€what€happened€in€the€periodÏafter€the€Court€of€Appeals€denied€reconsideration€in€òòNational€Ióó€onÐ  X# ÐAugust€17,€1995.€€òòSee€Halleóó,€339€Md.€at€131.€€As€we€noted,€thisÐ ˜!è% Ðmatter€arises€from€Nationalððs€suit,€filed€against€the€County€inÏ1996,€seeking€to€enforce€Nationalððs€right€to€include€the€LandfillÏin€the€Countyððs€¢SWMP£.€€National€prevailed€when€the€trial€courtÏawarded€partial€summary€judgment€to€appellant€in€March€1997,Ð Ø'(#- Ðð ðordering€that€[Nationalððs]€project€be€included€in€the€¢SWM£€planðð€andÐ h)¸$/ Ðissuing€ð ða€declaration€that€the€County€has€violated€the€law€inÐ ø*H&1 Ðfailing€to€do€so.ðð€€Ô#†XE>XXXÖaÀì#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔNational€still€could€not€obtain€¢MDE£€review,Ð ˆ,Ø'3 Ðhowever,€because€the€County€challenged€the€courtððs€ruling€onÏappeal.€€That€challenge€failed€when,€in€March€1998,€this€Court,Ïòòinter€aliaóó,€upheld€the€trial€courtððs€Order€of€March€26,€1997,€byÐ Ð  Ðwhich€the€County€was€ordered€to€include€the€Landfill€in€the€¢SWMP£.€Ô#†XE>XXXÖa ð#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔÐ ` ° ÐòòSee€National€IIóó.€€After€the€County€was€found€in€contempt€in€AugustÐ ð @ Ð1998€for€failing€to€abide€by€the€Order€of€March€26,€1997,€theÏCounty€sought€to€overturn€that€finding€on€appeal.€€Again,€theÏCounty€was€rebuffed€when€we€issued€our€decision€inÔ#†XE>XXXÖa±ñ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô€òòNational€IIIóó€inÐ  ð  ÐSeptember€1998.€€There,€we€recognized€òòin€dictaóó€that€we€had€beforeÐ 0€  Ðus€ð ðthe€third€in€a€series€of€appeals€involving€òòthe€CountyððsÐ À Ðattempts€to€block€Nationalððs€efforts€to€operate€a€rubble€landfillÏ.€.€.€œ.óóð𛀀òòId.óó,€slip€op.€at€1€(emphasis€added).Ô#†XE>XXXÖaó#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ԀРà0 Ðà  àIt€is€clear€that,€since€1994,€with€the€exception€of€the€briefÏperiod€from€August€4,€1998€to€November€19,€1998,€when€the€CountyÏsent€¢MDE£€the€Statement€of€Conformance€because€of€the€purgeÏprovision,€the€County€has€never€taken€any€meaningful€steps€toÏinclude€the€Landfill€in€the€¢SWMP£.€€Therefore,€¢MDE£€has€not€been€ableÏto€undertake€review€of€Nationalððs€permit€request,€despite€zoningÏapproval€from€the€Board.€€Although€the€trial€and€appellate€courtsÏof€this€State€have€ruled€against€the€County€virtually€every€step€ofÏthe€way,€National€is€no€further€along€in€its€quest€to€operate€theÏLandfill€than€it€was€when€it€first€began€the€project€almost€aÏdecade€ago.€€To€the€contrary,€if€the€County€is€correct€that€theÏspecial€exception€has€now€expired,€Nationalððs€position€hasÏdeteriorated€substantially.€€Indeed,€National€will€have€lost€theÏproverbial€war€despite€winning€almost€every€battle.Ð À+'2 Ðà  àÔ#†XE>XXXÖa¶ô#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔTo€be€sure,€we€do€not€fault€the€parties€for€exercising€theirÐ ° Ðlegal€rights.€€At€the€same€time,€we€cannot€disregard€that€delay€isÏan€inherent€consequence€of€litigation,€and€the€Countyððs€repeatedÏattempts€to€litigate€Nationalððs€right€to€proceed€with€the€LandfillÏultimately€made€it€impossible€for€National€to€comply€with€ðð€12„107.€ÏÔ#†XE>XXXÖa¹ø#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔIf€the€County€were€correct€in€its€analysis€as€to€tolling,€it€wouldÐ € Ð  Ðmean€that€a€developer€facing€a€time„related€condition€could€almostÏalways€be€thwarted€in€its€efforts€by€the€inevitable€delay€resultingÏfrom€litigation,€regardless€of€the€merits;€the€right€to€proceedÏwould€necessarily€expire€before€a€court€could€rule€otherwise.€€WeÏcannot€accept€that€logic,€which€elevates€legal€gamesmanship€to€newÏheights.€€Here,€NationalÔ#†XE>XXXÖaaú#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô€did€not€comply€with€ðð€12„107€because€theÐ à0 ÐCountyððs€exercise€of€its€rights€made€it€impossible€for€National€toÏdo€so.Ìà  àWe€have€not€uncovered€any€Maryland€cases€discussing€theÏconcept€of€tolling€in€the€context€of€this€case.€€Nor€have€we€beenÏreferred€to€any€applicable€Maryland€cases.€€Nevertheless,€otherÏauthoritiesÔ#†XE>XXXÖa^ü#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô€suggest,€by€analogy,€that€the€tolling€principle€oughtÐ @" Ðto€apply€to€the€circumstances€of€this€case.€Ô#†XE>XXXÖaÿý#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔÐ Ð $ Ðà  àThe€County€acknowledges€that€ðð€12„242€ð ðwas€intended€toÐ `"°& Ðstatutorily€capture€the€judicial€doctrine€of€ððvested€rights.ðððð€€ItÐ ð#@( Ðdistinguishes€the€present€case€from€a€vested€rights€case,€however,Ïbecause€National€never€acquired€a€permit.€€The€County€contends€thatÏwhen€an€entity€has€obtained€a€permit,€it€has€obtained€a€rightÐ  (ð#. Ðð ðdeserving€of€a€higher€level€of€protection€and€should€not€be€lostÐ 0*€%0 Ðsimply€through€the€passage€of€time.ðð€€Ô#†XE>XXXÖa¸þ#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔTo€be€sure,€a€specialÐ À+'2 Ðexception€is€not€a€permit.€€Nevertheless,€we€do€not€believe€theÏoutcome€of€this€case€necessarily€depends€on€Nationalððs€status€as€aÏ¢permittee£.€Ìà  àLike€the€special€exception€in€issue€here,€permits€are€oftenÏconditioned€upon€commencement€of€the€particular€use€within€aÏspecified€period.€€òò4€Ziegler,€¢Rathkopf£ððs€The€Law€of€Zoning€and€Planning,óó€ððÐ € Ð  Ð50.03€(4òòthóó€ed.€Rev.€1994).€€The€majority€view€provides€that€aÐ `  Тpermittee£€may€acquire€vested€rights€to€continue€construction,€orÏð ðòòto€initiate€and€continue€a€useóóðð€when,€in€ð ðgood€faith,ðð€and€actingÐ 0€  Ðwith€diligence,€the€¢permittee£€ð ð1)€made€a€substantial€change€ofÐ À Ðposition€in€relation€to€the€land,€2)€made€substantial€expenditures,Ïor€3)€incurred€substantial€obligations.ðð€òòId.óó,€ðð€50.04€(emphasisÐ à0 Ðadded).Ìà  àÔ#†XE>XXXÖa'#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔMoreover,€¢Rathkopf£€recognizes€that€circumstances€may€ariseÐ P Ðthat€toll€the€applicable€time€period.€€If€a€municipality€ð ðwillfullyÐ à Ðdelays€processing€an€application€in€order€to€prevent€an€applicantÏfrom€securing€vested€rights€through€substantial€construction€.€.€.Ïthe€courts€grant€the€¢permittee£€a€period€of€time€to€attempt€toÏsecure€that€state€of€completion€that€will€vest€his€right€thereto.ðð€Ð Ð $ ÐòòId.óó,€ðð€50.03.€€Further,€the€time€period€in€issue€is€ordinarilyÐ `"°& Ðtolled€during€litigation€ð ðfor€a€period€equal€to€the€time€thatÐ ð#@( Ðelapsed€.€.€.ðð€as€a€result€of€the€litigation.€€òòId.óó,€ðð€50.04.€€InÐ €%Ð * Ðaddition,€when€ð ða€municipality,€by€action€or€inaction,€prevents,Ð '`", Ðinterrupts,€or€interferes€with€a€¢permittee£ððs€efforts€to€continueÏwork€to€completion,€the€time€period€is€tolled.ðð€€òòId.óó,€ðð€50.03.€Ô#†XE>XXXÖa.#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔÐ 0*€%0 Ðà  àThe€case€of€òò¢Fromer£€v.€Two€Hundred€Post€Associatesóó,€32€Conn.Ð À+'2 ÐApp.€799,€631€A.2d€347€(1993),€is€particularly€instructive.€€There,Ïa€challenge€was€lodged€to€the€extension€of€a€wetlands€permit€issuedÏto€a€developer.€€The€permit€was€conditioned€upon€the€developerÏobtaining€a€zoning€permit€and€commencing€significant€activityÏwithin€one€year€of€issuance€of€the€permit.€€Subsequently,€theÏplaintiff€claimed€that€the€permit€expired€ð ðby€the€passage€of€time.ðð€òòÐ € Ð  ÐId.óó€at€350.€€The€court€noted,€however,€that€the€ð ðdefendants€haveÐ `  Ðbeen€involved€with€the€present€application€for€an€inland€wetlandsÏpermit€since€1987€[(i.e.,€6€years)]€because€of€the€appeals€broughtÏby€a€single€plaintiff,ðð€òòid.óó,€who€challenged€every€phase€of€theÐ À Ðprocess,€such€as€zoning€site€plan€approval€and€coastal€areaÏmanagement€site€plan€approval.€€Accordingly,€the€court€held€ð ðthat,Ð à0 Ðon€the€facts€of€this€case,€in€which€a€valid€permit€was€issued€toÏconduct€a€regulated€activity€within€a€specified€time€period€andÏappeals€from€the€granting€of€the€necessary€permits€to€conduct€thatÏactivity€were€not€resolved€within€the€time€period€during€which€theÏactivity€was€required€to€begin,€that€time€period€is€tolled€untilÏall€litigation€is€completed.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€349.€€The€courtððs€reasoningÐ @" Ðis€compelling:ÌÓÓà8  àà ` àIn€this€case,€the€¢defendant[s£]€complied€with€all€theÏapplicable€regulations€in€obtaining€their€permits,€andÏthe€plaintiff€exercised€his€legal€right€opposing€theÏgranting€of€the€permits€before€the€appropriate€boards€andÏthe€courts.€€The€¢defendant[s£]€prevailed€both€before€theÏregulating€agencies€and€in€the€courts.€€Yet,€six€yearsÏlater,€the€plaintiff€is€before€this€court€arguing€thatÏbecause€of€the€passage€of€time€the€inland€wetlands€permitÏhas€expired.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àòòThe€regulatory€process€is€not€designed€to€be€aÐ 0*€%0 Ðspiderððs€web,€snaring€one€who€follows€all€the€regulationsÏand€statutes,€obtains€all€the€necessary€permits,€andÏsuccessfully€defends€a€series€of€appeals,€but€then€losesÐ ˆ,Ø'3 Ðhis€right€to€proceed€because€the€passage€of€time€hasÏcaused€the€permits€to€expire.óóÐxÈÐ Ð  Ѐ€€€€€ÌÓÿÓòòId.óó€at€353.Ð X Ðà  àòò¢Cardinale£€v.€Ottawa€¢Regððl£.€Planning€¢Commððn£óó,€89€Ohio€App.€3dÐ ˜è Ð747,€627€¢N.E.£€2d€611€(1993),€is€equally€helpful.€€In€that€case,€aÏdeveloper€challenged€the€lower€courtððs€refusal€to€stay€theÏexpiration€of€a€conditional€plat€approval€granted€by€the€planningÏcommission.€€Although€the€developer€had€obtained€preliminaryÏapproval,€he€had€to€satisfy€certain€conditions€within€a€year.€€InÏthe€meantime,€several€adjoining€landowners€challenged€the€platÏapproval.€€Accordingly,€the€developer€requested€an€extension€toÏcomplete€the€conditions,€but€the€request€was€denied.€€Ìà  àOn€appeal,€the€developer€claimed,€òòinter€aliaóó,€that€theÐ ¨ø Ðpendency€of€the€litigation€should€toll€the€time€limit€because€itÏprevented€him€ð ðfrom€timely€satisfying€conditions€attached€to€aÐ È Ðfinal€plat€approval€.€.€.€.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€614.€€Further,€the€developerÐ X¨ Ðargued€that€ð ðthe€net€effect€of€the€appeal,€in€combination€with€anÐ è8 Ðinflexible€time€requirement,€is€that€any€ðð¢nimby£ðð€has€the€capacityÏto€block€a€project€merely€by€bringing€suit.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€615€(footnoteÐ  X# Ðomitted).€€The€court€agreed,€stating:€ð ðThe€inherent€delays€in€theÐ ˜!è% Ðnormal€course€of€a€lawsuit€may€then€effectuate€the€remedy€anÏopponent€seeks€without€any€court€ever€reaching€the€merits€of€theÏcase.ðð€€òòId.óó€Moreover,€the€court€labeled€as€ð ðunjustðð€the€ð ðspecter€ofÐ H&˜!+ Ðthe€adversaries€of€development€prevailing€without€a€hearing€on€theÏmerits€.€.€.€.ðð€€òòId.óó€€Therefore,€the€courtÔ#†XE>XXXÖa7 #ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô€concluded€that,€ð ðwhen€itÐ h)¸$/ Ðis€equitable€to€do€so,ðð€the€developerððs€time€within€which€to€complyÐ ø*H&1 Ðwith€certain€conditions€should€be€tolled,€if€the€developer€ð ðisÐ ˆ,Ø'3 Ðprevented€from€satisfying€the€named€conditions€by€the€legalÏintervention€of€third„party€adversaries€.€.€.€.ðð€€òòId.óó€€Ð @ Ðà  àòò¢Belfer£€v.€Bldg.€¢Commððr£€of€Bostonóó,€363€Mass.€439,€444,€294Ð Ð  ТN.E.2d£€857,€860€(Mass.€1973),€also€provides€guidance.€€There,€CarolÏManagement€Company€(ð ðCarolðð)€filed€an€application€for€a€buildingÐ ð @ Ðpermit€requesting€permission€to€erect€a€multi„story€building.€€TheÏpermit€was€denied€on€the€ground€that€the€proposed€building€violatedÏcertain€provisions€of€the€local€zoning€code.€€Carol€appealed€to€theÏboard€of€appeal€and€obtained€the€necessary€variances,€whichÏentitled€Carol€to€a€building€permit€for€two€years.€€By€statute,€theÏvariances€would€expire€if€not€used€within€two€years€from€issuance.€ÏThe€issuance€of€variances€was€challenged€on€appeal€by€personsÏclaiming€to€be€aggrieved.€€Consequently,€Carol€sought€declaratoryÏrelief,€asking€the€court€to€rule€that€the€appeal€challenging€theÏvariances€tolled€the€two€year€period€during€which€the€variances€hadÏto€be€used.€€The€court€concluded€that€ð ðrelief€from€time€limitationsÐ  p Ð.€.€.€where€a€legal€impediment€exists€to€the€use€of€a€benefit,Ïshould€.€.€.€be€given€where€an€appeal€from€the€granting€of€theÏvariance€creates€.€.€.€real€practical€impediments€to€the€use€of€aÏbenefit.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€860.€€It€reasoned€that€ð ð[¢o]therwise£€a€varianceÐ `"°& Ðwhich€was€lawfully€awarded€can€be€frustrated€by€the€delay€inherentÏin€an€appealðð€and€ð ð[¢u]nless£€an€appeal€tolls€the€time€period,€manyÐ €%Ð * Ðvariances€would€be€meaningless.ðð€€òòIdóó.Ð '`", Ðà  àWe€also€consider€noteworthy€the€case€of€òò¢Preseault£€v.€Wheelóó,Ð  (ð#. Ð123€¢Vt£.€247,€315€A.2d€244€(¢Vt£.€1974).€€There,€the€permit€was€issuedÏto€a€developer€to€construct€family€€houses,€but€the€permit€was€onlyÐ À+'2 Ðvalid€for€a€year.€€The€developer€did€not€start€construction€withinÏa€year€because€of€several€ð ðlegal€battlesðð€with€adjoining€landowners.€Ð @ Ð315€A.2d€œat›€245.€€Meanwhile,€the€city€had€changed€its€zoningÏordinance€so€that€the€development€no€longer€complied€with€the€newÏlaw,€and€the€builder€was€unable€to€renew€the€permit€because€of€theÏchange€in€the€zoning€law€and€the€failure€to€commence€construction.€ÏMoreover,€there€was€no€ð ðspecific€processðð€for€renewal.€€òòId.óó€€TheÐ `  Ðdeveloper€sued€for€declaratory€and€equitable€relief,€alleging€thatÏhe€had€acquired€a€vested€right€to€the€permit.€€The€court€agreed.€€Ìà  àThe€court€recognized€the€right€of€a€municipality€to€establishÏa€ð ðlimit€to€the€duration€of€a€building€permitðð€in€order€to€ð ðcontrolÐ P  Ðthe€use€and€development€of€land€in€the€face€of€changingÐ à0 Ðconditions.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€247.€€Indeed,€the€court€was€mindful€that€someÐ pÀ Ðdevelopers€would€ð ðdo€nothing,ðð€and€then€belatedly€ð ðcommenceÐ P Ðconstruction€distasteful€to,€and€long€proscribed€by,€theÏmunicipality.ðð€€òòId.óó€€But,€even€though€the€builder€in€question€hadÐ  p Ðnot€begun€construction,€he€had€expended€substantial€sums€forÏarchitectural,€surveying,€and€legal€fees,€and€the€court€believedÏthat€his€efforts€should€not€be€rendered€ð ðworthlessðð€by€the€conductÐ Ð $ Ðof€a€municipality€that€subsequently€deemed€the€projectÐ `"°& Ðð ðnonconforming.ðð€€òòId.óó€€The€court€explained:€Ð ð#@( ÐÓÓà8  à[¢R]ather£€than€sitting€on€his€permit€the€plaintiff,Ïthrough€counsel,€has€spent€a€substantial€amount€of€timeÏsitting€and€standing€in€courtrooms€.€.€.,€trying€toÏmaintain€the€foothold€he€obtained€during€the€short€periodÏof€time€when€the€City€.€.€.€approved€of€his€developmentÏproject.€€The€first€decision€below€in€the€case€of€òòIn€reÐ h)¸$/ ТPreseault£,€supraóó,€occurred€on€June€8,€1971.€€ThatÐ 0*€%0 Ðdecision€followed€hearings€held€prior€to€that€date.€€ThisÏCourt€remanded€when€that€controversy€reached€us,€and€theÏplaintiff€asserts€that€litigation€since€that€remandÐ ˆ,Ø'3 Ðcontinues.€€The€petition€to€enjoin€the€plaintiff€fromÏbuilding€the€duplexes€was€brought€by€the€adjacentÏlandowners€on€June€21,€1971.€€This€Courtððs€decision€inÏplaintiffððs€favor€came€on€July€11,€1973,€when€it€deniedÏmotion€for€¢reargument£€.€.€.€.€òòÐÐ Ð Ð  ÐóóÌÓ\(ÓÔ#†XE>XXXÖax#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ô315€A.2d€at€247€(internal€citations€omitted).€€Moreover,€the€courtÐ ` ° Ðadded:ÌÓÓà8  àWe€conclude€that€the€more€soundly€reasoned€cases€fromÏother€jurisdictions€support€the€proposition€that€where€aÏvalid€permit€is€issued€for€a€specified€period,€and€whereÏactual€construction€is€delayed€by€litigation,€involvingÏparties€who€have€standing€to€oppose€construction,€pastÏthat€time,€a€¢permittee£€otherwise€proceeding€in€good€faithÏis€entitled€to€¢reissuance£€of€that€permit,€even€where€theÏzoning€was€meanwhile€changed€so€that€the€project€isÏnonconforming.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌÔ#†XE>XXXÖa>,#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>Ôà@ÀÀ(ìà*€*€*ˆÐ P  ÐÌà8  àFor€this€jurisdiction€to€employ€a€test€under€which€aÏ¢permittee£€must€begin€actual€construction€within€one€yearÏand,€at€the€same€time,€to€not€allow€delay€caused€byÏlitigation€to€serve€as€a€modifying€or€exculpatory€factorÏwould€produce€greater€inequity€.€.€.€.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌòòñýñId.óóñýññþñ€ñþññýññüñóóñüññýññÿñ315€A.2d€ñÿñat€247,€248.Ð à Ðà  àÌÓ»,Óà  àWe€consider€the€reasoning€of€the€òò¢Preseault£óó€court€quiteÐ  p Ðpersuasive:ÓÓÌÓN1ÓÓÓÌà8  àFor€this€Court€to€hold€that€a€developer,€proceeding€asÏexpeditiously€as€possible,€must€be€denied€¢reissuance£€ofÏthe€permit€he€first€applied€for€and€received€solelyÏbecause€his€application€for€a€second€essential€permitÏresulted€in€litigation€of€more€than€a€year's€durationÏwould€go€beyond€the€desired€and€worthwhile€goal€ofÏcontrolling€development.€òòSuch€a€holding€would€makeÐ ð#@( Ðdevelopment€a€pure€gamble;€success€would€depend€on€theÏwhim€of€adversaries€to€litigate€or€not.óó€€This€resultÐ €%Ð * Ðwould€contravene€our€announced€policy€that€a€good€faithÏdeveloper€should€be€able€to€proceed€with€assurance.€€€€Ó{1ÓÔ#†XE>XXXÖaä.#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔÐ'`",Ð Ð  ÐññòòññññId.óóññññññóóññññññ315€A.2dññ€at€248€(emphasis€added).Ô#†XE>XXXÖaS4#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔÐ  (ð#. Ðà  àHere,€judgment€was€entered€in€Nationalððs€favor€as€to€itsÏclaims€for€mandamus€and€declaratory€action,€by€which€the€County€wasÐ À+'2 Ðfound€in€violation€of€the€law€for€failing€to€include€NationalððsÏLandfill€in€the€¢SWMP£.€€That€ruling€was€upheld€on€appeal.€€TheÏCounty€was€subsequently€found€in€contempt€for€failing€to€abide€byÏthose€rulings,€which€was€also€upheld€on€appeal.€€The€Amended€OrderÏof€Contempt€merely€deleted€certain€paragraphs€because,€as€theÏcircuit€court€noted,€the€ð ðprocessðð€was€not€the€issue,€and€the€CountyÐ € Ð  Ðhad€sent€the€Statement€of€Conformance.€€Were€we€to€adopt€theÏCountyððs€view,€we€would€render€hollow€Nationalððs€many€legalÏvictories€merely€because,€during€the€time€it€took€National€toÏachieve€those€victories,€the€special€exception€expired.€Ìà  àIn€òò¢Cardinale£óó,€the€court€was€ð ðcautious€to€fashion€a€remedy€withÐ P  Ðno€greater€breadth€than€necessary.ðð€€òò¢Cardinale£óó,€627€¢N.E.£€2d€at€615.€Ð à0 ÐRecognizing€that€there€are€times€when€a€developer€might€not€proceedÏwith€due€diligence,€or€that€passage€of€time€might€ð ðbe€accompaniedÐ P Ðby€a€change€of€conditions€.€.€.€which€would€cause€.€.€.€prejudiceÏ[to]€a€community,ðð€òòid.óó,€that€court€declined€to€hold€that€a€legalÐ  p Ðchallenge€ð ðautomatically€extends€the€time€for€compliance€with€theÐ °  Ðconditions.ðð€€òòId.óó€€The€reasoning€of€the€òò¢Cardinale£óó€court€seemsÐ @" Ðeminently€sound€to€us€as€a€way€of€preventing€misuse€or€abuse€of€theÏtolling€principle.€€Ìà  àÔ#†XE>XXXÖa5#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔIn€this€case,€however,€we€are€not€confronted€with€anÐ ð#@( Ðallegation€that€the€applicant€failed€to€act€diligently€inÏattempting€to€use€the€special€exception€that€was€obtained.€€Nor€hasÏappellantððs€ð ðgood€faithðð€been€assailed.€€Ô#†XE>XXXÖaÓ;#ÔÔ‡XÖaXXXE>ÔBecause€we€disagree€withÐ  (ð#. Ðthe€underlying€foundation€of€the€trial€courtððs€orders€of€SeptemberÏ10,€1999,€finding€that€the€special€exception€expired,€we€shallÐ À+'2 Ðvacate€those€orders€and€remand€for€further€consideration€of€theÏmany€other€issues€raised€by€the€parties€that€œwere›€not€addressedÏbelow.€ÌÓÓà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àò òORDERS€OF€SEPTEMBER€10,€1999Ð ` ° ÐVACATED;€CASE€REMANDED€TO€THEÏCIRCUIT€COURT€FOR€ANNE€¢ARUNDEL£ÏCOUNTY€FOR€FURTHER€PROCEEDINGS.€ÏCOSTS€TO€BE€PAID€BY€APPELLEE.ó ó€€Ð€ Ð À(#À(# ÐÌÔ#†XE>XXXÖa=#Ôòò