K. Hovnanian Homes v. Havre de Grace, 244 A.3d 1174

Hovnanian built Phase 1 infrastructure (water, sewer, roads) after a 2005 public works agreement; Parcels 2 and 3 were later owned separately and planned as Phases 2–3 (414 dwellings).
A 2009 public works agreement between the City and the owners of Parcels 2–3 contemplated reimbursement to developers for some infrastructure costs but left the method/amount to a future agreement.
In 2010 Hovnanian presented an "Infrastructure Capital Projects Cost Recoupment Agreement" under which the City would collect a $3,304.57 per-unit recoupment fee on Parcels 2–3 (up to ~$1.37M) and remit proceeds to Hovnanian; the Owners of Parcels 2–3 were not parties and objected.
The Havre de Grace City Council approved the Recoupment Agreement by verbal motion at a public meeting on October 4, 2010; the Mayor never signed the agreement, and the City did not collect the fees (33 building permits were later issued without fee collection).
Hovnanian sued for declaratory relief, mandamus (to compel the Mayor to sign and record), and damages; after multiple summary-judgment rulings and appeals, the Court of Appeals held the Agreement ultra vires and unenforceable because fee imposition required a duly enacted ordinance.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a City Council verbal motion/"resolution" approving the Recoupment Agreement created a binding, enforceable contract imposing fees on third-party property owners	Hovnanian: Council has charter authority to approve municipal contracts by motion/resolution; common-law municipal-contract rules permit adoption by motion; no ordinance required	City: Fee imposition is a legislative power that (under state law and the charter) must be enacted by ordinance; council motion and mayor's non-signature cannot bind the City	Held: No. The substance was imposition/collection of a municipal fee, which under the Maryland Constitution and Local Government Article must be adopted by ordinance; verbal motion was ultra vires and unenforceable
Whether the Mayor (executive) could bind the City by signing the Agreement or whether mayoral signature was required as executive action	Hovnanian: Mayor need not be sole actor; Council approval sufficed	City: Execution of contracts affecting fees is an executive act and/or requires Council ordinance; mayoral signature issues are relevant	Held: Court rejected the view that the mayor alone could lawfully impose these fees; whether "strong mayor" or not, the General Assembly conferred fee-making power on municipal legislative bodies and required enactment by ordinance, so signature or mayoral contract execution could not validate an act that needed legislative ordinance

Inlet Assocs. v. Assateague House Condominium, 313 Md. 413 (1988) (ordinance required—verbal council resolution insufficient—for municipal conveyance/major legislative action)
River Walk Apartments, LLC v. Twigg, 396 Md. 527 (2007) (agreements waiving or creating municipal fees are ultra vires if not authorized by ordinance)
Campbell v. Mayor & Aldermen of Annapolis, 289 Md. 300 (1981) (constitutional/statutory limits on municipal taxation and fees)