Martin O’Malley has a knack for delivering lines that combine scathing cynicism, a touch of humor and razor-sharp clarity.

The governor’s determined defense of his controversial land-use plan before the Maryland Association of Counties cut to the quick when he said his plan “is not going to prevent the counties from making stupid land-use decisions. They’re still free to do that. We’re not going to subsidize it.”

In other words, no more subsidies for stupidity.

Such a policy is 40 years late in arriving. But finding a way to put the policy into practice without generating furious protests that influence elections in 2012 and 2014 requires prolonged negotiations.

Land-use laws trigger resentment from Americans. Property rights are viewed by many as sacred, inalienable rights. Imposing community standards that restrict property uses is sensitive business.

Other governors sought to impose statewide land-use laws, too. All of them came up short. Parris Glendening, William Donald Schaefer, Harry Hughes and Marvin Mandel wanted to rein in sprawl and costly growth. They sought to bring pragmatic planning into the equation.

Every time, they ran into a buzz saw of local opposition.

Indeed, Mandel — the most powerful governor of the modern era — failed miserably to enact his state land-use law in the early 1970s. It was one of the few major defeats for Mandel during 10 years in office.

Once again, local opposition is growing against an effort to put some baby teeth in a state land-use plan. Local officials fear heavy-handed state control. They have nightmares of state bureaucrats usurping the traditional zoning and planning roles of local officials.

Who knows what’s best for Frederick, Montgomery or Carroll County? A pointy-headed policy wonk burrowed in a state office building in Baltimore or a local official with intimate knowledge and understanding of a county’s quirks and characteristics?

Howard County Executive Ken Ulman, an O’Malley supporter on most issues, noted that decisions on whether to develop parcels of land “is really what we do” on the county level.

Conversely, state planning officials have little understanding or expertise in local county zoning matters.

Can you imagine state planning officials further complicating the many decisions tied to the National Harbor development or adding more complexity to the zoning and planning process for the proposed Science City in Gaithersburg?

In fact, tough state land-use laws might have destroyed James Rouse’s dream of developing a new town on farmland in Howard County. Similarly, Baltimore County’s changes to its zoning laws that allowed for dense population growth in two town centers (White Marsh and Owings Mills) might have been deemed off-limits by earlier state planning czars.

Overcoming the fears of local leaders won’t be easy, particularly at a time when O’Malley also wants to outlaw new septic systems — a move that could have staggering negative implications for many of the state’s less-developed counties.

Still, it is sound policy for the state to tell counties that it will reward them for making sensible land-use decisions that keep population growth within designated areas already served by infrastructure. These counties will continue to get money for school construction, new roads and water and sewer systems.

But counties that insist on promoting sprawl and unchecked development will have to spend more of their own dollars on high-cost public services in those areas.

The problem is that until recently county leaders weren’t paying enough attention to O’Malley’s Plan Maryland. They were focused on local zoning and planning issues.

That leaves them little time to digest the state’s thick book of planning guidelines and figure out if the state is imposing impossible standards. Some counties could see their recent work on comprehensive growth plans wiped out.

There’s no need to rush this process. Indeed, failure to accommodate the planning desires of most county leaders would be a huge mistake by the governor.

Making sure the state isn’t taking a “one size fits all approach” is essential. O’Malley already has displayed the hammer to county leaders — the loss of large chunks of state capital. He has the advantage in negotiating sensible modifications.

But unless he allows more time for discussions, the governor could spark anger and hostility toward him and other State House Democrats, particularly in Southern Maryland, Western Maryland and the Eastern Shore. That, in turn, might influence votes in next year’s congressional and presidential races, not to mention statewide races in 2014.

Besides, Maryland’s planning projections need to be reassessed in light of the Great Recession and current uncertainties.

Earlier estimates of continuing population sprawl may be out of date. Economic growth, demographic trends and housing patterns may be much different than previously thought.

Should counties be allowed to make more stupid land-use mistakes? Unfortunately, the answer is yes. The new state plan won’t strip powers from the counties. But that doesn’t mean other state taxpayers should subsidize such costly foolishness.

Barry Rascovar is a State House columnist and communications consultant. His email address is brascovar@hotmail.com.