With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". If not, then any such ordinance would have to yield to the contrary statutory delegation of authority. It is axiomatic that State statutory law is superior to ordinances enacted by municipal corporations. Section 11-45-1, Ala. Code 1975, provides that “[mjunicipal corporations may from time to time adopt ordinances and resolutions not inconsistent with the laws of the state to carry into effect or discharge the powers and duties conferred by the applicable provisions of this title and any other applicable provisions of law....” See also Reed v. City of Montgomery, 341 So.2d 926, 933 (Ala.1976) (discussing a Montgomery ordinance and stating that “[a] basic principle of our system of government is the superiority of state law”); Hall v. City of Tuscaloosa, 421 So.2d 1244, 1249 (Ala.1982) (<HOLDING>). Did the legislature intend to make a general

A: holding that a municipal ordinance that contravenes state law as here is invalid for that reason alone
B: holding that a county ordinance conflicted with state laws and was invalid as applied to all citizens
C: holding seniorhousing zoning ordinance invalid as applied
D: holding city ordinance preempted by state law because ordinance prohibited act specifically allowed under state law
A.