[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6619428,"mediaKeyId","2836282-811b91e6f5fd1882516662570cfdee01","parentId",2836282,"title","House advances Housing for Jobs Act; lawmakers debate state targets, school-capacity and local control","audioSeconds",1009,"startMs",248000,"endMs",1257000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2836282-811b91e6f5fd1882516662570cfdee01&start=248&end=1257","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2836282-811b91e6f5fd1882516662570cfdee01/thumbnail_248000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6619428/Maryland/House-advances-Housing-for-Jobs-Act-lawmakers-debate-state-targets-school-capacity-and-local-control","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6619428-6eef9917b93516d129235d938830094e/orig.mp4?Expires=1776654791&Signature=HxzLdePKBCZBLWHKfpK0okaXhtOsRUjpWuI3egw8kUCHGIOI18ILCmkkmELkWHEw0p008h9mpn30M2Jq674fNwgaMy~axriyyd3dw0qU856tLaJkN1zjEK-4Q6RltyP7E9VYJhrglVXGFIhlfmh67ClJ0PFmALcPopgAF4dPnNCOym3SVATvoOa5KmOMYsbt7~Q6c9DbVRRs46gbxg8r~Vt~tRqSgY~LOIswvwmJtkAdrFbDYLoyk7zwNvWFl0fG~vJ1H-0GjxBAf0zCT2SWU0fukvf0seEQ1Jxk4XUMwERpIf4tEkxI18mpsGjrV65mWRjOVqdR7acAxvrDK4RrtA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Maryland General Assembly - House","date","2025-04-01T16:48:12.203Z","article","Annapolis, March 14 — The Maryland House of Delegates debated House Bill 503, the \"Housing for Jobs Act,\" during floor session March 14, hearing competing views over whether the state should set housing-production targets and how much deference to give local governments.

The bill as amended establishes the HOME Commission (Housing Opportunities Made Equitable Commission), directs the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) to work with counties and municipal corporations that exercise zoning authority to set housing-production targets beginning Jan. 1, 2026 and every 10 years after that, and requires DHCD to publish annual reports assessing jurisdictions' progress. Delegates said the targets are nonbinding and intended to support local planning.

Supporters argued the measure would create consistency across Maryland and help close a documented housing shortfall. \"The intent of the bill is to strengthen local jurisdictions' efforts to expand housing production, and it aims to do that in a very customized and targeted way that addresses the conditions, the aspirations, and the procedures that each jurisdiction uniquely has,\" a floor leader said on the House floor.

Opponents raised concerns that the bill could encroach on local land-use decisions or fail to account for immediate school-capacity problems tied to new housing. A delegate offering an amendment that would allow jurisdictions to delay housing projects tied to overcrowded schools argued the change would prevent new developments from worsening school crowding. \"So what this amendment says is the counties can push this off even further and not build the housing project, not overcrowd the schools until the problem is fixed,\" the delegate said.

The House rejected that school-capacity amendment on a roll call. \"There being 97 votes in the negative, the amendment fails,\" the clerk reported after the roll call.

Lawmakers also debated and rejected an amendment proposed to exempt Baltimore County from the bill's 10‑year target process on the grounds that Baltimore County already uses a more frequent comprehensive zoning map process; that amendment likewise failed on a roll call (97 votes in the negative). Supporters of the underlying bill said the statutory process would not override local comprehensive planning and emphasized that targets are nonbinding and intended to be set collaboratively with each jurisdiction.

One amendment adopted as friendly during floor debate added \"residential real estate owners\" to the commission's membership; the chair recognized and the House accepted that change by voice vote.

What happened next

After debate and the handling of amendments, the bill as amended was ordered printed for third reading.

Why it matters

Supporters said the bill is intended to help the state address a reported housing deficit by coordinating goal-setting and technical support across counties and municipalities; opponents pressed that local control over school-capacity decisions and land-use remains essential. The discussion reflects a broader tension in Maryland policy between state-level goals to increase housing production and local authority over zoning and school planning.

Votes at a glance

- Adoption of amendment adding \"residential real estate owners\" to the HOME Commission (amendment 453320/1): accepted (voice vote; amendment adopted on the floor).
- Amendment to permit counties to delay/deny housing projects until school overcrowding is resolved (amendment 753625/1): failed (roll call; 97 votes in the negative).
- Amendment to exempt Baltimore County from the 10‑year target requirement (amendment 633325/1): failed (roll call; 97 votes in the negative).

Speakers quoted in this report spoke during the HB 503 discussion on March 14; quotes are verbatim from the House floor record.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Floor Session, 4/1/2025 #1","oneSentenceSummary","The Maryland House of Delegates debated House Bill 503, the Housing for Jobs Act, on March 14 in Annapolis, advancing a version that establishes a HOME Commission and directs DHCD to work with local jurisdictions on 10‑year housing-production targets while rejecting amendments tied to school-capacity freezes and a Baltimore County exemption.","taxTitle","HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative, Maryland","taxId",15055,"location","Maryland","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6619420,"House floor rejects amendments seeking to broaden reparations commission’s scope",1794,2566000,4360000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2836282-811b91e6f5fd1882516662570cfdee01&start=2566&end=4360","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2836282-811b91e6f5fd1882516662570cfdee01/thumbnail_2566000.jpg","/articles/6619420/Maryland/House-floor-rejects-amendments-seeking-to-broaden-reparations-commissions-scope","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6619420-acd41793b7b2b3c4673281ed6b9bb926/orig.mp4?Expires=1776654791&Signature=WjeA41moPp0MisZ89-yLEmFDzo90e0apKWMFvyfBlXbb4bn-vt96pOt7p4~v7Y5jo7BaF0w97x0INKIYOqypJqLcUWUe3ORIEL-nPyLp~tVVvxn1E9ZWG7utODDjuxBS4rjw7RNyml0301ustbYQCHf1HYkFM3bNn6zg1j8~thVYkLQnBFPHh5hmJzW0usoFQ156tEu9vbNPoMVz7KUhgOv8kTNKJ-rfRsHXwQ6AxjG6XVd0aQ8GFhMm4F1MuOoHkb~C7ElUbVHyiOiYBTwhre4AHav673bfOsZhpFgGfFy~P-nJBzulmFwzQTb1Ioh3UAYfTEcrYfswl786-ef2ug__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Annapolis, March 14 — The Maryland House considered a bill to establish a Maryland Reparations Commission and heard extended debate on the commission’s scope and purpose during floor session March 14.

The committee reported the measure favorably, and members debated two substantive amendments on the House floor. The first amendment would have expanded the commission’s covered populations to include \"union soldiers who or others who fought to end slavery, or individuals whose ancestors served in the union army or fought to end slavery.\" The amendment sponsor framed it as a way to acknowledge and thank those who contributed to ending slavery; the bill’s committee chair countered that the bill is specifically targeted to address harms generated by state and local policies that enforced segregation, redlining, and other discriminatory practices during and after Reconstruction and Jim Crow.

The House rejected the union‑soldiers amendment on a roll call. The clerk reported \"there'll be 100 votes in the negative; the amendment fails.\"

A second, unrelated amendment would have allowed state and local per‑pupil funding to follow students who were enrolled in public schools that had been rated 1 star the previous year, permitting them to use combined funding in public or nonpublic schools in or out of state. Supporters described the proposal as a remedy for chronically low-performing schools and urged lawmakers to give families alternatives. The committee chair and other members replied that the commission already has broad authority to examine a range of topics and make recommendations, and they asserted reparations is a distinct issue tied to the long history of slavery and state policy. The House also rejected the school‑choice funding amendment on a roll call (clerk recorded 99 votes in the negative).

After the amendment votes, the committee’s favorable report was adopted as amended and the bill was printed for third reading.

Why it matters

Floor debate made clear the bill’s sponsor and committee view the commission as a targeted body to study the legacy of slavery and subsequent state and local policies (for example, the 1910 Baltimore residential segregation ordinance and redlining) and to recommend remedies. Delegates who proposed the amendments argued for expanding the commission’s remit or using the bill as a vehicle for contemporary remedies such as funding that follows students in failing schools; the House rejected those expansions.","Delegates considered the creation of a Maryland Reparations Commission. Two floor amendments — one to include Union soldiers or descendants and another to direct combined state/local per‑pupil funding to students in one‑star schools — were both rejected; the bill remained on the calendar for further consideration.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6619425,"House rejects statewide solicitation standard in disaster consumer-protection bill",880,1279000,2159000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2836282-811b91e6f5fd1882516662570cfdee01&start=1279&end=2159","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2836282-811b91e6f5fd1882516662570cfdee01/thumbnail_1279000.jpg","/articles/6619425/Maryland/House-rejects-statewide-solicitation-standard-in-disaster-consumer-protection-bill","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6619425-17500be1e6d3c772cd31d1cef7f20464/orig.mp4?Expires=1776654791&Signature=lWkpn3-1Fcagxoktt6usIXWutN5ZHVBRIYv6Q~Wm-u0R4J4IzBe8jcSRvPQyoy0Xc0hG7PDLP7mcivAmY6s3a30mLPG6bRWAcJlrdpJt7X2x75vIimJ27EIoflfd2g82CfvhRcg8s5nPm1Q-VHEIbx8Osx2LJu057a1nrTeLCOyfam97Vxdpjr7Vzab4YwXf2wqlQOg4PRr6ds-ecRP3L8qb6Op0MiOpnC2A8Rz4-XhLsmgfgtm6eDYn2qWH1dkZIq3I45SDB4y7YzFgLnUc~C8TVDVa5UnmHL2csmBxNlDlUiqrHIxmjmK7wbqxxjMm6sINkw2r4FhVWtPyAZ31tg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Annapolis, March 14 — The Maryland House of Delegates considered House Bill 1348, a consumer-protection bill that seeks to limit in-person solicitation following disasters and to set rules for rescission of home-improvement contracts tied to disaster remediation.

On the floor, a delegate proposed an amendment to make the bill’s solicitation restrictions uniform across all counties and municipalities rather than allowing local governments to set potentially different standards. Supporters of uniformity said consistent statewide rules would help contractors from outside Maryland and reduce confusion after disasters; opponents argued that local conditions vary and counties should retain discretion. \"When we're talking about disaster responses, you know, it's important to kinda have a uniform policy and procedure across jurisdictions,\" the amendment sponsor said. \"…if Maryland has a set standard, it's gonna be a lot better for folks coming to do work out of state because they'll know the roots rules of the road.\"

The House rejected that amendment on a roll call. The clerk reported: \"There being 97 votes in the negative, the amendment fails.\"

A separate amendment would have required that a homeowner who rescinds a home-improvement contract compensate the contractor for time and materials expended before rescission (a \"t and m\" provision). The floor leader and several delegates said the industry provided the rescission language already in the bill and cautioned that requiring retroactive t-and-m compensation could chill contractors' willingness to respond quickly after disasters. \"If there are fears that they are not gonna be made whole, there could be a chilling effect on the industry,\" one supporter of the floor-leader position said. The House rejected the t-and-m amendment as well; the clerk recorded that the amendment failed.

What happened next

With those amendments rejected, the bill otherwise moved forward on the calendar; the floor record shows the bill was ordered passed to third reading after committee amendments and floor action were resolved.

Why it matters

The bill is intended to protect homeowners from aggressive solicitation or unfair contract terms immediately after storms or other disasters. Floor debate highlighted an ongoing policy tension: whether to impose uniform statewide rules after disasters, or to preserve local flexibility to reflect different community layouts, building stocks and disaster profiles.

Speakers quoted in this report spoke on March 14 during the HB 1348 debate; quotes are verbatim from the House floor record.","Delegates debated House Bill 1348, a consumer-protection measure restricting in-person solicitation following disasters. The House declined amendments to make the rule uniform across the state and to require contractors be paid for time-and-materials when homeowners rescind ('t and m'); both proposed changes failed on the floor.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

House advances Housing for Jobs Act; lawmakers debate state targets, school-capacity and local control

House floor rejects amendments seeking to broaden reparations commission’s scope

House rejects statewide solicitation standard in disaster consumer-protection bill