Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Infraction Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State raises municipal fine cap to $5,000; Hagerstown staff propose escalating schedule and council supports drafting ordinance
Summary
The Maryland General Assembly increased the statutory cap on municipal infractions to $5,000 effective Oct. 1, 2025. City code enforcement staff proposed an escalating fine schedule for repeat infractions and council members directed staff to draft ordinances focusing on vacants and nuisance abatement.
City code enforcement staff briefed the Mayor and City Council on July 15 about a new Maryland law that raises the maximum municipal infraction fine to $5,000 and asked whether the city wants to revise local fine schedules.
Staff said the state law replaces a prior statutory cap of $1,000 and takes effect Oct. 1, 2025. The change allows municipalities to amend local codes to set higher municipal infraction penalties where appropriate. Staff recommended an escalating schedule tied to repeated offenses (for example, a lower fine for a first offense rising for subsequent offenses within a set period) and offered an alternate doubling schedule used by some health and safety enforcement programs in other states.
Why it matters: staff said existing preset fines are often well below the city's actual cost to enforce and remediate violations. Staff reported that only a small share of issued notices result in a citation (about 2.8% of notices become citations) and that about 118 unique properties per year receive fines from code enforcement. The department argued that higher, escalated fines could encourage corrective action and offset enforcement costs in difficult cases.
Proposed approach and council direction: staff outlined two sample approaches: (1) a graduated escalation tied to repeat offenses (staff illustrated a sample progression from a lower starting fine up toward the $5,000 cap for persistent noncompliance within a two‑year window), and (2) a doubling schedule used in other jurisdictions for serial public‑health or safety violations. Several council members said they favored an escalating approach and asked staff and the city attorney to prepare ordinance language; staff said they would draft amendments for introduction next month and a council vote in September so the local ordinance could take effect shortly after the state law.
Discussion vs. decision: the July 15 session was for direction only; no ordinance was introduced or adopted. Council members asked staff to prioritize vacants and nuisance abatement chapters and to consider stronger penalties for out‑of‑town owners and serial offenders while allowing inspectors discretion to grant reasonable extensions for active remediation efforts.
What to watch next: staff will return with draft ordinance language and proposed fine schedules for council introduction and a public hearing. If council adopts an ordinance, it would take effect after the adoption timeline and in coordination with state law.
