Advocates urge restoration of eviction‑prevention funds as DHCD defends FY26 priorities including Empower Maryland and broadband work

Advocates representing renters, social‑service agencies and local governments urged the Health and Social Services Subcommittee to restore a $5 million cut to eviction prevention (emergency rental assistance) during testimony on the Department of Housing and Community Development’s fiscal 2026 operating budget. DHCD officials described the department’s budget priorities and recommended a new statutory position tied to a 2024 law.

DLS analyst Scott Benson opened the DHCD presentation by noting the fiscal 2026 operating allowance rises $42.0 million, or 8.1%, to $558.6 million. "Special funds increased by $24.7 million in the fiscal 26 allowance or 18.8% compared to fiscal 25," Benson said, and flagged major components including rental services, energy programs and large volumes of non‑budgeted capital and bond resources used by DHCD programs.

Secretary Jake Day said the department is operating amid both structural fiscal constraints and federal uncertainty and defended the agency’s request. He noted a new position required by House Bill 538 of 2024 — a historic property revitalization director — would be funded with general funds and could not be absorbed by DHCD’s special funds. "If the General Assembly doesn't provide the general funds for this position DHCD will not be able to fulfill this statutory mandate due to fiscal constraints on our special funds," Day told the panel.

Energy and weatherization: The fiscal 2026 allowance increases funding for energy programs, driven by requirements in the Public Utilities Article (2024) that set greenhouse gas reduction targets and standards for contractors. DHCD and its assistant secretaries said the additional Empower Maryland funds will be used for single‑family and multifamily energy efficiency work, renovations and to pair energy investments with critical repairs for income‑restricted households.

Homelessness and eviction prevention: Many advocates urged the panel to restore $5 million in broadly available eviction prevention funds that the proposed budget trims while retaining a $5 million community‑school‑based eviction prevention allocation. Public Justice Center attorney Matt Hill said eviction prevention funds typically pay one to three months of back rent to stop a short‑term crisis from triggering an eviction. "We don't want that to become a catalyst for homelessness and that's what eviction prevention funds address," Hill said.

Advocates and local officials stressed demand has risen since federal pandemic-era programs ended and that eviction prevention is cost‑effective. Healthcare for the Homeless President Kevin Lindamood cited the DHCD qualified allocation plan changes that prioritize units that serve people exiting homelessness and urged the legislature not to reduce prevention funding as homelessness trends upward. Local shelter and service providers described increased client demand and full winter shelters in some jurisdictions; Baltimore County officials said HSP (Homelessness Solutions Program) funding provides critical match and gap support for services such as street outreach and emergency shelter.

Broadband and Main Street programs: Benson noted DHCD’s operating budget includes continued broadband and digital inclusion programs financed with federal awards and that a larger broadband portfolio is also reflected in capital allocations. Several Main Street representatives asked the committee to maintain the Main Street Improvement Program operating funding, saying it is essential to local small‑business support and downtown revitalization work.

Federal funding uncertainty: Multiple witnesses and DHCD staff warned that federal funding disruptions already have immediate effects — Day described a bond financing that had to drop a 200‑unit multifamily renovation from a planned issuance because federal climate‑linked funds were paused, delaying energy upgrades for those residents.

Ending: The subcommittee received broad testimony in favor of restoring eviction prevention funds and questions about implementation and federal funding risk. No formal vote took place at the hearing; DHCD committed to follow up on technical budget questions and to provide requested details on program implementation.