Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the HB90 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would let counties set different commercial tax rates; sponsor says revenue must go to education or transportation
Summary
Delegate Chris Fair told the Ways and Means Committee HB 90 would allow counties and Baltimore City to adopt differential commercial property tax subclasses while safeguarding residential rates and directing countywide revenues to education and overlay revenues to transportation; questions focused on business competitiveness and local process safeguards.
Delegate Chris Fair presented House Bill 90 to the Ways and Means Committee as an enabling tool to let counties and Baltimore City create differential property tax rates for SDAT‑defined commercial subclasses.
Fair said the bill is responsive to counties' requests for local flexibility and is intended to be constrained: it would not increase residential property rates, would require a residential credit for any mixed‑use property subject to a commercial rate increase, allow small‑business credits to protect small firms, and cap the authority so the General Assembly's intent of limited county power is preserved. He said any revenue raised under a county‑wide adoption must be used for education; revenues from a special overlay taxing district would go to transportation.
Delegate Griffith questioned whether the proposal would be a "third hit" on businesses that already pay transfer taxes and impact fees or would drive companies out of Maryland. Fair argued the authority is an investment tool that counties can use to bolster education and transportation — investments that can attract business — and cited Northern Virginia's use of similar tools as a comparative example. Delegate Miller raised competitiveness concerns and asked whether revenue could be used for capital or operating expenses; Fair replied the bill prescribes how countywide and overlay revenues are allocated.
Opponents and supporters alike noted the bill is enabling, not mandatory, and decisions would rest with county executives, councils and local public input processes. Several delegates asked whether some changes should require local ballot approval; Fair said he had not proposed statewide ballot requirements because local decision‑making provides the most direct accountability.
What happens next: The committee closed the public questioning and will consider the bill and any possible amendments affecting voter approval, caps and guardrails.
