Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Education Labor topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Unions push $25 minimum for education support professionals as witnesses dispute fiscal estimates

Ways and Means Committee · March 12, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Greg Williams presented HB 12-05 to require local school systems to pay education support professionals at least $25 an hour by July 1, 2028. Unions and ESPs testified about low pay and staffing shortages; witnesses debated fiscal-note modeling and implementation mechanics.

Delegate Greg Williams presented House Bill 12-05, which would require each local school system to pay education support professionals (ESPs) at least $25 per hour by July 1, 2028, and would require MSDE to report an implementation cost estimate to the governor and General Assembly by Dec. 1, 2026.

"When these roles are understaffed or underpaid, the impact is immediate," Williams told the committee, citing personal meetings with ESPs who work multiple jobs. He framed the bill as a path to recruitment and retention that supports students and school operations.

Union leaders and ESPs gave bipartisan support. Stacy Taman, president of the Calvert Association of Educational Support Staff, testified that many ESPs earn below a living wage and described a typical instructional assistant salary below $30,000 a year. SEIU and other unions urged a favorable report, noting short staffing across counties and the consequences for students with disabilities and daily operations.

School-system representatives and some committee members probed the fiscal-note methodology. Paul Embley of the Maryland State Education Association and other witnesses argued the DLS and some LEA fiscal projections overstate the cost by assuming broad scale increases; they offered alternative calculations that produce a lower statewide cost. Committee discussion also focused on whether increases would push up scale steps and how negotiated contracts would interact with a statutory floor.

The hearing included detailed back-and-forth on implementation timelines, variability across jurisdictions, and whether the state should provide additional funding to local school systems. The committee ended the hearing without taking a vote.