Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Care topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Delegates debate bill to let tenants operate certified family child care in rentals; amendment fails, sponsor lays over changes
Summary
Lawmakers debated House Bill 543, which would bar landlords from prohibiting certified family child care in new residential leases and allow landlords to be named on required insurance; an amendment about rent increases failed and sponsors laid the bill over for one day to consider changes.
The House considered House Bill 543, a landlord-tenant measure intended to expand access to regulated family child care. The bill would require that future residential leases not prohibit a tenant from operating a family child care home certified by the Maryland State Department of Education and would permit landlords to be listed on the child care operator’s insurance.
The floor leader said the bill “recogniz[es] that we have a child care crisis” and described it as designed to “maximize the possibility that anyone who’s willing to open up their home, go through all of the MSDE requirements…can do that anywhere in the state.” The sponsor emphasized that the child care proprietor, not the landlord, would bear liability for the children and that landlords could require additional property insurance.
Opponents on the floor sought a special order to allow amendment and more time for debate. A member seeking to protect landlords’ property interests framed an amendment to permit an owner to seek additional rent or other protections; the House voted on that motion and the amendment vote failed, with the chair announcing “There being 88 votes in the negative and 34 votes in support, the…motion fails.”
After further questions and discussion about insurance, leases and how the statutory certification process would allocate risk, a member moved to lay the bill over for one day. The motion to lay over was adopted and the clerk recorded that House Bill 543 and the amendment “has been laid over for 1 day” for reconsideration.
What happens next: sponsors said they would work with the committee offices on potential language changes to address landlord concerns before the bill is taken up again.
Vote and action record: the proposed amendment to permit rent changes tied to on-site child care failed on recorded floor counts (88 no, 34 yes); the underlying bill and the proposed amendment were laid over for one day for further consideration.
