Consumer Protection - Consumer Contracts - Prohibited Waivers
HB0103 makes the Access to Counsel in Evictions funding structure permanent and removes the sunset on the annual $14 million transfer from abandoned property funds to the Access to Counsel in Evictions Special Fund. It also makes permanent the Governor’s required $14 million annual budget appropriation from that fund to the Maryland Legal Services Corporation (MLSC), which administers the eviction-counsel program. In addition, the bill continues a $500,000 annual distribution to the Tax Clinics for Low-Income Marylanders Fund and preserves the existing $8 million distribution to the Maryland Legal Services Corporation Fund from abandoned property proceeds.
The bill also terminates the Access to Counsel in Evictions Task Force on January 31, 2026, and repeals the statutory provisions establishing that task force. Related conforming changes update cross-references and renumber sections of the Real Property Article so the eviction-counsel program provisions remain organized in the code after the task force provisions are removed. The bill takes effect October 1, 2025, with the sections dealing with the task force termination and related renumbering taking effect January 31, 2026.
HB0103 would amend the Commercial Law and Real Property Articles to make ongoing funding for eviction defense permanent rather than limited to a set fiscal-year window. It would require the Comptroller to continue directing abandoned property revenues to the Access to Counsel in Evictions Special Fund and require the Governor to include a $14 million annual appropriation from that fund to MLSC in each budget year. The bill also repeals the task force statute and renumbers the remaining eviction-counsel provisions, affecting the administration of civil legal services, tenant representation, and the allocation of abandoned property revenues.
The available record suggests the bill is generally supportive of the existing Access to Counsel in Evictions program and its funding stream, with the purpose of stabilizing and extending a policy already in place. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes in the provided material, there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition in the source set. The bill’s structure indicates an intent to preserve and institutionalize funding for legal aid and eviction defense rather than to change the underlying program model.
The main policy issue is the continued diversion of abandoned property funds and state budget dollars to eviction-related legal services, which may draw scrutiny from those concerned about the use of unclaimed property revenues or the size of the annual appropriation. Another possible point of contention is the elimination of the Access to Counsel in Evictions Task Force, which removes a formal advisory body that had been tasked with evaluating implementation and funding sources. Supporters are likely to favor the permanence and predictability of funding for low-income tenants and legal aid providers, while any critics would likely focus on fiscal priorities and the long-term commitment of state resources.