Supporting Inclusive Community Adaptation Act
HB0254 would prohibit certain public and local entities from requiring a current address from an individual experiencing homelessness in a range of application and eligibility settings. The bill applies to public libraries when issuing library cards, to recipients of specified Department of Housing and Community Development grants and loans for affordable housing, to the Department and public housing agencies when determining eligibility for housing assistance payments, and to counties and municipalities in certain employment contexts. It defines “individual experiencing homelessness” by reference to the federal McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act.
The bill also amends existing local government employment rules to make clear that counties and municipalities may not require a current address from a job applicant or employee who is experiencing homelessness as a condition of employment. It preserves existing exceptions for certain supervisory at-will employees and retains the general rule against residency-based employment discrimination, while allowing merit-system preferences for local residents where authorized by local law. The bill takes effect October 1, 2025.
HB0254 would add new statutory protections in the Education, Housing and Community Development, and Local Government articles of the Maryland Code. It would limit address-based eligibility requirements for library access, housing-related grant and loan programs, housing assistance payments, and certain local government employment decisions, thereby reducing barriers for people without stable housing. The bill would also require the Department of Housing and Community Development to adopt regulations to implement the new housing-program provisions.
The available context suggests generally favorable support for the bill, as reflected by its caption emphasizing inclusive community adaptation and its successful passage in the Senate by a 24-10 vote. No committee transcript is available, but the vote margin indicates meaningful support with some opposition. Overall, the bill appears to have been viewed as a targeted measure to reduce administrative barriers for people experiencing homelessness.
The main point of contention is likely the extent to which state and local entities may use address requirements to verify eligibility, manage employment, or administer programs. Opponents may have concerns about administrative burden, verification, or local control in hiring and program eligibility, while supporters would emphasize access, equity, and the practical reality that people experiencing homelessness may not have a current address. The bill preserves some existing employment exceptions, suggesting an effort to balance those concerns with the new protections.