HB0399 authorizes a narrow new category of charitable raffles in Baltimore City for organizations affiliated with a professional major league baseball team that plays its home games in the city. The bill creates a new section of the Criminal Law Article allowing such organizations to conduct raffles at or in connection with Baltimore City baseball games, provided they are located in Baltimore City, spend a majority of their funds in Baltimore City for qualifying fraternal, civic, veterans’, amateur athletics, or charitable purposes, and obtain a written permit from a city-designated agency.
The bill also sets operational rules for these raffles. Tickets must be sold using age-verification measures to ensure the buyer is at least 18, and sales and receipt of tickets may occur in person or on an electronic device only within the geographic boundaries of the Baltimore City stadium area, using geofencing technology to enforce that limit. A single permit may cover raffles at multiple games during the calendar year, and there is no cap on the number of raffles conducted in conjunction with those games. The bill is temporary, taking effect June 1, 2025 and expiring May 31, 2028 unless reenacted.
In terms of state law, HB0399 amends existing raffle and gaming-event provisions in the Criminal Law Article by carving out an exception from the general 12-raffle annual limit and by adding a new permit framework specific to these baseball-related raffles. It also updates enforcement language so violations of the new section are subject to the same misdemeanor penalties that apply to unlawful bazaars and raffles under current law. The bill leaves the broader charitable gaming structure in place while creating a localized, time-limited exception for Baltimore City.
The overall sentiment reflected by the bill’s progression is favorable. The bill received a favorable committee report with amendments and was adopted by the House, suggesting legislative support for the limited expansion of fundraising opportunities tied to Baltimore City baseball events. No committee transcript or recorded vote details were provided, so there is no direct record of debate or opposition in the supplied materials.
The main points of contention likely center on the policy choice to create a special exception for organizations affiliated with a professional baseball team, the use of electronic ticket sales and geofencing, and the relaxation of the usual raffle frequency limits. Potential concerns include gambling oversight, age verification, and whether the bill gives a preferential fundraising tool to a narrow class of organizations. Supporters would likely emphasize charitable fundraising, local economic activity, and the bill’s safeguards and sunset provision.
HB0399 amends Maryland’s Criminal Law Article to create a Baltimore City-specific raffle authorization for organizations affiliated with a professional major league baseball team that plays in Baltimore City. It adds a new permit process through a city-designated agency, imposes age-verification and geofencing requirements for electronic ticket sales, and exempts these raffles from the general 12-raffle annual limit. The bill also preserves existing prohibitions on private financial benefit from raffle proceeds and makes violations subject to existing misdemeanor penalties. The law is temporary and will automatically expire after three years unless extended.
The bill appears to have been received positively in the legislative process. It was reported favorably with amendments by committee and adopted by the House, indicating support for the measure’s limited, regulated expansion of raffle authority. Because no transcripts or vote breakdowns were provided, there is no direct evidence of floor debate or organized opposition in the supplied record.
The likely areas of contention are the bill’s narrow carve-out for organizations tied to a professional baseball team, the removal of the normal cap on raffles at those games, and the use of electronic sales with geofencing to restrict where tickets can be sold and received. Critics may question whether the exception is too specialized or whether it creates additional gambling-related enforcement and oversight issues. Supporters would likely argue that the permit requirement, age verification, geofencing, and sunset clause provide sufficient safeguards while allowing charitable fundraising in a controlled setting.