Civil Actions - Noneconomic Damages - Personal Injury and Wrongful Death
HB0476 amends Maryland’s alcoholic beverages law as it applies only to St. Mary’s County. The bill changes the quota for Class A alcoholic beverages licenses in the county’s 8th election district, increasing the population threshold used to determine how many licenses may be issued there. Under the revised rule, the Board may issue no more than one Class A license for every 4,000 residents in the 8th election district, while the quota remains one license for every 1,350 residents in the county’s other election districts.
The bill also preserves the rule that a license may not be transferred between election districts if the transfer would cause either district to exceed its quota. The Board must continue using the most recent County Planning Commission annual report to calculate population and maintain the quotas. The act takes effect July 1, 2025, and is a local law affecting only St. Mary’s County’s alcohol licensing system.
HB0476 changes the statutory licensing formula in Title 28 of the Alcoholic Beverages and Cannabis Article for St. Mary’s County, specifically Section 28-1601. It creates a separate, less restrictive quota for the 8th election district, which may allow additional Class A retail alcohol licenses in that district if population levels support them. The bill affects the county’s alcoholic beverages board, prospective license applicants, and existing license holders seeking transfers, but does not alter the broader statewide alcohol licensing framework because the underlying title applies only to St. Mary’s County.
The available record shows no committee transcript, vote tally, or recorded floor debate, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition in the materials provided. Based on the enacted text, the measure appears to be a targeted local licensing adjustment rather than a controversial statewide policy change. The absence of recorded votes or discussion suggests the bill likely moved as a routine local bill.
The main policy issue is the different quota treatment for the 8th election district compared with the rest of St. Mary’s County. Supporters would likely view the change as a way to better align license availability with local population or market conditions, while opponents could argue it creates unequal treatment among districts or increases alcohol outlet density. No specific individuals, agencies, or interest groups are identified in the provided materials as taking either side.