Prince George's County - Community Associations - Registration Fees for Administrative Hearing Process PG 408-25
Summary
HB360 is a Prince George’s County local law that changes how community associations and community association managers register with the county’s Community Association Registry. It requires cooperative housing corporations, condominiums, and homeowners associations in the county to register and renew registration annually, and it keeps in place the requirement that entities providing community association management services also register. The bill also authorizes the County Executive to set the annual registration fee, rather than fixing the fee in statute, and allows the county to establish additional reasonable fees tied to administrative hearing services and developer-related recording charges.
The bill further ties registration fees to funding the county’s alternative dispute resolution and administrative hearing process for disputes between community associations and owners. It bars a person or entity that fails to register, or that makes a false statement on the registration form, from filing a dispute through that process until compliance is restored. It also preserves misdemeanor penalties for willful violations and makes the governing body of each community association responsible for compliance.
Impact
HB360 amends the Corporations and Associations Article and the Real Property Article to expand and clarify Prince George’s County’s community association registry requirements and fee authority. It adds explicit registration obligations for cooperatives, condominiums, and homeowners associations in the county, revises the fee-setting structure, and directs collected fees to support the county’s administrative hearing process and related technical assistance. The bill affects community associations, their management companies, owners, and county officials administering the registry and dispute-resolution system.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been broadly supported and noncontroversial. It passed the House 137-0 and the Senate 42-2, indicating strong bipartisan approval. The lack of committee transcript material suggests there was little recorded public debate or that any concerns were resolved before final passage.
Contention
The main policy issue in the bill is the shift from a fixed statutory fee to fee-setting by the County Executive and county governing body, along with the use of those fees to fund administrative hearings and related services. Another potential point of concern is the enforcement mechanism that prevents non-registered parties from filing disputes until they comply, which could be viewed as a compliance incentive but also as a barrier to access. Any opposition likely centered on fee levels, administrative burden on associations and managers, or the scope of county authority, but the recorded votes suggest these concerns did not generate significant resistance.