Baltimore City - Raffles - Organizations Affiliated With a Professional Major League Baseball Team
Summary
HB399 authorizes a narrow new category of raffle activity in Baltimore City for organizations that are affiliated with a professional major league baseball team whose home games are played in the city. These organizations may conduct raffles at Baltimore City baseball games if they are located in Baltimore City, spend a majority of their funds in Baltimore City for specified civic, charitable, fraternal, veterans’, or amateur athletic purposes, and obtain a written permit from a city-designated agency. The bill also allows a single permit to cover raffles at multiple games during the calendar year, with no cap on the number of raffles conducted in connection with those games.
The bill adds a new section to the Criminal Law Article and amends existing raffle and gaming-event provisions to carve out this Baltimore City baseball-related exception. It requires age-verification measures to ensure raffle buyers are at least 18, limits sales and receipt of tickets to in-person or electronic transactions within the geographic boundaries of the Baltimore City stadium, and requires geofencing for electronic sales. It also preserves the general prohibitions on personal financial benefit from raffle proceeds and makes violations subject to the existing misdemeanor penalty for unlawful gaming activity. The act is temporary, taking effect June 1, 2025 and expiring May 31, 2028 unless extended.
The recorded vote history shows strong, unanimous support in both chambers: the House passed the bill 135-0 and the Senate passed it 47-0. No committee transcript excerpts were provided, but the favorable committee report and unanimous floor votes suggest broad agreement on the bill’s limited scope and local focus.
There is little evidence of public contention in the available record. The main policy issues embedded in the bill are the creation of a special raffle exception for a baseball-affiliated organization, the use of geofencing and age verification for electronic ticket sales, and the decision to exempt these raffles from the usual annual raffle limit. Any concern would likely center on whether the bill gives a special privilege to a sports-related organization or whether the technology-based location restrictions are workable, but no recorded opposition appears in the vote history provided.
Impact
HB399 amends Maryland’s Criminal Law Article provisions governing gaming events and raffles by creating a Baltimore City-specific exception for organizations affiliated with a professional major league baseball team. It adds definitions for designated city agency, electronic device, and geofence, exempts these raffles from the general 12-raffle annual limit, and authorizes a city-designated permitting process for the new category of raffles. The bill also expands enforcement language so that conducting a raffle in violation of the new section remains a misdemeanor under existing law. Its practical effect is to permit a limited, locally regulated fundraising activity at Baltimore City baseball games for qualifying organizations, while imposing age, location, and permit controls.
Sentiment
The overall sentiment appears strongly favorable and noncontroversial. The bill received unanimous approval in both the House and Senate, and the committee report was favorable with amendments. The lack of recorded opposition or divided votes suggests broad bipartisan support for a narrowly tailored local fundraising measure tied to Baltimore City baseball games.
Contention
The main points of potential contention are the special carve-out for organizations affiliated with a professional baseball team, the removal of the normal raffle cap for those game-day raffles, and the use of geofencing and age-verification technology to police sales. Critics could view the bill as granting a special exception to a sports-related entity, while supporters would emphasize the limited geographic scope, charitable or civic purpose requirements, and safeguards against underage participation and misuse of proceeds. No specific objections were recorded in the provided discussion materials.