Access to Counsel in Evictions - Task Force and Special Fund
Summary
SB154 makes the Access to Counsel in Evictions Special Fund a more permanent funding mechanism for Maryland’s eviction-defense program. It changes the distribution of abandoned property funds so that, after other required transfers, the Comptroller must continue sending $14 million annually to the Special Fund rather than limiting that transfer to a fixed set of fiscal years. The bill also requires the Governor to include a $14 million annual appropriation from the Fund to the Maryland Legal Services Corporation (MLSC), which administers the program.
The bill also updates the Access to Counsel in Evictions Task Force provisions. It terminates the Task Force, removes its ongoing reporting and staffing structure, and renumbers related Real Property sections accordingly. In addition, the bill revises the effective dates so that the funding-related changes take effect later, on January 31, 2026, while the rest of the act takes effect June 1, 2025.
Impact
SB154 amends the Commercial Law Article and the Real Property Article to extend and restructure the statutory funding stream for eviction legal services. It preserves the special fund’s role in financing legal representation for eligible low-income tenants facing eviction and related proceedings, while shifting the program away from a temporary task-force-driven framework toward a more permanent funding and administration model through MLSC. The bill also affects the State’s handling of abandoned property revenues by locking in the $14 million annual transfer to the fund after other required distributions.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have broad legislative support, as reflected by strong passage in both chambers with substantial majorities. The voting history suggests general agreement with continuing state support for access to counsel in eviction cases and with maintaining the funding structure for the program. No committee transcript was provided, so there is no recorded debate to indicate organized opposition in the available materials.
Contention
The main policy issue is the use of abandoned property funds and the continued diversion of those revenues to support eviction-defense services rather than the General Fund. Another possible point of discussion is the transition from a task force model to a more permanent funding arrangement, including the termination of the Task Force and the removal of its ongoing reporting duties. The bill also changes administrative responsibility and timing, which may have mattered to stakeholders such as MLSC, tenant advocates, landlords, and housing officials, though no transcript is available to show specific arguments.