Baltimore County - Residential Real Property - Moratorium on Assessment Increases and Review of Assessment Practices and Methodology
HB 791 would place a temporary cap on increases in the assessed value of residential real property in Baltimore County for taxable years beginning after June 30, 2026 and before July 1, 2028. During that period, residential assessments could not rise above the prior value unless one of several exceptions applies, including an owner-initiated zoning change, a change in use or character, substantial improvements adding at least $100,000 in value, a correction of an assessment error, termination of a residential use assessment, or a subdivision of the property.
The bill also directs the State Department of Assessments and Taxation to hire an independent third party by December 1, 2027 to study the Department’s residential real property assessment practices and methodology. The third party must recommend changes needed to ensure best practices, and the Department must report the study results and any implementation actions to the Governor and General Assembly. The bill is a targeted local property tax measure affecting residential homeowners in Baltimore County and the state agency responsible for property assessments.
HB 791 would temporarily override ordinary assessment growth rules for Baltimore County residential property by limiting annual assessed-value increases for a two-year period, subject to specified exceptions. It would also add a new oversight and review requirement for the State Department of Assessments and Taxation, requiring an outside study of assessment practices and a formal report to state leaders. The bill would affect Baltimore County homeowners, assessors, and local property tax administration, while leaving broader state assessment law in place outside the county-specific moratorium.
Based on the available context, the bill appears to be in an early stage and has only been scheduled for a House hearing, with no recorded votes or committee testimony provided. The measure’s structure suggests support from sponsors concerned about assessment increases and the fairness or consistency of assessment practices, but the absence of transcripts or votes means there is no documented public sentiment in the record provided. Overall, the bill appears to be framed as a consumer/property-tax relief and oversight proposal.
The main points of contention are likely to be the moratorium on assessment increases itself and the scope of the exceptions. Supporters may view the bill as necessary relief for homeowners and a way to ensure fair assessment practices, while opponents may argue that freezing assessments could reduce local tax revenue, interfere with normal valuation processes, or create inequities among taxpayers. The mandated independent study may also draw scrutiny from those who question whether the Department’s current methodology is flawed enough to justify outside review or a county-specific intervention.