HB0916 creates a new regional transportation framework for three parts of Maryland: the Baltimore region, the Capital region, and Southern Maryland. For each region, the bill establishes a transportation authority as a State instrumentality with a governing board made up of local elected officials, legislators, and transportation experts. Each authority must develop and periodically update a regional transportation plan, evaluate major transportation projects using quantitative methods, and oversee regional transportation priorities, including highways, mass transit, technology-related transportation projects, and emergency-related coordination.
The bill also creates three special, nonlapsing transportation funds—one for each region—to finance transportation facilities and projects. Those funds would receive revenue from newly imposed regional transportation authority surcharges on retail sales and uses, hotel stays, and property transfer instruments, with specified revenue-sharing formulas that direct most proceeds to the regional fund and the remainder to counties and municipalities for transportation purposes. The bill further authorizes each authority to issue bonds, notes, and other obligations backed by the dedicated revenues, while making clear that the obligations are not debts of the State or local governments.
In addition to the new regional surcharges, the bill amends tax and finance provisions to define the three regions, set surcharge rates, and exempt the new regional funds from the general rule that interest on certain special funds accrues to the General Fund. It also requires that at least 30% of each regional fund be used for transit projects each fiscal year and that expenditures be made through the State budget. The bill applies the property transfer surcharge provisions to instruments recorded or filed on or after October 1, 2026, and the act would take effect on that date.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill materials is policy-oriented and constructive, with the measure framed as a major investment in regional mobility, congestion reduction, and transportation planning. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes in the provided context, there is no direct evidence of support or opposition from debate or floor action. The bill’s structure suggests an emphasis on local control and dedicated funding, which may appeal to regional stakeholders seeking more predictable transportation financing.
Potential points of contention are likely to center on the new taxes and surcharges, the creation of additional regional authorities, and the allocation of revenue between regional funds and local governments. Some stakeholders may question the added cost to consumers, hotel guests, and property transfers, while others may debate whether the authorities should have broad bonding and planning powers or whether transportation funding should remain more centralized at the State level. The requirement that counties and municipalities use their distributions only for transportation purposes may also be a point of interest for local governments.
HB0916 would substantially amend Maryland tax, finance, and transportation law by creating a new Title 10.5 in the Transportation Article and establishing three regional transportation authorities with dedicated funding streams. It adds new regional sales/use, hotel, and property transfer surcharges, directs the resulting revenues into special nonlapsing funds, and authorizes the authorities to issue revenue-backed bonds. Counties and municipalities receiving distributions under the bill would be restricted to using those revenues for transportation purposes, and the bill also exempts the new funds from the general interest-to-General-Fund rule.
The bill appears to be generally favorable toward expanding regional transportation investment and governance, with its purpose framed around congestion reduction, mobility, safety, and broader planning goals. Because no committee testimony or votes are provided, there is no documented public opposition or support in the record supplied here. The text itself suggests a technocratic, pro-investment approach that is likely intended to appeal to regional planners, local officials, and transit advocates.
The main likely points of contention are the new tax surcharges and the creation of three regional authorities with significant planning and financing powers. Opponents may focus on the added burden on retail sales, hotel stays, and property transfers, as well as concerns about regional tax layering and the scope of authority bonding. Local governments may also scrutinize the revenue-sharing formulas and the requirement that their shares be used only for transportation, while some stakeholders may question whether the regional authorities duplicate or complicate existing State and metropolitan planning structures.