Revenue Stabilization Account - Transfer of Funds - State Disaster Recovery Fund
HB0953 authorizes the Governor, with approval from the Board of Public Works, to transfer money from Maryland’s Revenue Stabilization Account (the state’s rainy day fund) to the State Disaster Recovery Fund. The bill amends the disaster recovery fund statute to expressly include transfers from the Revenue Stabilization Account as a source of funding, alongside existing sources such as budget appropriations, Catastrophic Event Account transfers, repayments, reimbursements, and interest earnings.
The bill also amends the Revenue Stabilization Account statute to create a new exception to the general rule governing transfers out of that account. Under current law, the Governor may transfer funds from the account to support General Fund operations, subject to certain balance thresholds and legislative authorization. HB0953 adds authority for transfers from the account to the State Disaster Recovery Fund, so long as the transfer would not reduce the account below 5% of estimated General Fund revenues for that fiscal year and the Board of Public Works approves the transfer. The act takes effect June 1, 2026.
HB0953 changes Maryland law in two places: the Public Safety Article governing the State Disaster Recovery Fund and the State Finance and Procurement Article governing the Revenue Stabilization Account. It expands the permissible uses of the rainy day fund by allowing transfers to a dedicated disaster recovery fund, which may increase the state’s flexibility to respond to major emergencies and recovery costs without relying solely on annual appropriations or federal reimbursements. The bill does not alter the 5% minimum balance protection for the Revenue Stabilization Account, but it does create a specific statutory pathway for disaster-related transfers.
The available record suggests the bill was noncontroversial and received executive approval, ultimately becoming Chapter 450. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes in the provided materials, there is no evidence of significant opposition or debate in the available context. The bill’s purpose appears to have been broadly framed as a fiscal preparedness measure to support disaster recovery funding.
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. Potential areas of concern, based on the bill text, would be the use of the state’s reserve account for disaster recovery rather than only for general budget stabilization, and whether such transfers could reduce long-term fiscal flexibility. However, the bill preserves the 5% reserve floor and requires Board of Public Works approval, which likely addresses some concerns about overuse of the account.