Cecil County - Orphans' Court Judges - Compensation
Summary
HB713 revises the compensation structure for judges of the Orphans’ Court in Cecil County. Beginning in fiscal year 2027, each judge would no longer receive the fixed salary amounts currently set in state law; instead, compensation would be determined by the Cecil County Council, subject to a statutory floor of $11,000 annually. The bill also authorizes the County Council to set the Chief Judge’s additional compensation, with a minimum of $1,500 per year.
The bill further changes the travel allowance for each judge from a fixed amount in state law to an amount determined by the County Council, again with a minimum of $1,500 annually. These payments would continue to be made quarterly by the county. The act takes effect July 1, 2026, but, consistent with the Maryland Constitution, the compensation changes apply only at the start of the next term of office and do not alter pay during an existing term, except for a person appointed or elected to fill an unexpired term after the effective date.
Impact
HB713 amends Section 2-108(i) of the Estates and Trusts Article of the Annotated Code of Maryland, affecting only the Orphans’ Court judges in Cecil County. It shifts salary-setting authority from a statewide statutory schedule to the Cecil County Council, while preserving minimum compensation and travel-expense thresholds. The bill also creates a separate minimum additional payment for the Chief Judge and delays implementation until the next term of office, limiting immediate fiscal and legal effects on current officeholders.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been received favorably and passed the House unanimously, with 125 yeas and 0 nays on third reading. The committee report was favorable, and there is no recorded committee transcript indicating opposition or extended debate. Overall, the legislative record suggests broad agreement with the compensation adjustment for Cecil County’s Orphans’ Court judges.
Contention
No notable contention is reflected in the available record. The main policy choice is whether Cecil County should have local discretion to set judicial compensation and travel allowances, rather than relying on fixed amounts in state law. Any potential concern would likely center on local control versus uniformity, and on ensuring compensation remains adequate while staying within the statutory minimums, but no specific objections are documented in the provided materials.