WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 980

SB 980 - This act modifies the Tort Victims' Compensation Fund by providing that in addition to the current requirements, an uncompensated tort victim shall be a person who is a United States citizen or a lawful permanent resident or who holds a lawful visa issued by the United States Department of State. The Department of Labor and Industrial Relations shall verify eligibility requirements prior to the authorization of any payment from the Fund. Additionally, this act provides that an administrative law judge may, as part of any award, determine and allow reasonable attorney's fees, but such fees shall not exceed 15% of the amount awarded to the claimant. No attorney shall ask for, contract for, or receive any sum larger than the amount allowed. This act additionally modifies those injured victims eligible for payment from the Crime Victims' Compensation Fund. Eligible injured victims are persons who, at the time of application for compensation from the Crime Victims' Compensation Fund, are: (1) A United States citizen, a lawful permanent resident, or a person lawfully present under a valid visa issued by the United States Department of State; and (2) Killed or suffers personal physical injury in Missouri as a result of the commission or attempted commission of any crime by another person; a good-faith attempt to assist a person against whom a crime is being committed or attempted; or assisting a law enforcement officer in the apprehension of a person believed by the officer to have committed or attempted to commit a crime. The Department of Public Safety shall verify eligibility requirements prior to the authorization of any payment from the Fund. This act also modifies the amount of attorneys's fees that may be awarded from 15% to 10% of the amount subrogated to the Department of Public Safety from the claimant's legal proceeding related to the crime. TRISTAN BENSON, JR.

2026 Regular Session

SB 980 would shift more Program Open Space funds to MHAA, allowing grants up to 80% of project costs with a $300,000 per‑grant cap and expanded eligible activities.

Voted Do Pass S General Laws Committee
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 980

SB 980 — Natural Resources: Maryland Heritage Areas Authority — Funding and Grants

Status: Vetoed by the Governor (Policy) — veto issued 2025-05-16
Introduced: January 28, 2025 (Sen. Corderman). Effective date (if enacted): July 1, 2025. Companion bills: HB 1327, HB 1371, HB 426.

Purpose / Intent

To change how Program Open Space (POS) funds may be transferred to and used by the Maryland Heritage Areas Authority (MHAA), expand the Authority’s eligible uses, and alter grant size/eligibility rules to increase the share of project costs MHAA grants may cover.

Key provisions (substantive changes)

  • Increased transfers to the MHAA Financing Fund:
    • Raises the State-share transfer cap from up to $3.0 million to up to $9.0 million, increasing the total POS funding potentially transferred to MHAA from up to $6.0 million to up to $12.0 million annually (when combined with the existing, separate $3.0 million pre-allocation).
  • Operating expense limit:
    • Reduces the allowable share of transferred POS funds that MHAA may use for operating expenses from up to 10% to up to 7% or $600,000, whichever is greater.
  • Repeals a prior authorization that allowed up to $300,000 of the POS transfer to be distributed to the Maryland Historical Trust (MHT) for noncapital historic preservation grants.
  • Grant ceilings and cost-share changes:
    • Caps acquisition/development grants and program grants at $300,000 maximum per grant.
    • Raises the maximum percent of project (or plan) cost MHAA grants may cover from 50% to up to 80% (applies to acquisition/development, program grants, and management plan grants).
  • Eligible activities:
    • Explicitly adds “management of certified heritage areas” to the list of activities for which MHAA may award grants and loans.
  • Technical and statutory amendments to Articles (Financial Institutions; Natural Resources) consistent with the above.

Who would be affected

  • Maryland Heritage Areas Authority (MHAA): increased funding flexibility, larger cost-share authority, new explicit eligibility for management funding, modest change to operating expense rules.
  • Maryland Historical Trust (MHT): loss of a statutory authorization for up to $300,000 in POS-derived noncapital grants.
  • Certified heritage areas, local governments, and non‑profit or private entities that apply for MHAA grants: potential access to larger percentage funding (up to 80%) but subject to a $300,000 per‑grant cap.
  • Local governments and small businesses: potential increases in local projects, preservation activity, and related contracting opportunities; fiscal note flags a potential meaningful effect for small businesses.
  • State agencies (DNR, Department of Planning, State Treasurer): administrative and budgeting implications related to POS transfers and Fund management.

Fiscal and implementation notes

  • Fiscal note (Maryland Department of Legislative Services):
    • No expected net effect on overall State finances, but the bill could require hiring additional personnel (to be funded from transferred funds).
    • Local government revenues/expenditures may increase beginning in FY 2026.
    • Reallocates how POS funds are used (more to MHAA and less, in practice, to the $300k MHT authorization).
  • Effective date (as drafted): July 1, 2025.

Procedural history (selected)

  • Introduced Jan 28, 2025; reported favorable with amendments by Budget & Taxation; passed Senate (second & third readings) in March–April 2025; recorded as vetoed by the Governor on May 16, 2025.

Practical effect (summary)

If enacted, SB 980 would shift more POS resources toward MHAA-managed heritage-area projects and allow MHAA to cover a larger share of project costs (up to 80%) while imposing a per‑grant dollar cap ($300,000). It would also prioritize MHAA management activities and remove a small, earmarked grant authorization to MHT. The net statewide fiscal impact is expected to be neutral, but distributional effects (which projects or localities receive funding) and administrative impacts would change; however, the bill was vetoed by the Governor.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.