Motor vehicle collisions; collection of certain mobile telephone data, collision reports.

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Scott Surovell

MTA cannot acquire property for the Baltimore Red Line if doing so would cause involuntary residential displacement, protecting residents; effective July 1, 2025.

Failed to report from Courts of Justice with substitute (7-Y 7-N)

Summary — SB 1012

Maryland Transit Administration — Baltimore East–West Corridor — Property Acquisition

Status: Introduced (Senate Rules) — Introduced Feb 3, 2025.
Sponsor: Senator Cory V. McCray? (bill text lists “By: Senator Attar” — primary Maryland sponsor indicated as Attar).
Companions/Prior: HB 897, HB 107, HB 1137; prior-session HB 1221.
Proposed effective date in bill: July 1, 2025.

Purpose / Intent

SB 1012 prohibits the Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) from acquiring any real property for the planning, construction, operation, or maintenance of the proposed Baltimore “Red Line” east–west rail corridor if that acquisition would result in involuntary residential displacement. The bill intends to protect residents along the corridor from being forced to relocate as a consequence of property acquisition for the project.

Key provisions

Adds Section 7–718 to the Transportation Article.

Defines “Red Line” as a rail transit facility running generally east–to–west between Security Boulevard (west terminus) and Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center (east terminus) through Baltimore City and Baltimore County, in at‑grade, elevated, and/or underground configurations, and connecting to other fixed‑route transit services as appropriate.

Prohibits the MTA from acquiring any real property for the Red Line for purposes of planning, construction, operation, or maintenance where such acquisition would cause involuntary residential displacement.

Who is affected

Maryland Transit Administration — restricts use of property acquisition authority for the Red Line.

Residents and households located along the proposed Red Line alignment — intended beneficiaries, protecting them from involuntary relocation.

Property owners and developers along the corridor — impacts on sale/negotiation dynamics.

Local governments and project planners — may need to revise route alignments, designs, or procurement strategies to avoid triggering displacement.

Transit users and broader public — potential indirect impacts to project feasibility, timeline, scope, cost, and service outcomes.

Implementation, gaps, and likely impacts

The bill contains a categorical prohibition but does not define “involuntary residential displacement” or specify enforcement mechanisms, exceptions, or remedies — leaving interpretation to MTA or courts.

Practical effects could include limiting use of eminent domain for residential takings, requiring alternative alignments or design solutions (e.g., elevated or tunnel segments to avoid homes), seeking only voluntary acquisitions, or pursuing mitigation/avoidance measures.

May increase project complexity, cost, and schedule if land‑use constraints force redesigns; could also affect eligibility or conditions for federal funding or environmental review processes (e.g., NEPA).

Unclear how commercial takings, temporary construction easements, or acquisitions causing indirect displacement (e.g., economic pressure) would be treated.

Bill