A life-sized statue of abolitionist Harriett Tubman stands in the Old House Chamber in the State House in Annapolis. Photo by Bryan P. Sears.

Harriet Tubman was given the posthumous commission as a brigadier general in the Maryland National Guard on Monday by Gov. Wes Moore during a Veterans Day ceremony at the Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad State Park in Dorchester County.

“With each act of courage, Harriet Tubman helped bring us together as a nation and a people. She fought for a kind of unity that can only be earned through danger, risk, and sacrifice. And it is a unity we still benefit from to this day,” Moore said, according to a statement released by his office.

The commission was presented to Ernestine “Tina” Martin Wyatt, Tubman’s great-great-great-grandniece.

Tubman escaped the slavery she was born into on a Dorchester County farm. She became an abolition leader and is credited with rescuing 70 people during 13 trips to Maryland, according to the Harriett Tubman Underground Railroad Byway.

She later worked as a cook, nurse, scout and spy for the Union Army during the Civil War. According to the museum, Tubman became the first woman to “lead an armed expedition in the war.”

That expedition is credited with the liberation of 700 enslaved people.

The posthumous commission is just the latest recognition for Tubman, whose supporters have been fighting for years to have her represented on the $20 bill. In addition to the Tubman Byway on the Eastern Shore, the state in 2020 dedicated statues of her and of another Maryland native, famed abolitionist Frederick Douglass, in the Old House Chamber of the Maryland State House.

by Bryan P. Sears, Maryland Matters
November 11, 2024

Maryland Matters is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Maryland Matters maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Steve Crane for questions: [email protected]. Follow Maryland Matters on Facebook and X.

Comptroller Brooke Lierman and Lt. Gov. Aruna Miller, left, during Wednesday’s meeting of the Board of Public Works. Photo by Bryan P. Sears.

The taxman cometh for everyone.

Even the state.

For the first time in memory — perhaps ever — the Internal Revenue Service audited Maryland government. And it turns out Maryland taxpayers owe Uncle Sam at least $5.4 million for tax year 2020.

“This is a new one,” Comptroller Brooke Lierman said at Wednesday’s Board of Public Works meeting where the audit was discussed.

“It might be the first time the state has ever been audited. We looked back 30 years and it had not happened before,” she said.

State and local governments do not have income tax return filing requirements. The IRS notes that those entities are subject to employment and some excise tax filing requirements.

An IRS spokesperson declined to comment on Maryland’s situation, citing federal law on tax return confidentiality. But publicly available data shows that in fiscal 2023, the IRS said conducted 1,645 examinations — the agency’s term for an audit — of tax-exempt organizations, employee retirement plans, government entities and tax-exempt bond returns.

Initially, Maryland was on the hook for roughly $16 million.

Lierman and Lt. Gov. Aruna Miller, sitting as the Board of Public Works, unanimously approved a $5.4 million payment to resolve most of the matter. Treasurer Dereck Davis was absent from Wednesday’s meeting to attend a funeral.

Rachel Sessa, deputy comptroller for law and oversight. Photo by Bryan P. Sears.

“This [lower payment] is specifically because staff within the Office of the Comptroller and other state agencies worked tirelessly to provide and obtain documentation to the IRS to significantly reduce the amount the state owes,” said Rachel Sessa, deputy comptroller for law and oversight. “And since this is the first examination and assessment of its kind, the IRS agreed to waive penalties.”

Sessa warned that the state may still have to pay interest. The amount of that is not yet known. Sessa said state officials were scheduled to meet with the IRS Wednesday afternoon.

The penalties in tax year 2020 were related to three areas, according to Sessa.

First, nine state agencies failed to properly withhold federal taxes for some employees.

Second, a handful of state police within five agencies made contributions to deferred compensation plans that exceeded limits.

Finally, the state was unable to show the IRS that backup withholding was applied to some vendors.

Sessa said the state is implementing a series of “corrective actions” that include education and training for state agencies. She said the IRS will assist in the training, which will begin “over the next couple of months.”

Lierman said she and other state officials “are working to resolve the underpayment issue with the IRS. It occurred under the previous administration. Gov.Moore, Treasurer Davis, I, Lt. Gov. Miller, I know we’re all committed to transparency in the business of government, and … wanted to make sure that people understand what this is, where it came from, and how we are handling it.”

Board approves more public safety lawsuit settlements

The two-member board also unanimously approved nearly $900,000 to settle three cases involving the Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services. The settlements Wednesday bring the total paid out by the department to $10.5 million for the year, according to Lierman.

Joseph W. Sedtal, deputy secretary of administration for the Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services said the agency is working to improve document retention policies for both paper records and video recordings.

Joseph W. Sedtal, deputy secretary of administration for the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services. File photo by Bryan P. Sears.

“Obviously, one of the things we’ve seen before is that not having that documentation forces the department to defend a negative,” Sedtal told the board. “We’re trying to combat that through an infrastructure improvement, improving our cameras, improving our policies and retention associated with that, including now looking into ways to potentially audit the ability to retain that information, and ensure that when we say, ‘Hey, we need to hold this for a period of time,’ we’re actually doing it.”

Lierman said such policies are necessary not only to protect the state but also to ensure that incarcerated individuals are not mistreated.

“At the end of the day, it comes down to what evidence we have of what happened,” Lierman said. “We can’t allow our lawyers to be put in a position where they’re asking for video footage or sign-in sheets that have been destroyed or that were never made, because then we have put ourselves in a position where we can’t go to trial and we have to settle because there’s no evidence to prove what we what our side of the story, or to prove … to show what really happened, so that we can then discipline the employees and take appropriate action about against the employees.”

Lierman said the department needed not only to update its policies but to ensure those policies are carried out.

“It’s nice to have good policy, but what matters is actual implementation and follow through,” she said.

by Bryan P. Sears, Maryland Matters
October 30, 2024

Maryland Matters is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Maryland Matters maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Steve Crane for questions: [email protected]. Follow Maryland Matters on Facebook and X.

 Voters cast their ballots inside the Silver Spring Civic Building in Montgomery County during the 2022 elections, as election workers stand by to help. File photo by Emmett Gartner/Capital News Service

As local election boards work around the clock to recruit and train workers before early voting starts this week, some Maryland counties are facing pressure to hire more Republican election judges.

Elections officials across the state told Capital News Service they are still working through the challenge of hiring an equal number of Republican and Democratic election judges, who administer the vote and then count ballots.

“Parity is something we always aspire to,” said David Garreis, Anne Arundel County election director. “But frequently what you’re going to find is that the participation rates between the parties are very different.”

Under Maryland law, local boards of elections must make every effort to staff polling places with an equal number of judges who are registered Democrats and Republicans — although election judges who are not affiliated with either party can be used to make up the difference if officials can’t get an exact partisan match.

Striving for that balance is what Garreis and other local election officials say they are working on now.

But officials in some counties aren’t offering their recruitment numbers or providing updates to the public – even in the face of concerns from local Republicans who say they’d like to volunteer but can’t seem to get a foot in the door.

“I think they’re not being fair with me, and they’re not being transparent about the situation,” said Shawn Poulson, a Kent County Republican and former local party official who says his application to serve as a judge was sidelined by his local board.

CNS spoke with nonpartisan election officials, party leaders and would-be Republican judges in multiple counties to understand this issue.

Anne Arundel County

Garreis said his team is working tirelessly to recruit judges through events at churches and schools as well as by direct mail and social media. These efforts include partnership with both the Democratic and Republican Central Committees in Anne Arundel County.

“With our election judges, usually the first qualification is, do you have a pulse?” Garreis said.

“Because it’s usually very hard to find election judges. The only reason that we would really turn someone away is if they are at a precinct and we’ve already filled all the spots at the precinct.”

Garreis said he has hired more than 2,100 judges so far and needs to hire roughly 400 more. Of those judges, more than half are Democrats, just over a quarter are Republicans, and the rest are unaffiliated.

Registered voters need to attend a three-hour training session in person before they can serve as an election judge.

Calvert County

Kristen Scott, deputy elections administrator in Calvert County, said she has recruited 368 election judges: 181 Democrats, 140 Republicans and 47 unaffiliated. She said the uneven party split should not be of concern to voters.

“The one thing that we really do stress to our election judges is that this is a nonpartisan position,” Scott said. “When you’re in that polling place, there’s no political talk. It’s very nonpartisan, and you’re there to serve the voter, whatever party it is.”

Like Garreis, Scott said she doesn’t immediately turn away judges, but places them on a standby list. In the event that someone cannot serve, she can replace those individuals with Republicans on standby. She said she prioritizes parity on a precinct level.

Scott said that voters can also be poll watchers. Watchers, sometimes called “challengers,” register with their party and are approved to be onsite at precincts to watch election judges. Watchers are unpaid and do not interact with voters or make decisions regarding the vote, but they can report misconduct or other concerns.

Talbot County

In an Oct. 1 letter to the local board of elections, Talbot County Sheriff Joseph Gamble said he had received 25 complaints from citizens over the uneven party distribution of election judges.

Among those complaints, Gamble said, were several Republicans who wanted to serve but were instead placed on standby and told that there were no vacancies at the time. Elections aren’t under Gamble’s purview as sheriff, but he said he was weighing in due to the number of complaints he had received.

Jared DeMarinis, the state administrator of elections, quickly tried to reassure the public in a press release following Gamble’s letter.

“An election judge’s partisan affiliation does not impact or determine the outcome of the election,” he wrote. “Voters decide the outcomes of elections.”

DeMarinis could not be reached for comment on this story. But the head of the local board said the numbers are getting pretty close to even.

Tammy Stafford, Talbot County’s election director, said last week that she has hired 124 election judges, including 61 Democrats, 53 Republicans and 10 unaffiliated judges. She emphasized that these numbers are subject to change.

Stafford said that 106 of the election judges in her county are returning after having worked in the primary. She said her office continues to take applications from interested voters, but as of now, the 10 polling places across Talbot County are fully staffed.

Kent County

Poulson, 47, of Worton, said he applied to be a Republican election judge in Kent County and was placed on a standby list instead of being assigned to a polling place.

Poulson previously served as an election judge and was chair of the Kent County Republican Central Committee. After stepping down from the committee this spring, Poulson said he immediately applied to be an election judge. He said he wanted to be a chief judge – one of the two judges who run a polling place and manage other judges.

Instead, Poulson was disappointed to receive a letter last month stating he was assigned as a standby judge. Poulson said he is not aware of an update from Kent County Election Director Cheemoandia Blake.

Blake declined to speak with CNS or provide an update on the number of election judges hired in Kent County by party.

Cecil County

Gary Holmes, Cecil County’s election director, said he has fully staffed his precincts, hiring approximately 150 Republicans, 140 Democrats and 46 judges who are unaffiliated or third-party.

Although President Joe Biden won Maryland in the 2020 general election, voters in Cecil County overwhelmingly favored Donald Trump.

Holmes said that when he attends training sessions, he tells prospective election judges, “You’re not here to be political. You’re not here to express an opinion.”

Holmes said that his team is proactively fighting misinformation about the election, sharing proper links through social media and directing citizens to the state’s election rumor-tracking page.

Holmes said that the state’s rigorous system of checks and balances ensures that the vote is secure.

“We don’t care who you vote for as long as you get the chance to vote, and we can assure you that we’re very particular about how these records are being kept,” he said.

Montgomery County

Gilberto Zelaya, public relations officer at the Montgomery County Board of Elections, said that he couldn’t say how parity is shaping up between Democrats and Republicans because his team is still in the thick of recruiting.

To hire between 3,500 and 4,000 election judges, Zelaya said, his team holds an average of 500 events annually. Zelaya said he works closely with both parties and has held at least four meet-and-greet events this year at the local GOP office in Rockville.

Stacey Sauter, vice chair of the Montgomery County GOP, also plays a role in voter education and election judge recruitment.

“It’s an overwhelming task for the board of elections,” Sauter said. “And what I have witnessed so far is what they do is very fair and balanced, but they are the apparatus. You cannot control what happens with the people when they go to work at the polls.”

Sauter has run for office as a Republican and previously served as an election judge. She said she has witnessed some things she thinks call for better training. She said she once saw a woman check in to vote who was unable to speak the language or fill out the ballot.

“The question was, is this somebody who is eligible to vote?” Sauter said. “Those are the kinds of things where you could find some kind of debate or discussion on the floor, and you would want to make sure that you had a Republican and a Democrat there to be able to sort it out in an official way.”

Some election watchers see this as a troubling trend. Kate Sullivan is a member of the advocacy group Maryland Election Integrity. The group is a plaintiff in a lawsuit against the State Board of Elections for what they say is a failure to maintain voter rolls and use secure voting systems.

“We have great concerns about the [local boards of elections] following the letter of the law,” Sullivan said. “The parity requirement is in service of ensuring neither party feel disenfranchised during an election.”

Sullivan’s case against the state was dismissed on standing by a U.S. district court judge in May, but she said an appeal hearing is scheduled for December.

by Capital News Service, Maryland Matters
October 20, 2024

By Caley Fox Shannon and Morgan Leason

Maryland Matters is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Maryland Matters maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Steve Crane for questions: [email protected]. Follow Maryland Matters on Facebook and X.

Polls show overwhelming support for Question 1, the ballot question that would guarantee “reproductive freedom” as part of the state constitution, but advocates on both sides of the issue say that’s not the end of the fight.

In fact, they say, it’s a reason to fight hard until the end.

With a recent University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Institute of Politics poll showing that 69% of likely voters will vote for Question 1 and just 21% of respondents planning to vote against it, both sides of the issue say they want to ensure that their voters do not get complacent because of the seemingly insurmountable gap.

Abortion rights advocates want to keep that lead strong on Election Day and opponents need every vote they can get to try to defeat the measure in abortion-friendly Maryland.

The UMBC poll results reaffirm a widely understood reality, that Maryland voters are largely in support of protecting abortion access across the state. But polling numbers are only valuable if people get out and vote, said Erin Bradley, chair of Freedom in Reproduction-Maryland (FIRM).

Is ‘abortion’ actually on the November ballot? Breaking down Question 1

“The only way we realize those numbers is if everybody does it. If people get really satisfied with the number and that wide margin of error, and they may stay home, then we run the risk of not winning,” she said.

“That’s really the risk here: That everyone feels that way, and far too many people stay home and we wind up losing — not because people aren’t supportive, not because it’s the will of Marylanders, but just because everyone was really comfortable with the nice lead and decided it was safe to skip it,” Bradley said.

She said that the promising poll numbers do not mean FIRM advocates will relax their advocacy efforts. In fact, it’s reason to keep them going.

On the other end of the abortion spectrum, anti-abortion advocates are also working to ensure that their voters are not discouraged by the apparent popularity of Question 1 and decide to sit out the election as a result.

Jeffrey Trimbath, president of the Maryland Family Institute, said that as the minority position in Maryland, anti-abortion groups are “always concerned about complacency of voters.”

“I think that’s always the case for us. Perhaps especially so with this question,” Trimbath said. “And so, it’s up to us to try to stay engaged and educate as many people as we can and to provide hope for people who have a pro-life perspective on these things.”

While the advocates fret over turnout in November, Jacob Rubashkin, deputy editor for Inside Elections, says they shouldn’t worry too much — abortion is not the only draw for Maryland voters this election.

The U.S. Senate race between former Gov. Larry Hogan (R) and Prince Georges County Executive Angela Alsobrooks (D) will draw people to vote, but the presidential election is the real pull.

“Ultimately, the race at the top of the ticket is what’s going to drive voter turnout here, more so than any sort of down-ballot race or measure,” Rubashkin said. “Especially in a state like Maryland. There are a couple things about Maryland that are somewhat more unique: high voter turnout historically, high levels of civic engagement … and one of the most anti-Trump states.

“In an election with Trump on the ballot and a blockbuster Senate race, I don’t think that confidence in the passage of the abortion rights ballot measure is going to depress turnout at all, because it’s only a small part of the calculations,” Rubashkin said.

Still, abortion rights and anti-abortion advocates are pushing forward in their campaigns just to be sure.

Trimbath said that campaign efforts to oppose the ballot measure from now until Election Day will focus on letting voters know about their grievances with the ballot measure, one of which is a claim that it would create a legal loophole that result in any number of far-reaching possible and unforeseen scenarios.

“For us it means that we need to get to as many people as we can and tell them the truth of what this means,” Trimbath said.

Group supporting abortion ballot question launches digital ad

Rubashkin said that the results of the UMBC poll will not likely discourage any anti-abortion advocate that was going to vote against Question 1, since they knew going in that “you’re already the underdog. You understand you are the minority of the state.”

“And so from the beginning, I think you’ve probably been operating with the assumption that it probably was going to be an unsuccessful effort on your part,” Rubashkin said. “So, I don’t think another poll showing you down 30, 40 points is going to do all that much difference on whether you are going to show up or not.”

That said, Bradley with FIRM said that her organization is continuing outreach efforts in the days leading up to the election to ensure that their supporters aren’t swayed by the opposition, so the ballot measure succeeds with the current projected lead.

FIRM just launched a $500,000 digital ad campaign in support of the measure, which is the largest media expenditure on behalf of the ballot question so far.

“It’s really just reminding people about the importance of this. It is our time, it is our opportunity,” Bradley said. “69% of Marylanders, we’re led to believe through polling, support this. It’s their opportunity to make sure that it gets across the finish line.”

by Danielle J. Brown, Maryland Matters
October 14, 2024

Maryland Matters is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Maryland Matters maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Steve Crane for questions: [email protected]. Follow Maryland Matters on Facebook and X.

Maryland voters will have the chance to weigh in this fall on Question 1, a ballot measure that would amend the state constitution to enshrine “reproductive freedom,” a change supporters say will protect access to abortion, among other procedures.

But anti-abortion advocates say there’s a problem: The word “abortion” does not show up in the proposed amendment language.

That’s true. The word “abortion” will not appear on ballots this election cycle, even though the constitutional amendment is billed by advocates to protect one’s right to an abortion.

Opponents call that a legal loophole “you can drive a Mack Truck … through,” and have put forth any number of far-reaching possible scenarios the amendment could allow.

Supporters say opponents are just “making stuff up” to confuse voters on an issue that has overwhelming support – a recent poll said 69% of those surveyed plan to vote for Question 1, compared to 21% who will vote no. Even though the word abortion is not on ballot, they said, there’s no way the amendment can be interpreted otherwise.

Secretary of State Susan Lee certified the official ballot language in June. It states, in part, that “the proposed amendment confirms an individual’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom, including but not limited to the ability to make and effectuate decisions to prevent, continue or end the individual’s pregnancy.”

Erin Bradley, chair of Freedom in Reproduction-Maryland (FIRM), said supporters would have preferred the term “abortion” be used in the ballot language, but it’s not a large issue for them.

“National polling experts have shared with me that when the word ‘abortion’ is in the language, it performs better,” she said. “So, we would have liked to have said, ‘You can prevent a pregnancy through birth control, you can end a pregnancy through abortion,’ but it doesn’t.”

Bradley said the ballot measure, if successful, would still protect the right to an abortion even though it “doesn’t say it outright.”

“The ballot language speaks to the person having the right to make and effectuate their own decisions about preventing a pregnancy – so that covers birth control. About maintaining their pregnancy unfettered – so staying pregnant as they would like and starting a life as they would like. Or to end a pregnancy – which covers abortion,” Bradley said.

Anti-abortion advocates counter that the ballot measure is not limited to just abortions but “paves the way for all kinds of” other medical procedures, according to Jeffrey Trimbath, president of the Maryland Family Institute.

Mail-in voting has already started and almost 70% of Marylanders in a recent poll said they are broadly in support of “adding an individual’s right to reproductive freedom to the Maryland state constitution.” That leaves Trimbath and other opponents with a steep climb to convince a majority of Marylanders to vote against Question 1.

They have latched onto the fact that “abortion” doesn’t appear in the amendment language “because, fundamentally, it’s not about abortion.”

“It’s about undermining parental rights,” he said.

Trimbath and other anti-abortion organizations, like Maryland Right to Life and Health Not Harm MD, say the ballot measure does not explicitly exclude minors, and would overstep a parent’s ability to “influence the health care decision of their kids, and that includes abortion,” he said.

He also argues that the bill language would include gender-affirming care by “being able to take away reproductive function.”

“And that certainly is in the transgender space, where you have hormones and surgeries that do these things,” Trimbath said. “The fact that the word ‘abortion’ doesn’t appear tells us it’s not primarily about that subject, it’s about undermining parental rights.”

He said that as written, the ballot initiative isn’t clear on “what it includes or doesn’t include.”

“‘Including but not limited to…’ My goodness, you can drive a Mack Truck, legally speaking, through that phrase,” Trimbath said. “So we think that this just paves the way for all kinds of things.

“We don’t know what it includes or doesn’t include,” he said. “And you can try to guess, but I would take the amendment at its word – at its expansive ordinance.”

Katie Curran O’Malley, retired Baltimore City District Court judge and current executive director of the Women’s Law Center of Maryland, agrees that the ballot language is broad, but says it is “not vague at all.”

“People get hung up on that sentence that says it confirms an individual’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom ‘including but not limited to,’” she said. “And then they just start making stuff up and saying that means there’s maybe gender-affirming care.

“Not using the word ‘abortion’ is intended to reflect the broad sort of reproductive health services that people need to have protected, that are being attacked now,” O’Malley said. “I would argue that this language is not vague at all – it is broad though. It has to capture those large number of reproductive services that people want to have.”

She noted that while transgender individuals may still need access to abortion and other services, gender-affirming care is separate from reproductive health care.

“It says clearly in the amendment – decisions to prevent, continue or end an individual’s pregnancy… all of those reproductive health services which are completely different from gender-affirming care,” she said.

Bradley with FIRM said the ballot initiative does not cover gender-affirming care or override current state law about minors receiving medical care without parental consent.

“What this does not do: it does not change anything in existing law or statute about parental notification, who can and cannot give or provide an abortion, it doesn’t change any of the medical standards or any of the practices related to the provision of health care,” she said. “Only that no one can interfere with your right to have that health care.”

But Trimbath counters a change to the Maryland Constitution would trump state statute.

“Since it … will amend our state’s constitution, by definition, it will be the supreme law of the land. It will supersede every other state statute having to do for health care with minors,” he said.

Sharon Blugis, founder and legislative director of Reproductive Justice Maryland, says opponents are clutching at straws, and she is not surprised they are looping parental rights concerns and transgender issues in to their arguments against the amendment.

“This is their MO — it’s what they do. It’s the same stuff over and over and over and over. Doesn’t have to be true for them to do it,” she said. “There is not one iota or anything that would allow a child to have any kind of sex operation.”

“It’s outrageous, but it works. It won’t hit in this state as much as it will in Ohio, Missouri or Florida,” she said. “But it gets people all worked up if they’ve never actually read the bill … or the ballot language.”

By Danielle J. Brown

The Easton town council heard a sobering report from two leaders of the Neighborhood Service Center about a pending crisis in seniors and low-income households’ ability to afford heating costs this winter. Executive Director Marilyn Neal and MEAP/EUSP Director Cardeaner Robinson presented the realities and consequences of a drop in state assistance funding to the council.

The primary source of help for those struggling with high energy costs for many years, the state-funded Maryland Energy Assistance Program, has seen dramatic cuts in their budget, leading to a 70% decrease in kerosene benefits, a 75% decrease in heating fuel, and propane, and a 50% decrease in electric subsidies.

This has left many struggling to afford heating costs, with the Neighborhood Service Center already exhausted 85% of its funding to fill the gap.

The NSC has requested $50,000 in support from the town to help alleviate the crisis.

This highlight video is approximately 13 minutes in length. 

The Maryland Department of Juvenile Services today announced the launch of the Commission on Juvenile Justice Reform and Emerging Best Practices, a statewide commission to review and report on juvenile services, facilities, and programs in Maryland. In parallel, the department also announced reforms to its detention policies and launched new supportive programming for justice-involved youth.

“The Maryland Department of Juvenile Services is focused on promoting accountability, rehabilitation, and preventing justice-involved young people from reoffending,” said Maryland Department of Juvenile Services Secretary Vincent Schiraldi. “Using a data-informed approach and in partnership with our legislative leaders, law enforcement, community leaders, and other system stakeholders, we are committed to working with the Commission on Juvenile Justice Reform to build safer and stronger communities.”

Authorized by the passage of House Bill 814 and signed into law by Governor Moore in May 2024, the commission reflects the Moore-Miller Administration’s commitment to making Maryland safer by holding accountable and providing comprehensive rehabilitative support for youth who are justice-involved. The commission will be housed within the Governor’s Office of Crime Prevention and Policy and will hold its first meeting in October.

In addition to reviewing and reporting on juvenile services and facilities, the 26-member commission is charged with reviewing programs to divert children from the juvenile justice system. The commission will also review and report on a number of high-priority juvenile justice policies, including support and programming for girls in the juvenile justice system; the use of child-in-need-of-supervision petitions; the number of petitions authorized or denied by jurisdiction; and wait times for placement of children in facilities.

In parallel with the launch of the commission’s work, the department also announced the following reforms to its detention policies and launch of supportive programming for justice-involved youth:

• All youth who are referred to the department after being accused of a violent felony and who are not detained will be placed on electronic monitoring prior to their initial court appearance.

• All youth who are already on electronic monitoring and are charged with a violent felony will be detained.

• “CARE”—or Community Assistance for the Release Eligible—is a new program that will work with system-involved youth who are neither detained nor placed on community detention to support them and their families and provide service referrals.

• The Detention Diversion Advocacy Program will support youth who are placed by the courts in the community while their cases are pending with intensive supervision support from credible messengers .

The new supportive programming initiatives build upon the department’s ongoing reforms, including:

Establishment of the Thrive Academy, which is focused on justice-involved youth who are at the highest risk of gun violence. Thrive provides heightened supervision by specialized case managers and life coaches, many of whom have been formerly incarcerated themselves, in addition to a robust range of services, supports, and opportunities to create pathways for success. Maryland is the first juvenile system in the country to launch such a gun violence prevention initiative. Thrive was recognized in August with the prestigious Inspiration Innovation Award from the Council of Juvenile Justice Administrators.

$17 million investment in a continuum of community programs for youth. Authorized by the General Assembly for Fiscal Year 2025, the department is investing in a robust array of services, supports and opportunities for youth across the state to assist with rehabilitation and ensure public safety. The new investment marks an increase over the previous administration’s approach, which depleted community programming and under-spent its budget by an average of $13 million dollars per year.