Companies, trade groups and nonprofits hire high-priced lobbyists to testify at public hearings and run ad campaigns — all in the effort to advocate for their positions on all sorts of critical issues up for debate in Annapolis.

[ READ MORE about our investigation and dig into Sun lobbying databases at baltimoresun.com/lobbying ]

Lobbyists also operate behind the scenes — meeting with lawmakers or officials in Gov. Wes Moore’s administration in the hallways of the historic State House, over steakhouse dinners and at fundraisers for elected officials’ campaigns.

The Baltimore Sun analyzed thousands of new disclosures filed with the Maryland State Ethics Commission, along with the data behind more than 40,000 lobbying reports from the last five-and-a-half years, to get a better understanding of the work of lobbyists in Maryland.

Here’s what we found.

Lobbying spending continues to hit new records

Corporations, trade groups and nonprofits combined to spend $58 million on lobbying in the last two months of 2024 and the first four months of 2025 — a period that includes the annual 90-day lawmaking session.

That was $2.76 million more than the previous year and $9.1 million more than two years ago, The Sun found.

The biggest spenders were Constellation Energy, whose $793,000 was 33% more than the same period covering the 2024 session, and the Maryland Chamber of Commerce, whose $713,000 represented a 257% increase since 2022. Both organizations had much on the line in 2025, with business taxes and energy policies at the forefront.

Other new and notable spenders included Kiewit Infrastructure, the company rebuilding the Francis Scott Key Bridge; and Stonewall Capital, the developer behind the ONE Westport project in South Baltimore.

Read the full story here: Special interests spent $58 million to influence Maryland officials during 2025 legislative session

A focus on taxes and alcohol in grocery stores

The $3.3 billion hole in the state budget dominated many conversations in Annapolis this year, spurring even more than the typical avalanche of lobbying around the state’s tax-and-spend plan.

The Chamber of Commerce and other business groups fought back on a variety of tax proposals. A corporate tax rule known as “combined reporting,” which proponents say would close a long-existing loophole, was shelved. And a broad 2.5% sales tax on business-to-business services was put aside for a narrower 3% tax on certain technology services.

The Maryland Retailers Alliance, whose $625,190 in lobbying expenses was the third highest, also significantly increased its lobbying efforts while focusing on those taxes and other policies like the state ban on selling alcohol in grocery stores.

The alliance seized on Moore’s statement in December that the law should be changed. And though legislative leaders quickly made it clear that it wouldn’t be a priority this year, the alliance stepped up its lobbying on the issue. All four of the new lobbyists it hired and collectively paid $119,000 only reported the alcohol bills as their focus.

Read the full story here: How Maryland lobbyists influenced debate on taxes, alcohol in grocery stores, other business interests

A string of other wins

Other companies with large lobbying budgets saw advancements for their causes

Northeast Maglev, a company seeking to break ground on a high-speed magnetic levitation train that would run from Washington, D.C., to New York City, routinely pays Annapolis lobbyist Gerry Evans more than any other company pays a lobbyist in Maryland — $340,000 for the latest six-month period. The company’s big win this year was getting the support of Moore, who traveled to Japan in April and rode the bullet train that inspired the effort in Maryland.

The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, a trade group representing car manufacturers, spent more than six times as much as the previous year in a pressure campaign to delay Maryland’s transition to electric vehicles. The legislation failed, but an executive order from Moore in early April had the same outcome.

Other wins were lower profile. The Baltimore Orioles successfully repealed a law that prohibited the team from conducting 50/50 raffles at every home game. Health care advocates helped expand a state board that aims to make medications more affordable.

Read the full story here: From Maglev to the Orioles, here’s how companies paid to influence Maryland government in 2025

Embattled gaming companies hire lobbyists to expand in Maryland

Two companies that got into the lobbying game in the last year have a checkered history in Maryland and in neighboring Washington, D.C.

Intralot, an international gaming company based in Greece, and another local gaming company, known as VSC, both paid top dollar for Maryland lobbyists while they were under investigation and eventually fined for what the district’s attorney general called an “elaborate scheme” related to their work in online sports betting.

VSC’s lobbying expenses came as it secured a Maryland mobile sports wagering license in 2024. Intralot’s came as it started bidding on a new, lucrative contract to run Maryland’s lottery, The Sun found.

Read the full story here: Gaming companies that allegedly deceived DC officials increased lobbying while looking to expand in Maryland

Lobbyists increased their campaign donations by 75%

With about $2.6 million donated to the campaigns of Maryland officials, lobbyists have increased their campaign spending supporting the same officials they’re trying to influence, The Sun found. Those donations since the 2022 election represented a nearly 75% increase compared to the same period in the last four-year term.

Moore, House Speaker Adrienne A. Jones, Senate President Bill Ferguson, all Democrats, and a litany of key legislative committee chairs were the largest recipients.

Although the donations are legal, campaign finance and ethics experts say they can lead to the perception of pay-for-play, which has prompted some states to pass stricter laws.

Read the full story here: Lobbyists increase donations to Maryland politicians by 75% since last election

Have a news tip? Contact Sam Janesch at sjanesch@baltsun.com, (443) 790-1734 and on X as @samjanesch.

The spike in donations has helped pad the campaign war chests of Gov. Wes Moore, top leaders in the Maryland General Assembly and hundreds of other rank-and-file lawmakers or local officials before another important election next year in 2026, The Sun found.

[ SEARCH DATABASES: Lobbyist donations to Maryland politicians | Companies that lobby most in Maryland ]

It’s also reflective of the complex — and generally spreading — web of money involved in Maryland policymaking.

“From an optics standpoint, it is concerning if you have powerful industries or powerful interest groups that are contributing a lot of money and then getting favorable regulatory outcomes,” said Eric Petry, a campaign finance expert at the Brennan Center for Justice.

Companies with a stake in decisions made by state lawmakers have spent millions of dollars every year on lobbying, including $58 million in the latest six-month period covering this year’s 90-day session, according to The Sun’s review of thousands of lobbying disclosures. That spending includes lobbyists’ often lucrative compensation, ad campaigns and meals with legislators.

At the same time, lobbyists and the firms they run have increasingly donated to politicians’ campaigns, The Sun found. Such donations have been limited or barred in other states. And they’re prohibited, along with all other donations, from going to Maryland lawmakers during the annual session in order to avoid real or perceived pay-for-play.

But the timing and size of those donations — often large amounts changing hands right before the session begins in January — can still create a perception of corruption and erode public trust, good-government advocates say.

“Whether there’s an actual quid-pro-quo or not, there’s a question,” Petry said, “and it raises legitimate concerns in the public eye of why decisions are being made.”

Petry called the increase in Maryland “pretty staggering,” though he said he was unfamiliar with whether there have been similar increases in other states.

The biggest beneficiary

Twice-yearly disclosures to the Maryland State Ethics Commission are designed to highlight how lobbyists are involved in shaping policies both in public and behind closed doors.

They also reveal an interest in shaping politicians — and usually those in powerful roles.

Moore has collected the most money from registered lobbyists, $285,171, since he launched his campaign for governor in 2021, The Sun found.

About $145,000 of that was donated while he was a candidate. Another $140,000 came after his election and as he began governing.

Of the 143 lobbyists or firms who contributed to Moore, the most amount of money has come from some of the highest-paid and most sought-after lobbyists in the state. Those include:

• Tim Perry, whose client list features United Healthcare, Washington Gas and FirstEnergy;
• Gerry Evans, whose list includes the transportation group Northeast Maglev and the wind energy company Orsted;
• Major Riddick, who represents Cigna;
• and Bruce Bereano, who represents many clients pursuing state contracts.

They were among the roughly dozen lobbyists who gave Moore’s campaign the $6,000 maximum donation, or close to it, since he took office, The Sun found.

Moore, a first-time elected official and the most prominent political figure in the state, has been a successful fundraiser on multiple fronts. The lobbyists’ donations represent a relatively small portion of his overall fundraising — which amounted to more than $4.1 million last year for his own campaign account.

But lobbyists’ own donations don’t paint the entire picture. Companies that hire them also frequently make large campaign donations, which are not reported to the State Ethics Commission but are reported separately by candidates and businesses to the State Board of Elections.

In some cases, those contributions can vastly exceed the normal limits — like when Moore’s special inauguration committee in 2023 received more than two dozen donations of $30,000, including from Exelon and its subsidiary, Baltimore Gas and Electric; Amazon; and a political committee run by the state’s largest teachers’ union.

“Making campaign contributions is one way lobbyists build relationships with politicians,” said Michael Beckel, research director for the Washington, D.C.-based reform group Issue One. “Politicians need money for their campaigns, and lobbyists want to curry favor with lawmakers. This incentivizes politicians and lobbyists alike to become entangled in a web of access, influence and money.”

Legislative leaders not far behind

It wasn’t immediately clear if previous Maryland governors also saw an influx in such donations after they first won office. Data from after former Gov. Larry Hogan’s reelection win in 2018 does not show a similar increase, though Hogan did not have another campaign in sight at the time. (The data also doesn’t include fundraising for Hogan’s second inauguration in 2019, when Exelon’s $100,000 was among several large donations from corporations.)

It is not uncommon, however, for newly prominent politicians to start attracting money from powerful interests.

House Speaker Adrienne A. Jones and Senate President Bill Ferguson were the second and third-largest recipients of lobbyists’ donations behind Moore, with about $100,000 and $91,000 in contributions, respectively, since November 2022.

After they assumed their leadership roles in 2019, their fundraising operations skyrocketed, largely because of individuals and groups with something at stake during the session, according to The Sun’s review of their campaign finance disclosures.

Ferguson, a Democrat representing South Baltimore, went from raising $103,000 in both 2017 and 2018, to $721,000 in 2019, The Sun found. Almost all of those 2019 donations were made in November and December, immediately after his selection as the top Senate leader and before the next session. It was also still three years away from the next election.

Jones, a Baltimore County Democrat, similarly went from raising an average of $71,000 per year before her selection as speaker to raising $753,400 afterward.

Lobbyist disclosures show Jones has collected $248,000 and Ferguson has collected $210,000 from lobbyists and their firms since late 2018. Other campaign finance records show additional high-dollar contributions from the companies that hire the lobbyists.

For example, the Alliance for Automotive Innovation donated $2,500 and DoorDash donated $2,000 to Ferguson’s campaign just before the start of this year’s session in January, according to the Senate president’s most recent campaign filing. Those donations don’t appear in the lobbying disclosures, which showed both organizations significantly increasing their spending on other lobbying activities.

Both went on to get key wins in the following months. The alliance, a trade group representing car manufacturers, saw Moore sign an executive order that delayed the implementation of Maryland’s electric vehicle mandate. And DoorDash fought a proposed 75-cent fee on online retail deliveries, which lawmakers removed from Moore’s original budget proposal.

“The problem there is that if you’re seeing a huge uptick in lobbyist contributions right before the legislative session … It raises at least the perception that there’s some sort of pay-to-play going on, or purchasing access, purchasing influence,” Petry said.

Other legislators who chair important committees and help craft the state budget have been the other top recipients of lobbyists’ donations, according to The Sun’s review.

Sen. Craig Zucker helms the process for developing the capital budget, where billions of dollars are allocated every year for public and private projects. He has received the most from lobbyists behind Jones and Ferguson — $68,700 — since the 2022 election. Sen. Guy Guzzone, who chairs the rest of the budget process for his chamber, received $67,900 while his counterpart in the House, Del. Ben Barnes, received $55,750.

Dels. C.T. Wilson, Jheanelle Wilkins and Vanessa Atterbeary; and Sens. Pam Beidle, Brian Feldman, Jeff Waldstreicher, Will Smith and Dawn Gile — most of whom chair key committees — all received between $40,000 and $66,000 in donations from lobbyists. Nearly four-dozen others received at least $10,000.

In a state where Democrats have a supermajority in both the House and the Senate, all the top recipients of lobbyist donations were Democrats. But Republicans have benefited as well. Senate Republican Leader Steve Hershey received more than $35,600 from lobbyists, and Sens. J.B. Jennings and Justin Ready received nearly $27,000 and nearly $20,000, respectively. House Republican Leader Jason Buckel received $15,650.

Transparency and accountability

Experts say transparency and other guardrails are crucial for fostering public trust when powerful interests prop up politicians.

And though Maryland’s disclosure laws stack up well, they say, there are areas where other states have gone further.

In California, lobbyists are barred from donating to state officials’ campaigns. Some contractors or businesses seeking contracts are also limited in what they can donate — $500 maximum while the process is pending as well as in the year before and after the final decision — to officials who have a role in the decision.

In Massachusetts, lobbyists face a maximum $200 donation limit, which is one-fifth of the maximum for candidate political action committees and far less than the $5,000 maximum for state party committees.

Beckel, of Issue One, said there’s been an appetite to make reforms among voters in both parties. He pointed to 2016, when both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump rose to political prominence by railing against the influence of money in politics. Though Trump originally vowed to self-fund his campaign and said he couldn’t be “bought,” he quickly began accepting donations and corruption allegations have littered his time in office. Sanders has continued to rail against corporate money.

“There are a lot of voters left, right and center who are frustrated by the access and influence they see big money having in politics,” Beckel said.

Have a news tip? Contact Sam Janesch at sjanesch@baltsun.com, (443) 790-1734 and on X as @samjanesch.

Though state laws require the disclosure of how they operate — and how much they spend doing so — it can be difficult for the public to make sense of the thousands of transparency reports that are filed every year.

The Baltimore Sun analyzed the data behind tens of thousands of disclosures from several years to better understand which special interests are increasing their presence in Maryland.

Read the series and its key findings here. And search the tables below that show the top-spending companies and the Maryland politicians who received the most campaign contributions from registered lobbyists.

Have a news tip? Contact Sam Janesch at sjanesch@baltsun.com, (443) 790-1734 and on X as @samjanesch.

Have a news tip? Contact Sam Janesch at sjanesch@baltsun.com, (443) 790-1734 and on X as @samjanesch.

The tax increases — which also apply to vending machine sales, capital gains and more — are part of the most significant rewrite of Maryland’s tax code in years.

Though leaders like Gov. Wes Moore previously set a “very high bar” for increasing taxes, the state budget that goes into effect Tuesday included more than $1.1 billion in new recurring tax revenue to help balance a roughly $3.3 billion deficit.

Here’s what’s in store for Marylanders, from the largest tax changes to the smallest.

‘Tech tax’

A broad expansion of Maryland’s 6% sales tax — one that would have lowered the overall rate while adding previously exempt products and services — didn’t get close to the finish line during the 90-day legislative session in Annapolis this year.

But a more narrow expansion into certain technology services did pass in a form that critics are calling a “tech tax.”

The 3% tax will apply to services like data storage and processing, software publishing and website hosting. Independent state analysts have said it will raise $482 million in its first year.

It will largely impact business-to-business transactions, which business owners and their lobbyists have said will hurt a key industry where Moore and others are prioritizing for economic growth.

Income tax changes

Changes around personal income taxes will affect the highest number of Marylanders, raising about $350 million in the process. The impacts are expected to be relatively modest both for the larger number of people who stand to benefit and the small number of wealthy earners who will pay more.

Under the changes, the maximum tax rate of 5.75% on individuals making at least $250,000 will increase with the addition of two higher brackets — 6.25% on individuals making at least $500,000; and 6.5% on individuals making more than $1 million.

The value of the Maryland standard deduction will also increase from $2,800 to $3,350 for individual filers. And itemized deductions for taxpayers making more than $200,000 (or $100,000 if married and filing separately) will start to be phased out.

The net effect: About 60% of taxpayers will see their state income tax liability decrease by an average of $43, and one-third of filers will see no change, according to an analysis by the Maryland comptroller’s office using 2023 tax data.

The smallest pool of taxpayers — about 169,000 who make up 5.7% of all returns — will pay an average of $1,849 more.

Another area targeting the wealthiest Marylanders is a new 2% surcharge on capital gains income for those with more than $350,000 in household income. Most of the $229 million in expected revenue from that fee will go to the depleted transportation budget.

Cannabis

The sales tax on cannabis products will increase from 9% to 12%.

Lawmakers set the original rate two years ago after voters overwhelmingly approved the sale of recreational-use cannabis for adults. Some hoped to keep the rate even lower to avoid customers being incentivized to continue purchasing cannabis illegally.

Cannabis used for medicinal purposes is not subject to the tax, which amounted to more than $72 million in 2024. The revenue is mostly used for funds aimed at supporting community initiatives, with the remainder going to the state’s general fund.

Sports wagering

Taxes on sports betting are increasing from 15% to 20%.

Legalized by voters in 2020, sports betting is a booming industry in Maryland and elsewhere, with $5.8 billion in wagers through the first 11 months of the fiscal year that ended Monday, according to the Maryland Lottery and Gaming Control Agency.

Tax revenue has increased as a result — from $54.6 million in 2024 to $79.7 million during the same period in the 2025 fiscal year — with proceeds mostly going to the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future education reform.

Snack foods and advertisement images

Vending machines and visual advertisements are other targets of smaller sales tax increases.

Though previously exempt, “snack food” purchased in vending machines will now be subject to the 6% tax. That includes, according to the law, potato chips and sticks, corn chips, pretzels, cheese puffs and curls, pork rinds, extruded pretzels and chips, popped popcorn and nuts and edible seeds.

Milk, yogurt and fresh fruit and vegetables purchased from vending machines will still be exempt from the sales tax.

Officials expect to raise $9.1 million off the change. Repealing other sales tax exemptions on photographic or artistic material used in advertising, and on sales of precious metal coins or bullion, are expected to raise another $18.7 million and $2.5 million, respectively.

Vehicle fees

Officials have struggled to find a way to fund Maryland’s expansive transportation agenda and even routine maintenance upgrades, some of which have been cut in the last two years because of limited money.

Though ideas like toll increases and a 75-cent fee on Amazon-style deliveries have been shelved, a variety of new or increased transportation fees aim to raise about $500 million annually.

• The certificate of title fee for new and used vehicles will double from $100 to $200.
• The 6% vehicle excise tax will increase to 6.5%.
• A new 3.5% excise tax will go into effect for rental vehicles. A discounted registration rate for rental vehicles will also be eliminated.
  Vehicle Emissions Inspection Program fees will increase from $14 to $30 and be increased further according to the rate of inflation.
• The definition of historic vehicles, which have specialty tags, will be limited to the 1999 model year or earlier, making any “historic” vehicle more recent than that subject to other fees.
• A new $5 fee for new tires will be enacted halfway through the fiscal year, on Jan. 1.

Increases to vehicle registration fees that were passed in 2024 and scheduled to be phased-in over multiple years will also be accelerated to be fully enacted this year.

Have a news tip? Contact Sam Janesch at sjanesch@baltsun.com, (443) 790-1734 and on X as @samjanesch.

Maryland lawmakers introduced and fast-tracked the 3% tax with limited public input in the final weeks of the 90-day session earlier this year in order to help fill a $3.3 billion deficit.

Businesses — now universally dependent on software, data and IT services — protested, saying the tax would decimate their finances and risk losing what Gov. Wes Moore has identified as a key sector for economic growth.

Proponents, on the other hand, said it was a compromise — one that modernizes Maryland’s tax code by imposing a tax rate on select services at a rate that’s half as much as the larger 6% sales tax.

Here’s how Maryland plans to implement the new tax, according to guidance, emergency regulations and other resources from the office of Comptroller Brooke Lierman, the state’s chief tax collector.

What falls under the new tax?

Maryland already applies its sales tax to a wide range of products, including digital products. Modern-day digital purchases of everything from e-books to ringtones were added to the 6% sales tax list in 2021.

The additions now, taxed at 3%, are for previously exempt services like data storage and processing, software publishing and website hosting.

The full list distributed by the comptroller’s office includes video and audio technical streaming support, cryptocurrency mining, game server hosting, software design and development, and archiving music, movies, photos and news clippings.

Exemptions were added for cloud computing software bought by a qualified cyber security business. Companies that work to advance quantum computing innovations within the University of Maryland’s Discovery District — which Moore has specifically targeted for extra government-backed support as a means to larger economic growth — are also exempted.

Who will pay the tax?

Businesses that sell the digital services — like those who sell any taxable products — are responsible for collecting the tax and passing along the money to the comptroller.

Because of the nature of the services targeted, lawmakers believe much of the tax will be applied to transactions between businesses.

For example, the Maryland Freedom Caucus — a conservative bloc that opposed the tax — this week highlighted an email that Zoom sent its Maryland customers about the changes to its pricing.

The email noted that the 6% sales tax on current “software as a service” plans purchased for individual use would not be changed, but a new 3% sales tax would be added for “enterprise customers” and video and audio conferencing services used by companies.

“Legislation has consequences. Did you receive this email this morning? Expect more…,” the caucus commented on X alongside the email. Zoom did not return a request for comment from The Baltimore Sun.

Impact on government contracts

Like other sales taxes, state and federal government entities, as well as nonprofit organizations, are exempt from the tax.

Though Maryland taxpayers won’t have to directly pay the cost of the tax on government contracts — some of which run into the hundreds of millions of dollars — the price of those contracts could still be impacted.

According to the comptroller’s guidance, companies that use subcontractors to help carry out their work for the government will be required to pay the tax on the transaction between the companies.

The guidance uses an example in which the federal government hires a company to design a new submarine. If that company purchases computer-aided design services from another business to help with its work, it must pay the 3% tax on those services.

Even if the primary company entered into a contract with the government before July 1 and then purchases the extra services from another company later, the “contractor’s cost of performance will go up,” according to the guidance. If the two companies had a previous agreement not to charge any sales tax, then the subcontractor would have to “absorb” the cost.

How much money will be raised, and when?

Maryland collects approximately $5.9 billion annually in sales tax, one of the state’s largest sources of revenue.

State fiscal analysts estimate the expansion to bring in $483 million in the fiscal year that starts Tuesday, $684 million in the following year and more than $700 million in each year after that.

That makes it the largest source of new, recurring revenue that lawmakers have passed in years. It will be used, in part, to cover major initiatives, such as the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future education reform plan, which lawmakers previously passed without a full plan to fund it.

Republicans and other opponents of the group remain skeptical that the “tech tax” will raise the level of funds Democrats expect, though Democrats have also said it will take time to implement and adjust in future years.

Either way, it will likely take several months to get a glimpse at the first year’s collections. The first monthly returns will be due to the comptroller by Aug. 20 (Taxes collected must be remitted to the state by the 20th of the following month). Until then, the comptroller’s office expects to continue fielding a multitude of questions from businesses about how to comply.

“Maryland businesses. July 1st is almost here,” reads a banner on the comptroller’s website. “Are you ready?”

Have a news tip? Contact Sam Janesch at sjanesch@baltsun.com, (443) 790-1734 and on X as @samjanesch.

A round of buyouts and the elimination of vacant positions ––– other steps aimed at saving $121 million in personnel costs over the next year ––– will take longer to sort out.

Gov. Wes Moore’s administration announced the trio of personnel-focused measures this week in order to hit the savings benchmark that helps resolve the $3.3 billion budget shortfall in the budget year beginning July 1.

Officials are still setting the parameters for the “voluntary separation program,” including which employees will be eligible and how much they’ll be offered. But previous years of similar efforts offer a glimpse of what’s to come.

Some positions will be exempt

A similar set of job classifications will be exempt from both the hiring freeze and separation program, officials said.

That includes positions that provide 24/7 direct care in health care facilities or programs, law enforcement and other safety fields, parole and probation agents, and others like “family investment specialists” who help provide social services.

Employees across all executive agencies other than those in the university system will be eligible.

Officials said they still have to engage with public employee unions before those parameters are established.

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees — which represents more than 26,000 state employees — has argued that previous years of budget cuts and unfilled positions have decimated certain agencies, creating unsafe environments in places like prisons and undermining a variety of services.

The group’s president, Patrick Moran, said in a statement Tuesday that the union would “continue to advocate for responsible decision-making around both cost-saving and revenue-raising measures that prioritize our state services and the workers who make them happen.”

How many positions will be slashed, and how fast?

It wasn’t immediately clear when the separation program would be established and offered to state employees, or how many of the roughly 51,000-person workforce will be approved.

But it will be based, in part, on the same initiative offered a decade ago after then-Republican Gov. Larry Hogan took office.

Hogan’s effort aimed to eliminate 500 positions. It was launched Feb. 18 and spurred more than 1,500 employees to submit applications, according to a report from the governor’s Department of Budget and Management later that year.

About 1,240 of those were eligible and 458 were approved. Another 10 positions eliminated separately brought the total to 468, and they were effectively “separated from their positions” by April 28.

How much money will it cost and save?

Maryland taxpayers are expected to pay about $12.3 billion in state employee personnel costs in the next year — representing about one-fifth of the entire state budget, according to state records.

And though it will cost some money to buy-out employees, the latest measures will aim to save money in the long-run.

In 2015, separated employees were provided a lump-sum payment of $15,000 plus $200 for each year of service. The average length of service for those who were accepted was 28 years, with the total cost of the payouts reaching $13.2 million, according to the budget department’s report. The savings expected in the next full fiscal year were $32.2 million.

The departments of Transportation, Health and Human Services saw the highest number of exits, and thus the most in payouts and savings. It was not immediately clear if those same agencies or others would be the most-impacted in the next round of buyouts.

Have a news tip? Contact Sam Janesch at sjanesch@baltsun.com, (443) 790-1734 and on X as @samjanesch.

Doubling down on his insistence that he stepped down despite Moore saying he “ordered” the resignation, Schiraldi wrote that he left because of what he called the “draconian law” that automatically treats some juveniles as adults.

“My participation in this harmful farce left a stink on me that won’t soon wash off,” Schiraldi wrote.

Schiraldi’s striking condemnation of the system he sought to reform came after a sometimes tumultuous two-year run at the helm of Maryland’s juvenile corrections facilities and programs.

Though he was applauded by many advocates who sought a more rehabilitative approach to youth crime, Schiraldi met fierce resistance from Republican lawmakers, law enforcement and state prosecutors who said the system lacked oversight and accountability.

The Democratic governor had stood by Schiraldi and celebrated the progress made in an agency that he said was critically flawed when he took office in 2023. But his “patience was running low,” so he “ordered Secretary Schiraldi’s resignation after several lengthy conversations,” Moore said earlier this month.

Schiraldi acknowledged, also earlier in June, that he’d “become a bit of a lightning rod” and that he was proud of the progress he’d made but didn’t want to be a distraction. He said he told Moore’s office “some time ago” that he wanted to step away.

The op-ed he authored Thursday offers another motivation — the “main reason,” as Schiraldi describes it: He no longer wanted to be associated with Maryland’s habit of incarcerating young people in adult corrections facilities.

“[S]ince history doesn’t smile on people who say they were only following orders as they operationalized human rights abuses, I left, choosing to use my voice on the outside to push for change more vociferously than is appropriate for a departmental secretary,” he wrote.

Schiraldi’s frustration lay with the failed legislative efforts to give judges more authority in deciding whether youth should be tried in juvenile or adult court.

Under Maryland law, teenagers who are at least 16 years old and are alleged to have committed crimes like robbery, kidnapping, abduction, third-degree sexual offenses or possessing or selling a firearm are not tried in juvenile court. Children who are at least 14 years old and charged with an act that, for adults, would be punished with a life sentence are also not under the jurisdiction of juvenile court.

As a result, Schiraldi wrote, those young people are initially sent to adult jails, even though 85% of the cases are eventually dismissed or returned to juvenile court. He pointed to one case in which a 17-year-old sophomore in high school with “borderline intellectual functioning” was charged with misdemeanor gun possession in December, spent three weeks in an adult jail, six months in a juvenile facility and then saw his case dismissed last week.

Such cases create a more expensive process for the state and are a detriment to public safety, he wrote, citing research that notes how youth who are subjected to adult prosecution are more likely to reoffend and in more violent ways.

He put the blame on the Maryland General Assembly. Lawmakers should have passed legislation — supported by the Legislative Black Caucus, Attorney General Anthony Brown and a group of judges — that would have given the juvenile courts more jurisdiction.

That legislation was sponsored by Sen. Will Smith, a Montgomery County Democrat who chairs the committee where the legislation was introduced but never received a vote. Schiraldi’s agency testified in support of the bill — typically a sign that the governor’s administration supports the policy — while prosecutors like the Baltimore State’s Attorney’s Office testified against it.

“Maryland lawmakers repeatedly refused to budge on this costly, ineffective, and racially divisive approach, ignoring legislative proposals to do so year after year,” Schiraldi wrote.

The op-ed does not specifically reference Moore or the legislation he signed into law last year that increased penalties for younger children accused of certain crimes — a controversial change spurred by prosecutors’ criticisms and public outcry over youth crime.

Have a news tip? Contact Sam Janesch at sjanesch@baltsun.com, (443) 790-1734 and on X as @samjanesch.

The letter suggests the efforts aim to fulfill a goal that lawmakers worked into the cash-strapped state budget earlier this year — to save $121 million in personnel costs by reducing some positions without forgoing raises for most state employees. They also represent a shift in approach for Moore, a Democrat who entered office in 2023 promising to fill thousands of positions left vacant by his predecessor.

“We are committed to engaging with our public sector unions as we work through these difficult decisions,” Moore wrote in the letter. “We are moving with care and intentionality to minimize impact on current employees and be transparent throughout the process.”

Administration officials said essential positions in law enforcement, health care and more will be exempt from the hiring freeze that could last the entire fiscal year that begins on July 1. The details for the “voluntary separation program,” meanwhile, were still being sorted out but will be based on previous similar programs in 2011 and 2015, officials said. In 2015, employees were given three weeks to accept $15,000 plus $200 for every year of service if they left their job.

Despite the cost-cutting measures, Moore is still prioritizing hiring workers who were laid off or left their roles with the federal government since President Donald Trump took office in January, officials said. The widespread federal layoffs stand to impact Maryland more than other states because of the state’s proximity to Washington, D.C. and the agencies that are based in the state, and Moore has launched initiatives to get workers in both public and private jobs.

‘Should have happened months ago’

Republican lawmakers who have called for more drastic personnel cuts criticized the timing of Moore’s announcement, while key Democratic lawmakers said the savings, when combined with billions of dollars worth of other spending cuts this year, put the state on better financial footing.

Republican lawmakers pointed to their public statements throughout the 90-day session, which ended in April, that called for actions like a hiring freeze. Sen. J.B. Jennings, a Republican who represents Baltimore and Harford counties, argued then that the state did not “necessarily need to hire” positions that were in Moore’s original budget proposal because lawmakers were trying to resolve a roughly $3 billion deficit at the same time.

“Back in February, I questioned the wisdom of expanding state government while facing a $2.8 billion deficit. I said then, and I repeat now: when you’re in a hole, you need to stop digging,” Jennings said in a statement Tuesday. “The decision to finally enact a hiring freeze and reduce vacant positions is the right one — but it should have happened months ago, before the situation became more urgent.”

House Minority Leader Jason Buckel, an Allegheny County Republican, told The Sun the timing of Moore’s announcement “reflects the sad reality that people just want to play politics with things that are really obvious facts.”

Sen. Guy Guzzone, a Howard County Democrat who leads the Senate’s budget process, said the governor’s latest move is “logical and appropriate.”

Though the state budget called for personnel savings, including a reduction in some positions, it did not specifically prescribe the hiring freeze or separation program that Moore announced Tuesday.

“We were able to make sure that vital services were funded like education, health care and transportation while finding these vacancy savings,” said Del. Ben Barnes, a Prince George’s County Democrat who is the state House’s top budget negotiator. “We were realistic about some of the challenges and had to make some tough decisions, and these vacancy savings were part of that.”

Maryland House Speaker Adrienne A. Jones declined to comment on the announcement, though Democrats in her chamber and in the Senate pushed back this year on efforts to further reduce the size of the federal government or eliminate planned raises for union employees.

No specific number

Patrick Moran, president of AFSCME Maryland Council 3, said his union has been in “close communication” with Moore’s office about the decision. The union represents more than 51,000 workers across Maryland, including over 26,000 state employees.

“While it’s clear our state must navigate tough and volatile times, any solutions cannot come at the cost of providing quality state services,” Moran said in a statement.

Moore administration officials, who spoke on background to reporters Tuesday, said there was currently no specific number of employees they anticipated or wanted to see accept the separation agreement. They also said state agencies will work to identify vacant positions that can be defunded, though they have not set specific goals for that strategy either. Eligibility requirements and other details associated with the separation program will be determined in the coming weeks, they said.

Maryland is home to more than 160,000 federal employees. Toward the start of Trump’s tenure, Moore signed multiple memoranda directing the state departments of Transportation, Budget and Education to connect impacted workers with state jobs.

During a speech Tuesday at the Maryland Municipal League conference in Ocean City, Moore again addressed the firing of thousands of government employees that the Trump administration has conducted in the name of reducing “waste, fraud and abuse” within the federal government.

Moore said the state has assisted federal employees who have lost their jobs, and he highlighted municipalities in some of the most affected areas that have hosted job fairs and career training opportunities. When addressing the issue of connecting affected employees with jobs, the governor pointed largely to the private sector.

“If there is a public servant who was recently laid off from the federal government who has an interest and a skillset, let’s get them certified, let’s get them qualified, let’s get them into hospitals, let’s get them into classrooms, let’s get them into hospitals,” Moore said. “Let’s make sure they continue serving, and make sure they continue serving people they love and admire in the state of Maryland, and let’s do it fast.”

Have a news tip? Contact Sam Janesch at sjanesch@baltsun.com, Carson Swick at cswick@baltsun.com, or Hannah Gaskill at hgaskill@baltsun.com.

“I’m enjoying retirement,” Hogan told reporters after initially declining to answer questions following the event at Pew Charitable Trusts in downtown Washington. “That’s keeping me pretty happy right now — spending time with the family and grandkids, doing a little business.”

Hogan has not said whether he will run again, though political analysts have said he is his party’s best, though longshot, chance at winning the governor’s office again in the near future.

Hogan left office in 2023 after being the first Maryland Republican elected to two terms as governor in more than 60 years. He was constitutionally prohibited from seeking a third consecutive term and went on to lose Maryland’s open U.S. Senate race to Democrat Angela Alsobrooks in 2024. Though he overperformed other Republicans across the country, Alsobrooks’ 12-point victory was a comfortable win in a state dominated by Democratic voters.

Moore, a rising figure in national Democratic politics who maintains positive approval ratings in Maryland, has said he will run for a second term in 2026.

Though Hogan and his successor have clashed publicly — over the state’s budget issues and the Senate race — the Republican did not mention Moore or his actions during the panel event Tuesday.

Alongside Democratic former Montana Gov. Steve Bullock, Hogan spoke generally about some of Trump’s actions, how states should respond and how he responded when he was in office during Trump’s first term.

“If I were a governor, I would say do what Gov. Bullock and I did … Not pay too much attention to all the noise and try to actually sit down and focus,” Hogan said. “No matter how crazy it might get, I think it’s very important that governors focus on their states and their relationship with the federal government.”

Hogan said he agreed and disagreed with different aspects of Trump’s return to the White House, which he actively worked to avoid.

He said he agreed with Trump’s decision and unilateral action over the weekend to attack Iran’s nuclear capabilities. Hogan also said he agreed with the “premise” of finding inefficiencies and waste in government spending, which was Trump and Elon Musk’s stated reasoning for slashing large swaths of the federal budget and firing public employees.

But the lack of thought and “meat-axe” approach rather than a precise look at where savings could be found was wrong, Hogan said.

“Maryland is probably going to be impacted more than just about any other state because we have the highest per capita number of federal employees and we’ve already had a lot of layoffs,” he said, echoing independent reviews and other elected officials from both parties in recent months.

Governors will have to determine where to push back on specific spending cuts, he said, while not mentioning Moore’s public efforts to fight the spending cuts and layoffs.

“Most of the Republican governors are going to say, ‘Yeah, we need to cut spending,’ and I think most people agree with that,” Hogan said. “But you can go and say, ‘Defunding this program is crazy. Laying off all these veterans at VAs, it doesn’t make sense.’ Whatever the issue is that you can find the common ground on, and then governors are going to have to figure out how to deal with it.”

When asked about Trump’s move to send federal troops to political protests in Los Angeles against the wishes of Gov. Gavin Newsom, Hogan said Trump should not have overruled Newsom. But he said he disagreed with Democratic governors and mayors who he said had allowed their cities to be “taken over” by violent protests. He praised his own decision, as he has often in the past, to send Maryland National Guard members to Baltimore to suppress the unrest after the killing of Freddie Gray in 2015.

In one of the few clashes on stage with Bullock — who he ran the National Governors Association alongside when they were both in office ––– the Democrat said he didn’t think Los Angeles County “was being overtaken by violence” and that local officials should have handled the situation.

“I agree with that, I just don’t know that they were handling it,” Hogan replied. “I think it was completely taken over. That’s the argument. Somebody has to handle it.”

Have a news tip? Contact Sam Janesch at sjanesch@baltsun.com, (443) 790-1734 and on X as @samjanesch.