Correctional Officers' Retirement System - Reemployment After Retirement - Exemption From Earnings Offset
HB 1194 exempts retired correctional officers from having their retirement benefits reduced if they return to work for specific state correctional agencies. The bill changes Maryland law so that retirees reemployed by the Division of Corrections, Division of Pretrial Detention, or Patuxent Institution as correctional officers or parole/probation staff for up to four years will not face the usual earnings offset that would lower their retirement payments. This applies only to those returning to correctional roles at these designated facilities, not to all retirees. The change removes a financial penalty currently applied when retirees work for the same type of employer (state or non-state) after retirement. It directly affects retired correctional officers who return to these specific state correctional positions.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2026
Committee Review
Apr 2026
House of Delegates Passage
Apr 2026
Senate Passage
Apr 2026
Signed into Law
Apr 2026
Introduced Feb 11, 2026
Signed Apr 28, 2026
Maddy AI version diff · 1 comparison
What changed between versions
First - Correctional Officers' Retirement System - Reemployment After Retirement - Exemption From Earnings Offset
→
Third - Correctional Officers' Retirement System - Reemployment After Retirement - Exemption From Earnings Offset
·
3 edits
MINOR
The bill was amended to clarify that the earnings offset exemption applies to reemployment with 'certain participating employer employers' (likely a drafting error intended to specify eligible entities) and to add a specific exemption for Correctional Officers reemployed as bailiffs in state courts. The text also includes new explanatory notes regarding how amendments are marked in the document.
Scope change
The scope of the exemption was expanded to explicitly include Correctional Officers reemployed as bailiffs, while the phrasing regarding 'participating employers' was altered to include the word 'certain' twice, potentially narrowing or clarifying the definition of eligible employers.
ELIGIBILITY
The phrase 'a participating employer' was changed to 'a certain participating employer employers', altering the grammatical structure and potentially the definition of eligible employers.
A new exemption was added for Correctional Officers who are reemployed on a contractual basis as bailiffs in a state court.
TECHNICAL
New explanatory text was inserted at the beginning of the document to define how capitalization, brackets, underlining, and strikethroughs are used to indicate amendments.
Floor votes · House of Delegates Mar 11, 2026
How they voted
This bill passed the Senate by voice vote (no roll call recorded).
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
15
Key actions
9
Committee
6
Apr 28, 2026
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor - Chapter 259
executive
Apr 8, 2026
Lower · Passed
Returned Passed
lower
Apr 8, 2026
Upper · Passed
Third Reading Passed
upper
Apr 1, 2026
Upper · Passed
Favorable Adopted Second Reading Passed
upper
Apr 1, 2026
Upper · Passed
Favorable Report by Budget and Taxation
upper
Mar 23, 2026
Committee
Referred Budget and Taxation
upper
Mar 23, 2026
Lower · Passed
Third Reading Passed
lower
Mar 21, 2026
Lower · Passed
Favorable with Amendments {
lower
Mar 21, 2026
Lower · Passed
Favorable with Amendments Report by Appropriations
lower
Mar 11, 2026
House Of Delegates · Passed
House of Delegates Vote: pass (136-0-6)
house of delegates
Feb 11, 2026
Committee
First Reading Appropriations
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Dana Jones
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about HB 1194
Scope: MD
Hi! I can help you understand HB 1194. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline