Avid followers of the Pay to Play Law Blog know how active the State of Maryland has been over the past few years with regard to the amendment and revision of its pay-to-play framework for those contracting with or otherwise doing business with state and local governments. In 2014, we saw a new pay-to-play regime implemented that instituted an array of new filing obligations, contribution reporting requirements, and enhanced record retention and certification obligations for Maryland government contractors. Then, in 2015, state legislators followed up with a collection of amendments to the new regime that closed unintended disclosure loopholes and shifted the semi-annual reporting calendar to the May and November schedule that now applies to covered contractors across the Old Line State. A few months after those legislative changes, the State Board of Elections (“SBOE”) joined the party with the promulgation of an array of regulations clarifying how the rapidly evolving pay-to-play regime would be administered and enforced moving forward.

Click here to view image.

Fast forward to 2016 and the regulated community probably feels like it’s having deja vu all over again. During this year’s General Assembly session, lawmakers in Annapolis once again took it upon themselves to pass legislative amendments tweaking their beloved pay to play framework. The changes, which are relatively minor in comparison to last spring’s modifications, codify an interpretive rule proposed by the SBOE last year that sought to broaden the political contribution disclosure obligations of covered contractors who have politically-active business affiliates.

Under the existing regulatory regime codified in state law, pay-to-play filers are required to report the political donations of their subsidiaries provided such affiliates are “doing business with” Maryland state or local government and 30% or more owned or controlled by the covered contractor. The 2016 amendments, however, broaden the scope of potential affiliate disclosure. The recent legislative revisions, which were signed into law by Governor Larry Hogan in late April and go into effect on October 1 of this year, clarify that covered contractors should disclose the donations of all politically-active subsidiaries (which are 30% owned or controlled) regardless of whether or not such affiliates do business with state or local governments in Maryland. An express exemption to this disclosure obligation was provided for a very narrow group of subsidiaries that are affiliated with publicly-traded, bank holding companies and that are not doing public business in Maryland. The legislative changes will, however, require that most covered contractors disclosure the political contributions of their affiliated subsidiaries.

A few short days after these legislative changes were signed into law, the SBOE followed the General Assembly’s lead in preening over Maryland’s “precious” pay-to-play framework. The Board, in a Notice of Proposed Action published in the State Register, recommended changes to several of its current regulatory provisions governing the disclosure of political contribution activity by covered state and local government contractors. First, as one might expect, the proposed regulations seek to align current SBOE rules with this year’s legislative changes regarding the attribution of contributions by the subsidiaries of covered government contractors. Perhaps more interestingly, however, the proposed rules also seek to alter the current timing of the “initial” pay to play disclosure filings required of new Maryland contractors and to clarify how entities doing business in the state can comply with the “CEO reporting obligations” concerning disclosable political contributions.

As those in the regulated community know well, Maryland’s current regulations require specific state and local government contractors to file with the SBOE an initial registration statement (highlighting specific contract information) and a statement of reportable political contributions (covering the two years prior to the contract) within one business day of the contract’s award. The Board’s new proposal advocates for an extension of the filing window for the registration from one business day to fifteen business days after the contract’s award. The proposed rules also request that the time frame for submitting the political contribution disclosure report be extended to fifteen business days after the registration statement is filed.

In addition to these administrative changes, the Board’s newly-proposed rules seek to clarify how covered government contractors can meet their CEO-reporting requirements under existing law. Under current law, the officers, directors and partners of covered contractors are required to report disclosable political contributions to the CEOs of their entities as part of the state disclosure requirements. Such CEOs are also obligated to notify all reporting individuals with their entities (and reporting subsidiaries) that Maryland law requires public disclosure of their contributions. To ease the administrative burdens associated with the incoming notification process, the SBOE’s proposed rules would permit a designee of the CEO to collect contribution information on behalf of a reporting entity provided such collection is completed within five business days of the close of the applicable reporting period. In regard to the outgoing notification process, the proposed rules would allow CEOs to avoid their obligation to warn all reporting individuals about their reporting requirements under state law if the disclosing entity implements a legal pre-clearance framework and a written compliance policy that is annually reviewed by such donors.

These proposed rules and regulations are open for public comment with the SBOE until May 30, 2016. As the comment period comes to a conclusion and final provisions are adopted, Pay to Play Law Blog will be sure to closely monitor any relevant changes to help the regulated community stay abreast of the latest on Maryland pay-to-play law.