In the October 8 issue we reported on the county charter amendments that voters will see on their ballot. In the October 15 issue we reported on the county bond issues. That reporting followed feedback from Greenbelt residents who were unaware there were questions to consider or who had been unable to find information about the questions. Since that reporting, we’ve heard from many readers how helpful it has been to have information that hadn’t been included in voter guides elsewhere as well as details from related bills and background, in addition to the language of the questions as they appear on the ballot. Since then, we’ve also received requests to cover the statewide questions. To help provide information that’s important to our residents as they head to the polls, here are the three state questions you should be prepared to vote on. All three are constitutional amendments.
Question 1: Arbitration Reform for State Employees Act of 2026
Providing that each budget submitted by the Governor shall include proposed expenditures necessary to implement wages, hours, fringe benefits, health benefits, and other terms and conditions of employment in each collective bargaining memorandum of understanding with State employees, whether the State and State employees reached those terms and conditions by mutual agreement or through a neutral decider’s order. (Amending Article III of the Maryland Constitution)
The governor’s proposed budget each year must include state salaries but uses the current salary plan as its basis. The proposed amendment would require the budget to include funds for changes to state employee collective bargaining agreements. It would mean that binding arbitration can be used to resolve labor disputes even if it isn’t resolved by the time the budget is prepared.
Those in favor of the measure might see it as a commitment to fair labor practices and a fully balanced budget. Those against it might argue binding arbitration could result in more than the state can afford.
Question 2: Temporary Appointments on the Commission on Judicial Disabilities
Authorizing temporary substitute appointments to the Commission on Judicial Disabilities when a member is recused or disqualified, or when a member’s term expires. In these situations, the Commission Chair may recall a former member of the Commission, or the Governor, at the request of the Commission Chair, may appoint a temporary substitute member or extend the term of a current member until a permanent replacement is appointed. Only individuals who meet the constitutional eligibility requirements may be recalled or appointed to the Commission. (Amending Article IV of the Maryland Constitution)
This change would allow temporary substitute appointments to the 11-member Commission on Judicial Disabilities, a body that hears and oversees complaints about judges. If the change to the constitution is approved, a vacancy could be filled by the chair appointing a former member to temporarily fill it and, if the chair requests, could allow the Governor to appoint a temporary substitute member or extend the term of an existing member (currently there is a 10-year term limit). As it stands, temporary appointments are not allowed and vacancies can occur if a member is recused, disqualified or their term ends.
Those in favor might want all seats to be filled so the commission can expediently hear complaints against judges. Those against might be wary of allowing the chair of the commission the power of appointment, concerned that “temporary” is not defined, or may be satisfied by the current system, since the commission can hear complaints with a majority present, even when a seat is vacant.
Question 3: Electoral Districts – General Assembly and Congressional Representatives
For the purpose of clarifying that certain requirements apply only to districts for the election of members of the Senate of Maryland and the House of Delegates; authorizing the General Assembly to grant original jurisdiction to the Supreme Court of Maryland to review the congressional districting plan of the State; and providing that nothing in the Maryland Constitution provides applicable criteria for the boundaries of a congressional districting plan. (Amending Article III of the Maryland Constitution)
This question seeks to allow changes to the rules for drawing congressional districts. In other states, congressional districts have been redrawn to benefit different political parties — a process known as gerrymandering. The Supreme Court has declined to block it.
Those in favor of this amendment want to be able to impact Congressional representation as other states have done through their redistricting. Currently Maryland has one Republican seat — its 1st Congressional District including the Eastern Shore and parts of Baltimore and Harford counties — and it sends seven Democrats and one Republican to Congress each year. Redrawing the map could potentially eliminate that single Republican seat.
Those in favor include former President Barack Obama, who has appealed to Marylanders to “stop this Republican power grab” by voting yes on Question 3. Republicans have redrawn congressional maps in the middle of an election year to hold onto power in Congress, argues Obama in an advertisement. Question 3 allows Maryland to “draw its own fair maps,” he says. Governor Wes Moore has also campaigned for the question, saying, “Question 3 is about our democracy.” State and local leaders including Comptroller Brooke Lierman, Prince George’s County Executive Aisha Braveboy, U.S. Representative Steny Hoyer and others are also calling on residents to vote yes. Many frame it as a fight against Trump.
Those opposed object to gerrymandering and redrawing maps to deliberately advantage any particular party. The amendment might also leave standards for maps in question; it would remove the requirements that apply to state legislative districts when drawing congressional districts but doesn’t provide new standards. Those against might also want to protect minority party representation. The earliest a new map could take effect is for the 2028 election, the next presidential election year.
The News Review’s election coverage can be found online at Greenbeltnewsreview.com/elections2026.