Senate Hearing 2/19 Just Got More Complicated

Could they possibly make this any harder?

If you’ve been following the Maryland historic plate legislation closely, you know we’ve been pushing for clarity, consistency, and most importantly, preservation of the grandfather clause. What we’re now seeing ahead of the February 19 Senate hearing adds another layer of complexity.

Here’s what’s happening.

1️⃣ SB452 (Senator Jennings)

• Scheduled for hearing: February 19
• Currently posted version: A walkover of HB125
• Problem: It reflects the old version, which does not include the grandfather clause.
• We have been told that a new amended version of HB125 includes the grandfather clause and will be used, but that updated version is not yet posted publicly.

That creates uncertainty.

2️⃣ SB566 (Senators Ready, Folden, Bailey, Salling)

• Also scheduled for hearing: February 19
• Walkover of HB4
• Includes the grandfather clause.

So now we have two separate Senate bills, both tied to House legislation, both being heard on the same day, but with different structures and legislative pathways.

What This Means for the Community

We Need to Submit Two Separate Testimonies for February 19.

A) Testimony for SB452

We support SB452 only if it reflects the amended House version of HB125 that includes the grandfather clause.

Suggested position:

“We support HB125 on the condition that the new version, including the grandfather clause as amended and approved in the House of Delegates, is used as the final version for SB452.”

If the grandfather clause is not included, support becomes conditional.

B) Testimony for SB566

SB566 mirrors HB4 and already includes the grandfather clause.

We support this bill.

There is an opportunity to respectfully note that if coordination between legislative bodies had been aligned earlier, this could potentially have been streamlined into a single, unified process rather than requiring duplicate testimony.

The Bigger Issue

We were told:

• The House had alignment
• HB4 and HB125 would be rectified
• They would be heard together
• No need for separate testimony
• Final language would carry forward cleanly into SB452

Instead, we are now navigating two Senate bills, separate filings, and unclear posted amendments.

This highlights a broader issue: The House and Senate are operating as separate bodies, and communication between them does not appear fully synchronized.

That makes grassroots advocacy more complicated. But it does not make it impossible.

What You Should Do

1. Prepare and submit testimony for both SB452 and SB566 (click here to learn how).
2. Clearly state support for the inclusion of the grandfather clause.
3. Keep your testimony focused and respectful. You will have two minutes if speaking.
4. Submit even if you cannot attend in person. Virtual participation still counts.

Please don’t assume others are doing this. Take a few minutes and submit, even if you cannot attend in person.

Why This Matters

The grandfather clause protects existing historic registrations. That protection is not a small technical detail. It is central to fairness, predictability, and trust between citizens and the Motor Vehicle Administration.

We have made tremendous progress. The fact that these bills are moving is evidence of real momentum.

Now we need to stay coordinated and disciplined.

The Maryland Collectible Auto Association will continue to monitor updates closely and provide guidance as amended language becomes publicly available.