Panel split on allowing legal notices in qualifying digital publications

Senator West presented SB 64 to let local governments and attorneys publish required legal notices in qualifying digital publications, provided the outlet meets guardrails (employs at least one full-time journalist, produces original reporting, maintains an accessible archive, and meets circulation/geo-staffing criteria).

Sarah Walton of the Baltimore Banner said digital-first outlets can dramatically expand legal-notice reach; the Banner cited monthly traffic and subscriber metrics to argue notices will be seen by many more Marylanders than legacy print alone. Justin Fury of the Maryland Municipal League framed modernization as a chance to cut costs for local governments and improve notice accessibility.

Opponents, including the Maryland, Delaware, DC Press Association, warned the bill expands notice eligibility beyond print publications that publish circulation statements and second-class-periodical certifications; they cited concerns about measurement, ownership, and archive permanence. Rebecca Snyder (press association) noted that most print outlets already publish notices online and that MDDC aggregates notices at no charge.

Committee members probed paywall and archive issues, the 50-mile employee rule, and safeguards for smaller, rural publications. Sponsors signaled they would work with the committee on amendments to ensure free online archives and clarify distance/revenue language.