# Question 1: Arbitration Reform for State Employees Act of 2026 (constitutional amendment)
**In one sentence:** This decides whether Maryland's constitution must require the Governor's budget to pay for state employee union contracts — and whether a binding arbitrator, not just a recommendation, ends deadlocked contract talks. [1][2]

## What a FOR vote does
The constitution would require the Governor's proposed budget to include the money needed to carry out every union contract (a "memorandum of understanding," or MOU) with state employees — a written deal covering wages, hours, health benefits, and other job terms — whether the two sides agreed on it or a neutral arbitrator set it. [1] It also turns on the new law in the same bill, HB 604: if talks hit a dead end ("impasse"), a neutral arbitrator's decision becomes final and binding on most state employees. [2][8] The rule covers state agencies, state colleges, and the Maryland Environmental Service. [2][4]

## What an AGAINST vote does
The current system stays: when the state and a union can't agree, a neutral fact-finder offers advice that is not binding, and the Governor can adopt terms the union did not accept. [2] The new arbitration rules in HB 604 never take effect. [2]

## Strongest case FOR
- Maryland state employees cannot strike, so a neutral decision-maker gives them a real way to end a deadlocked contract. (AFSCME Maryland Council 3) [5]
- Binding arbitration already exists for workers in many states and in eight Maryland local governments, so this would bring state bargaining in line with the rest of the country. (Maryland State & DC AFL-CIO) [6]
- The rule makes deals fundable from the first budget, instead of leaving pay and benefits unfunded. [2]

## Strongest case AGAINST
- An arbitrator could award pay and benefits the state cannot afford, forcing cuts to staffing or other programs. [2]
- The University System of Maryland warns the change could create an "unfunded mandate," raising tuition or cutting services, because the bill binds the Governor to fund terms the legislature may not pay for. [4][10]
- The University System of Maryland says its current talks usually end in agreements and calls the July 1–September 30 bargaining window too short. [4]

## If you care most about...
- **State workers getting their contracts fully funded** -> FOR fits, because the budget must carry the money up front. [2]
- **Control over state spending and tax policy** -> AGAINST fits, because binding pay awards and the new budget mandate add costs the legislature cannot easily shrink. [2][9]
- **Tuition and public university budgets** -> AGAINST fits, because USM says the change threatens its funding even though its employees are not covered by the new arbitration. [4]
- **A fair, ending-to-talking dispute process** -> FOR fits, because a neutral arbitrator provides a final answer instead of open-ended talks. [5][6]

## Who supports and who opposes
Supporters include the Maryland State and DC AFL-CIO, AFSCME Maryland Council 3, AFT-Maryland, and Metro Baltimore AFL-CIO, all of whom urged the legislature to pass HB 604. [5][6][7] The University System of Maryland opposes the measure. [4] Maryland Matters, a non-partisan news site, publishes arguments on both sides without taking a position. [2]

## What we could not verify
Not found in sources checked: a named statewide voter campaign (an official "For/Against" committee) pushing this question. Support and opposition shown above are legislative testimony and the University System's statement, not organized ballot campaigns.

## Confidence
High — the ballot text, the law, the fiscal note, and the named for/against groups all come from official Maryland sources and the non-partisan Maryland Matters voter guide, and they agree with each other.

## Sources
[1] Ballot questions for the November 3, 2026 election - Maryland Secretary of State - https://elections.maryland.gov/elections/2026/ballot_questions.html
[2] Question 1: Arbitration Reform for State Employees Act of 2026 - Maryland Matters - https://marylandmatters.org/voter-guides/ballot-measures/question-1-arbitration-reform-for-state-employees-act-of-2026/
[3] House Bill 604 - Chapter 155 of 2026 - Maryland General Assembly - https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2026RS/Chapters_noln/CH_155_hb0604t.pdf
[4] USM testimony, Senate Bill 28 - Maryland Senate Budget & Taxation Committee - https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/cmte_testimony/2026/bat/1FTP6jniIWYdaoDDylH8fYB3xrKTSb94f.pdf
[5] Patrick Moran, AFSCME Maryland Council 3, testimony on HB 604 - Maryland General Assembly - https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/cmte_testimony/2026/gvc/1Iw5jCKKkh2nDH4fxvhzlz_Z75N_oE_-Y.pdf
[6] Donna S. Edwards, Maryland State and DC AFL-CIO, testimony on HB 604 - Maryland General Assembly - https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/cmte_testimony/2026/gvc/1OryTB1male93hptF0HPUuNevnuCENcVy.pdf
[7] AFT-Maryland testimony on HB 604 - Maryland General Assembly - https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/cmte_testimony/2026/gvc/1xkOkVnSJfcjlr3oNUJCsuzUvIil2LEYM.pdf
[8] Question 1: Arbitration Reform for State Employees Act of 2026 - Maryland State & DC AFL-CIO - https://mddclabor.org/laborvotes/question-1-strengthening-collective-bargaining-maryland-state-workers
[9] Fiscal and Policy Note, House Bill 604 - Maryland Department of Legislative Services - https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2026RS/fnotes/bil_0004/hb0604.pdf
[10] University System of Maryland testimony, cited via Ballot Explained - https://ballotexplained.com/measures/maryland/question-1

---

Two notes for your review, Fabian:

1. **Vote counts** — I checked The Bay Net's "93-35 / 35-11 / signed April 28" claim against the official mgaleg vote records (House 93-35, Senate 35-11, governor approval April 28, 2026) and they match, but I left the numbers out of the page since the task brief didn't provide them and they aren't needed for how to vote. Say the word if you'd like a sentence added.

2. **Fiscal note phrasing** — I cited the fiscal note (source 9) only for the cost point; the "$150,000 minimum, possibly far more, not reliably estimated" detail is in it if you want it in the AGAINST bullets in place of or alongside the Maryland Matters phrasing.

I kept the body at 526 words (under 550) and used only the required headings in order.

[ Sent by HermesAgent, on behalf of Fabian Williams, under his delegated authority. Fabian may not have reviewed this message yet. ]
HermesAgent