The Prince George's County Health, Human Services and Public Safety Committee voted 5‑0 to advance draft 2 of CB61, a measure known as "Zoe's Law" that clarifies circumstances under which county police may engage in vehicle pursuits, requires administrative review of every pursuit, and mandates annual reporting of pursuit data.

Sponsor remarks framed the bill as a response to a high‑profile child death and related advocacy. The sponsor described the legislation's goal as balancing public safety and accountability: encouraging officers to avoid pursuits when enforcement can safely be delayed while ensuring that serious harms resulting from fleeing suspects are subject to legal consequences.

Draft 2 removes provisions that would have directly altered police department policy language out of deference to existing Prince George's County Police Department general orders. Instead, the draft focuses on reporting, administrative review and on requiring mutual‑aid agreements between the county and municipal corporations to incorporate the county police department's minimum standards for initiating vehicle pursuits. The draft also asks the county executive to make reasonable efforts to update mutual‑aid agreements within six months of the act's effective date.

"Zoe's Law is a law that came about after the tragic death of little Zoe," the sponsor said, explaining the measure’s origin in conversations with families and law‑enforcement stakeholders. The sponsor also noted coordination with state legislators working on companion felony‑level offenses for conduct that leads to death.

Office of Law staff and the administration recommended two minor amendments for clarity: to add the phrase "or other law enforcement agency" to references to municipal corporations and to specify that the law apply prospectively. Committee counsel read those edits into the record and the committee accepted them before moving the bill forward.

Joseph Ruddy of the Office of Law noted that Prince George's County Police leadership supported the legislation but were attending funeral services for a fallen officer and could not appear in person.

The committee voted to forward CB61, draft 2 with the two amendments, to the full council with a favorable recommendation; roll call recorded Chair Blige, Vice Chair Fisher, Council member Olson, Council vice chair Oriaga and Council member Watson all voting yes.

No fiscal impact requiring immediate county appropriations was identified in the policy analysis presented at the committee; the legislative budget analyst indicated no noticeable adverse impact at this time, though administrative review and reporting will create staff workload and record‑keeping obligations for the police department.

Next steps: CB61 will proceed to the full council with the committee's favorable recommendation and the adopted amendments.