Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legislation Police Accountability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Deputy county attorney outlines bills affecting police accountability boards; only narrow year‑and‑day fix appears likely to advance
Summary
Deputy county attorney John Houser briefed the Police Accountability Board on six bills tracked at the Maryland General Assembly. He said only a narrow bill adjusting the 'year and day' rule (HB238/SB533) appeared likely to move, while bills proposing expanded subpoena power, a second ACC, or record‑expungement changes were uncertain.
Deputy county attorney John Houser updated the Police Accountability Board on state legislation that could affect police accountability boards and administrative charging committees.
Houser told the board he had identified six bills of potential relevance. As of the March 12 meeting, only a narrow bill adjusting the "year and a day" rule — cited in the meeting as HB 238 / SB 533 — appeared to be advancing. He said that bill would provide more flexibility when a related criminal investigation or prosecution affects the ACC's year‑and‑a‑day timing on complaints and dispositions.
Houser discussed HB 985, which would authorize a county governing body to create a second administrative charging committee to address caseload strains. He said HB 985 had significant cosponsorship and could be a potential longer‑term solution, but had not yet advanced. He also summarized HP 836 (a subpoena/ investigative‑power bill that would allow some local boards expanded investigatory authority) and SB 625 / HB 885 (a bill about expunging or removing records where allegations are unfounded or exonerated); he said those measures had uncertain prospects this session.
Asked about timing, Houser said crossover and "sine die" deadlines were approaching; he noted April 7 as a key date for the legislature this year and said one bill — the year‑and‑a‑day adjustment — appeared most likely to move before deadlines. He cautioned that last‑minute amendments are possible and recommended monitoring the session closely.
Board members asked about subpoena power and the bills' sponsorship; Houser said the subpoena bill (HP 836) was a refile of a measure that failed previously and that he did not expect it to advance this year. He also noted the practical implications of any changes for ACC workload and county implementation.
