Attorney General seeks mandatory cameras in long‑term‑care common areas; providers cite cost and privacy concerns

Attorney General Anthony Brown urged the Health and Government Operations Committee to approve House Bill 576, which would require video recording in common areas of nursing homes and assisted living facilities, retain footage for at least 120 days, and permit law‑enforcement inspection upon request. ‘‘Video can change the trajectory of the cases I just described and provide a path to justice,’’ said Zac Shirley, Chief of the Medicaid Fraud and Vulnerable Victims Unit, summarizing cases where hallway and doorway cameras produced decisive evidence.

Nut graf: The measure would require cameras in common areas with 120‑day retention and limited access rules. Proponents said footage has been used to secure criminal convictions and to corroborate complaints in cases where victims cannot testify; opponents — including LeadingAge Maryland, Lifespan Network and SEIU 1199 — said the upfront and ongoing costs, privacy concerns and the risk of driving small assisted‑living providers underground outweigh benefits unless the state offsets costs and clarifies enforcement.

Attorney General Brown and prosecutors showed committee members still images (submitted to the committee record) from prosecutions that they said came from hallway or door‑area cameras: examples included a resident shoved, a day‑program assault, a caregiver dragging and kicking a resident and a neighbor’s doorbell camera that recorded abuse. Brown said the bill focuses on common areas to limit intrusions into private rooms.

Opponents described the likely cost burden and operational challenges. LeadingAge told the committee initial install costs could range from $50,000 to $200,000 per community and ongoing storage and maintenance $40,000–$80,000 annually; Lifespan and SEIU warned that constant surveillance could harm staff recruitment and residents’ sense of dignity, and that smaller assisted living homes (74% have nine beds or fewer, one witness said) could face disproportionate burdens. Witnesses suggested alternatives: more frequent surveys, complaint‑led targeted inspections, strengthening staffing and ownership transparency.

Ending: The committee requested additional fiscal detail and said it would seek follow‑up with the Office of Health Care Quality. No vote was taken at the hearing.