Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Special Police topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Delegation pauses vote on 'special police officer' designation amid legal concerns
Summary
Charles County delegates agreed to hold further action on proposed 'special police officer' enabling legislation after members raised concerns about the designation's legal scope and potential slippery-slope effects.
CHARLES COUNTY, Jan. 24 — The Charles County delegation held off final action Friday on legislation that would authorize a special designation for certain security personnel, citing uncertainty about the legal powers tied to a "special police officer" classification.
Senator Jackson told colleagues, "I did not sign off on that … I am still not comfortable with that piece," explaining she expected more information before consenting to the proposal. Delegation members said the item remained on the agenda for further review.
Members raised two distinct concerns: whether the personnel would be county employees or private contractors and whether the designation could expand powers beyond ordinary private security. Delegate Deborah Davis said the workers being discussed were "not law enforcement. They're working, quote, quote, unquote, private security for the county. So they're not officer. They're not state officers or county officers. They're private officers." Another member flagged the statutory reference, noting "there's a designation in the Public Safety Article that could get ... we need to go down [that] road," and recommended consulting legal counsel.
Discussion included requests to route the proposal back to staff for clarification and to invite input from the chair of ECMCT (an external stakeholder the speaker identified as wanting to provide input). Delegates agreed to hold the bill for further review and to ask legal counsel to advise whether the county's proposed use of buses or coordination with outside groups would create conflicts of interest or other compliance issues.
Why it matters: The delegation flagged that labeling private security personnel as "special police officers" implicates statutory authority and public-safety responsibilities; members said they needed more detail on responsibilities, limits and oversight before endorsing legislation.
What’s next: Delegation staff and legal counsel will be asked to provide a written opinion and additional details; members said they would revisit the proposal at a future meeting.
