Prince George's County review finds Administrative Charging Committee handling more complaints with limited staff

The Administrative Charging Committee has reviewed hundreds of complaints since it began operating and sustained about a third of allegation findings, county officials told the Prince George’s County Council Health, Human Services and Public Safety Committee during an FY26 budget presentation.

Inspector General Anthony Bennett, director of the Office of Integrity, Compliance and Police Accountability (OICPA), said the agency “oversee[s] 29 law enforcement agencies that that actively work within Prince George’s County,” and described the ACC as a civilian board that reviews citizen-initiated disciplinary matters.

Isabelle Williams, program administrator for the ACC, told the committee that since the office began operating the ACC has received 640 allegations and that the committee sustained 203 allegations. She said the ACC has held seven trainings for police internal affairs units and received investigations from 15 law enforcement agencies.

Why it matters: County staff said the ACC’s caseload and some newly enacted or pending legislation will increase workload and require additional personnel and an upgraded case management system so citizens can track complaint status and staff can reduce review time.

Committee budget staff presented the ACC’s FY26 request and said the committee’s proposed total budget is $1,400,000, a decrease of $257,700 from FY25. The general fund portion of the ACC’s FY26 request is $1,200,000, a decrease of $64,700; staffing was listed as unchanged at eight positions.

Williams gave a breakdown of outcomes and types of allegations. She said the ACC’s primary disposition is “sustained,” at about 34% of allegations, and that the most common allegation category is “conduct unbecoming,” followed by attention to duty, neglect of duty, use of force, discourtesy and protocol violations. Williams told the committee that the ACC sustained more body-camera related violations in the past year because committee members expect familiarity with those general orders.

Williams also said the ACC has issued 17 terminations since opening; seven terminations occurred last year, and of those seven she said three were for law violations, two for unbecoming conduct and two for false statements.

Committee members pressed staff on repeat respondents. Council member Olson asked how many officers returned repeatedly to the ACC. Williams said the ACC observed about a 20% recidivism rate but has not implemented a systematic follow-up process except for domestic violence cases. Bennett, the inspector general, said his office is developing tracking to identify repeat respondents and will work with the county’s Chiefs Association and individual agencies to consider training or other remedial steps.

Staff recommendations and needs described to the committee included a capital request for a full-service case management system that would allow public tracking of complaints, and additional staff to handle future workload increases and statutory review periods.

Ending: Committee staff said some FY26 ACC expenditures are funded centrally through the Office of Information Technology and that portions of accountability-related costs were moved between agencies in the proposed budget. Council members asked for follow-up on tracking repeat respondents and on steps to shorten review times.