Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Illegal Dumping Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Maryland bills aim to expand public reporting and MVA photo access to crack down on illegal dumping
Summary
Lawmakers discussed two related measures: one to let Prince George's County offer monetary rewards for video evidence leading to convictions, and another to give Baltimore City—s special investigations unit access to Motor Vehicle Administration (MVA) photographic records to link vehicles to illegal dumping footage.
Delegate Denise Roberts (Prince George's County) and Baltimore City representatives urged the Environment and Transportation Committee on March 12 to expand tools for policing illegal dumping, citing high cleanup costs and enforcement staffing shortages.
The bills discussed would let counties make greater use of community-supplied evidence and vehicle owner information. Delegate Denise Roberts described House Bill 15-27, which—if enacted as a local Prince George's County program—would allow members of the public to submit video evidence of illegal dumping and receive half of any fine collected if that evidence leads to a conviction. Roberts said fines for illegal dumping currently range from $500 to $1,500, and that expanded reporting could increase fine collections and public engagement.
Separately, testimony from Baltimore City officials supported House Bill 15-33, which would authorize the Motor Vehicle Administration to share digital photographic images and signatures with Baltimore City's Special Investigations Unit in the Department of Housing and Community Development for illegal dumping enforcement. Nina Themlas, Baltimore City director of government affairs, said the unit already operates an extensive camera network and needs access to MVA photos to connect license plates to named vehicle owners quickly; she told the committee the city logs more than 15,000 service requests and about 20,000 illegal-dumping complaints annually.
Speakers framed both bills as responses to enforcement capacity constraints. Roberts cited law-enforcement staffing shortages in multiple Maryland counties that limit the police ability to prioritize litter enforcement. Baltimore City's special investigations director, David McGannis, said the police can do MVA photo searches now but can take weeks to process requests; city staff said quicker access would speed prosecutions of repeat offenders.
Supporters pointed to other states— programs as precedents. Roberts referenced reward and reporting programs in California and Florida; Themlas and city staff described an existing secure MVA data-access procedure that would be extended specifically to the city's special investigations unit. Questions from the committee focused on jurisdictional scope (Roberts said the Prince George's provision was being processed as a delegation/local bill) and data-privacy safeguards for license photos.
No formal votes were recorded during the hearing. Committee members asked for clarifying information about county-specific amendments and data-security procedures; sponsors said they will provide amendments and that Prince George's and Baltimore City are coordinating with state agencies.
Background and next steps: Both measures were presented for committee consideration; the Prince George's measure is moving as a delegation/local item and the Baltimore City MVA-access measure was described as limited to access already governed by secure procedure. Committee members requested follow-up detail on data handling and how reward payments would be administered before taking final action.
