The segments below provide a brief overview of MACo’s work on public safety and corrections policies in the 2025 General Assembly session.
Counties are primary providers of public safety services in the state. Each county must have an elected sheriff with deputies, and some also have a county police force. Additionally, each county operates a local jail that holds incarcerated individuals awaiting trial and those sentenced to 18 months or less.
Maryland’s 447th legislative session convened amidst a substantial concern over the State’s fiscal situation, with weakened revenues and cost increases for many services at every level of government. Despite the fiscal limitations, a wide range of policy issues received a full debate, with many resolutions arising from the 90-day annual process. MACo’s legislative committee guided the association’s positions on hundreds of bills, yielding many productive compromises and gains spanning counties’ uniquely wide portfolio.
Follow these links for more coverage on our Conduit Street blog and Legislative Database.
MACo supported with amendments HB 1084/SB 942 – Correctional Services – Medication-Assisted Treatment Funding. This bill would have clarified State procedures and viable funding sources for medication-assisted treatment in local detention centers. County-offered amendments would clarify the original intent of the bill – reflecting a careful balance to resolve a prolonged and vexing issue to help the State finally reach compliance with at least one of several missed obligations within local detention centers. This bill did not pass.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo opposed HB 647/SB 702 – Correctional Services – Restrictive Housing. This bill would have changed the definition of restrictive housing to require more than 7 hours of out-of-cell time in a 24-hour period. This shift is up from 2 hours. Unlike state facilities, county run detention centers simply do not have the physical space, staff, and in some instances, hours in the day to safely comply with this mandate. While most detention centers are able to provide more than the minimum requirement, an adjustment this substantial would not be practical or possible in most smaller, locally operated facilities. The bill did not pass but conversations are expected to continue to help lawmakers understand the constraints and opportunities in local facilities.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 836 – County Police Accountability Boards – Investigation of Complaints of Police Misconduct. This bill would have authorized county governments to allow police accountability boards to investigate allegations of police misconduct and issue subpoenas as part of an investigation. Currently, this authority only rests with the administrative charging committees. This bill would have provided an additional tool for local governments to make adjustments, only if deemed necessary, to ensure the integrity of the civilian review process of police misconduct. This bill did not pass, likely due to issues with confusion of authority and redundancies in process.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo submitted a letter of information on SB 977 – Enforcement of Federal Immigration Law – Restrictions on Access to Information (Maryland Data Privacy Act). This bill aimed to protect the private information of an individual that is not legally required to be shared with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), or any other federal agency. While well-intentioned, the original form of the bill brought up more concerns than clarifications, including ambiguity in local requirements, lack of a clear framework for proposed new penalties, and bookended consequences for local governments that could be impossible to avoid even with a good faith action. This bill did not pass.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported SB 690 – Higher Education – Scholarships for Correctional Officers. This bill would have expanded eligibility for the Maryland Police Officers and Probation Agents Scholarship Program to include correctional officers. The legislation was an opportunity for local governments to have another tool for building and sustaining a qualified and enthusiastic workforce of employees while incentivizing their professional development and career longevity. This bill did not pass but does have bi-partisan support and could be reconsidered in the next session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 1107/SB 827 – Juvenile Law – Confinement and Restrictive Housing. The bill would have prohibited the placement of a juvenile in an adult detention center, including all local detention centers. This bill wisely recognized that adult detention centers operated by both the State and counties are not suitable for the holding of minors under any circumstances. This effort has been a priority for a number of years and is broadly understood to be an important step for protecting juveniles who are incarcerated in Maryland. While the bill did not pass, future efforts are expected.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 669 – Law Enforcement Officers – Body-Worn Cameras – Requirements with amendments. This bill would have implemented a balanced release of police body camera footage, while being conscious of the broader privacy concerns of Maryland residents who might – either intentionally or inadvertently – be recorded by public safety officials. The provisions of this bill have been a MACo priority for a number of years, with much bi-partisan support. The potential to protect victims, defendants, public safety officials, record custodians, and the public at-large remains an important focus of legislatures. This bill did not pass but the issue is likely to only increase in priority level, particularly as digital recording devices are becoming increasingly more prevalent.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo originally opposed HB 728/SB 495 – Opioid Restitution Fund – Authorized Uses. As introduced this bill would allow the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) to access operating funds for the department from the State opioid settlement dollars. The potential for these deductions to erode remediation efforts was a major concern for local jurisdictions that are doing recovery work in communities every day as a result of the devastating consequences of the opioid crisis. As amended, this bill clarifies a set amount to be redirected to the Attorney General’s Office as well as specifies a date when the withdrawals would conclude. This bill passed in the amended posture. These short-term changes will enable the OAG to continue recovering funds for victims and preserve resources for remediation.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 985 – Police Discipline – Administrative Charging Committees – Additional Charging Committee with amendments. This bill would have allowed a county to authorize the use of an additional Administrative Charging Committee (ACC) to review investigations into police misconduct that are the result of a civilian complaint. Counties urged some clarifying amendments to ensure proper implementation of this facet, when needed, particularly to make sure consistency and equity were paramount. This bill ultimately did not pass, but in the future could present a valuable tool for jurisdictions with multiple municipality police forces. There is no civilian review process authorized at the municipality level, so county programs must review all of those cases in addition to claims filed against a county law enforcement agency.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 186 – Police Discipline – Trial Board Composition with amendments. This bill would have expanded the pool of individuals who can act as the chair of a trial board for the review of a civilian complaint of police misconduct. Broadening the pool of potential candidates would help bring more speed and efficiency to the civilian review process. The bill as introduced, however, made the requirements so general that they ran the risk of discrediting and eroding the integrity of the process. The bill did not pass but changes with more stringent and clear requirements for these positions could be an opportunity for this process in the future.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 222/SB 175 – Public Safety – Fuel Gas Piping Systems and Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing – Prohibitions and Study. This bill requires that corrugated stainless steel tubing (CSST) meet certain requirements in order to be sold, transferred, or distributed. The bills prohibition also outlines consequences for a violation of the new statute and establishes a work group to study more opportunities to ensure safety for residents and first responders. Promoting standards for these materials can help promote safety and avoid some of the worst dangers threatening our first responders during active structure fires. This bill passed.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported with amendments HB 1222 – Public Safety – Immigration Enforcement (Maryland Values Act). This bill originally required local detention centers and law enforcement to hold certain detainees at the request of federal immigration authorities for the purpose of transferring the individual to federal custody. These requirements were only if the individual was found to be someone unlawfully present in the country and convicted of a crime of violence. Additionally, the bill sought to discontinue some local detention center contracts with federal immigration authorities. MACo’s position was to ensure that some form of documentation be required in order to make the mandated transfer. This would allow local jurisdictions to comply with the provisions of the bill while also not increasing liability exposure for the potential violation of an individual’s constitutional rights. While the bill attempted to abolish three local programs, full cooperation with immigration enforcement was still allowed, and actually mandated by the provisions of the bill, precluding only the formalized agreement. The bill did pass but heavily amended, leaving the existing programs in place and with no mandate to transfer a covered individual. Detention centers without programs are welcome to establish them but also can move forward with federal cooperation as the bill intended. Additionally, the remaining provisions of the bill primarily require local jurisdictions to adopt a policy for compliance with immigration enforcement.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 309/SB 326 – Public Safety – Law Enforcement Agencies – Peer Support Programs with amendments. This bill promotes more stability within the public safety workforce across Maryland, where employers currently face historic challenges and vacancies. By expanding opportunities for law enforcement officers and corrections officers to seek support from their peers when struggling with the mental and emotional impacts of working in public safety, counties can ensure better community outcomes. The bill passed without the inclusion of corrections officers, but conversations with stakeholders assure the potential for the detention center officers to be included in future legislative measure.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo opposed HB 1361 – Public Safety – Law Enforcement Agencies – Standardized Report Writing System (Maryland Statewide Law Enforcement Report Writing Standardization Act). This bill requires all law enforcement agencies statewide to adopt a state-mandated, uniform reporting system centralized at the state level. Additionally, it mandates the discontinued use of current local reporting systems that house not only police reports but also large amounts of sensitive information and vital documents regarding victims and people of interest, as well as investigatory reports, evidence, and the like. This bill had significant fiscal and operational challenges to overcome at both the state and local level and did not pass.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 139 – Public Safety – Police Accountability – Deadline for Completion of Investigation with amendments. This bill sought to clarify a timeline of nine months for when a law enforcement agency must complete a review of a misconduct complaint from the public. This legislation likely does not leave enough time for a thorough investigation by the agency, so counties suggested some modest changes to this timeline. The requests made by MACo ensure both law enforcement and civilian boards have sufficient time to adequately investigate and review. Those provisions were adopted into SB 533 discussed below, which ultimately passed the legislature.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 885/SB 625 – Public Safety – Police Accountability – Investigation Records Relating to Unfounded and Exonerated Complaints. This bill would have allowed for law enforcement officers with exonerated or unfounded claims, following a police misconduct investigation, to be expunged from a personnel record. Accordingly, the bill would have left the records on file for three years before removal. These expungements would only be for claims where the officer either followed procedure or the behavior in question did not happen. The provisions of HB 885 could help not only recruit more officers into the profession but also keep qualified officers in the field. This bill did not pass.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 238/SB 533 – Public Safety – Police Accountability – Time Limit for Filing Administrative Charges with amendments. This bill aimed to clarify a number of procedural elements in the civilian oversight process for police accountability. The tolling provisions of the bill ensure that when criminal charges are pending against an officer for an incident that is also the subject of a civilian complaint of misconduct, then the criminal case must be resolved first. By reviewing the cases consecutively, the bill reduces the risk of a 5th or 14th amendment violation which could lead to a mistrial. Without these provisions the potentially responsible officer could avoid consequences for actions due to the system’s susceptibility to procedural errors. Additionally, the bill clarified the investigation and review timelines to ensure that both the agency and civilian review teams have sufficient time to properly assess each case. The bill passed.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo submitted a letter of information on HB 1431 – State and Local Agencies – Enforcement of Federal Immigration Law – Restrictions on Access to Information (Maryland Data Privacy Act). This bill attempted to strengthen existing standards regarding the protection of information that shall be denied in an instance where immigration enforcement may be the cause for the request. To that end, the challenges the bill presents are numerous and the MACo letter of information was intended to add to the conversation as lawmakers consider next steps, if inclined to advance this bill. The bill did not pass but an effort was made to clarify some of the language that was found to be contradictory and confusing, particularly with the penalty provisions at stake for counties as employers.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 707 – Vehicle Laws – Licenses, Identification Cards, and Moped Operator’s Permits – Notation of Nonapparent Disability (Eric’s ID Law). This bill requires that an original and renewal application for a license, an identification card, or a moped operator’s permit allow an applicant to choose to indicate on the document the applicant’s nonapparent disability. Additionally, the bill clarifies that an individual can request the removal of the information indicating a nonapparent disability and specifies terms under which the disclosure of the information is permissible. This bill was broadly supported and passed.