County Council Works Through Amendments On Police Accountability Board

Debate continues on the Anne Arundel County Council’s proposed Police Accountability Board (PAB).

At its April 5 meeting, the council heard testimony from several members of the public, all of whom opposed Bill 16-22, which establishes the board, in its current form.

Many of those providing testimony represent The Anne Arundel County Coalition for Police Accountability – a group of more than 20 local organizations whose goal is to ensure the final version of the Police Accountability Board stands to protect and involve those populations most affected by police misconduct.

“You’ve been moving toward passing a police advisory board, which is not the same as an accountability board,” said Anne Arundel County resident Linda Gardner.

During the 2021 General Assembly session, the Maryland legislature passed House Bill 670, mandating that counties establish PABs. The boards are designed to provide policy advice through meetings with law enforcement agencies, review disciplinary matters stemming from public complaints, receive complaints of police misconduct filed by members of the public, and more.

The PABS will replace the Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights, which guaranteed certain procedural safeguards to law enforcement officers. By law, Anne Arundel County must have a PAB established by July 1, 2022.

The council voted on a series of amendments to Bill 16-22.

Amendments that required drug testing and a high school diploma to serve on the PAB were defeated. Both amendments were sponsored by District 5 representative Amanda Fiedler, who prior to the vote explained she found it “important to put basic standards on par with the standards of being a law enforcement officer in our county.”

A representative from the county executive’s office responded that they felt these measures went too far in prohibiting community members from serving on the PAB. Prior to voting “nay,” Councilman Nathan Volke of District 3 pointed out that county council members themselves are not subjected to drug tests.

These amendments were two that the Coalition for Police Accountability opposed, making their defeat a win for many in attendance.

A handful of other issues raised by the coalition did not go their way: an amendment prohibiting residents with prior felony convictions passed, while one that attempted to keep the immediate families of law enforcement officers from becoming voting members of the PAB failed.

An ongoing theme throughout the testimony is that House Bill 670 is a floor, not a ceiling.

“This plane is still being built as we’re trying to fly it,” said Councilwoman Allison Pickard of District 2.

The lack of direct language in House Bill 670 on the matter of whether or not county PABs can have independent investigative authority was debated once again as it has since Bill 16-22 was introduced. Councilwoman Lisa Rodvien’s amendment requiring the Police Accountability Board to investigate any complaints it receives independently and concurrently with other internal investigations failed, with both the county legal team and other council members voicing concern that House Bill 670 does not provide this authority.

State Delegate Sandy Bartlett (District 32) agreed that the legislation she helped to draft should be seen as a starting point for the counties tasked with creating these boards.

“We did our best to create the best framework for counties to use. We, in my opinion, did not create something that was in stone. We created what we thought would be the beginning of a conversation,” Bartlett said, adding that she has asked the Maryland attorney general to draft a letter clarifying some of the language in the state bill in hopes that provides some clarity for council members.

The council will continue with this matter at the April 18 meeting.