WAITING FOR THE PICTURE TO POP UP.
[00:00:02]
OKAY. GET STARTED.GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. I'M GOING TO CALL THE MAY 7TH, 2025 POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY BOARD MEETING TO ORDER.
THAT'S JUST A SMALL ANNOUNCEMENT.
I'VE BEEN ASKED TO ACT AS THE CHAIRMAN.
I'M SORRY. THE BOARD CHAIRMAN TONIGHT.
AND WITH THAT, WE'LL DO THE ROLL CALL.
DAVE REILLY, DAVE WHALEY PRESENT.
TODDLER. PRESENT. PHIL CLARK, PRESENT.
GARIN. JOHN. PRESENT AND ALSO PRESENT.
MIKE RUSS, PB ATTORNEY AND KIM RAEDER THE PAB ADMINISTRATOR.
SO FIRST UP FOR THE ITEM OF DISCUSSION FOR THE BOARD IS THE.
POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY BOARD, ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGING COMMITTEE, AND TRIAL BOARDS. CHAPTER 20 OF THE POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY CODE OF PUBLIC LOCAL LAWS OF CAROLINE COUNTY. AND THE RESOLUTION THAT YOU'VE ALL BEEN GIVEN TO DISCUSS.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGING COMMITTEE HAS ALREADY DISCUSSED THAT THAT RESOLUTION AS WELL, AND PROVIDED FEEDBACK, THAT WITH THE TO TO THE BABY.
ADMINISTRATOR, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENT? CONCERNS. QUESTIONS? THAT THE BOARD HAS BEEN DELAYED.
IN REFERENCE TO THIS. I'M SORRY, IN REFERENCE TO THIS.
IN REFERENCE TO THE TO THE 2025 ORDINANCE, YES.
THE PROPOSED BIGGEST CHANGE IS JUST TAKING THE NUMBER DOWN FROM 7 TO 5.
RIGHT? YES. ONE OF THE CHANGES.
OKAY. AS WELL. KIM, DO YOU WANT TO GIVE ON THE RECORD A BRIEFING OF THE CHANGES? SURE. SO THE RESOLUTION WAS ORIGINALLY PASSED WHEN THE POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ACT WAS PUT UPON THE COUNTY. AND WHAT THEY HAVE DONE IS OUTLINED, AS YOU ALL CAN SEE, WHAT THE ROLE IS OF THE COUNTY, AS WELL AS EACH OF THE BOARDS.
CURRENT IT'S BEEN AMENDED TWO TIMES AND CURRENTLY WE ARE IN THE ORDINANCE, WHICH WE'RE GOING TO SWITCH OVER TO AN ORDINANCE WHICH WILL GO THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS. IT WILL HAVE THREE READINGS, A PUBLIC HEARING AS WELL AS THERE CAN BE AMENDMENTS MADE ALONG THE WAY.
WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS ORDINANCE WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AS WELL AS THE POLICE CHIEFS. THROUGH THE DIFFERENT MUNICIPALITIES, AS WELL AS THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGING COMMITTEE WHICH WAS MENTIONED THERE, EDITS HAVE BEEN SUGGESTED, SOME HAVE BEEN ADDED IN, AND WE ALSO HAVE SOME PROPOSED CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSIONERS THAT WILL STILL BE DISCUSSED.
SO THIS EVENING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO JUST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
YES, ONE OF THEM IS MAKING THE BOARD A LITTLE BIT SMALLER.
I KNOW, AS YOU ALL KNOW, THAT ATTENDANCE HAS BEEN A PROBLEM WITH SOME PEOPLE'S SCHEDULES AS WELL AS WE'VE HAD SOME RESIGNATIONS.
SO WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A SMALLER BOARD AS WELL AS THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGING COMMITTEE. AS EVERYONE IS AWARE, AT SOME POINT IN TIME THERE WERE QUESTIONS ABOUT BRINGING AN OFFICER IN IN FRONT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGING COMMITTEE TO SPEAK DURING A INVESTIGATIVE WHEN THE ACC LOOKS AT THE INVESTIGATION AFTER THE LEAGUE HAS PRESENTED IT TO THEM, IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, THEY WERE GOING TO ASK AN OFFICER TO COME IN, WHICH IS THEIR RIGHT TO DO.
BUT WHAT HAS BEEN DECIDED AND WHAT HAS BEEN SUGGESTED, NOT ONLY IN THIS COUNTY BUT OUTSIDE IN OTHER COUNTIES IN THE STATE OF MARYLAND, IS THAT WE DON'T CALL AN OFFICER IN FIRST THAT THERE ARE SOME OTHER STEPS TO TAKE PRIOR TO CALLING AN OFFICER IN.
SO THAT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED IN THIS AS WELL, WHICH IS ON PAGE FIVE, NUMBER C. LET ME SEE. SO MEMBERSHIP WAS ADDRESSED ACC OH, ALSO WITH THE ACC THERE WAS SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER AN FOP MEMBER CAN BE SERVED ON THE BOARD, AS WELL AS WHAT IS CONSIDERED A RELATIVE.
[00:05:06]
SO IF YOU HAVE A BROTHER IN LAW OR IS IT A SISTER WHO THEY WORK IN THIS COUNTY? DO THEY WORK IN ANOTHER COUNTY IN THE STATE OF MARYLAND? THINGS LIKE THAT HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED AND SUGGESTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE. SO THIS ISN'T NECESSARILY SET IN STONE.SO IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT YOU SEE THAT MAYBE WAS IN THE RESOLUTION IS ALSO IN HERE THAT YOU FEEL SHOULD BE CHANGED, ADDED TO, DELETED, FEEL FREE TO DO THAT AS WELL.
LET'S SEE. RESIGNATION AND REMOVAL.
ANOTHER ITEM IS IF YOU DO NOT ATTEND A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF MEETINGS WITHIN THE YEAR, YOU ARE AUTOMATICALLY RESIGNING FROM THE BOARD.
SO NO LONGER WHO DECIDES WHAT A GOOD EXCUSE IS? IT'LL BE IF YOU DON'T ATTEND THIS MANY MEETINGS IN A ROW WITHIN A CALENDAR YEAR, THEN YOU AUTOMATICALLY ARE RESIGNING FROM THE BOARD.
KIM, CAN I ASK A QUICK QUESTION ON THAT? SURE. OF COURSE. WHAT WOULD A VIRTUAL MEETING NUMBER TWO MEMBERS ARE EXPECTED TO ATTEND ALL BOARD MEETINGS IN PERSON.
WOULD VIRTUAL NOT BE AN OPTION? AND THAT WHICH PAGE IS THAT? AGAIN, IF YOU DON'T MIND PAGE. PAGE NINE. OH, IT'S ON PAGE NINE. OKAY.
I KNOW WE DID VIRTUAL LAST MEETING TO GET A QUORUM.
I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THAT'S NOT AN OPTION.
SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ADDRESS.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO VIRTUAL MEETINGS.
THAT IS SOMETHING 100% THAT WE CAN WRITE.
IF YOU ALL VOTE UPON THAT, THEN I CAN PUT IN A LETTER AND PEN IT AND YOU CAN APPROVE IT, AND WE CAN SUGGEST IT AS A CHANGE.
IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL FEEL OR A MAJORITY OF YOU FEEL WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO THIS BOARD, I THINK OTHER ORGANIZATIONS ARE MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION JUST BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE'S CRAZY SCHEDULES, PEOPLE BEING OUT OF TOWN, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER. I MEAN, THAT'S COULD HAVE BEEN WHY IT DECIDED TO DROP OFF BECAUSE IT WAS NEVER IN TOWN. SO HE JUST FIGURED, YOU KNOW, I CAN'T I CAN'T FULFILL MY OBLIGATION HERE. WHERE IF HE COULD HAVE COUNTED FOR, YOU KNOW, THE VIRTUAL.
AND THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE BECAUSE I'M WITH YOU. I HAVE WATCHED WHEN I FIRST STARTED IN THIS ROLE AND MOVING FORWARD, A MAJORITY OF THE MEETINGS THAT I WATCH, ALL OF THE MEETINGS THAT I WATCHED BEFORE WE STARTED HAVING OURS WAS ONLINE, AND THAT'S HOW I LEARNED WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH THE OTHER COUNTIES. SO THAT'S ANOTHER REASON WHY WE STARTED STREAMING IT, SO WE CAN MAKE SURE EVERYONE CAN SEE WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IN THIS COUNTY.
SO IF WE DO IT, IT WOULD BE THE SAME WAY IT WOULD BE LIVE FOR THE PUBLIC TO ATTEND, BUT IT WOULD ALSO BE SOMETHING WHERE YOU ALL CAN ATTEND VIRTUALLY AS WELL.
SO WE CAN PUT THAT DOWN, AND I'LL WRITE THAT DOWN AS ONE OF THE SUGGESTIONS THAT YOU ALL HAVE.
WHAT ELSE WAS I SAYING? SO RESIGNATION.
WE COVERED THAT. I'M TRYING TO THINK IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE THAT I'M MISSING.
I THINK THOSE WERE THE HIGH POINTS FOR SURE. OKAY.
AND THEN THE TRIAL CARDS, WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT TRIAL BOARDS.
SO WE STILL HAVE A TRIAL BOARD PENDING THAT WE ARE WAITING FOR A JUDGE, A RETIRED JUDGE, TO HEAR.
SO IT WAS ARE WE GOING TO FIND ONE HERE LOCALLY IN THE COUNTY THAT IS WILLING TO SERVE AND ONLY SERVE ON A TRIAL BOARD? AND AS YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WE'VE HAD ONE THAT IS STILL PENDING.
WE DON'T HAVE MULTIPLE ONES. SO A RETIRED LAW JUDGE WOULD HAVE TO THIS WOULD BE THEIR SOLE JOB. SO UNFORTUNATELY, FINDING SOMEONE HAS BEEN VERY DIFFICULT.
I'VE TRIED AND TRIED AND TRIED.
SO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO NOW IS TAKE IT UP WITH THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS POTENTIALLY, AND THEN THE COUNTIES WILL BE WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING IT, BUT THE MUNICIPALITIES WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING.
IT IS WHAT IS PROPOSED IN THIS.
EVEN THOUGH I KNOW THAT THE MUNICIPALITY, THE CHIEFS, WOULD PREFER FOR THE COUNTY TO PAY FOR IT.
SO THAT'S THAT'S BEEN GOING BACK AND FORTH, BUT THAT'S ALSO INCLUDED IN HERE SINCE THAT TRIAL BOARD HAS BEEN PENDING FOR SO LONG. AND THEN IT WAS OKAY.
WELL, WE CAN'T FIND A RETIRED JUDGE THAT WOULD EITHER BE FREE OR VERY REASONABLY PRICED. NOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FACE REALITY, AND THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO ANOTHER DIRECTION.
AND THEN IT'S WHO'S GOING TO PAY FOR IT.
WELL, UP TILL NOW YOU HAVEN'T HAD A NEED FOR ONE EITHER RIGHT. WELL WE'VE HAD ONE.
AND I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT IT ABOUT THE DUE PROCESS FOR THE OFFICER TOO.
SO THAT HAS BEEN SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR A REALLY LONG TIME NOW. SO IT NEEDS TO GET SETTLED. AND THERE'S NO LONGER.
LET ME SEE WHAT I CAN DO KIND OF THING.
IT'S LIKE, LET'S LET'S FIND SOMEBODY.
BUT IT IS EXPENSIVE. SO I'VE LOOKED INTO IT.
I'VE INQUIRED, SO IT'S JUST ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO HAPPEN.
RIGHT. THAT'S THE AGENCY IS BASED IN HUNT VALLEY, CORRECT? YEAH. SO I KNOW I'M AWARE.
WE JUST WENT THROUGH 15 TO 18,000.
IS WHAT IT'S CALLED. OH, OKAY.
AND THAT'S WHAT, 6000? YEAH. WELL, THAT'S WHAT THEY SAID. FOR A TRIAL. FOR A TRIAL BOARD. THAT'S STILL HOT.
WOW. THAT'S A THREE DAY TRIAL BOARD.
[00:10:02]
I MEAN, BUT THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE IS THE MOST EXPENSIVE PART OF THE.WOW. I MEAN, HE'S GETTING $250 AN HOUR, AND THAT'S FROM THE TIME HE WAS IN BALTIMORE COUNTY TO THE TIME HE GETS HERE.
AND THAT'S ANY PREP TIME AS WELL.
SO IF HE NEEDS TO PREP AND READ EVERYTHING AND SO ON AND SO FORTH PRIOR TO THE TRIAL, HE'S HE'S AT THAT CLOCK.
YOU KNOW, ATTORNEYS ARE. YEAH, SURE.
OH, WOW. WOW. WELL, THEN I THINK THAT'S ALSO LIKE MEALS AND EXPENSES AND.
RIGHT. AND THEN I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT IS IT POSSIBLE BLANK CHECK VIRTUAL YOU KNOW, WILL THAT SAVE AN EXPENSE. AND YOU ALSO HAVE THE EXPENSE OF A COURT REPORTER, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. SO IT DOES TEND TO ADD UP RELATIVELY QUICKLY.
SO. AND THE PROBLEM WITH THIS, THIS LAW IS THE FACT THAT NOT THIS LAW, ANNAPOLIS IS THE FACT THAT THERE IS NO PROCESS FOR EVERYTHING IS PUNITIVE.
SO YOU GET A INSTEAD OF A PUNITIVE ANYTHING THE BOARD THE ACC GIVES IS PUNITIVE.
SO THERE IS NO WAY FOR YOU TO GET A WRITTEN REPRIMAND.
IT'S A WRITTEN REPRIMAND INSTEAD OF JUST A DOCUMENTED COUNCIL. SO POLICE OFFICERS WHO DISAGREE WITH THE WRITTEN REPRIMAND GO IN THEIR PERSONNEL FILE ARE GOING TO TAKE IT TO TRIAL. SO THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
THAT'S THE ISSUE. SO MOST POLICE OFFICERS ARE GOING THEY DISAGREE WITH IT, ARE GOING TO TAKE IT, YOU KNOW, TO THE TRIAL BOARD BECAUSE THE TRIAL BOARD MIGHT SAY, NO, THIS IS TOO EXTREME.
YOU KNOW, WE AGREE THAT IT SHOULD BE A DOCUMENTED COUNSELING OR NOTHING AT ALL. AND THEN THAT'S WHY IT'S WORTH AND IT'S NOT IT'S COSTING THEM, YOU KNOW, AN ATTORNEY OR AN ATTORNEY, BUT IT'S ALSO GOING THEIR PERSONNEL FILE.
SO THEY BELIEVE THAT IT'S IT'S IT'S AN ACTION THEY TAKE. AND THEY'RE YOU'RE SEEING AN EXTREMELY LARGE AMOUNT OF TRIAL BOARDS THROUGHOUT THE STATE BECAUSE OF THIS.
AM I CORRECT? ROBBERIES HAVE INCREASED.
YEAH. ON THAT NOTE, IS THE TRIAL BOARD.
THERE'S SOME MEMBERSHIP REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT TRIAL BOARD TO IS.
WOULD IT BE ADVANTAGEOUS TO INCLUDE THAT INTO THIS? OR JUST TO NOTE IN THE I GUESS WHAT WE'RE DOING IS DENOTING THE TITLE THREE OF SUBTITLE ONE OF PUBLIC SAFETY ARTICLE OF STATE CODE AS TO REFERENCING WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE.
I KNOW WE'VE WROTE IN THIS WITH ACC MEMBERSHIP LOOKS LIKE IN THE MEMBERSHIP LOOKS LIKE WE HAVEN'T DEFINED WHAT THE TRIAL BOARD.
I KNOW IF TRIAL ACC MEMBER CAN'T BE ON THE TRIAL BOARD.
CORRECT. BUT THAT'S NOT IN HERE.
SO IN THE STATUTE THAT THAT DRAFTED IT JUST SAYS TRIAL, TRIAL BOARD SHALL BE COMPOSITION, POWERS AND DUTIES AS SET FORTH IN THE STATE STATUTE. RIGHT. SO I THINK THE IDEA WAS WE WEREN'T MAKING ANY CHANGES TO JUST REFER TO THAT. YEAH. GOTCHA. THERE'S AN OVERHANGING STATE.
SAVE TREES. RIGHT. THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.
IS THE BOARD HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? CONCERNS? COMMENTS? NOPE.
AUTHORIZED POLICE OFFICER CALLED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE SEC TO BE ACCOMPANIED BY REPRESENTATIVES. THEY CAN CHOOSE ANYONE.
YES. WHAT DOES DEFINE THAT? AND IT'S IN A STATE STATUTE THAT A LOT OF THE INFORMATION IN THIS STATUTE, IN THE STATE STATUTE, THAT'S IN THE STATE STATUTE AS WELL, AND IT DOES NOT DEFINE WHO REPRESENTATIVE IT IS. IT CAN BE A PERSONAL FRIEND, IT CAN BE AN FOP REPRESENTATIVE, OR IT CAN BE AN ATTORNEY.
ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE JUST LEAVING IT OPEN ENDED, BASICALLY. WELL, I MEAN, THAT'S THE THAT'S THE STATUTE AS WELL, BUT IT'S IN THE STATE STATUTE. SO THE STATE STATUTE CANNOT THE COUNTY STATUTE IS NOT GOING TO SUPERSEDE STATE STATUTE. YES.
AND THAT'S AN EXCELLENT POINT.
THERE'S JUST SOME THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED IN IN CERTAIN AREAS, LIKE I HAD MENTIONED ABOUT THE SEC ON FIVE.
SEE? THAT WAS JUST THERE'S SOME VERBIAGE THAT'S BEEN ADDED A LITTLE BIT, BUT MOST OF IT COMES RIGHT FROM THE LAW.
OKAY. LIKE WE CAN CHANGE THE NUMBER.
MEMBER NUMBERS. YOU KNOW, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE I DON'T KNOW HOW THE BOARD WE WERE TALKING EARLIER KEEPING ALTERNATE FIVE MEMBERS WITH ONE ALTERNATE JUST FOR SCHEDULING PURPOSES.
I MEAN, I KNOW WE'RE HAVING TROUBLE WITH PEOPLE ATTENDING MEETINGS, GETTING ATTENDANCE. IF WE HAD THAT ALTERNATE, IT WOULD SERIOUSLY HELP WITH QUORUMS THAT WE'VE HAD TROUBLE IN THE PAST.
SURE, SURE. I THINK, BUT ALSO TOO, IF YOU IF YOU ALLOW THE VIRTUAL THAT MAY THAT MAY ELIMINATE SOME OF THE YOU COULD THE SHORTAGES TO SEE.
YEAH. YEAH. YES. AND THERE'S BEEN TALK ABOUT THE PAB HAVING A PAB MEMBER OR TWO ON THE SEC, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.
TWO. SO WE'RE STILL WORKING OUT THE DETAILS OF HOW WE'RE GOING TO BECAUSE WE'RE MISSING NOW THERE'S A VACANT POSITION ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGING COMMITTEE AS WELL. SO WE'RE WORKING OUT THE DETAILS ON HOW THESE BOARDS, NUMBER WISE, ARE GOING TO WORK OUT WHO'S THERE MAY BE AN OVERLAP OF OCC AND PAB MEMBERS. AND ONCE I KNOW THAT, I'LL DEFINITELY LET YOU KNOW.
THAT'S SOMETHING THE COMMISSIONERS WILL MAKE THE DECISION ON SINCE THEY'RE DOING THE APPOINTMENT. AND THEN I BELIEVE THE PERSON OUR CHAIR HERE,
[00:15:06]
JOHN BARTLETT THAT RESIGNED, HE WAS APPOINTED BY THE COMMISSIONERS.SO THE COMMISSIONERS WILL BE APPOINTING THE NEXT ACC MEMBER, AS WELL AS APPOINTING THE POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY BOARD CHAIR, ALSO ON PAGE SEVEN, WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT GOING FROM SEVEN MEMBERS TO FIVE, THEN BELOW IT, WHEN IT'S TALKING ABOUT HOW MANY YEARS YOU SERVE, THAT'S BASING IT ON HAVING SEVEN MEMBERS.
SO SO THAT'S ONE OF THE CHANGES OF THE LAW TOO, IS, IS, IS THE RECOMMENDATION WAS TO TAKE AWAY THE TWO YEAR TERM.
SO IT WOULD BE YOU COULD SERVE FOR A LIFETIME.
YEAH. SO I MEAN AND THAT WAS ONE OF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE, FROM FROM MYSELF AND THE CHIEFS.
BECAUSE WHEN YOU GET SOMEBODY IN A SEAT AND THEY'RE THERE FOR EIGHT YEARS AND THEY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND WHAT'S THE SENSE OF TAKING THEM AWAY, IT'S LIKE, YOU KNOW, HAVING A GOOD DENTIST, YOU KNOW, AND YOU HAVE A GOOD DENTIST AND YOU ONLY GIVE THEM EIGHT YEARS TO GET YOUR TEETH. YOU KNOW, YOU MAY HAVE A OR A DOCTOR OR WHATEVER YOU GET COMFORTABLE WITH. YOU DON'T WANT TO GET RID OF THEM. SO ONCE YOU GET SOMEBODY IN A SEAT THAT'S COMFORTABLE, YOU MAY NOT WANT TO GET RID OF THEM. SO WE RECOMMEND THAT YOU TAKE AWAY THE TERM LIMIT.
SO THAT'S ONE OF THE CHANGES IN THERE AS WELL.
SURE. YES. THANK YOU. AND THEY'RE ALSO DOING THAT WITH OTHER BOARDS IN THE COUNTY BECAUSE THEY ARE HAVING, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES A PROBLEM GETTING PEOPLE TO STAY ON THE BOARD OR TO VOLUNTEER FOR THE BOARDS.
SO YOU STILL WOULD NEED TO BE REAPPOINTED AFTER YOUR TERM IS UP.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S A LIFELONG IN THE SENSE THAT YOU JUST CONTINUE FOREVER.
ONCE YOU'RE YOUR TERM LIMIT IS UP, YOU WILL NEED TO BE REAPPOINTED, BUT YOU'LL BE ABLE TO BE REAPPOINTED IF YOU SO CHOOSE TO.
EXACT SAME THING YOU JUST SAID, I REPEAT.
BUT SHE'S EXACTLY RIGHT. YOU WILL SERVE A FOUR YEAR TERM AND YOU HAVE TO BE REAPPOINTED. SO THE COMMISSIONERS DISAGREE WITH YOU OR DON'T LIKE YOU, THEN THEY CAN GET RID OF YOU. FAIR ENOUGH.
BUT AS WELL AS THIS BOARD CAN TO THE BOARD CAN GET RID OF MEMBERS THEMSELVES WITH A TWO THIRDS VOTE IN THE CURRENT STATE LAW. STATE STATUTE.
THANK YOU. I FORGOT ABOUT THAT EXPERT ON THIS. YEAH.
ASK AWAY BECAUSE I SHALL TELL YOU.
NO. THAT'S GOOD. THANK YOU FOR BEING CORRECT. KIMMEL. ONE THING SHE SAID THAT THAT THAT THAT THAT WHAT THE, THE ACC IS DOING AROUND THE STATE AS FAR AS CALLING LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS BEFORE THEM CAROLINE COUNTY, TO MY KNOWLEDGE AND TO THE STATE'S KNOWLEDGE, IS THE ONLY COUNTY ACC TO EVER CALL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER BEFORE THEIR BODY FROM THE DIRECTOR OF THE MARYLAND POLICE TRAINING COMMISSION. I THINK IT'S A IT'S IT'S FROWNED UPON IS WHAT I WAS GETTING AT.
YEAH. YES. AND IT IS AS A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE FOP, I WOULD ABSOLUTELY ADVOCATE THAT THEY DO NOT TESTIFY IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD.
IT HAS NOT ONLY CRIMINAL, CRIMINAL IMPLICATIONS, BUT CIVIL IMPLICATIONS WHICH ARE DOWN THE ROAD.
SOMEBODY COULD BE SUED FOR YEARS AFTER AN INCIDENT OCCURS.
AND THIS BOARD IS LONG DONE WITH ANY CASE IN THAT TIME FRAME.
SO YOU HAVE TO BE AWARE OF THOSE IMPLICATIONS AS WELL.
WOULD YOU MIND INTRODUCING YOURSELF JUST FOR THE AUDIENCE? MY NAME IS CHRIS QUINTON. I'M THE CURRENT FOP PRESIDENT HERE FOR CAROLINE COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE I APPRECIATE THAT. YES, MA'AM. YEAH, THIS JUST SO CHRIS KNOWS, THIS IS THIS IS THE PAB, NOT THE ACC, SO IT WOULDN'T BE TESTIFYING IN FRONT OF US.
YEAH, RIGHT. SO WITH THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS IN HERE.
REPRESENTATIVES, IS EVERYBODY OKAY WITH THIS? YOU GUYS SUPPORT IT. HOW DO YOU GUYS FEEL ABOUT IT? SO I WOULD SAY THAT THE CHIEF ONE IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE OF THE CHIEF ASSOCIATION OF CAROLINE COUNTY. HE IS DRAFTING A LETTER RIGHT NOW IN SUPPORT OF THIS DOCUMENT.
YOU KNOW, AGAIN, YOU GUYS ARE AN INDEPENDENT BODY OF THE ACC AND THE CHIEFS.
SO HOWEVER YOU SEE FIT TO TO ENDORSE THIS.
BUT I WILL SAY AS SHERIFF, I AND I HAVE HAD A LOT OF HANDS IN WITH THIS AND I DO AGREE WITH THIS.
AND THERE IS GOING TO BE THERE WAS A WE TALKED TO THE, THE SHOOT THE MARYLAND POLICE TRAINING COMMISSION DIRECTOR THE OTHER DAY, WAYNE SILVER IS HIS NAME IS ELUDING ME.
AND THERE IS ANOTHER CAVEAT TO THIS THAT HE SUGGESTED THAT BE ADDED INTO IT.
I'M NOT SURE IF KIM KNOWS YET OR NOT.
THAT THAT THAT THE CHARGE AT HAND IS THE ONLY CHARGE THAT THE ACC CAN LOOK AT.
RIGHT. AND AND HE SAID THAT'S ABSOLUTELY CONSTITUTIONAL AND WILL MEET THE MUSTER OF THE LAW. AND THAT THE LAW FOR THE STATE OF MARYLAND, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION OF THE LAW IS THAT IT IS A FLAW AND NOT A CEILING.
AND HE ABSOLUTELY WHEN THEY WERE ASKED ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT COUNTIES CAN PUT REGULATIONS OR OR STRINGS ON IT. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION WAS ABSOLUTELY.
AND THE SPIRIT OF THIS LAW WAS FOR THE COUNTIES TO HAVE CONTROL.
SO, ABSOLUTELY, I DON'T WANT TO SEEM LIKE A KNOW IT ALL, BUT I AM PRETTY, PRETTY PRETTY VESTED IN THIS IN THIS LAW.
SO AND I WOULD APPRECIATE THIS BODY SUPPORT.
AND, AND A LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THE MEN AND WOMEN WHO PUT ON THE UNIFORM IN THIS COUNTY
[00:20:04]
AND GO TO WORK EVERY DAY AND TRY TO DO A GOOD JOB.I WILL SPEAK FOR MAYBE ALL OF US ON THIS BOARD, THAT WE ALL SUPPORT THE POLICE OFFICERS OF THIS COUNTY AND DOING OUR EXECUTING OUR DUTIES. WE APPRECIATE, I THINK EVERYONE ON THIS BOARD ECHOES THAT SCENARIO. I KNOW, CERTAINLY, I HEAR IT TOO.
WELL, THEY JUST THEY JUST HEARD IT.
I CAN TELL YOU FROM TALKING TO SOME OF THEM WITH ALL THE CHANGES AROUND HERE.
I KNOW THIS IS SCARY STUFF FOR POLICE OFFICERS.
THIS IS A NEW LAW THAT WAS PUT IN PLACE.
SHERIFF BAKER KNOWS IT WAS A LAW THAT WAS VERY NOT CLEARLY DEFINED, HAS A LOT OF BUMPS IN IT, A LOT OF BUMPS IN IT.
AND WE'RE HERE BECAUSE WE HAVE TO BE HERE BECAUSE THIS BOARD HAS TO BE PRESENT A STATE LAW. AND WE'RE WE'RE IT'S A PLEASURE TO SERVE, BUT IT'S ALSO A PLEASURE TO SERVE OUR POLICE OFFICERS. ME SPEAKING PERSONALLY.
SO I AM HERE. IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS. IF NOT, I'M GOING TO STEP BACK. BECAUSE LAST TIME KIM KIM WAS READY TO SHOOT ME, I WAS HERE FOR TWO HOURS DEALING WITH THE ACC, SO. SO NO PROBLEM.
DOES THE BOARD FEEL LIKE WE NEED AN ALTERNATE OR NO BOARD? FIVE MEMBERS WITH AN ALTERNATE OR JUST FIVE MEMBERS? ALTERNATE? YES, PROBABLY IS A GOOD IDEA.
IT SAYS IN HERE, IF YOU DON'T MAKE 75% OF THE MEETING, YOU'RE OUT. WELL, THE GOOD THING IS, IF YOU HAVE AN ALTERNATE, SOMEBODY STEPS DOWN AND YOU HAVE SOMEBODY IMMEDIATELY TO STEP IN. YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO SEARCHING. THAT'S FAMILIAR WITH A GOOD POINT.
GOOD POINT. YEAH. THAT WAY YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE INTERVIEW PROCESS. YEAH.
START IT ALL OVER AGAIN. SO IF YOU HAD ALTERNATE ON THE BOOKS, IT'S NO HARMFUL IN. YEAH.
CAN WE PUT THAT INTO. OF COURSE.
SO WHAT WE'LL DO IS I'M WRITING THIS DOWN IS VIRTUAL MEETINGS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING AS WELL AS FIVE MEMBERS AND AN ALTERNATE.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT I HAVE SO FAR WITH YOUR THE TWO CHANGES.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT I MISSED? NOPE.
DO YOU NEED. I DID HAVE A QUESTION BECAUSE I'M CONFUSED ON SOMETHING I KNOW.
BEFORE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE FOP BEING A REPRESENTATIVE ON THE BOARD OR THE ACC AND ALL THAT, WHAT WAS IT WAS LIKE, COME ON, BACK UP, GET AWAY THAT EASY. WHAT'S THE ISSUE WITH THAT IF THEY'RE RETIRED? SO THE WHEN WE'RE DOING THIS ETHICALLY THE COUNTY HAS AN ETHICS COMMISSION.
I WOULD SUGGEST SO. SO THE PROBLEM IS IS IF YOU HAVE AN ACTIVE AND IT WOULDN'T APPLY TO ANYBODY WHO'S CURRENTLY ON THE BOARD, THEY WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE GRANDFATHERED IN.
SO SAY IF IF CHRIS IS THE FOP PRESIDENT, YOU KNOW, WAS WAS APPOINTED TO THE AND HE WASN'T A POLICE OFFICER ANYMORE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A POLICE OFFICER TO BE PRESIDENT. HE WAS GONE FOR THREE YEARS. THE PROBLEM IS IF THE LOOK IF OF OF THAT, IF YOU HAVE A POLICE OFFICER WHO IS GOING IN FRONT OF THE ACC AND THE ACC MEMBER IS IS A CURRENT FOP PRESIDENT, AND IF THERE WAS A LODGE HERE THAT HAD, YOU KNOW, DINNERS OR WHATEVER, OR HAD A BAR OR WHATEVER, AND YOU WERE IN THERE HAVING A DRINK, YOU KNOW, WITH THEM AT THAT TIME, THEN YOU'RE GOING THE NEXT DAY TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, DECIDE UPON THEM.
ETHICALLY, IT COULD BE PERCEIVED AS AN ISSUE.
SO THE COUNTY JUST WANTED TO LOOK TRANSPARENT.
AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, THERE WAS GOING TO BE NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
YOU KNOW, IT'S A SMALL COMMUNITY, SO THERE ARE GOING TO BE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T GET AWAY FROM THOSE. BUT THAT IS ONE CONFLICT.
AND IT WASN'T FOP, IT WAS ACTUALLY ANY ORGANIZATION.
YOU KNOW, I THINK THE ACTUAL LAW STATES ANY POLICE FRATERNAL ORGANIZATION IS WHAT IT SAID. IT DIDN'T ACTUALLY SAY FOP.
SO IT SAID POLICE. LIKE IF IT WAS THE MARYLAND TROOPERS ASSOCIATION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, JUST THAT. SO THE CONFLICT OUT OF THAT.
NOW, THE OTHER ISSUE WAS, YOU KNOW, IMMEDIATE MEMBERS OR MEMBERS OF A POLICE FAMILY. YOU KNOW, I ABSOLUTELY SUPPORTED TAKING THAT OUT BECAUSE THERE'S A CURRENT MEMBER ON THE BOARD WHO HAS A FAMILY MEMBER, BUT THEY LIKE, LIVE IN MICHIGAN OR SOMETHING. HE'S A COP IN MICHIGAN. YOU KNOW, I THINK WE NARROWED THAT DOWN TO YOU HAD TO BE MARYLAND OR, YOU KNOW, CAROLINE COUNTY. I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT THAT WAS. YES. JUST YES. NOT IN THIS COUNTY. NOT IN THIS COUNTY. YEAH. SOMETHING TO THAT EXTENT. SO THAT WAS SO THAT WAS THE EXTENT OF IT. SO THERE WAS JUST SO THAT THE APPEARANCE OF CONFLICT WAS OUT OF IT, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS THAT GOES.
YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THAT WAS JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR THAT WAS THAT WAS PROPOSED BY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, NOT BY ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT ORGANIZATION OR ANYTHING ELSE.
BUT WE DID NOT WE DID NOT FIGHT THAT.
I'LL SAY NOW, THE FOP MAY HAVE TOTALLY DIFFERENT STANCE.
KIM, DO YOU NEED A MOTION ON THIS? I DO, I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
WE APPROVE IT. MOTION MADE IN SECOND.
WITH THE EXCEPTIONS THAT WE WANT TO PUT IN.
IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND JUST TELLING ME EXACTLY WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION FOR.
I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE COUNTY, WITH THE EXCEPTION, THE TWO EXCEPTIONS THAT WE PUT IN, ONE BEING AN ALTERNATE MEMBER.
[00:25:03]
AND WHAT WAS THE OTHER ONE? THE VIRTUAL MEETING. VIRTUAL MEETINGS.OKAY. EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND THE MOTION? YES. I HEAR A SECOND. SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? NO DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAY NO.
THE AYES HAVE IT. OKAY, GREAT.
SO WHAT I'LL DO IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF DAYS IS I WILL PEN THE LETTER AND THEN I WILL SEND IT TO ALL OF YOU, ALL VIA EMAIL.
YOU'LL BE BLIND COPIED AS YOU ARE USUALLY, AND THEN YOU WILL LET ME KNOW.
LOOKS GOOD. OR IF I MESS SOMETHING UP OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE.
AND THEN AFTER THAT I WILL HAVE TODD SIGN IT, AND THEN I'LL FORWARD IT ON TO THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AS WELL AS THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND DEPUTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR.
AND THEN THE FIRST READING OF THIS IS GOING TO BE WHICH IS GOING TO BE ANNOUNCED.
I'M JUST KIND OF GIVING YOU A HEADS UP FOR ALL OF YOU WHO MAY NOT KNOW.
LET'S SEE. IT'S GOING TO BE ON THE 20TH OF MAY.
TUESDAY AT THE COMMISSIONERS MEETING WILL BE AT A LEGISLATIVE SESSION WHERE THIS ORDINANCE WILL BE READ FOR THE FIRST TIME THE WEEK AFTER WILL BE READ AND HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH WILL BE ON THE 27TH AND THEN THE FIRST TUESDAY OF THE MONTH.
THE LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS ARE ON THE SECOND, THIRD AND FOURTH TUESDAY OF THE MONTH, SO IT WILL GO FOR ITS FINAL READING ON JUNE 10TH WITH AMENDMENTS.
NOW, IF THERE'S AMENDMENTS, WE MAY NEED TO START THE PROCESS OVER. BUT JUST TO KIND OF GIVE YOU A HEADS UP OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR MOVING FORWARD, IS THAT THE FIRST READING WILL BE ON THE 13TH.
I MEAN, ON THE 20TH, 20TH, AND THEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 27TH.
AND THEN IF ALL GOES WELL AND THERE'S NO MAJOR CHANGES AND THE COMMISSIONERS APPROVE IT, IT WILL GO TO JUNE 10TH AND IT WILL BE APPROVED AND ENACTED.
AND YOU ALL, I WILL MAKE SURE EVERYBODY, INCLUDING THE AUDIENCE.
AND IF YOU'D LIKE TO GIVE ME YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS, I DON'T MIND SENDING YOU THE COMMISSIONERS AGENDA WHEN THIS IS GOING TO BE ON THERE.
SO YOU'RE FULLY AWARE OF WHEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IS AS WELL, IF YOU'D LIKE TO ATTEND AND SPEAK.
IN ADDITION TO ALSO HAVING YOUR LETTER SAID YOU WOULD BE SPEAKING AS THE PUBLIC.
YOU WOULDN'T BE REPRESENTING THE BODY, BUT UNDERSTOOD IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO KEEP KEEP THE MEMBERS AND THE POLICE POLICE AGENCIES INFORMED AS TO THOSE HEARINGS.
Q&A WITH MUNICIPALITIES AND SHERIFF'S OFFICE.
SO DO WE HAVE ANYBODY FROM SOUTH FEDERALSBURG? MR.. JACKSON. GASSER. GASSER.
GASSER. MR.. GASSER. COME ON UP.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY ANYTHING? TALK TO US. TELL US ANYTHING.
NO. HOW'S IT GOING DOWN IN FEDERALSBURG? IT'S GOING OKAY. EVERYTHING GOOD? ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? HOW ABOUT DENTON? ANYBODY FROM DENTON? UNFORTUNATELY, HE'S NOT ABLE TO ATTEND THIS EVENING IS AS WELL AS GREENSBORO.
SO THEY DO HAVE EXCUSED ABSENCES FOR TODAY.
OKAY, SO THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM.
ALSO, BECAUSE I KNOW WE WERE THIS WAS THE MAIN PURPOSE WAS TO DISCUSS THIS ORDINANCE, BUT IT ALSO ALLOWED US TO HAVE OUR SECOND MEETING FOR THE YEAR.
SO WE KIND OF COMBINE THE TWO.
BUT I DID KNOW THAT THEY WERE NOT GOING TO BE HERE TONIGHT. OH MY GOSH.
I'M SORRY. I WANT TO LOOK HOW I JUST FORGOT ABOUT HIM.
I APOLOGIZE. YOU CAN REPRESENT DENTON, GREENSBORO AND FEDERALSBURG.
ALL RIGHT. OKAY. HOW'S DENTON GOING? FABULOUS. GREAT TO SEE YOU GUYS.
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. SHERIFF BAKER, YOU YOU'RE A PLETHORA OF INFORMATION.
I WOULD JUST SAY THAT THAT THAT THAT THAT THE LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY IN CAROLINE COUNTY APPRECIATES THE SUPPORT AND AND GUIDANCE, BY ALL MEANS.
ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? CHAIR.
NO, I JUST HAVE ONE. WHAT'S THE STATUS OF THE EXPUNGEMENT LEGISLATION? SO I, I SUBMIT A WRITTEN TESTIMONY AND WENT UP FOR THE HEARING.
AND AS WELL AS A LOT OF OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT EXECUTIVES THROUGHOUT THE STATE.
ARE YOU KIDDING? REALLY? THAT WAS AN EXPERIENCE, I WILL SAY. EVEN THE ALL FOR, WHICH IS CRAZY TO ME, OPPOSED IT. I HAVE NO IDEA WHY THEY OPPOSED IT, BUT SITTING THERE AND WATCHING IT, CONSIDERING THAT, YOU KNOW, AN HOUR ALLOWING FELONS TO GET THEIR RECORDS EXPUNGED, IT JUST AMAZES ME THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS IN THE STATE OF MARYLAND CANNOT HAVE UNFOUNDED AND EXONERATED COMPLAINTS EXPUNGED FROM THE.
FIRST OF ALL. WOW. BUT AGAIN, YOU KNOW, I HAD THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WALK RIGHT BY ME AND NEVER EVEN SAID A WORD TO ME, NEVER SAID HI, NEVER SAID NOTHING. A BUNCH OF US WERE STANDING THERE IN UNIFORM, JUST WALKED RIGHT BY. SO.
[00:30:01]
SO AGAIN, IT'S ANNAPOLIS.IT'S A LEARNING EXPERIENCE FOR ME. AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT LEAVING THERE MY STOMACH WAS JUST A LITTLE, A LITTLE UPSET.
BUT HE'LL BE BACK NEXT YEAR, WON'T IT? OH, WELL, IT'LL BE BACK IN OCTOBER BECAUSE. OH, THAT'S RIGHT, WE GOT A SPECIAL SESSION.
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE ENOUGH REVENUE THAT THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE GOING TO MAKE. THEY THEY KNEW THEY'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE IT. AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A SPECIAL SESSION IN OCTOBER TO CUT COSTS. I DON'T THINK THEY RAISE TAXES, BUT THEY WILL CUT COSTS AND STATE EMPLOYEES WILL GET THE MONEY.
I THINK IT'S I THINK IT'S INCUMBENT UPON ME AS A CHAIR TO SAY FROM THE BOARD'S PERSPECTIVE, WE DO SUPPORT EXPUNGEMENT.
ABSOLUTELY, YES. YOUR RECORDS, IF YOU'RE EXONERATED, THAT TO ME IS LUDICROUS.
YEAH. I CANNOT. AND JOHN WAS UP THERE SUPPORTING IT AND IT JUST, IT JUST IT, IT IT WAS NOT IT WAS NOT SUPPORTED BY THE LARGER MUNICIPALITIES AS FAR AS THE, THE, THE DEVS WHO ACTUALLY CAME AND TESTIFIED AGAINST IT.
BUT BUT THERE'S GOING TO BE I THINK THERE'S GONNA BE A LOT OF CHANGES NEXT LEGISLATIVE SESSION. I BELIEVE THAT BALTIMORE CITY IS DROWNING.
THEY'RE HAVING 800 COMPLAINTS A MONTH.
THEIR POLICE OFFICERS TERMINATED ARE FALLING THROUGH THE CRACKS BECAUSE THEY'RE LOSING FILES AND NOT GETTING TO THEM. AND NOW THEY'RE GOING TO THE POLICE TRAINING COMMISSION AND ASKING FOR THEIR CERTIFICATION TO BE WITHDRAWN BECAUSE THEY CAN'T GET TO THEM. SO I DO BELIEVE THAT EVEN THE THE, THE THE MAJORITY OF THE JUDICIAL BOARD UP THERE OR THE COMMITTEE IS GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT MINOR OFFENSES GO BACK TO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY FOR FOR TO BE WITH THE AGENCY AND NOT GO THROUGH THE OCC.
AND THAT'S UNFORTUNATELY FOR THE OCC AND THE CAROLINE COUNTY IS THAT THE MAJORITY OF OUR CASES ARE MINOR OFFENSES, YOU KNOW, SUCH AS, YOU KNOW RUDE, DISCOURTEOUS, YOU KNOW, JUST STUFF THAT SHOULD BE HANDLED THAT SHOULD, SHOULDN'T TAKE MORE THAN, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE WEEKS THAT, YOU KNOW, IT TAKES A COUPLE MONTHS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IT HAS TO GO THROUGH A LENGTHY PROCESS. AND I THINK THAT YOU KNOW, THAT YOU WILL SEE THAT CHANGE NEXT LEGISLATIVE SESSION. AND I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE TO CHANGE THIS, THIS LAW WAS MADE FOR, YOU KNOW SERIOUS POLICE MISCONDUCT, POLICE BRUTALITY, THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT, THAT NORMALLY HAPPEN IN THE METROPOLITAN AREA THAT DON'T HAPPEN DOWN HERE.
AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BOARD WAS MADE FOR. SO AND CAN'T YOU? ONCE YOU GET THE RUDE AND DISCOURTEOUS TRIFLE COMPLAINT AND THE OFFICER DISAGREES WITH HIS PUNISHMENT, YES, HE CAN ASK FOR A TRIAL.
BECAUSE HE HURTS SO MUCH. THEY DIDN'T SEE THAT COMING, DID THEY? YES. SO I THINK THAT I THINK THAT ABSOLUTELY.
THAT WILL CHANGE. THEY SEE THAT, YOU KNOW, AND THEY EVEN QUESTIONED BALTIMORE CITY'S PAB BOARD AND ACC BOARD ABOUT THAT.
YOU KNOW, WOULD THESE COMPLAINTS GO DOWN IN BALTIMORE CITY IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE THESE SMALL FRIVOLOUS COMPLAINTS TO DEAL WITH AND YOU COULD DEAL WITH MORE SERIOUS ONES? AND EVEN THEY HAD TO SAY, YES.
BUT, YOU KNOW, THE PROBLEM IS WHEN YOU GIVE, WHEN YOU CREATE A BUREAUCRACY, YOU CREATE A BUREAUCRACY. YOU KNOW, BALTIMORE CITY WAS WANTING TO CONTROL THE PA, WAS WANTING TO CONTROL THEIR OWN BUDGET. I MEAN, YOU HAD ALL THAT STUFF THEY WERE FIGHTING WITH THE MAYOR ABOUT, AND IN ANNAPOLIS, THEY WERE THEY WERE ASKING FOR MORE AUTHORITY AND MORE POWER. AND EVEN THE LEGISLATURES UP THERE WERE SAYING PUTTING THE BRAKES ON AND SAY ENOUGH.
SO. SO THEY SEE THEY'VE CREATED A MONSTER, AND NOW THEY'RE TRYING TO CONTROL THAT MONSTER. SO IT WAS IT WAS LIKE IT WAS AN EYE OPENING EXPERIENCE FOR ME.
YOU KNOW, I'VE REALLY NOT BEEN TO ANNAPOLIS FOR A LEGISLATIVE BODY THAT MUCH, BUT IT WAS ACTUALLY AN EYE OPENING. BUT I DID THINK THAT THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, BESIDES NOT PASSING, THAT THEY THERE WAS SOME WISDOM ON THAT ON THAT COMMITTEE, AND THEY WERE SEEING THE ISSUES AND THE PROBLEMS. THEY WERE JUST DEALING WITH THE BUDGET THIS YEAR AND THEY'LL PROBABLY REVISIT NEXT YEAR, I HOPE SO. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING? WELL, THAT WE'LL CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT? HAVING HEARD NO PUBLIC COMMENT, WE'LL CALL FOR A MOTION.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION. WE ADJOURN.
MOTION. SECOND. MOTION MADE AND SECONDED TO ADJOURN.
MEETING IS ADJOURNED. THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.