Under state law, drivers caught texting or using a cell phone can be stopped and cited by police, but some Montgomery County lawmakers want to expand that enforcement by implementing a video camera monitoring system that would catch and cite drivers who are using their phones.
A bill in the Maryland General Assembly would establish a pilot program for distracted driving monitoring in Montgomery and Prince George’s counties that would employ special video camera technology. The technology would detect drivers using phones, record video and take photos, and then issue $40 citations.
The proposed legislation is co-sponsored by Montgomery County Sen. Jeff Waldstreicher (D-Dist. 18) and Prince George’s County Sen. Michael Jackson (D-Dist. 27) and cross-filed in the House of Delegates by Montgomery County Del. Linda Foley (D-Dist. 15) and Prince George’s County Del. Kent Roberson (D-Dist. 25).
According to the bill’s sponsors, the program would function in a manner similar to red light and speed cameras. What would make this program different is the employment of video technology that its developers claim would be able to specifically detect a human hand using a cell phone.
“This bill aims to reinforce distracted driving laws and to discourage behaviors,” Jackson told members of the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee Thursday at a hearing on the proposed bill in Annapolis.
Jackson said the camera would only be able to record the license plate of the car and would not be able to collect facial recognition data.
“For privacy reasons, we have chosen to blur the image of the driver and not allow for facial recognition,” Jackson said. “The citation will be sent to the owner of the vehicle, who will be subject to the payment.”
Montgomery County police Assistant Chief David McBain testified in support of the legislation Thursday, saying it would be helpful in assisting the department’s enforcement of distracted driving laws as the department faces staffing challenges.
“As a result [of a declining workforce], officers are focused on serious crime and calls for service,” McBain said. “The amount of time officers spend on designated traffic enforcement simply declined because of this. We’re looking for alternative roadway safety measures.”
McBain said that in July 2024, Montgomery County partnered with a California-based automated enforcement company, Obvio, and deployed nine automated camera systems throughout Montgomery County for a month. The cameras collected data but the department did not send citations to offending drivers.
“Data showed that we were capturing 2,500 violations per day at these nine locations, basically 20% of all vehicles passed through the automated system violated distracted driving laws,” McBain said. “Sustained enforcement would save lives. I believe this technology will make our roadways safer.”
Wade Holland, the county government’s Vision Zero coordinator, supported the legislation at Thursday’s hearing. Vision Zero is a global road safety initiative aiming to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries by the end of 2030. The county adopted the initiative in 2016 but has not seen a significant decline in pedestrian fatalities despite efforts to improve road safety, according to traffic data. Holland said the proposed pilot program aligns with the county’s Vision Zero goals.
“Smartphones went from a luxury to a necessity in the last 15 years, as we’ve seen roadway fatalities rise across the U.S.,” Holland said. “An estimated 26% of all fatal crashes in the U.S. involve cell phones.”
Concerns about surveillance
Some legislators at Thursday’s hearing voiced skepticism, particularly concerned about the surveillance risks.
“I have a little bit of heartburn with this bill,” said Sen. Mary-Dulany James (D-Dist. 24), who represents Harford County. “I think people are going to be a little shocked when they get [a picture of themselves with the citation]. I would be immediately apoplectic about that intrusiveness.”
She said if the bill passes, there should be an outreach campaign to educate drivers.
Dhruv Maheshwari, co-founder of Obvio, the company that created the technology, told legislators the artificial intelligence video technology has privacy mechanisms in place to delete data that is not related to a violation.
“We’ve built an on-device privacy shield,” Maheshwari said. “Once the camera determines if there is a violation, it automatically blurs everything that’s not essential before the data leaves the [camera] device … all of the data that is not a violation can immediately be erased.”
Currently, the technology is being used as part of a pilot program in Washington, D.C., Maheshwari said.
Some committee members were concerned the technology may not be able to differentiate between a driver holding an item other than a phone or may incorrectly detect a phone holder attached to a dashboard as a human hand.
“We’re all guilty of distracted driving … whether you’re eating a Big Mac and a Coke, doing your makeup or hair, it’s all distractive,” said Sen. Mike McKay (R-Dist. 1), who represents parts of Allegany, Washington and Garrett counties.
He said he was confused about the focus on cell phones specifically, in contrast to other forms of distracted driving.
Maheshwari said the technology is specifically created to detect a human hand as opposed to a phone holder.
“Our technology focuses on the device in somebody’s hand … all of this is state of the art. It didn’t exist two years ago,” Maheshwari said. “Distracted [driving] is a very broad category, but texting increases the risk of a crash by 23 times.”
The technology would not be able to detect someone watching a video on a device in a cell phone holder or a Tesla screen, Maheshwari said.
Other efforts to curb driver behavior
In 2020, Waldstreicher tried unsuccessfully to push through similar legislation, which faced scrutiny from Montgomery County Council members, including Will Jawando (D-At-large), who voiced concerns about driver privacy.
This isn’t the only program legislators have pursued recently in an attempt to improve driver behavior. Last year, the General Assembly passed legislation allowing local jurisdictions to establish pilot programs to reduce excessive vehicular noise by implementing a noise abatement monitoring system, also known as noise cameras. It was sponsored by Del. Julie Palakovich Carr (D-Dist. 17), who represents Rockville and Gaithersburg and chairs the Montgomery County House delegation.
In October, the council voted to approve a pilot noise camera program to be used on county roads. If volume is detected at least five decibels above the standard set by the state, the camera would capture a video of the vehicle causing the noise and a citation would be sent to the vehicle’s registered owner.
Similar concerns about police surveillance arose when the council approved the police department’s Drone As First Responder program in November 2023. The program funds drones to assist the police department in emergency response before officers arrive on the scene and is deployed in Silver Spring, Wheaton, Gaithersburg, Germantown and soon in Bethesda.
Drones are deployed after a 911 call if the dispatcher and drone pilot believe there is a use for the drone to respond. Once the drone arrives on the scene, the pilot can assess if threats are credible, if more emergency responders are needed, and other details that could help expedite emergency response.
While the program has received praise from state officials, some community members have voiced skepticism about whether it could be misused for surveillance by police. The drones do not have face recognition technology and are not permitted for surveillance under county law, including of First Amendment-protected events, unless there is an immediate safety concern or threat.
On Tuesday, council President Kate Stewart (D-Dist. 4) and councilmember Kristin Mink (D-Dist. 5) introduced legislation that would require surveillance technology to meet certain standards before being approved for use by the county government. It would apply to the current drone program. Such technology would be subject to reports on its impact before it could be deployed and use of facial recognition in surveillance would be limited. The proposed legislation also would require the establishment of oversight standards for use of the technology.
“New technology is always advancing and can be used in ways and deployed to help advance our public safety goals,” Stewart said at Tuesday’s council meeting. “Because it is advancing rapidly, we need to make sure that we have good procedures and guidelines in place to protect people’s privacy and their civil rights.”
According to Stewart’s office, the county legislation was not proposed in response to the state bill. If the state bill passes, the video surveillance pilot program would be subject to the standards imposed by the county bill if it is approved.
The House version of the General Assembly bill has not been scheduled for a hearing. The Senate version has not been scheduled for additional hearings or votes.
