Following Monday’s end of a legislative session that some Maryland General Assembly members called “tough” and “challenging,” not every proposal by Montgomery County lawmakers made it to Gov. Wes Moore’s (D) desk to be signed into law.
This legislative session was difficult for many lawmakers, with the debate over the proposed state operating budget for the upcoming fiscal year continuing until a vote during the final hours Monday night, and last-minute changes affecting funding for the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future education reform plan.
As often happens, a number of bills filed by lawmakers failed to move through the legislative process. Committee chairs set the agenda for which proposed legislation will be scheduled for hearings and votes. With hundreds of bills filed during the 90-day session, it is not possible for every bill to go through the full process, often leaving legislators at the mercy of committee leaders to prioritize their bills.
Despite this, county legislators experienced a fair number of successes. Del. Lesley Lopez (D-Dist. 39) of Germantown has touted a “groundbreaking” abortion grant funding program that made it through, and bills dealing with topics ranging from speed camera monitoring to strengthening safety protections for corrections officers also were approved under the wire on Monday.
Here’s the status of some other legislation filed by local lawmakers that Bethesda Today followed closely this session:
Special elections efforts fail again
Legislation related to special elections to fill legislative seats once again failed to pass the General Assembly. A bill sponsored by Sen. Cheryl Kagan (D-Dist. 17) who represents parts of Rockville and Gaithersburg in the Senate and cross-filed by Del. Linda Foley (D-Dist. 15) who represents Potomac in the House would have required special elections to fill legislative vacancies in certain circumstances. The legislation proposed an amendment to the state constitution to deal with the issue of filling legislative vacancies statewide. Similar bills have been unsuccessful over the past several years. The bill was closely observed in Montgomery County due to scrutiny over the process as the Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee (MCDCC) appointed 10 legislators to fill vacancies in the state legislature in 2023 and 2024.
The bill would have required that, in the event of a legislative vacancy, a special election for the seat be held at the same time as the regular statewide primary and general elections — if the vacancy occurs on or before the date that is 55 days before the candidate filing deadline for that election. If a vacancy occurred more than two years into a legislator’s four-year term, a special election would not be required and a political party’s central committee could fill the seat.
Kagan’s bill received a favorable vote on the Senate floor on Feb. 27 and successfully “crossed over” to the House of Delegates before the March 17 deadline, but was never placed on an agenda for the House Ways and Means Committee, meaning it was never subject to a vote.
Another bill, sponsored by Del. Julie Palakovich Carr (D-Dist. 17) who represents parts of Rockville and Gaithersburg in the House of Delegates and cross-filed in the Senate by Sen. Clarence Lam (D-Dist. 12) of Anne Arundel and Howard counties, took a different approach than the legislation proposed by Foley and Kagan.
It would have created new requirements for central committees when conducting internal elections to fill vacancies, including standards for advertising the vacancy and opening the voting meeting to the public, with the intent of improving transparency, according to Palakovich Carr. Currently, MCDCC follows these protocols.
However, the bill also would have required any member of a central committee who has applied to fill a vacancy to recuse themselves from voting on candidates to fill the vacancy, which is not currently the practice of the MCDCC.
Palakovich Carr’s bill received a favorable vote from the House of Delegates and “crossed over” to the Senate was never scheduled for an introduction in the Senate.
Sgt. Patrick Kepp Act to become law
A law named for Montgomery County police Sgt. Patrick Kepp that would impose stricter punishments on reckless drivers has made it to Moore’s desk. A Frederick man is currently standing trial after he allegedly drove a car into Kepp on I-270 in October 2023, causing the officer to lose his legs. The driver, Raphael Mayorga, now 21, had been cited multiple times including by Kepp for reckless driving in the area, according to police.
Sen. Nancy King (D-Dist. 39) and Del. Greg Wims (D-Dist. 39), who represent Germantown, decided to sponsor legislation in the General Assembly after learning from Kepp and other county police officers that reckless drivers do not seem deterred by the state’s limited penalties for such traffic violations.
Once the bill is signed into law by Moore, it will increase the number of points placed on a person’s driver’s license if the driver is found to be driving recklessly. It also will change the state’s definition of reckless driving to include speeding at a rate of 30 mph or more above the posted speed limit. Drivers charged with reckless driving could face up to 60 days in prison and a fine of up to $1,000 under the new law.
Distracted driving monitoring program derailed
A controversial bill that would have established a pilot program for distracted driving monitoring in Montgomery and Prince George’s counties by employing special video camera technology didn’t make it out of the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee.
The program would have used artificial-intelligence technology to detect drivers using phones, record video and take photos of the alleged infraction, and then issue $40 citations. The legislation was co-sponsored by Montgomery County Sen. Jeff Waldstreicher (D-Dist. 18), who represents parts of the Silver Spring area, and Prince George’s County Sen. Michael Jackson (D-Dist. 27) and cross-filed in the House by Foley and Prince George’s County Del. Kent Roberson (D-Dist. 25).
According to the bill’s sponsors, the program would have functioned in a manner similar to red light and speed cameras. What would have made this program different is the use of video technology that its developers claim can detect a human hand using a cell phone.
The proposal received scrutiny from members of the Judicial Proceedings Committee, who voiced concerns about privacy and surveillance.
Eric’s ID Law passes both chambers
Legislation promoted by a Montgomery County family that aims to improve communication between law enforcement officers, first responders and people with so-called hidden disabilities such as autism passed both the House and the Senate.
Eric’s ID Law, sponsored by Sen. Will Smith (D-Dist. 20) and Del. Jheanelle Wilkins, who both represent Silver Spring. It is named for their constituent, Eric Carpenter-Grantham of Silver Spring, who came up with the concept.
If signed by Moore, the new law will allow Maryland residents with specific hidden disabilities to “opt-in” to have the Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration (MVA) place a special symbol — a butterfly logo — on their driver’s licenses or other state identification cards. The legislation also requires the MVA to conduct public outreach about the symbol program and for law enforcement officers within the state to receive training about the program as well as working with individuals with invisible disabilities.
Carpenter-Grantham, who is autistic, came up with the idea when his mother voiced concerns that law enforcement officers may not understand how to communicate with him and other people with certain disabilities following the 2020 death of Minneapolis resident George Floyd at the hands of police.
Stop Silencing Survivors Act doesn’t make committee agenda
The Stop Silencing Survivors Act, sponsored by Sen. Sara Love (D-Dist. 16) of Bethesda, would have changed state law so that a person who “in good faith discloses information about allegations of sexually assaultive behavior may not be held liable for the disclosure,” according to the bill.
The bill would not have prevented individuals accused of sexual assault from filing lawsuits against alleged survivors, according to Love. However, it would have switched the obligation to prove the veracity of allegations from the alleged survivor to the person filing the suit. The bill was also written so that defendants in such suits — sexual assault survivors being accused of defamation — would have their legal fees covered.
Despite receiving support from groups that advocate for sexual assault survivors, the legislation was never scheduled for a second reading or a vote by the Senate’s Judicial Proceedings Committee.
