CALVERT COUNTY, MD – A legal dispute over access to public records in Calvert County has ended in a settlement, as the Maryland Board of Public Works and the Calvert County Sheriff’s Office agreed to resolve a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Maryland. The lawsuit challenged the Sheriff’s Office over the use of high fees to deny access to public records related to invasive police searches.
Under the terms of the settlement, the Sheriff’s Office will provide the ACLU with all requested records from 2020 through 2024 without charge. Additionally, the Sheriff’s Office will pay $35,000 in legal fees incurred by the ACLU during the litigation process.
This resolution follows rulings by both the Circuit Court and the Appellate Court of Maryland, which rejected the Sheriff’s arguments and underscored the importance of transparency and public accountability.
Lawsuit Rooted in Allegations of Police Misconduct
The ACLU filed the lawsuit in 2022, seeking documents under the Maryland Public Information Act (MPIA) that detailed invasive searches conducted by Calvert County Sheriff’s deputies. Community members alleged that the searches disproportionately targeted Black residents, prompting the ACLU to investigate.
When the ACLU submitted its records request in 2021, the Sheriff’s Office initially delayed responding and later demanded more than $12,000 to process the request. The ACLU argued that such fees obstruct public access to critical information and filed suit when negotiations failed.
The lawsuit aimed to enforce the ACLU’s right to a fee waiver under the MPIA, particularly in cases where the requested records serve the public interest. The ACLU cited Maryland’s 2021 police accountability reforms, including “Anton’s Law,” which made certain police records more accessible, as evidence of the public’s demand for greater transparency.
Court Rulings Favor Transparency
The Baltimore City Circuit Court ruled in favor of the ACLU in 2023, finding that the Sheriff’s Office acted improperly in denying the fee waiver. Judge Martin Schreiber emphasized the public’s right to scrutinize police practices and ordered the Sheriff to produce the records at no cost.
The Sheriff’s Office appealed the ruling, but the Appellate Court of Maryland upheld the Circuit Court’s decision in August 2024. Writing for a unanimous three-judge panel, Appellate Judge Douglas Nazarian described the Sheriff’s position as “arbitrary and capricious,” dismissing the claim that the records served no public purpose as “sheer nonsense.”
The court also provided detailed guidance on how government agencies should handle public interest fee waiver requests, reinforcing the principle that transparency is essential to accountability.
Settlement Ensures Public Access
Following the appellate decision, the parties reached a settlement, which was approved by the Maryland Board of Public Works. The Sheriff’s Office agreed to waive the $12,271.50 fee initially charged for the records and to compensate the ACLU for its legal expenses.
Deborah Jeon, legal director for the ACLU of Maryland, celebrated the outcome, noting that it reinforces the intent of Maryland’s policing reforms. “This settlement sends a clear message that government agencies cannot use excessive fees to block transparency and accountability,” said Jeon.
The case highlights a broader pattern across Maryland, where public interest groups have faced steep fees when seeking records under the MPIA. Advocates argue such practices undermine the goals of police accountability laws like Anton’s Law, which was named after Anton Black, a teenager who died in police custody on Maryland’s Eastern Shore in 2018.
Legal Representation
The ACLU’s legal team included attorneys from Zuckerman Spaeder, who worked on the case pro bono. Samantha Miller Kavanagh, one of the lead attorneys, stressed the significance of the decision: “This case makes clear that government officials must fairly consider the public interest when deciding whether to charge excessive fees for compliance with public records requests.”
The settlement not only secures access to the requested records but also sets a precedent for how public interest fee waivers should be evaluated across Maryland. Advocates hope the decision will deter government agencies from imposing financial barriers to transparency in the future.
