89OAG076
89OAG076
Cite as 89 Md. Op. Att'y Gen. 76
76
MARYLAND NATIONAL CAPITAL
PARK AND PLANNING COMMISSION
COUNTIES – MODE OF APPROVAL OF POLICE MUTUAL AID
AGREEMENTS
March 25, 2004
Mr. Derick P. Berlage
Chairman, Montgomery County Planning Board
Maryland-National Capital Park
and Planning Commission
You have advised that the Maryland-National Capital Park and
Planning Commission (“MNCPPC”) and Montgomery County are
considering a proposed mutual aid agreement to extend the
jurisdiction of the Park Police outside park property within
Montgomery County. You ask for our opinion on the proper method
for the Montgomery County Council to approve the proposed
agreement. In particular, you ask whether the County must approve
the proposed agreement by a law or by a resolution of the County
Council.
In our opinion, the County may enter into the mutual aid
agreement by enacting a law approving the agreement or by taking
other appropriate action under County law that involves the
participation of both the County Executive and the County Council.
Approval by a resolution of the County Council alone would not
suffice.
I
Jurisdiction of Park Police
The MNCPPC’s enabling legislation authorizes it to establish
a police force “to provide protection for the [MNCPPC]’s activities
and property.” Annotated Code of Maryland, Article 28, §5-114(a).
The Park Police are also “to prevent crime, apprehend criminals,
enforce the criminal and motor vehicle laws of the State, enforce
77
park regulations and perform whatever other related duties” are
required by MNCPPC. Id.
As a general rule, the Park Police share concurrent jurisdiction
with the Montgomery and Prince George’s county police within the
parks and other areas under the jurisdiction of the MNCPPC. Article
28, §5-114(a). Under Annotated Code of Maryland, Criminal
Procedure Article (“CP”), §2-105, the Park Police may be given
additional jurisdiction outside park property through a mutual aid
agreement Id. The MNCPPC may not expand its police force in
Montgomery and Prince George’s counties beyond what is needed
to protect its own activities and property, unless the expansion is
authorized under a mutual aid agreement. See Chapter 542, Laws of
Maryland 2002.
II
Mutual Aid Agreements
As a general rule, a police officer may exercise police powers
only in the geographical area of the officer’s agency. Stevenson v.
State, 287 Md. 504, 509, 413 A.2d 1340 (1980). The General
Assembly has expanded the extra-territorial authority of law
enforcement officers under certain circumstances. See 89 Opinions
of the Attorney General 66 (2004).
For example, under CP §2-105, it has authorized police officers
to exercise extra-territorial jurisdiction in accordance with mutual
aid agreements. That statute authorizes counties, municipalities, and
the MNCPPC to enter into mutual aid agreements with other
political subdivisions to provide personnel, including police officers,
for mutual assistance. Pertinent to your question, the statute
provides that the MNCPPC “may make a reciprocal agreement for
the period that it considers advisable with ... a county ... and
establish and carry out a plan to provide mutual aid by providing its
police officers and other officers ... together with all necessary
78
The statute also requires that any mutual aid agreement involving
1
the MNCPPC include specific waiver and indemnification provisions. CP
§2-105(e)(2). Other provisions of the statute address the extension of
official immunities and authorize the purchase of insurance with respect
to officers acting under a mutual aid agreement. CP §2-105(c), (f).
equipment as provided in [CP §2-105(b)].” CP §2-105(e)(1). The
1
cross-referenced section provides, in relevant part:
By action as in the regular routine for
legislative enactment, the governing body of
a county ... may determine the circumstances
under which the police officers ... of the
county ... may lawfully go ... beyond the
boundaries of the county ... to any place within
or outside the State.
CP §2-105(b) (emphasis added). For purposes of this section,
“governing body”of a charter county with a county executive (such
as Montgomery County) is defined as the county executive and
county council. CP §2-105(a).
III
Analysis
Your inquiry concerns what action Montgomery County must
take to enter into a mutual aid agreement with the MNCPPC.
Under CP §2-105(e)(1), it is the “governing body” of the
county that may enter into an agreement with the MNCPPC. By
definition, the governing body of Montgomery County is the County
Executive and the County Council. CP §2-105(a); see also
Montgomery County v. Anchor Inn Seafood Restaurant, 374 Md.
327, 335, 822 A.2d 429 (2003) (even in the absence of a statutory
definition, the “governing body” of Montgomery County consists of
county executive and county council). Thus, the mechanism used by
the County to enter into an agreement must involve both the
Executive and the Council.
As noted above, CP §2-105(b) requires the governing body of
a county to take action “in the regular routine for legislative
79
The statute does not further define the phrase “regular routine for
2
legislative enactment.”
If a mutual aid agreement were to authorize the Montgomery
3
County police to exercise law enforcement authority on park property in
Prince George’s County, a “legislative enactment” would be required for
Montgomery County’s assent to the agreement. In that event, enactment
of a special ordinance or approval pursuant to §35-13 of the Montgomery
County Code – itself a legislative enactment – would satisfy the
requirement. However, §35-13 would likely have to be amended for that
purpose. See footnote 4 below.
The County Attorney has advised that §35-13 currently applies
4
only to mutual aid agreements with counties, municipalities, and the
District of Columbia, but would need to be amended to cover an
agreement with the MNCPPC. As is our usual practice, we defer to the
(continued...)
enactment.” However, that type of action is required for a county
2
to authorize its own police officers to “lawfully go ... beyond the
boundaries of the county....” In the context of an agreement with the
MNCPPC, the Montgomery County police already have concurrent
jurisdiction on park property. Article 28, §5-114(a) (“The
Montgomery ... County police have the same general police
jurisdiction ... within the parks and other areas and buildings under
the [MNCPPC]’s jurisdiction as they have elsewhere in [the
county]”). As we understand it, the proposed mutual aid agreement
would not authorize Montgomery County police to operate in any
place where they do not already have jurisdiction. Rather, the effect
of the agreement would be to authorize the Park Police to act in
Montgomery County in areas and circumstances in which the Park
Police would not otherwise have jurisdiction. Thus, although the
agreement is not an “agreement” unless approved by Montgomery
County governing body in some fashion, by its literal terms, CP §2-
105(b) does not mandate that Montgomery County approve the
agreement by any particular device.
3
Under the County Charter, enactment of an ordinance involves
the participation of both the County Executive and the County
Council. See Montgomery County Charter, §§111, 208. We also
understand that the County Code allows for the County Executive to
enter into certain mutual aid agreements subject to the approval of
the County Council. Montgomery County Code, §35-13. In our
4
80
(...continued)
4
opinion of the County Attorney on this question of local law.
view, either of these mechanisms would satisfy the requirement of
CP §2-105(e) that the County “governing body” enter into the
agreement. On the other hand, a Council resolution alone that did
not involve any action by the County Executive would not satisfy the
terms of the statute.
IV
Conclusion
In our opinion, the County may enter into the mutual aid
agreement by enacting a law approving the agreement or by taking
other action that involves the participation of both the County
Executive and the County Council. Approval by a resolution of the
County Council alone would not suffice.
J. Joseph Curran, Jr.
Attorney General
Robert N. McDonald
Chief Counsel
Opinions & Advice