WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 1046

SB 1046 - Under this act, upon classification of a school district as unaccredited, the State Board of Education may suspend the governing or managing authority of the elected school board members of the unaccredited school district and take actions relating to special administrative boards as set forth in the act. Current law provides that a special administrative board for a school district shall have no fewer than five members. Under this act, such board shall have seven members, four of whom shall be residents of the school district. Each member of the board shall serve for three years, and the qualifications of the members are listed in the act. The special administrative board shall meet at least once per month, and each member shall receive a salary of $500 a month. Within 15 days after the vote to appoint a member to the special administrative board, if a member of the Missouri House of Representatives whose district includes the school district, in whole or in part, submits a request to the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, the appointment shall be subject to the advice and consent of the Senate. The members of the school district's elected school board shall be ex-officio, non-voting members of the special administrative board. Upon failure of the school district to be classified as provisionally or fully accredited for at least two successive academic years, the State Board of Education shall require the special administrative board to establish a specific plan and timeline for achieving accreditation and shall require the special administrative board to satisfy certain other requirements, including the appointment of a new superintendent of the school district for a term of not more than three years. The authority of the special administrative board shall expire at the end of the third full school year following its appointment, unless extended for not more than three school years by the State Board of Education. Governance of the school district shall be returned to the elected school board upon the expiration of the authority of the special administrative board. The act repeals a provision of law authorizing the State Board of Education to appoint additional members to any special administrative board and to set final terms of office for members of such board. Not later than six full school years after the appointment of the special administrative board, on a date set by the State Board of Education, any district operating under the governance of a special administrative board shall return to local governance. This act is identical to SB 306 (2025), is substantially similar to SB 1104 (2024), SB 272 (2023), SB 951 (2022), and HB 1774 (2022), and is similar to HB 2048 (2026), HB 387 (2025), HB 1646 (2024), and HB 63 (2023). OLIVIA SHANNON

2026 Regular Session Introduced by Angela Mosley

Allows correctional officers to lawfully record oral communications with body-worn cameras under strict conditions and requires uniform facility policies and model guidelines.

Second Read and Referred S Education Committee
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 1046

SB 1046 — Correctional Officers: Body‑Worn Digital Recording Devices

Status snapshot
- Title: Correctional Officers – Body‑Worn Digital Recording Devices
- Introduced: January 31, 2025
- Hearing scheduled: April 2, 2025 at 1:00 p.m.
- Sponsor(s): Senators McKay and Smith (Maryland)
- Bill type: Emergency measure (would take effect on enactment)
- Fiscal note: Not expected to materially affect State or local finances

Purpose and intent
- Authorize correctional officers to lawfully intercept oral communications using body‑worn digital recording devices (BWCs) or electronic control devices (when those devices are capable of recording video and oral communications) in the course of their regular duties, subject to specified requirements and safeguards.
- Require statewide development and publication of a model BWC policy for correctional facilities and require facility managers to adopt consistent written policies.

Key provisions
1. Lawful interception conditions
- A correctional officer may intercept an oral communication with a BWC or qualifying electronic control device only if:
- the officer is in uniform or prominently displaying badge/insignia;
- the officer is making reasonable efforts to conform to applicable standards;
- the officer is a party to the oral communication;
- the officer notifies the individual that they are being recorded “as soon as practicable,” unless unsafe, impractical, or impossible; and
- the interception is part of a videotape or digital recording.
- Failure to notify a person who joins a conversation in progress does not automatically exclude admissibility if proper notification had already been given to others.

  1. Model policy and facility policies

    • Maryland Police Training and Standards Commission (MPTSC) must develop and publish online, by January 1, 2026, a model policy for adoption by each correctional facility’s managing official covering: testing and operation, procedures for device failures, when recording is mandatory/prohibited/discretionary, consent and notice rules, when recordings may end, access/confidentiality, secure storage, review/use, retention, dissemination, remedies for policy violations, privacy protections, procedures for officers who interact with the public, and other implementation issues.
    • The Secretary of Public Safety and Correctional Services and each facility’s managing official must develop and maintain written policies consistent with the MPTSC model and must identify which correctional officers are required to use BWCs.

  2. Technical and labor rules

    • BWCs that have the capability must automatically record and preserve at least 60 seconds of video immediately prior to manual activation (a pre‑event buffer).
    • Policies established under the bill may not be negated or altered through collective bargaining.

Definitions and context
- “Body‑worn digital recording device” — a device worn on an officer that can record video and intercept oral communications.
- “Electronic control device” — a portable weapon designed to discharge electrical current (defined elsewhere in statute); included only if capable of recording video and oral communications.
- The bill amends the State’s wiretap/interception framework to make these specific interceptions lawful when the listed conditions are met (Maryland is a two‑party consent state by default).

Who would be affected
- Correctional officers and correctional facilities (state and local facilities covered by the Correctional Services Article); incarcerated individuals, visitors, and other persons interacting with correctional staff; MPTSC and the Secretary of Public Safety and Correctional Services; collective bargaining parties for correctional staff; courts (evidence admissibility).

Procedural / timeline highlights
- MPTSC policy deadline: January 1, 2026.
- Emergency measure: if enacted, the law would take effect immediately upon enactment.
- Fiscal note indicates no material State or local fiscal impact anticipated.

Potential legal and practical impacts
- Expands existing law‑enforcement recording exceptions to explicitly include correctional officers under defined conditions, reducing the legal risk of interception charges when officers comply with policy requirements.
- Requires uniform policy standards and technical features (pre‑event buffering), which may affect procurement, training, data storage, and privacy practices within facilities.
- Limits the ability of labor agreements to restrict adoption of BWC policies established under this law.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.