Jesmond Riggins, a member of Baltimore’s Police Accountability Board, sued the Scott administration on September 9 in Baltimore City Circuit Court. He is asking the court to stop the city from removing current board members while it decides whether their seats became vacant when their terms expired or whether they remain protected by four-year terms, according to the Daily Record.
The dispute centers on competing readings of the board’s terms
At a July 6 board meeting, the mayor’s office said that all but the youth appointee were serving in holdover status because their terms had expired on December 3, 2024. Members were given two weeks to apply again, and a city memo set September 9 as the deadline for the mayor to submit nominations to the City Council, according to Baltimore Brew.
Riggins was appointed in February 2023 to what he says is a four-year seat. He argues that the administration’s interpretation would end that term early and allow the mayor to replace nearly the entire 17-member board at once. An administration lawyer has taken the opposing view, saying the members’ terms are “coterminous with the mayor’s term of office,” according to the Daily Record.
Appointment and removal rules are part of the legal question
How the oversight system handles complaints
According to Baltimore City, the Police Accountability Board receives all public complaints of police misconduct, refers them to the appropriate law-enforcement agency for investigation and does not assign independent investigators. During the first five months of case reviews in 2023, Baltimore’s civilian oversight bodies evaluated 413 police investigation files, according to CBS Baltimore. Baltimore City describes the related Administrative Charging Committee as a five-member civilian body that reviews investigations of complaints filed with the Police Accountability Board and decides disciplinary outcomes. The supplied records establish the number of files reviewed during that 2023 period but do not provide a cumulative total or a breakdown of disciplinary outcomes since the state accountability law took effect.
The board was established under Maryland’s 2021 Police Accountability Act, while Baltimore set out its local structure in Ordinance 22-146. As described in Riggins’ account of the governing rules, members serve four-year terms and may be removed during an unexpired term only for six specified causes, with approval from at least nine board members. Most members are recommended by the City Council and approved by the mayor rather than selected solely by the mayor, according to the Daily Record.
The city charter generally permits terms for mayoral appointees to coincide with the mayor’s term, but it contains an exception for boards and commissions governed by state or federal law. Riggins relies on that exception in arguing that the state-created accountability board is governed by its own term and removal provisions. The administration’s position is that the mayoral-term rule applies instead. The court’s ruling will determine which framework controls the current members’ seats.
The stakes extend beyond one seat
The board receives public complaints about police misconduct, refers them to the appropriate law-enforcement agency for investigation and reports on misconduct trends and policy recommendations. Baltimore City says the board does not assign independent investigators. During its first five months of case reviews in 2023, Baltimore’s civilian oversight bodies evaluated 413 police investigation files, according to CBS Baltimore. Members whose terms end ordinarily remain in place as holdovers until replacements are appointed, according to the Daily Record.
The new case is Riggins’ second lawsuit against the city this year. In April, he sued in federal court after his November 2025 removal from the five-member Administrative Charging Committee, which considers police discipline. He alleges that the removal was retaliation for remarks supporting the accountability board’s independence; the city has moved to dismiss his amended complaint, and that motion remains pending, according to the Daily Record.
A spokesperson for Mayor Scott said the administration would reserve comment for the appropriate judicial forum. The Police Accountability Board did not respond to a request for comment, according to the Daily Record.
