The Montgomery County Council is considering a change to existing law that could bar people from county facilities, including libraries and public transit, for up to two years. Currently, the county can bar someone for engaging in disruptive behavior for up to 90 days.
According to existing county law, disruptive behavior is described as “acting in a manner that a reasonable person would find disrupts the normal functions being carried on at that public facility, or engaging in conduct that is specifically prohibited by a notice conspicuously posted at that public facility.” The law also prohibits “conduct that poses a danger to the person engaging in the conduct or to others.”
The bill before the council, Bill 37-26, was submitted by County Executive Marc Elrich. At Tuesday’s council hearing, Council President Natali Fani-González made clear that she was introducing the bill as required by county process, not because she supports it.
“I have nothing to do with that bill — I just want to say that on the record,” she said.
Reinforcing that she had “zero involvement,” Fani-González explained, “I really dislike the process we have that the council president is forced to introduce bills by the county executive.”
According to data provided in the legislative packet on the bill, the number of disruptive incidents where people were barred from county facilities increased from 22 in 2020 to 168 in 2024.
Earl Stoddard, assistant county administrative officer, told WTOP the number of incidents continued to grow, with 190 documented in 2025, most of them occurring at public libraries.
Several people who spoke at Tuesday’s hearing spoke in opposition to extending the period for disruptive behavior orders, or DBOs.
Dena Lebowitz, speaking on behalf of Jews United for Justice, told the council, “This bill imposes broad and lengthy bans, keeping people with mental health challenges from some of the few spaces that are safe and available to them.”
Lebowitz also said there are concerns related to free speech. She asked, “What explicit protections would safeguard lawful speech, peaceful protest, signs, testimony, organizing and attendance at meetings?”
Thomas Gibson, who explained that he’s a resident of the Nebel Street Emergency Men’s Shelter and a member of Housing Justice Montgomery, told council members that 78% of the DBOs were issued based on incidents at public libraries.
But he said libraries and other county facilities “are precisely the kinds of places people experiencing homelessness depend upon, because we don’t have private spaces of our own.”
What concerns Gibson the most, he said, is that if a person who’s subjected to a DBO violates that order, “their mere presence, in violation of that order, can then expose them to legal penalties.”
Gibson asked the council to “preserve access to essential services, and reserve enforcement for actual threats to safety rather than allowing exclusion itself to become a pathway into the criminal justice system.”
But Brenna Olson, who spoke on behalf of Shepherd’s Table, which works with the county’s homeless population in downtown Silver Spring, said, “In extreme cases, and with proper safeguards and procedures, a ban over 90 days can be appropriate.”
However, Olson said, barring a person from multiple county sites, such as all county libraries or buildings that provide county services, “could be detrimental to unhoused or under-resourced neighbors who must access public facilities to meet their basic needs.”
Asked to describe what kind of behaviors have led to DBOs being issued, Stoddard told WTOP there have been cases in which visitors to a library got into a fight, and when a staff member tried to call police, one of the people involved in the fight grabbed the phone from the staff member and slammed it down.
There have been other instances of threats made to staff at county facilities, including one in which a person who had been the subject of DBOs showed up at the Silver Spring Aquatic Center with a pipe and threatened visitors and staff.
“Ultimately had to have a police intervention in that case as I recall,” said Stoddard.
Stoddard said there will be discussions about amending the bill to ensure that homeless people or those with either developmental disabilities or mental health issues aren’t negatively affected.
“We have to find the right balance between ensuring that those individuals are protected and have access to services and that other individuals in the facilities not be unsafe or subject to inappropriate harassment or other things of that nature,” he said.
A work session on the bill is scheduled for Oct. 19.
Source
