Public Service Commission - Implementation Plan to Convert Formerly Operational Fossil Fuel Generating Stations
Summary
HB1349 creates a new criminal offense related to the use of unmanned aircraft systems, or drones, over private property. The bill prohibits a person from knowingly and intentionally causing a drone to enter another person’s property and come within 50 feet of a dwelling when the purpose is to coerce, intimidate, or harass someone, or to capture video or photographs of the property, the owner, a resident, or a guest. The bill defines “unmanned aircraft system” by reference to existing Maryland law and includes exceptions for people with consent and for operators acting under federal authorization and in compliance with federal law.
A violation of the bill would be a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in jail, a fine of up to $5,000, or both. The bill would add a new section to the Criminal Law Article, expanding Maryland’s trespass- and surveillance-related criminal provisions to address drone activity near homes. It is scheduled to take effect October 1, 2025.
Impact
The bill would add a new criminal prohibition in the Maryland Criminal Law Article, creating Section 3-908 to address drone trespass and intrusive surveillance near dwellings. It would give law enforcement and prosecutors a specific misdemeanor offense to use against intentional drone incursions onto private property when done to harass, intimidate, coerce, or gather images, while preserving lawful use by consent or under federal authority. The law would primarily affect drone operators, property owners, and residents concerned about privacy and nuisance surveillance.
Sentiment
No committee transcript or vote record is available, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to gauge formal sentiment. Based on the bill text, the measure appears to be framed as a privacy and property-rights protection, suggesting support from sponsors concerned about drone misuse. The absence of recorded opposition in the provided materials means any controversy is not documented here.
Contention
The main potential points of contention are the balance between privacy protection and lawful drone use, and the scope of the prohibited conduct. Supporters are likely to emphasize protection from harassment, intimidation, and unwanted surveillance over homes, while critics could question whether the 50-foot standard is clear enough or whether the bill could affect legitimate drone operations, photography, or other uses near private property. The federal-law exception also suggests attention to avoiding conflict with FAA-regulated activities.