The Prince George’s County Government Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee on Thursday acted on a package of resolutions addressing procurement, community wealth building, economic tools and employee pay, recording a mix of favorable moves and holds, all by 3-0 votes.

At a glance
- CR-92-2025: Feasibility study for a county‑owned grocery store — moved favorable as amended (3-0). (See separate article for full coverage.)
- CR-86-2025: Prince George’s County Community Wealth Building Compact — moved favorable as amended (3-0). The compact encourages voluntary commitments by anchor institutions to increase procurement with local Black‑owned businesses and MBEs, and the committee’s amendments struck language providing county technical assistance/matchmaking and changed some agency references; the resolution retains an annual compact progress report requirement.
- CR-87-2025: Minority Business Enterprise prime contractor initiative — motion to hold indefinitely passed (3-0). Sponsor noted $1 million previously set aside to run the program as a pilot and requested additional offline work with administration and procurement before advancing.
- CR-97-2025: Deferred collection of development impact fees (request to Maryland General Assembly) — motion to hold passed (3-0). Office of Management and Budget submitted comments opposing the change’s fiscal impact; the resolution would ask the General Assembly to authorize deferral until issuance of use and occupancy permits.
- CR-104-2025: Economic development tools request to General Assembly — moved favorable (3-0). The resolution urges the state to provide Prince George’s County additional tax‑credit authority and other tools to support targeted industries, including the restaurant sector inside the Capital Beltway.
- CR-107-2025: Compensation and benefits; Salary Schedule G — moved favorable (3-0). The resolution amends the county pay plan for FY2026 to reflect a 2% cost‑of‑living adjustment and merit increases; the Office of Management and Budget estimated an adverse fiscal impact of approximately $15,289,486 covering about 1,556 employees.

Committee discussion and legal notes
Committee staff and the policy office provided fiscal and policy impact notes for each resolution. For CR-86, the Office of Law said the compact’s race‑focused procurement encouragement, though voluntary, raised equal‑protection concerns and could present legal challenges; the sponsor accepted amendments to remove a technical assistance/matchmaking obligation and to create a flexible county process for formalizing commitments (pledge, MOU or similar).

For CR-87 the sponsor said the legislation had a companion item and that the administration had agreed to pursue pilot details offline; the sponsor moved to hold indefinitely to allow program planning and to preserve previously allocated funds.

CR-97 asked the General Assembly to amend state statute to allow a county option to defer development impact fee collection; members expressed concern about fiscal consequences and agreed to hold the request so the county can refine the approach.

CR-104 seeks expanded economic incentives from the state to support targeted industries and was advanced with administration support. CR-107, the salary schedule amendment, was approved with the administration’s support; the fiscal note estimating roughly $15.29 million in additional FY2026 expenditures was presented by policy staff.

Votes and next steps
All final committee votes recorded during the meeting were unanimous among voting committee members present, with results recorded as 3-0 for the described motions. Held items will be revisited if sponsors reintroduce them after further work; favorable committee actions move the drafts to the next legislative step per council rules.

Speakers who contributed substantive remarks during the package discussion included Policy Group staff (Caleb Callender, Roger Benagas), Budget and Policy staff (David Noto, Dave Indotto), legal counsel (Miss Bell, Office of Law), County Executive liaison Miss Owens, sponsor Council Vice Chair Orianna and local business owner Brandon Starks.

The committee packet contains the full policy and fiscal impact statements, agency comments and PAPI entries cited during discussion for members and staff to use in follow‑up work.