Prince George's General Assembly Committee reviews local bill priorities, approves enabling changes and holds others ahead of Oct. 1 deadline

The General Assembly Committee of the Prince George's County Council met Sept. 9 and reviewed a slate of county-only bills to transmit to the county delegation before the Oct. 1 deadline. Chair Waneka Fisher said the committee’s work is time-sensitive: “Local bills are due October 1,” and the committee must finalize which Prince George’s-only proposals will be pursued.

The meeting focused on whether to advance, hold or seek amendments for a range of bills affecting utilities, transportation safety, development finance, procurement, supplier diversity, environmental fees and courthouse transparency. Committee members voted to adopt enabling language for an impact-fee deferral, to seek local authority over a portion of the 10¢ bag fee, to support a Prince George’s-specific courthouse transparency proposal for certain pretrial bond hearings, and to approve supplier-diversity authority for county procurement. Several other measures were held for follow-up with the county executive or sponsoring members.

Why it matters: the committee must submit county-specific local bills to the county delegation by Oct. 1 for the 2026 Maryland General Assembly session. Decisions this month determine which proposals the delegation will carry and how staff and delegates will frame testimony in Annapolis.

Most significant outcomes

- Deferral of impact-fee collection (county enabling bill): The committee voted 4–0 to support an enabling local bill allowing Prince George’s County to defer collection of impact fees until later in the development process, subject to enabling language that would allow the county to design details locally. Council members debated how the tool should be targeted (for example, toward multifamily housing) and whether enabling legislation should include geographic or product-type limits. Council member Meredith Ivy said the change “doesn't decrease the amount of money that the county receives” but would lower financing costs for developers; other members urged drafting that avoids incentivizing sprawl and that includes provisions to manage short-term cash-flow gaps for bond payments.

- 10¢ bag fee revenue-sharing (enabling amendment): The committee voted 4–0 to support seeking enabling state legislation that would allow the county to receive a portion of the 10¢ bag fee revenue rather than require a specific statewide split. Members noted the current local practice leaves revenue with retailers and that public perception is the county already collects the fee. Vice Chair Oriada argued for flexibility so local leaders could determine any split or use of funds.

- Supplier diversity and procurement unification authority: The committee voted 4–0 in favor of enabling local authority to establish supplier-diversity participation requirements for county procurement and to pursue unification of business registration/procurement processes across county agencies. Members discussed whether memoranda of understanding (MOUs) among agencies or enabling legislation was the faster path; staff were asked to consult with the county executive and institution leaders (Prince George’s County Public Schools, Prince George’s Community College, and relevant quasi‑agencies) before the next meeting.

- Courthouse virtual access for some pretrial/bail hearings (Prince George’s County-specific request): The committee voted 4–0 to support a Prince George’s County delegation bill asking that virtual access remain available for certain pretrial bond hearings in county courts (excluding juvenile matters). The request came from advocates who said virtual access improves transparency for court-watch programs and public oversight.

Other items held for follow-up or further drafting

- Termination-of-service notification for multifamily dwellings: Committee members discussed a bill that would require a public service company (electric/gas/water) to notify the municipality and local elected officials before terminating service to a tenant in a multifamily dwelling when the utility has received the customer’s consent. Members raised two clarifications: (1) the statutory definition of “multifamily dwelling unit” and (2) realistic expectations for county or municipal intervention after notice. Staff agreed to provide the statutory definition and the bill was first put on hold and later returned to the committee; the committee ultimately voted 4–0 to move a version focused on apartment buildings and limited to notification only, with staff follow-up on the definition and implementation logistics.

- High Incident Network corridor assessment (Routes 202 and 704): The committee held a request for a state study of safety and speed-limit options on Routes 202 and 704 after members noted the State Highway Administration is already engaged on portions of Route 202 and that meeting directly with SHA might produce faster results than a state bill. Motion to hold carried 4–0.

- Small- and minority-business participation at University of Maryland, Bowie State: Members expressed support for the goal but noted the university is a statewide institution and that asking the General Assembly to dictate institutional spending is likely to face resistance; the committee held the bill 4–0 to pursue outreach/advocacy instead.

- Beer and wine sales in grocery stores: After discussion about pilots and prior committee votes, an initial motion in support met objections and the committee substituted a motion to hold pending further discussion with the county executive and delegation; the hold passed 4–0.

- Excess revenue allocation above the TRIM cap (abandoned properties language): Members discussed prior Attorney General guidance and whether clarifying legislation should specifically reference abandoned‑property proceeds. The committee moved to hold for additional drafting and discussion; the record shows the motion to hold carried (vote recorded as 3–0 during the meeting discussion phase).

Votes at a glance (motions, movers/second, tally)

- Hold: Termination-of-service notification (initial hold) — Motion: “hold the termination of service priority.” Mover: Chair Waneka Fisher. Second: (recorded). Vote: Fisher Aye; Burrows Aye; Ivy Aye; Vice Chair Oriada Aye. Outcome: motion to hold (4–0). (See actions below for final action on amended apartment-focused version.)

- Hold: High Incident Network corridor assessment (Routes 202 & 704) — Motion to hold; Second by Council Chair Ed Burrows. Vote: 4–0. Outcome: hold.

- Support (with amendment/enabling): Deferral of impact-fee collection (enabling for Prince George’s County) — Motion: moved to support as enabling; Second recorded. Vote: Fisher Aye; Vice Chair Oriada Aye; Burrows Aye; Ivy Aye. Outcome: favorable (4–0) with amendment to be enabling legislation.

- Hold: Small/minority-business participation at University of Maryland, Bowie State — Motion to hold; Second by Council Member Ivy. Vote: 4–0. Outcome: hold.

- Hold (substitute): Beer and wine sales in grocery stores — Substitute motion to hold after initial motion encountered objections. Vote on substitute hold: 4–0. Outcome: hold.

- Hold: Excess revenue allocation above TRIM (abandoned properties focus) — Motion to hold; recorded vote shows motion to hold carried (3–0 at time of discussion). Outcome: hold pending clarifying language.

- Support: Supplier diversity participation requirements (authority to set local requirements for PGPS and PGCC procurement) — Motion in favor; Vote: 4–0. Outcome: favorable.

- Support (enabling amendment): 10¢ bag-fee revenue sharing (enabling local authority; no statewide split specified) — Motion favorable with amendment. Vote: 4–0. Outcome: favorable with amendment.

- Support: Courthouse virtual access for certain pretrial bond hearings (Prince George’s County-specific request for delegation) — Motion favorable. Vote: 4–0. Outcome: favorable.

Committee directions and staff follow-up

Staff (committee director Marvely Neville Simpson, legislative officer Jabari Cooper and county executive staff member Marcus Jackson) were directed to: - Provide the statutory definition of “multifamily dwelling unit” and draft updated language narrowing the termination-notification proposal to apartments/multifamily buildings and clarifying implementation expectations. - Discuss procurement unification and supplier-diversity authority with the county executive’s office and the leadership of Prince George’s County Public Schools and Prince George’s Community College, and report back at the next meeting. - Return with clarified draft language on the excess‑revenue/abandoned‑property proposal and on any county‑specific bag‑fee enabling language.

Who spoke (selected)

- Waneka Fisher, Chair, General Assembly Committee, Prince George’s County Council (chaired meeting; motioned to hold and later moved bills). First referenced at 00:05:52. - Marvely Neville Simpson, Committee director, Prince George’s County Council staff (presented bill slate). First referenced at 00:02:00. - Jabari Cooper, Legislative officer (presented bill texts). First referenced at 00:02:00. - David Williams, Legislative policy analyst (staff support). First referenced at 00:02:00. - Marcus Jackson, County executive team (provided executive-branch perspective). First referenced at 00:02:00. - Council Member Ed Burrows (participated in roll calls; seconded motions). First referenced at 00:00:31. - Council Member Meredith Ivy (questioned scope and financial implications on several bills). First referenced at 00:00:34. - Vice Chair Oriada (vice chair of the committee; participated in votes and discussion). First referenced at 00:00:05. - Council Member Watson (explained local incident that prompted the termination-of-service proposal). First referenced at 00:54:49. - Council Member Hawkins (bill sponsor referenced for procurement unification request). First referenced during procurement discussion.

Authorities and legal references cited in the meeting

- “Public utility article” (referenced as the section of law the termination-notice bill would amend) — referenced by staff and sponsors. - State law generally and the TRIM cap (tax rate limitation) and related state revenue/tax code (discussion about excess revenue allocation above the TRIM cap and how education funding is prioritized under state law). - Attorney General opinion (referenced regarding the disposition of proceeds from abandoned properties). - Existing county resolution endorsing beer-and-wine sales in supermarkets (the committee noted the council previously passed a supportive resolution).

Clarifying details recorded

- Deadline: Local bills to be delivered to the county delegation by Oct. 1, 2025. - Bag fee: Current county practice leaves collected 10¢ bag-fee revenue with retailers; committee seeks authority to allow the county to receive a portion via state enabling language. - Termination-of-service case example: Council Member Watson described a Greenbelt apartment where an owner’s nonpayment led to threatened utility termination and residents—who had paid utilities—facing service loss; the notice on doors prompted council intervention. - Route focus: The high-incident corridor request specified Routes 202 and 704; members noted State Highway is already implementing stop‑gap measures on portions of Route 202. - Procurement: Staff noted separate procurement/MBE processes exist across county government, Prince George’s County Public Schools and Prince George’s Community College and that unification could reduce paperwork for small businesses.

Proper names (selected)

- Prince George's County (agency/jurisdiction) - University of Maryland, Bowie State (institution) - Prince George’s County Public Schools (agency) - Prince George’s Community College (institution) - Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC) (quasi‑agency) - Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M‑NCPPC) (quasi‑agency) - Pepco and WSSC (utility companies referenced in discussion of terminations)

Meeting context and next steps

The committee handled many items in a single meeting and directed staff to follow up with the county executive’s office and sponsors on several proposals. Committee director Marvely Neville Simpson reminded members of a Sept. 16 breakfast meet-and-greet with the county delegation and county leadership to coordinate priorities. Members indicated several items will return to the General Assembly Committee for final wording before the Oct. 1 submission deadline.

Ending note: The committee emphasized that several of the measures are seeking only enabling authority from the General Assembly, allowing the county council to design the local rules afterward rather than prescribing statewide mandates.