Prince George's County launches task force to study stormwater pond maintenance

Prince George's County convened its first Stormwater Pond Task Force to inventory privately maintained ponds, clarify maintenance standards and responsibilities, and identify funding and ownership options ahead of a report due in January 2026.

Councilwoman Walla Blaquet, who sponsored the resolution establishing the body, said the task force was created after "many of the residents in my district" raised concerns about poorly maintained ponds that are causing erosion and other problems. Councilmember Ingrid Watson was named vice chair; Blaguet said she will chair the group.

The task force's creation follows County Resolution CR 49-2024, which directs the group to identify stormwater facilities maintained by homeowners associations or other private entities, define what operation and maintenance entails, assess homeowners associations' capacity to maintain ponds and, where capacity is lacking, "identify alternative and creative methods to come up with ways to finance the operation and maintenance." The resolution gives the task force until January 2026 to provide a report, including a countywide cost analysis and equity assessment for proposed transfers of ownership to government entities.

At the meeting, staff and outside experts outlined an initial work plan that will focus on information gathering during approximately the first four months of the task force's work. County staff from the Department of the Environment (DOE) committed to provide a countywide list of stormwater ponds and a presentation summarizing existing inspections and retrofit activity. A representative from the Department of Permitting, Inspections and Enforcement (DPIE) said all development must obtain stormwater management approval through the department and offered to provide the department's approval requirements at the next meeting.

Joanna Smith, associate director for the Office of Storm Drain Maintenance in the Department of Public Works, clarified the division of responsibilities: "DPW&T is actually the part the agency that is for the maintenance of our public infrastructure, not DOE. DOE is actually responsible to inspect to ensure that the private facilities are meeting compliance, but not maintenance." She and other staff said DPW&T inspects county-owned facilities on a regular cycle and can provide cost ranges for maintenance work.

Task force members asked agencies to provide specific materials at the next meeting: a list of ponds and who maintains them (DOE), the entitlement and approval criteria used when plans are reviewed (DPIE), and the Department of Public Works' maintenance standards, inspection frequencies and cost estimates (DPW&T).

Engineers on the task force described categories of maintenance and how they affect cost. Morris Kofer, an environmental engineer, and Jim Soltes of Soltes Engineering said maintenance typically separates "functional" tasks that keep a pond operating as designed from "aesthetic" tasks such as vegetation trimming. Soltes said engineers prepare concept and construction plans and can help assess post-construction handoffs to homeowners associations. As Soltes put it, these facilities are “typically reviewed under county and state regulations,” and costs vary widely depending on size, age and the extent of deferred maintenance.

Officials discussed inspection frequency and condition ranking. John Tarr of the Prince George's Soil Conservation District explained the district's dam-safety mandate, and DPW&T staff said county inspections use a condition ranking system with a three-year inspection cycle for county-owned facilities; ratings reflect whether a facility is in good condition or requires work to restore functionality. DPW&T staff said costs can range from tens of thousands of dollars for routine work up to larger sums when sediment removal or major repairs are needed.

Community representatives and HOA managers urged clearer handoff processes from developers to HOAs and better access to technical assistance and potential funding. Tony Phelps, deputy director of administration for the county planning department, recommended comparing developer-controlled HOA financials with resident-run HOAs to understand the difference in capacity and reserves.

The task force set a meeting schedule of once monthly and selected the next meeting for February 20 at 6 p.m., to be held virtually. Members asked county staff to circulate requested presentations and data in advance so the committee can limit the next meeting to an information session and then begin formulating recommendations by June.

The meeting ended with a record that the group will start with data collection and agency presentations before moving to policy options and potential funding strategies.