Bay Journal
MCA, Sugarloaf Citizens Association, Montgomery Ag Producers and the Montgomery County Farm Bureau have all released a statement regarding the passage of SB931.
The provision opens up around 100,000 acres of farmland/forestland across the state to the siting of solar with no oversight from local jurisdictions - missing an opportunity for Maryland to lead with thoughtful policies to balance renewable energy and thriving farms, prime soils and forests. The bill directs the Public Service Commission to approve solar projects on 5% of each county's priority preservation areas (farmland and forest conservation areas) - upending the decades of time and taxpayer funds spent to conserve these areas all across the state.
Here close to home, we are still gathering the specifics on what this means for the Ag Reserve, but it is looking like 5,000 acres of the nation's most successful farmland protection zone will spend a generation under solar and battery storage. Efforts to amend the legislation to honor the unique zoning of the Reserve (and the similar long term preservation efforts of other counties) or reduce the percentage cap were unheeded by the very same representatives of the Ag Reserve's district.
What happens now?
Even before the Governor's signature makes this official, there has already been a marked increase in outreach from solar developers to Ag Reserve landowners - still offering 10-20 times what farmers pay to lease land and now adding "signing bonuses" to sweeten the deal. We continue to represent the Reserve in two cases at the PSC of solar developers seeking to site on prime soils (a public hearing in Beallsville will go ahead on the 14th - please show up if you can). But is is unclear what this new law would mean for these projects. As we seek more specifics about just how dramatic the impacts will be from this bill - we join with our partners - both old - Sugarloaf Citizens Association, Maryland Ag Producers and the Montgomery County Farm Bureau - and new ag partners across the state to end on a resolute note. The work of farmland protection in Maryland has been dealt a heavy blow but we are all the more committed to seeing farms thrive right here where they are needed. Please stay tuned.
Background:
Good summary of provision and of the current state of play here
Currently:
Generally, a person may not begin construction in the State of a generating station, overhead transmission line, or a qualified generator lead line unless a CPCN is first obtained from PSC. The application process involves notifying specified stakeholders, public hearings, the consideration of recommendations by State and local government entities, and the project’s effect on various aspects of the State infrastructure, economy, and environment. PSC must take final action on a CPCN application only after due consideration of the recommendations of the governing body of each county or municipality in which any portion of the project is proposed to be located; the effect of the project on various aspects of the State infrastructure, economy, and environment; the effect of climate change on the project; and, for a generating station only, other specified information.
Short version: currently the PSC must consider local planning and zoning in rendering a decision of whether to grant a CPCN permit. Local jurisdictions as well as local stakeholders can present their views as parties to the proceeding.
The effect of SB 931:
The bill also explicitly states that an owner of a solar energy generating station must comply with all State laws relating to stormwater management, erosion and sediment control, site stabilization, impacts on soil density and compaction, and impacts on ground cover under the panels.
An owner of a proposed solar energy generating station must comply with various land use requirements, which include, among other things: Setbacks, screening, fencing, holding graded soil on site.
Take note the legislation provides:
However, the owner of a proposed solar energy generating station and the applicable county may enter into a written siting agreement that provides less stringent restrictions than those specified above. Written documentation provided to PSC or the applicable local jurisdiction must be considered as meeting the requirements.
Short version: Now the PSC will not consider local planning and zoning in rendering a decision of whether to grant a CPCN permit. Local jurisdictions as well as local stakeholders will not be afforded the opportunity to meaningfully participate in the proceeding.
Update: Agriculture is still being denied a seat at the table as amendments are being discussed. Nevertheless we persist at the doorway, recommending refinements to the bill that will provide the guardrails to protect agriculture and natural resources such as mature forests. We have underscored the MD code requirement (66B as amended in 2009) that land use action must be substantially consistent with County master plans. Without amendments this legislation violates this requirement, here in MC in particular, by upending the Ag Reserve’s central purpose: the continued primacy of farming.
Please take a moment to personalize a message to our leaders in Annapolis.
Please take a moment to personalize a message to our leaders in Annapolis.
Montgomery County among many other counties has written in opposition to the bill.
First Hearing 2/28: The first hearing in Annapolis was contentious. (Full video here) (our ED Caroline Taylor's testimony here) Caroline's report from the hearing:
Notes from the field - Annapolis 2.28.25
You know what is particularly tough in these legislative tussles? It’s having to bear some extraordinarily ill informed folks making some outrageous statements and, worse, state electeds making decisions without knowledge or care as to the consequences. So much of this could be avoided by making a bigger table for stakeholders at the outset. In this case the most affected, agriculture, has been left out. The solar Industry clearly had their hand in it, unencumbered.
We’ve been advised that we are “fighting city hall” and this bill to strip local control completely from how industrial solar will be sited in MD counties will pass. Our reply- “Yeah , well, we will go down swinging.” And your emails/calls to decision makers is keeping the heat up… thank you!
Yesterday in Annapolis, we rose with farmers and colleagues from across the state. Farmers left important work in their fields, greenhouses, seed catalogues, from machine repair, animal care- coming together at the joint hearing on SB 931/ HB 1036.
Chief sponsor of this bill Rep. CT Wilson berated speakers including MC councilmember Marilyn Balcombe, whose strong testimony opposing the bill and calm response to the delegate’s dismissive and disrespectful comments was admirable.
Give voice to maintaining balance in how we deploy solar facilities across MD. Help protect the land that sustains us Take action
Notes from the field - Annapolis 2.28.25
You know what is particularly tough in these legislative tussles? It’s having to bear some extraordinarily ill informed folks making some outrageous statements and, worse, state electeds making decisions without knowledge or care as to the consequences. So much of this could be avoided by making a bigger table for stakeholders at the outset. In this case the most affected, agriculture, has been left out. The solar Industry clearly had their hand in it, unencumbered.
We’ve been advised that we are “fighting city hall” and this bill to strip local control completely from how industrial solar will be sited in MD counties will pass. Our reply- “Yeah , well, we will go down swinging.” And your emails/calls to decision makers is keeping the heat up… thank you!
Yesterday in Annapolis, we rose with farmers and colleagues from across the state. Farmers left important work in their fields, greenhouses, seed catalogues, from machine repair, animal care- coming together at the joint hearing on SB 931/ HB 1036.
Chief sponsor of this bill Rep. CT Wilson berated speakers including MC councilmember Marilyn Balcombe, whose strong testimony opposing the bill and calm response to the delegate’s dismissive and disrespectful comments was admirable.
Give voice to maintaining balance in how we deploy solar facilities across MD. Help protect the land that sustains us Take action
Montgomery County's own Senator Brian Feldman is carrying forward SB 931/ HB1036 The Renewable Energy Certainty Act a bill that would override all local master plan protections in the the siting of community and industrial scale solar and large battery storage installations.
That means overriding local level protections across the state for:
-Farms and prime soils (stripping of topsoil is allowed)
-Forests
-Stream buffers and slopes
MCA, in partnership with 62 other local and state organizations successfully crafted a ZTA in 2021 that allowed solar in the county's Ag Reserve - notably protecting prime soils, forests and steep slopes to balance renewable energy and shared resources - allowing acreage totaling 3 square miles to be used for community solar projects in the Reserve. (That's in addition to the 187 MW total the County has generated - second highest of all MoCo Counties - data from the PSC 12/24)
This bill, lacking the ZTA's balanced approach, is a clear threat to the Ag Reserve, where solar developers are already proposing large arrays on prime soils in an attempt to override county zoning at the state level. The Montgomery County Council has voted to oppose SB931.
Maryland's counties and municipalities have spent many decades rightly protecting farmland, forests and sensitive watershed areas at the taxpayer's expense. This proposal supplants every one of these priorities for the sake of solar. A broad suite of best practices for siting large scale solar that balances these commitments is readily available (see more below). Moreover, while it seems clear the solar industry had a hand in crafting this bill, it seems no one in Annapolis consulted farmers or the myriad groups working on forest and water protection. By refusing to acknowledge the complexity of solar siting, this bill is simply raising hackles when it could be building bridges - a missed opportunity that is hindering the aim of more renewable energy.
For our part, MCA is working with local partners representing farming and environmental interests to suggest amendments that will better balance this bill. We are gathering partner groups and will be releasing an action alert this week.
Please stay tuned. This bill is scheduled for a hearing on February 28th.
Explore More
Best Practices for siting large scale solar (hint: discouraging or prohibiting solar on forests, prime agricultural soils and stream buffers is a theme):
- Abell Foundation “Getting Solar Siting Right in Maryland”
- Farmland Solar Policy Design Toolkit (U-VT and USDA)
- “Where solar arrays shouldn’t go is as critical as where they do go” - Lee Epstein, Chesapeake Bay Foundation director of Lands Programs
More reactions to SB 931:
- WBOC: Maryland Senate Bill on Renewable Energy Sparks Debate Over Local Authority
- New Organization Farmers Alliance for Rural Maryland is pushing back against Data Centers, Battery Storage and other industrial uses on Ag Zoned lands
- Central Farm Markets: Energy Boondoggle
- Cherstertown Spy Opinion: Maryland's Legislature is failing Rural Communities
- From Delmarva Farmer: Shore growers meet to beat Maryland bill
- Baltimore Sun Opinion: Solar Sprawl is not what Maryland Needs
- Maryland Association of Counties opposes SB931 and offers amendments
MCA recently hosted a solar info session to explain the County's conditional use process for solar in the Ag Reserve and developers looking to end run the County's master plan.
We need to deploy a lot more solar - in all the right places. Looking for ways to go solar at your farm, business, home? We hosted a number of info sessions with the MoCo Green Bank, find all the recordings here.
