[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_25":26},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_27":28,"_29":30},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[31,75,87,99,111],{"_32":33,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":39,"_40":41,"_42":43,"_44":45,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6373853,"mediaKeyId","2145442-f6e00b3578f94c2db954e84e64ef6168","parentId",2145442,"title","Bill would require Maryland utilities to disclose how they vote in PJM stakeholder subcommittees","audioSeconds",1124,"startMs",1711000,"endMs",2835000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2145442-f6e00b3578f94c2db954e84e64ef6168&start=1711&end=2835","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2145442-f6e00b3578f94c2db954e84e64ef6168/thumbnail_1711000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6373853/Maryland/Bill-would-require-Maryland-utilities-to-disclose-how-they-vote-in-PJM-stakeholder-subcommittees","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6373853-2a4a0222372bc513ed5287d54f57581f/orig.mp4?Expires=1769768566&Signature=m56IrdRF34KUB1UGW5Pnk8JkWAmvYEnWe~wkUfIXLyAUPBL~k20HUZVJYdYLhPiPQyqtH9kLI~YFE8pol7ro-xzJ4~aTc3xemv9KxRoIsz9k1ilrpfBHE-qPEsjtJWkS6j22UQerJ4I-C-eiVNxYmFyBvFYcLf6lRv5r904qiaGPmB2envYT4t1dsn~B1kVYeki1Djqa253QJoFMqTylzdrVpu6NUOoaH248isFft4CvXqPFK36Agih0bRe5KEMIbaZ6z3IfDdEsFrOKfoFnXNWR9Qvo3ikLlYgSUuEtvibVVeGyudnVeHx4R0Klc6s1Rh4eH23PJRhBXOPUcyXF3g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Maryland General Assembly - Economic Matters","date","2025-01-23T00:00:00Z","article","Delegate Lorie Charcutian told the committee HB 121 seeks to require Maryland‑regulated utilities to disclose how they vote in PJM’s lower‑level stakeholder committees, putting those votes on an annual report to the Public Service Commission. “The way that decisions get made at PJM is there’s higher level committees that are public… but before a proposal can get to those higher level committees it has to go through lower level committees and the votes at the lower level committees are not public at all,” Charcutian said.

Supporters said the lack of transparency can hide how incumbent utilities and generators shape market rules that affect reliability, transmission planning and customer bills. Clara Summers, campaign manager for Consumers for a Better Grid, said the stakeholder process can influence major issues — for example, the planning for Brandon Shores retirements and transmission planning — but votes in subcommittees are not recorded or reported.

David Lapp of the Office of the People’s Counsel said Maryland utilities have substantial influence in PJM and that decisions in subcommittees have contributed to outcomes that raise customer costs; he cited recent capacity‑market and transmission disputes brought to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Tammy Bresnahan of AARP Maryland said transparency matters to ratepayers who face rising bills and limited capacity to track hundreds of meetings.

Witnesses and the sponsor said the bill is narrowly focused on disclosure of votes by utilities the state regulates and would not directly change PJM rules or FERC jurisdiction. Committee members asked whether similar bills have advanced in other states; witnesses said several states introduced versions last year and a few more plan bills this session, but none had passed as of testimony. No formal vote on HB 121 was recorded during the hearing; proponents asked for a favorable report to advance the proposal.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","ECM Committee Session, 1/23/2025 #1","oneSentenceSummary","Delegate Lorie Charcutian asked the committee to require Maryland utilities to disclose how they vote in PJM’s lower‑level stakeholder committees, arguing the records are necessary to evaluate whether utilities are acting in the public interest.","taxTitle","Economic Matters Committee, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative, Maryland","taxId",15059,"location","Maryland","headline","","shortSummary",{"_32":76,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":77,"_40":78,"_42":79,"_44":80,"_46":81,"_48":82,"_50":83,"_52":84,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":85,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":86,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6373859,"Sponsor seeks one‑time assessment on largest fossil‑fuel emitters to fund Maryland climate damages",791,195000,986000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2145442-f6e00b3578f94c2db954e84e64ef6168&start=195&end=986","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2145442-f6e00b3578f94c2db954e84e64ef6168/thumbnail_195000.jpg","/articles/6373859/Maryland/Sponsor-seeks-onetime-assessment-on-largest-fossilfuel-emitters-to-fund-Maryland-climate-damages","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6373859-566c0ecbf4fbb026de06da4c007a81e2/orig.mp4?Expires=1769768566&Signature=GGn3bkxBhybQAUznbzCvw3-uXPfxelLYaJ5qlAdq8a8y~q0SDHWPGcggGGZawul44Lb7~2SPHGFqqoQ7H3yg5ksIqQK4IPlKiE10Q6eXL~HZbp7J9FGwZhakJf6sPGzDTL64xXXdCzpI7v0Zx9XP~VCpWLUw~YIzPREW69QDKaVIAPKlc~a8IXX43d9IKQ~0yEL12vOmnPi4BhB5OKJdTmjSyaxsvM3C0tq4TjqQVowG3VHTZGjCdVikSBhol7YavH~wPwuND2i2~cZIeGMTacNU5NNjOftU4bAveYmFppdEH1qCkGCWaVIN-YscYY1R2MDjC2dFBTRZ09QMeBIv-A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Delegate Delia Frazier Hidalgo, sponsor of House Bill 128, told the House Economic Matters Committee on Jan. 23 that the bill would create a fund to cover damage from extreme weather and other climate impacts by assessing the largest fossil‑fuel companies for historic emissions. “The fossil fuel industry has known for over 40 years…that burning fossil fuels is the leading cause of greenhouse gas emissions,” Hidalgo said, adding the bill would require companies that emitted more than 1,000,000,000 tons of greenhouse gases since 1994 to pay a one‑time assessment.

The bill would direct proceeds into a mitigation fund for purposes Hidalgo and witnesses listed — stormwater management, sea‑level rise protections and public‑health responses. Hidalgo said the measure would target multinational companies such as ExxonMobil and Shell and estimated the measure could generate about $9 billion in total, including roughly $900 million in an illustrative first calculation cited during testimony.

Brittney Baker, Maryland director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, said the bill applies a strict‑liability approach to the largest polluters and described the measure as a cost‑shifting mechanism: “The purpose of this bill is to cost shift these unavoidable costs off of Marylanders and onto the largest, most polluting fossil fuel companies,” Baker said. She told the committee the measure would not affect Maryland utilities or local fuel retailers and cited polling and attorney‑general support in submitted material.

William Pirmitay, testifying as an individual and identified as managing director of the environmental law program at the University of Maryland Carey School of Law, said the RENEW Act is modeled on the federal Superfund and similar state bills. Pirmitay told the committee he was confident Maryland’s police powers would justify a compensation‑based assessment and that recent litigation challenging Vermont’s law raises constitutional issues now being litigated elsewhere.

Several faith‑based, environmental‑justice and consumer groups also testified in favor, describing rising adaptation costs borne by local governments and households. Stacy Hartwell of the South County Environmental Justice Coalition cited county and municipal adaptation spending and urged the committee to prioritize low‑income and historically marginalized communities in any spending plan.

Committee members asked about legal exposure under dormant commerce‑clause and retroactivity arguments; witnesses replied the bill targets compensation for historic harms and that precedent exists in CERCLA‑style legislation. Hidalgo and witnesses said the bill would include a study in its first year to define collection and distribution mechanisms.

No committee action or formal vote on HB 128 was recorded during the hearing. The sponsor and proponents requested a favorable report to advance the bill for further consideration.","Delegate Delia Frazier Hidalgo asked the House Economic Matters Committee to grant a favorable report on House Bill 128, a one‑time assessment on very large fossil‑fuel emitters intended to fund a Maryland mitigation and recovery fund for climate damages.",{"_32":88,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":89,"_40":90,"_42":91,"_44":92,"_46":93,"_48":94,"_50":95,"_52":96,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":97,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":98,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6373838,"Bill would create revolving loan program to help Maryland nonprofits finance clean‑energy upgrades",256,4211000,4467000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2145442-f6e00b3578f94c2db954e84e64ef6168&start=4211&end=4467","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2145442-f6e00b3578f94c2db954e84e64ef6168/thumbnail_4211000.jpg","/articles/6373838/Maryland/Bill-would-create-revolving-loan-program-to-help-Maryland-nonprofits-finance-cleanenergy-upgrades","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6373838-5a0bc75c2bf6b98e4f1b5816dc786c13/orig.mp4?Expires=1769768566&Signature=ADwTnOct1yNAmDAvZyrbb7My5ACraa6dYQIcvyPdWsg-BBFOiq2V65Pauo2Iok7qdu8lZXhpQugSRmOizdIEr2wgWUlfaekGzXAYom-MFQ0UMz0rnO9tDcXwkvIKcVseUID1bMSXpV-GHrvDB-FQy9lfK2kYpO80jgp4lL6X0oNvOzOJtMbA8JWGJpll9nIc9ULVwJFtfIWdqQaLISAZmCdVrTqXlCVrhsK7Oqyrj45OXyWj2C7cpUxlSRwTF16qDgcXTMHVIaaiagMx4uYkPYPeqdcQBvwgTwzzUrDs84o~f~JzxzBL~O2MGfs2trcKM6wxuH1-cAz93jmKUl5l6g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Delegate Adrianne Boafo presented House Bill 145 to establish a revolving loan program to finance renewable energy and energy‑efficiency projects for Maryland nonprofit organizations, using allocations from the state’s C‑Fund or through the Maryland Clean Energy Center under a proposed amendment. “HB 145 establishes a revolving loan program to fund environmental infrastructure projects for Maryland nonprofits,” Boafo said.

Henry Bogdan of Maryland Nonprofits testified in support and described the program as filling a financing gap because many nonprofits cannot access tax‑based incentives available to private entities. “It gives us a chance to be contributing to the state to reaching its climate goals,” Bogdan said, noting the potential market would be in the thousands of nonprofits with eligible projects.

Witnesses recommended allowing administration through the Maryland Clean Energy Center (MCEC) to leverage private capital and lower the need for a large state appropriation. Katie Meddle of Advanced Energy United also endorsed the bill, citing benefits to solar and storage providers and nonprofit operating budgets. Committee discussion noted that appropriation and fund‑source questions would be considered in the budget process and that a Senate cross‑file has already moved in the other chamber. No formal committee vote was recorded during the hearing.","House Bill 145 would establish a revolving loan program to finance renewable and energy‑efficiency projects for Maryland nonprofits; sponsor and nonprofit representatives supported the concept and suggested an amendment to route administration through the Maryland Clean Energy Center.",{"_32":100,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":101,"_40":102,"_42":103,"_44":104,"_46":105,"_48":106,"_50":107,"_52":108,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":109,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":110,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6373843,"Bill would boost eminent‑domain compensation for farmland taken for infrastructure projects",394,3745000,4139000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2145442-f6e00b3578f94c2db954e84e64ef6168&start=3745&end=4139","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2145442-f6e00b3578f94c2db954e84e64ef6168/thumbnail_3745000.jpg","/articles/6373843/Maryland/Bill-would-boost-eminentdomain-compensation-for-farmland-taken-for-infrastructure-projects","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6373843-6ef68cbfd75715b06f8d0f902b1c8a34/orig.mp4?Expires=1769768566&Signature=D0XvkBQI7x-DqKMqYlRChxMAV1q8d6wBsQu5X1Jxu-F-oQxbOVH5qj7WR2ZlEN67hp~zaO7g~wVV0Fb17pO3N3BJoX0RfwJZJg2ZwkvZiVkkgotP7P1Xm2ve15NruARtaw72WFFdAFobiii~uyws2Zl0Vkjc2xk3jHUP-TjNLXWB8CdqMvTADbdB3utNEwpjZabrEwbw6jNW1Pkq5ufnNXcwxuNnxtt0m0HsH5v4ZEiytS9mi-izJtrypFQCsQjO-8pJyQhczHATNgSbMiP~52e44oGjbNg48WOxPphiL2bAi4hw7PCi81Itbrs9zb7CpOTHtEYtRR~TGL7Yuox2uQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Delegate Nina Mangione, sponsor of House Bill 81, told the committee the bill would add a 350% premium to the highest appraisal when productive farmland is taken by condemnation proceedings. “This bill…adds a 350% premium to the highest appraisal of farmland taken by the eminent domain process,” Mangione said, arguing the premium recognizes farmland’s long‑term productivity and community value.

Witnesses supporting the bill said large infrastructure and data‑center projects threaten Maryland farmland and that higher compensation would protect agricultural communities. An activist identified as Bridal Hill argued that AI‑infrastructure projects — defined in testimony to include data centers, transmission lines and cooling systems — are pressing for eminent domain on preserved and privately owned agricultural land and urged higher valuation, even proposing a 10‑times market‑value approach for some projects.

Proponents cited Maryland’s agricultural economy and statistics on acreage and farm cash receipts to contextualize the proposal. Committee members asked proponents about how the premium was calculated and whether the measure might affect project development timelines; proponents said the measure is intended to raise the stakes for projects that seek farmland by eminent domain but acknowledged policy tradeoffs.

No formal vote or amendment was recorded during the hearing; the sponsor requested a favorable report.","House Bill 81 would increase compensation for condemned farmland by adding a 350% premium to the highest appraisal; sponsor and supporters said the change is intended to deter use of eminent domain for large‑scale transmission or data‑center projects that convert productive farmland.",{"_32":112,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":113,"_40":114,"_42":115,"_44":116,"_46":117,"_48":118,"_50":119,"_52":120,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":121,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":122,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6373848,"Sponsor seeks study of data‑center energy, economic and environmental impacts in Maryland",559,2842000,3401000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2145442-f6e00b3578f94c2db954e84e64ef6168&start=2842&end=3401","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2145442-f6e00b3578f94c2db954e84e64ef6168/thumbnail_2842000.jpg","/articles/6373848/Maryland/Sponsor-seeks-study-of-datacenter-energy-economic-and-environmental-impacts-in-Maryland","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6373848-5796a37033e6054011c16a3eb19d0f82/orig.mp4?Expires=1769768566&Signature=UMsjX1EXeFOwiVkegyOyad4ahIEcidlgAMRzjFeGTCgf-8C29rm11vsio03SI0HHf7xj~8d1GzruZ8IdCVp9HydE-nOyJHfUULUDcfDmXWEJGI70uy3AHT-uxmrcUcO7helqgpznpPeN0XnkjFhrPRPe2fRY90dTYXBXomtTKdkZFBfm4ZzRdGBG84KaUGCa0ISbWB08jJ898iAzsueaXo2VPnlldCKEckQN20J4~xg6onQGLUmtdJBjSV6KFmeP5VObCnkWS~BktTC8bP85UKdo41mIYKrvxo8fXG3LpRxkBwvKwl2s24obiwV6s7KjO26nwdeNHF3pyngx5NGJhg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Delegate Brian Crosby, sponsor of House Bill 270, told the committee the bill will commission a study to quantify the environmental, energy and economic impacts of data‑center development in Maryland and inform future policy choices. “What we want to see is what are those financial benefits? And do they outweigh the cost of energy…that impact on the grid that is gonna have on Marylanders,” Crosby said.

David Lapp of the Office of the People’s Counsel testified in support, saying data centers can impose substantial costs on residential customers because of high energy demand and that recent PJM transmission allocations driven by projected data‑center demand had assigned significant transmission costs to Maryland ratepayers. “Maryland customers will bear those costs even if all those data centers never actually materialize,” Lapp said, urging better information before large transmission investments are finalized.

Multiple witnesses described hyperscale centers’ large power and water needs and urged the study to include counts of existing and proposed centers, projected load, and interconnection and cooling impacts. Brandon Hill and Elizabeth Law, a former transmission planner and FERC staffer, said Maryland currently generates roughly 60% of its power demand and that hyperscale data centers can consume power at city‑scale levels; Law testified that an individual hyperscale campus might require multiple high‑capacity transmission lines at full buildout and urged accurate statewide accounting.

Delegate Crosby said the bill does not halt negotiations or construction; it creates a two‑year study (with statutory effective/finish dates reflected in the bill language) to provide aggregate, neutral information to policymakers. Committee members asked whether the study would consider both costs and benefits — such as potential operational efficiencies from cloud migration — and Crosby said the study is intended to analyze net economic, environmental and grid impacts. No committee vote on HB 270 was recorded during the hearing.","House Bill 270 would commission a multi‑year study on the aggregate energy, environmental and economic impacts of data‑center development in Maryland; supporters, including the Office of the People’s Counsel, said a statewide accounting would help policymakers and the state coordinate with PJM planning and avoid premature transmission costs.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Bill would require Maryland utilities to disclose how they vote in PJM stakeholder subcommittees

Sponsor seeks one‑time assessment on largest fossil‑fuel emitters to fund Maryland climate damages

Bill would create revolving loan program to help Maryland nonprofits finance clean‑energy upgrades

Bill would boost eminent‑domain compensation for farmland taken for infrastructure projects

Sponsor seeks study of data‑center energy, economic and environmental impacts in Maryland