Caroline County commissioners voted Oct. 14 to amend a proposed local law that would create a county Agricultural Land Preservation Fund to receive compensatory payments from utility‑scale solar and energy‑storage projects that affect high‑quality farmland.

The planning commission recommended calculating payments using the Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation (MALPF) appraisal average per acre (the state’s appraisals of fair‑market value) and charging 75% of that amount on the full project acreage when any portion of the solar site includes Class 1 or Class 2 soils. Commissioners approved that recommendation and directed county counsel and staff to incorporate the planning commission text into the local act for further readings.

What the proposal would do

• Compensatory fund: The proposed ordinance (legislative bill 2025‑011) would require solar energy generating stations and associated energy storage devices sited on soils identified as prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance (planning commission recommended mapping to Class 1 and Class 2 soils in COMAR) to pay a compensatory preservation contribution to a county fund.

• How the payment would be set: The planning commission recommended using the MALPF program’s average fair‑market value per acre (the state’s appraisal output) as the basis, then charging 75% of that value for the entire project acreage if any portion includes Class 1 or 2 soils. Staff said the MALPF averages are computed from independent appraisals that the state obtains for easement offers.

• Use of funds: Money deposited into the county’s agricultural land preservation fund could be used to purchase agricultural conservation easements or otherwise support permanent farmland preservation; funds would be disbursed only with written county commissioner approval.

Why staff and planning recommended MALPF values

Planning staff and the planning commission told commissioners they favored the MALPF appraisal approach because the state program already generates independent, defensible appraisals and an average per‑acre figure the county can apply without commissioning a separate suite of site‑specific appraisals. That approach, planners said, reduces county workload and legal risk compared with asking solar applicants to commission two independent appraisals per site.

Discussion and concerns

Commissioners and attendees discussed the tradeoffs. Some commissioners said MALPF’s average per‑acre values may lag market conditions and could understate value for parcels with higher development potential near municipal growth areas. Others argued the MALPF‑based approach is more defensible administratively and reduces the risk of legal challenges by using an established state methodology.

A vote to amend and proceed

Commissioner motion language recorded at the meeting directed staff to revise the bill to reference Class 1 and Class 2 soils (COMAR mapping) and implement MALPF 75% calculations on the entire project area; the board approved the motion by voice vote. Staff said the revised text will appear for a subsequent reading and final vote on the legislative calendar.

Ending

County staff and the planning commission emphasized the measure is intended to generate money for permanent easements or other farmland preservation actions and said the details of disbursement and whether funds would be pooled with other preservation programs would be worked out by the board before final adoption.