Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Forest Conservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County planning staff supports code changes tied to state forest law; farmers and advocates raise concerns
Summary
Montgomery Planning presented proposed revisions to the county’s forest conservation code (Bill 18‑25) to align local law with Senate Bill 0526 (state law). Planning staff and environmental advocates highlighted priority changes; farming groups and others urged more consultation on definitions and impacts for agriculture and solar projects.
Kelsey Desmond, a forest conservation planner with Montgomery Planning, told the council that Bill 18‑25 updates County Code Chapter 22A to align with statewide changes that took effect July 1, 2024 (Senate Bill 0526) and to codify existing staff practice.
“Bill 18‑25 reflects proposed changes to Chapter 22A and to the corresponding regulations,” Desmond said, summarizing changes including a statutory removal of afforestation requirements for solar photovoltaic facilities, four new categories to priorities for forest retention, reinstatement of forest mitigation banks with a 50% credit limit, and removal of significant trees from tree‑save plan requirements where state law requires.
Supporters and opponents: planning staff said the revisions were reviewed by Maryland Department of Natural Resources and recommended by the Planning Board. Several public commenters praised stronger emphasis on protecting existing forests and forest mitigation banks; others — including Montgomery Ag Producers and Montgomery County Farm Bureau — opposed parts of the draft and urged further discussion, especially around a proposed local change in the definition of “tree” and how agricultural operations and producers would be affected.
Farm representatives said they were not consulted on several changes and expressed concern that a tighter local definition of “tree” could affect routine farm management of windbreaks, fence rows and stream buffers. Kelsey Desmond and Planning Board members said the amendments were intended to align the county with state law, but several agricultural organizations urged that any provisions beyond the state changes be handled through a separate, consultative process.
What happens next: the Transportation, Environment Committee will hold a work session on Bill 18‑25 on July 28, 2025. Public testimony at the hearing flagged a set of technical questions the committee may address, including definitions, solar exemptions, and whether forest mitigation banks should be limited in how credits are applied.
