House advances energy package after prolonged debate over solar siting, agricultural preservation and RGGI

Maryland legislators on March 20 advanced a multi-bill energy package after prolonged debate on how to site utility-scale solar, how to protect preserved farmland, and whether program revenues from the regional greenhouse-gas compact should be returned directly to customers.

What happened: The House considered several related bills in a single package — including a measure to create an expedited certificate-of-public-convenience-and-necessity (CPCN) route for certain generation projects, language on generation and siting called the "Public Utilities Generating Stations / Renewable Energy Certainty Act," and several companion bills addressing resource adequacy, planning and emissions reductions. The floor considered many amendments aimed at: - Restricting or clarifying where utility-scale solar can be sited on priority preservation/agricultural land (a 5% cap per county was a central negotiation point); - Prohibiting use of eminent domain for solar siting and requiring decommissioning bonds; - Requiring Public Service Commission (PSC) decision-making to attempt an "equitable distribution" of projects across counties; - Mandating environmental "dashboards" or EJ screening for projects; and - Suspending or repurposing revenues from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) to provide immediate ratepayer relief.

Outcomes: Most of the floor amendments that would have substantially changed siting rules, imposed an outright ban on eminent domain for solar, or suspended RGGI were rejected on roll calls. The floor generally retained the committee pproach: a 5% cap on certain preserved agricultural acreage per county, an expedited process for some generation projects, new installer licensing requirements, minimum decommissioning safeguards and PSC discretion to manage the queue. Several bills in the energy package were ordered printed for third reading after the votes.

Why it mattered: The debate highlighted a clash between efforts to rapidly expand renewable generation and the concerns of rural counties and farmers who say large-scale solar threatens agricultural production and local economies. It also underscored immediate consumer pressure over spiking utility bills and differing views on whether RGGI and other funds should be spent on programmatic investments or returned directly to ratepayers.

Key arguments from the floor Protect farmland and local economies: Delegates from the Eastern Shore and other agricultural counties said that even a 5% cap applied to the "priority preservation area" could amount to thousands of acres in their counties and would still threaten integrated agricultural economies. Speakers described farm operations as interdependent (grain, poultry integrators, feed suppliers) and warned that large-scale solar leases — with offers of $3,000—or community solar or $3,000—or utility scale per acre per year in some markets — would be irresistible to financially stressed farmers.

Spread projects across the state and protect ratepayers: Several delegates asked for PSC authority or explicit bill language to encourage a more geographically distributed set of projects so that no single county or district would shoulder most of the siting, transmission upgrades or decommissioning costs. Delegates from urban or suburban districts said the bill makes it easier for landowners across the entire state to choose to place solar on their land and that instituting caps helped balance land-use concerns and energy goals.

Eminent domain and community benefits: Delegates pressed whether state law should ever allow eminent domain to secure private solar projects; a proposed ban on eminent domain for solar was defeated. Other amendments to require project labor agreements or to exempt projects from prevailing-wage requirements were also rejected.

RGGI, Empower and returns to ratepayers: Lawmakers debated whether money collected via RGGI (the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative) and other program funds should be allocated to energy-efficiency and community investments or returned directly to ratepayers (some delegates proposed monthly bill credits). Proposals to suspend the generation component of RGGI or to direct SEIF or Empower funds back to ratepayers were rejected on roll calls, though several delegates said they would continue to press for more immediate ratepayer relief.

Notable votes and actions - Motion to require the PSC to "attempt to ensure the equitable distribution among all counties" of new small-generation construction (mover: a delegate from the Eastern Shore): failed on a roll call (the clerk announced 98 votes in the negative). (Transcript s=5996–6001.) - Amendment to bar the use of eminent domain for solar siting: failed, 95 votes in the negative (Transcript s=7385–7393). - Amendment to suspend RGGI and remove the generation compliance component: failed, 95 votes in the negative (Transcript s=12900–12903). - Multiple other amendments to restrict siting or modify the 5% cap were offered and defeated (roll-call counts varied; see transcript for each vote summary). - Several bills in the package were ordered printed for third reading after the floor votes; committee reports were recorded as "amended and adopted." (Multiple transcript entries across the afternoon.)

Technical and regulatory clarifications discussed - Priority Preservation Area (PPA): The bill ties the 5% cap to a county—alculation of priority preservation acreage; delegates noted the cap is applied per county and that some counties have large PPA amounts, translating to thousands of acres at 5%. - BEPS and DHCD grants: Amendments and questions around building codes and the Building Energy Performance Standards (BEPS) were raised; one delegate withdrew an amendment after staff clarified that grants to help multifamily affordable housing meet BEPS already exclude fossil-fuel equipment where BEPS requires electrification. - Installer licensing: The bill would create a new installer license for rooftop and other solar installers; delegates clarified that high-voltage grid interconnections and transfer-switch installations remain regulated electrical work outside the new installer license. - Brandon Shores and RMR: Delegates referenced recent closures and reliability-related RMR (reliability-must-run) payments — notably Brandon Shores — as evidence of the fragile state of local generation and the need for careful planning.

Context and next steps This set of bills is part of a multi-year push to add generation and resilience in Maryland while meeting emissions goals. The House debate reflected competing goals: accelerate renewable generation and meet decarbonization targets vs preserve agricultural land and reduce near-term rate impacts for consumers. With the bills ordered to third reading after today nd several amendments defeated, final text will be set as the chamber advances each measure to final passage or conference with the Senate.

Speakers and roles cited in this article are identified in the House transcript as the floor leader, committee chairs, and delegates from agricultural counties, among others. Direct quotes were attributed where the transcript expressly identified the speaker.

Votes at a glance - PSC equitable-distribution amendment (attempt to require PSC to "attempt to ensure" geographic distribution): failed, clerk announced 98 negative (Transcript s=5996–6001). - Ban eminent domain for solar siting: failed, 95 negative (Transcript s=7385–7393). - Suspend generation component of RGGI / redirect funds: failed, 95 negative (Transcript s=12900–12903). - Multiple other amendments on caps, decommissioning and installer licensing: defeated; bills in the package ordered for third reading (multiple transcript entries).

Ending note Lawmakers left the floor with several key policy questions unresolved, but the committee approach largely remained intact: modest limits on preserved-ag land (the negotiated 5% cap), expedited permitting pathways for generation projects, and new consumer-protection or installation rules. The package will move toward third reading and further interchamber negotiations in the coming days of the legislative session.