Conservation groups and MDA defend land‑preservation and cost‑share funding amid bid pressures for Food Center

Capital Budget Subcommittee · February 16, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Maryland Department of Agriculture and conservation groups urged the subcommittee to maintain funding for MALPF and the Ag Cost Share program (MAX). DLS flagged higher‑than‑expected construction bids for the Maryland Food Center Authority wholesale market and potential scope or financing changes.

DLS presented the Maryland Department of Agriculture's FY27 capital analysis and recommended concurrence with the governor's PEGO and GO allowances. Analyst Mr. Gray highlighted recommended authorizations for the Maryland Agricultural Cost Share Program ($8 million) and a proposed deauthorization for the Salisbury Animal Health Laboratory replacement ($622,224) because the project is complete.

Gray said the Maryland Food Center Authority (MFCA) received construction bids markedly above earlier internal estimates: two responsive bids came in near $50 million versus an earlier $30 million estimate. He described options under consideration, including reducing project scope and potential financing through the Maryland Economic Development Corporation.

Secretary Addicks (MDA) defended capital investments for agricultural land preservation (MALPF) and the Ag Cost Share program (MAX), noting the programs are integral to Chesapeake Bay goals and farm viability. She said program open space cuts enacted in the prior session reduced MALPF's FY27 share by $11.7 million and urged the committee not to enact further cuts.

Conservation and land‑trust representatives (Anne Jones, Carol Bean, Eric Galli, Anna Mudd Griffith) testified in support of the governor's budget for agriculture, stressing the need for consistent funding to preserve farmland, improve soil health, and sustain program credibility for landowners who make long‑term decisions based on available funding.

Committee members acknowledged the testimony; DLS and MDA will continue to coordinate on options for the MFCA bid gap and program timing.