Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Kent County to oppose large solar arrays on farmland; commissioners discuss PSC intervention
Summary
Multiple residents told the Kent County board that utility-scale and community solar installations on agricultural land near Chestertown and Route 20 threaten farmland, aesthetics and drainage; commissioners discussed options including intervening at Public Service Commission hearings and drafting a letter to state leaders but did not adopt a formal vote to change state law.
At the April 14 meeting, several Kent County residents urged commissioners to take a public position opposing large-scale solar projects sited on agricultural land.
Pat Byrne (speaker 5) described multiple proposed installations near Chestertown—including a project of roughly 110 acres outside town—and asked what tangible community benefits Kent County would receive. "What's the benefit to the community for installing acres of solar panels on AG property that's also used for waterfowl and other activities?" Byrne asked. Michael Hanlon (speaker 17) urged the board to take a formal position and to consider intervening at Public Service Commission hearings, pointing to a recent Queen Anne's County filing opposing a nearby project.
County staff and commissioners explained limits on local control: the Maryland Public Service Commission issues certificates for large projects and is required to give the county "due consideration" but may still approve a project over local objection. Commissioners stressed prior efforts to oppose projects at the PSC and acknowledged frustration with State law that allows rooftop and community-solar incentives to override some local land-use preferences. One commissioner proposed drafting a letter to the governor, PSC and legislative leaders stating county concerns and posting that letter on the county’s website; staff suggested placing any draft letter on a future agenda so the board can consider and possibly vote on it.
No formal board resolution to change state law or to direct immediate litigation was adopted at the meeting. Commissioners said they will continue to monitor individual PSC dockets, intervene where appropriate, and consider drafting a public letter for formal consideration at a subsequent meeting.
