Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Carroll County commissioners set aside $100,000 to oppose NPRP power‑line project
Summary
The Board of Carroll County Commissioners approved a $100,000 one‑time fund to support legal fees, outreach and other expenses opposing the NPRP power‑line proposal after commissioners said the project could increase electric rates and affect county property rights.
The Carroll County Board of County Commissioners voted May 12 to add $100,000 to the FY27 budget to create an anti‑NPRP fund for legal fees, staff overtime, public relations and related expenses to oppose the NPRP power‑line project.
The chair (speaker 1) said the county has stood with residents opposing the project and that the new category would appear under the commissioners' office. "Basically what we would use this for would be everything from legal fees, staff overtime, research and analysis, printing and production, public relations, signage, relevant consulting," the chair said, asking the board to authorize the allocation. Commissioner Collard (speaker 6) seconded the motion. The board took a voice vote and the motion carried.
Commissioners cited financial as well as property‑rights concerns. One commissioner pointed to a recent Office of People's Counsel report alleging billions in costs could be passed into distribution rates and urged the county to press alternatives such as co‑conductoring on existing lines. "Rates are going up tremendously," that commissioner said, adding that alternatives to NPRP had not been fully explored by regulators.
Commissioners agreed the funds could be used broadly to support county participation in hearings and advocacy around property easements and rate impacts. Staff confirmed the appropriation would be recorded in the commissioners' office budget as a new category and that specific expenditures would follow county procurement and legal policies.
The motion passed on a voice vote; no roll‑call was recorded. The board left open the option of using the fund for litigation, outreach and coordination with state partners depending on developments in pending hearings.
