Senator seeks to change eminent domain laws in response to proposed transmission line
The Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project (MPRP) is a proposal from the New Jersey-based company Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG) to construct a 500,000-volt transmission line across roughly 70 miles in Frederick, Carroll and Baltimore counties.
On Dec. 31, 2024, PSEG applied to the state's Public Service Commission for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to construct the MPRP.
Only after obtaining the certificate would PSEG be considered a public utility that can acquire rights of way through eminent domain, though opponents of the MPRP have been concerned about the prospect of land being taken by the company.
Maryland state Sen. Justin Ready, a Republican representing parts of Carroll and Frederick counties, said he and other elected officials from areas along the proposed transmission line route are primarily concerned with making sure the project is not approved as proposed.
However, Ready said in an interview on Wednesday, state lawmakers from impacted districts are pursuing bills to change eminent domain proceedings, transmission planning processes and state approval criteria for utility projects in the event the MPRP proceeds.
SB657 and SB661 are both sponsored by Ready and deal with eminent domain. Del. Nino Mangione, a Republican from Baltimore County, has cross-filed versions of both bills in the House of Delegates.
SB657 would require defendants in eminent domain proceedings to be reimbursed for legal fees and other costs associated with defending against the taking of their land, regardless of if they prevail.
SB661 would establish that the 'fair market value' of agricultural land for eminent domain proceedings is 350% of the property's highest appraised value.
William Smith, a spokesperson for PSEG, said in a phone call on Wednesday that the company is aware of both bills, but declined to comment on them.
The policy and fiscal notes attached to both bills indicate they could increase state and local expenditures for capital improvement projects while also having a potentially meaningful impact on small businesses involved in eminent domain proceedings, either as defendants or attorneys.
'Expensive proposition'
During a hearing before the Senate's Judicial Proceedings Committee on Tuesday, attorney Harris Eisenstein from the law firm Rosenberg Martin Greenberg said that the current system only allows defendants in eminent domain proceedings to recover legal fees and other costs 'in rare circumstances.'
'This is true even though condemnors' initial offers often fall short of just compensation,' he said.
Eisenstein said SB657 would help reduce the financial hardship of landowners defending against 'an opponent with endless resources' in eminent domain proceedings.
'To even contest an eminent domain finding in court is an expensive proposition,' Ready said on Wednesday. 'This situation is also different than a court proceeding where the state is coming after you because you did something wrong. ... These people, through no fault of their own, are having their land potentially seized by a corporate entity.'
Sen. Sara Love, a Democrat from Montgomery County, asked if SB657 would assist landowners who seek legal advice about potential takings, but do not enter into an eminent domain proceeding.
Ready said that's a fair issue, but it's not covered under his bill.
With regard to SB661, Ready said his goal was to address agricultural land being undervalued by appraisers because of a lack of development potential, particularly when state and local governments have encouraged people to preserve land through tax breaks and other incentives.
Of the Frederick County properties within the path of the MPRP, 13 are under Forest Resource Ordinance easements. Three are under Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation easements and 131 are zoned for agricultural use.
Two Frederick County properties in the path of the MPRP are under Rural Legacy easements and one is under a Maryland Environmental Trust easement, according to a county web page about the transmission line project.
'This will protect farmers, agricultural producers and farmland and require the state and other entities to really weigh the necessity of projects against the harm it causes to our open spaces and protected lands,' Ready said during the hearing for SB661.
Joanne Frederick, the president of the Board of Directors for the organization Stop MPRP, spoke in favor of both bills on Tuesday.
Without the bills, Frederick said, 409 property owners like herself will be 'left defenseless in the face of eminent domain.'
'For generations, our members have lived and worked on their land — land that just isn't dirt and fences, but a legacy that has been passed down,' Frederick said. 'Now that land is at risk of being taken — not at a fair price, not through a voluntary sale, but by force.'
Sen. Mary-Dulany James (D-Harford) said on Tuesday that she supports the idea behind SB661, but suggested expanding it to include land preserved for reasons other than farming as part of a state strategy.
Sen. Chris West (R-Baltimore and Carroll) suggested narrowing the scope of SB661 to land seized to construct or maintain a power transmission line.
Ready said he is amenable to both changes.
The Judicial Proceedings Committee did not take a vote on either of Ready's bills Tuesday. If either bill gets a favorable report from the committee, it advances to the Senate floor for a second reading, followed by a final vote.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
12 minutes ago
- New York Post
Democrats facing crisis as more than 2M voters leave party in four years: analysis
The Democratic Party is bleeding registered voters, suffering a 4.5 million swing against it that could take years to recover from, according to a new report. Between the 2020 and 2024 presidential elections, Democrats lost about 2.1 million voters across the 30 states that track registration by political party, according to a New York Times analysis of data gathered by the L2 tracking firm. Over the same period, the Republican Party gained 2.4 million registered voters. Officially, there are still more registered Democrats than Republicans nationwide, but that number is incomplete because blue states like California and New York allow voters to register by party — as does the District of Columbia — while reliably red states like Texas, Missouri and Ohio do not. Most alarmingly for Democrats, the decline is nationwide, with the US seeing more new voters registering with the GOP in 2024 for the first time in six years. Democrats also saw their registered voter advantage dwindle in four 2024 battleground states — Arizona, Nevada, North Carolina and Pennsylvania — all of which President Trump carried this past Nov. 5. Democrats lost about 2.1 million registered voters in the 30 states that track registration by political party. AP Michael Pruser, who tracks voter registration closely as the director of data science for Decision Desk HQ, warned that the numbers not only help explain Trump's victory last year — in which he became the first Republican presidential candidate to win the popular vote in 20 years — but also forecast significant headwinds for Democrats in next year's midterm elections as well as the 2028 presidential vote. 'I don't want to say, 'The death cycle of the Democratic Party,'' Pruser told the Times, 'but there seems to be no end to this.' 'There is no silver lining or cavalry coming across the hill. This is month after month, year after year,' he added. In North Carolina, Democrats lost 115,523 voters between the 2020 and 2024 election, with Republicans gaining more than 140,000 members and erasing the Dems' registration advantage, according to the L2 data. More new voters registered to be Republican than Democrat last year, the first time since 2018. Michael Nagle Democrats suffered similar losses in Arizona and Pennsylvania, while in Nevada — a state whose politics were long dominated by the Las Vegas-based Culinary Workers Union — the share of registered Democrats suffered the second-steepest plunge of those states measured between 2020 and 2024. (Only deep-red West Virginia saw more precipitous losses.). Even Democratic bastions like New York and California were not safe from voter erosion, with Dems losing 305,922 registered voters in the Empire State in between the two elections. In California, Democrats lost 680,556 voters between 2020 and 2024. All in all, Democrats went from enjoying an advantage of nearly 11 percentage points over Republicans in registered voter numbers in 2020 to just over six percentage points across the 30 states and DC in 2024, the Times found. Experts believe that the fall of new Democratic registrations can be linked to the growing number of voters choosing to be independents or unaffiliated, a trend that is sapping both parties' rolls. In 2018, more than one-third (34%) of new voter registrations nationwide were Democrats, while registered Republicans made up just 20% of new voters. As of last year, however, Republicans had erased that gap, with party supporters making up 29% of new voters, while Democrats made up 26% of new voters.
Axios
12 minutes ago
- Axios
Texas law requiring Ten Commandments temporarily halted in some schools
A federal judge in San Antonio temporarily barred some school districts from implementing a Texas law requiring every public school classroom to display the Ten Commandments. Why it matters: The ruling slows one of the nation's most aggressive pushes to mandate religious displays in public schools — setting up a likely First Amendment fight that could reach the Supreme Court. Catch up quick: The law, passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature earlier this year, mandated a 16x20-inch Ten Commandments poster in every classroom and was set to take effect Sept. 1. Sixteen Texas families from San Antonio, Austin, Houston and elsewhere — backed by the American Civil Liberties Union — sued in July to stop it, naming 11 school districts, including Alamo Heights, Northside, Northeast and Lackland ISDs. Caveat: U.S. District Judge Fred Biery's order only blocks the law in the 11 districts named in the lawsuit — in the Austin, San Antonio, Houston and Dallas areas — not statewide. What they're saying: Biery wrote that the law would likely result in unconstitutional religious coercion. "The displays are likely to pressure the child-Plaintiffs into religious observance, meditation on, veneration, and adoption of the State's favored religious scripture, and into suppressing expression of their own religious or nonreligious background and beliefs while at school," he wrote. "Children's religious beliefs should be instilled by parents and faith communities, not politicians and public schools," San Antonio plaintiff Rabbi Mara Nathan said in a statement. The other side: Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton told CBS he would appeal the ruling. "The Ten Commandments are a cornerstone of our moral and legal heritage, and their presence in classrooms serves as a reminder of the values that guide responsible citizenship," Paxton said in a statement. Texas will always defend our right to uphold the foundational principles that have built this nation, and I will absolutely be appealing this flawed decision."
The Intercept
12 minutes ago
- The Intercept
Price Tag for Trump's D.C. Military Surge: At Least $1 Million a Day
The military forces deploying in Washington, D.C. — whose mission includes not only 'community safety patrols' but assisting in 'traffic control' and 'area beautification' — could cost upward of $1 million per day, with the possible price tag climbing into the hundreds of millions for the open-ended occupation, according to expert analysis. Washington is now ground zero in President Donald Trump's push to turn America into a full-fledged police state. The power grab in the District of Columbia — which thus far has involved seizing control of D.C.'s police force, deploying National Guard troops, and flooding the streets with federal officers — follows deployments of federal troops from coast to coast, surges of masked federal agents around the United States, and consistent tyrannical use of executive authority in ways with little precedent in modern U.S. history. Trump has brushed off being called a 'dictator' since his capital city putsch, which he touted as a law enforcement operation and urban beautification campaign. The Republican governors of West Virginia, South Carolina, Ohio, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Tennessee announced, in the last several days, that they will send National Guard troops to assist Trump's efforts to 'federalize' D.C. Those forces will join the nearly 900 D.C. National Guard troops already activated by Trump and deployed in the capital. Approximately 500 National Guard members from West Virginia had arrived in the capital by Monday afternoon, according to a defense official who spoke to The Intercept on background. Around 300 troops from South Carolina were en route, the official said. (South Carolina's Gov. Henry McMaster only publicly authorized the deployment of 200 Guard members.) All told, around 2,100 troops will soon be deployed. The Intercept asked Hanna Homestead of the National Priorities Project, a nonpartisan research group, to estimate the possible expense of this operation. Her analysis finds that the cost of Trump's troop deployment in Washington could exceed more than $1 million per day, based on the deployment of around 2,100 Guard members to D.C. U.S. Army soldiers from the District of Columbia National Guard, activated in support of the 'D.C. Safe and Beautiful Task Force,' at the National Mall in Washington on Aug. 18, 2025. Photo: Nina Cortez/U.S. Army/Joint Task Force DC/DVIDS 'It's unconscionable that the Trump administration would hand the military a blank check of over a million dollars a day to occupy D.C. while stripping access to health care and food aid from millions of families across the country,' Homestead told The Intercept. 'The daily cost of the D.C. troop deployment is more than six times what it would cost to operate affordable housing for D.C.'s entire unhoused population. The government's priorities could not be more clear.' 'The daily cost of the D.C. troop deployment is more than six times what it would cost to operate affordable housing for D.C.'s entire unhoused population.' Homestead based her calculations on recent National Guard deployments where the total number of troops, cost, and deployment length are publicly available but cautioned that government secrecy makes it impossible to account for all variables including lodging, transportation, equipment usage, and other expenses. Homestead noted that since Trump began his federal power grab, more than 450 people have been arrested. 'Describing the National Guard deployment as a glorified gardening mission is an attempt to whitewash the danger of the expanding police state,' she told The Intercept. 'It directly contradicts reports of what is actually happening on the ground: Troops aren't picking up trash or planting flowers, they are operating checkpoints and helping make hundreds of arrests of mostly Black and brown residents.' The Pentagon claims it does not know the costs of these National Guard deployments, leaving taxpayers on the hook for inestimable costs. 'We won't know the cost until the mission concludes,' another defense official told The Intercept, speaking on the condition of anonymity. The first defense official expressed skepticism of this claim of total unknowability, intimating that the Pentagon does, or at least could, have an idea of the cost: 'The concern is they don't want anyone pinning them down, saying, 'Oh, you said it's going to cost this much, but actually it cost a lot more.'' The ultimate length of the deployment is unspecified, leaving open the possibility that it could last for months or longer, driving costs into the tens or hundreds of millions by Homestead's estimate. Trump suggested that funding for his D.C. takeover — including rousting homeless camps, removing 'all' the city's graffiti, and tending to 'grasses' in the parks — would cost a 'relatively small amount of money.' 'Spending tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars to deploy the National Guard to the nation's capital, whether to address an imagined increase in violent crime or in support of immigration enforcement missions, is a massive distraction from the military's mission,' said Gabe Murphy, a policy analyst at Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan budget watchdog advocating for an end to wasteful spending. 'It undermines readiness, pulls resources and personnel from other missions, and dangerously blurs the lines between military and civilian jurisdictions.' Louisiana National Guard soldiers arrive at the D.C. Armory in Washington on Aug. 19, 2025. Photo: Cpl. Joseph Martin/U.S. Army/Joint Task Force DC/DVIDS Despite Justice Department figures showing that violent crime in the D.C. was already at a 30-year low, Trump declared a crime emergency in Washington on August 11. 'Our capital city has been overtaken by violent gangs and bloodthirsty criminals,' Trump said at a White House news conference that day, painting the city as a hellscape filled with 'drugged out maniacs' and 'caravans of mass youth' who 'rampage through city streets' day and night. 'I'm deploying the National Guard to help reestablish law, order and public safety in Washington, D.C.,' he declared. The National Guard deployment is one facet of Trump's efforts to put the District of Columbia under federal authority. He also declared that he is temporarily taking control of the city's police department. Hundreds of officers and agents from more than a dozen federal agencies — including the FBI; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; Drug Enforcement Administration; Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and the U.S. Marshals Service — have also fanned out across Washington. Masked federal agents have made arrests in neighborhoods across the city, set up traffic checkpoints to enforce laws against seatbelt violations or broken taillights, and torn down a protest banner, among other efforts. On Friday, Washington's attorney general sued the administration for appointing the head of the DEA as the city's 'emergency police commissioner.' The administration walked back the move but then issued a follow-up order that directed local police to 'cooperate fully and completely with federal immigration authorities.' In his first seven months in office, Trump has commanded the military to increasingly insert itself into civil and law enforcement functions within the United States. He has deployed around 20,000 federal troops on American soil, including personnel from the National Guard, the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, and the Marines, according to the Pentagon. But the true number of personnel deployed may be markedly higher. U.S. Northern Command has no running tally of how many troops have been deployed around the country. These federal forces have been operating under Title 10 authority, or federal control, in at least five states — Arizona, California, Florida, New Mexico, and Texas — in service of the Trump administration's anti-immigrant agenda. Many more troops, like the National Guard forces deploying to the capital, are operating under so-called Title 32 status, meaning they are under state, rather than federal, control, unlike deployments in Los Angeles and across the southern border. With no governor to report to, the D.C. National Guard's chain of command runs from its commanding general, to the secretary of the Army, to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, to the president. U.S. soldiers from the West Virginia National Guard are deputized at the D.C. Armory as part of the 'D.C. Safe and Beautiful Task Force' in Washington on Aug. 19, 2025. Photo: Pfc. Nina Cortez/U.S. Army/Joint Task Force DC/DVIDS Late last month, the Trump administration authorized the deployment of National Guard troops to immigration facilities in 20 states. The National Guard will be deployed in Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and Virginia, among other states. When he announced the D.C. deployment, Trump also threatened to carry out similar power grabs in numerous cities led by Democratic mayors in states with Democratic governors. 'If we need to, we're going to do the same thing in Chicago, which is a disaster,' Trump said. 'You look at Los Angeles, how bad it is. We have other cities that are very bad. New York has a problem. And then you have, of course, Baltimore and Oakland. We don't even mention that anymore. They're so far gone,' he continued. 'We're not going to let it happen. We're not going to lose our cities over this. And this will go further.' Homestead noted that governors from red states were now actively collaborating in Trump's authoritarian overreach. 'Republican governors are now voluntarily using federal tax dollars to militarize D.C. instead of addressing the needs of their constituents, who are some of the poorest in the country,' she said. Experts say that the increasing use of military forces in the interior of the U.S. represents an extraordinary violation of Posse Comitatus, a bedrock 19th-century law seen as fundamental to the democratic tradition in America. Critics warn that this might put the troops being deployed and their commanders at legal risk of prosecution down the line. Gen. Randy George and Sgt. Maj. of the Army Mike Weimer meet with soldiers from Joint Task Force–D.C., the National Guard response force, in Washington on Aug. 19, 2025. Photo: Sgt. Aaron Troutman/U.S. Army/Joint Task Force DC/DVIDS 'Through his manufactured emergency, President Trump is engaging in dangerous political theater to expand his power and sow fear in our communities. Sending heavily armed federal agents and National Guard troops from hundreds of miles away into our nation's capital is unnecessary, inflammatory, and puts people's rights at high risk of being violated,' said Hina Shamsi, the director of the ACLU's National Security Project. 'Governors need to understand that with each order, the Trump administration increases legal and ethical jeopardy for state troops being deployed. No matter what uniform they wear, federal agents and military troops are bound by the Constitution, including our rights to peaceful assembly, freedom of speech, due process, and safeguards against unlawful searches and seizures. If troops or federal agents violate our rights, they must be held accountable.' On Monday, Trump seemed close to declaring victory in D.C., although his triumphant tale involved unnamed persons calling him 'sir' — which has been identified as a key tell that Trump is lying. 'We went from the most unsafe place anywhere to a place that now people, friends are calling me up, Democrats are calling me up, and they're saying, 'Sir, I want to thank you,'' Trump claimed. ''My wife and I went out to dinner last night for the first time in four years. And Washington, D.C., is safe. And you did that in four days.'' Trump said the military would help to 'liberate this City, scrape away the filth, and make it safe, clean, habitable and beautiful once more!' in a Truth Social post. State governors and National Guard officials have used similar but more moderate language. 'We stand ready to support our partners in the National Capital Region and contribute to the collective effort of making our nation's capital a clean and safe environment,' said West Virginia Adjutant General Maj. Gen. Jim Seward in a statement. 'The National Guard's unique capabilities and preparedness make it an invaluable partner in this important undertaking.' Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson repeatedly emphasized that Guard members would be involved in 'area beautification' during a press briefing last week. The defense official expressed exasperation at the comments. 'I wish someone would have asked Kingsley when she said it,' said the official, noting that many people took it to mean that soldiers would be picking up trash. The Intercept then asked if it meant gardening. 'I don't imagine you'll see them necessarily planting flowers, but it could be,' said the official, who offered that troops might also 'do debris removal or something like that.'
