The Local Source for News and Information Since 1980
CAROLINE COUNTY – The Caroline County Planning Commission’s October 8 public meeting was meant to focus on the upcoming update to the county’s Comprehensive Plan, but much of the discussion quickly shifted to a topic that has dominated many local conversations in recent years: solar development on farmland.
The Comprehensive Plan, which guides the county’s long-term growth and land use decisions, is being updated for the first time since 2010. It is intended to reflect the community’s vision for the future, addressing areas such as housing, infrastructure, natural resources, transportation, and economic development. “This plan says who we are, where we want to go, who we want to be, and how we're going to get there,” said Jeff Jackson, Chairman of the Caroline County Planning Commission.
According to the county’s presentation, “A Comprehensive Plan is a guide for how the County will grow and develop to meet future needs and reflect the community’s vision.” It applies to all unincorporated areas outside town limits and is used to update zoning codes once adopted. The plan is typically revised every 10 years, but Caroline County’s last update was delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic and the slow release of 2020 Census data.
As part of the update process, county officials are encouraging residents to share their input through a public survey, available at www.carolinemd.org/654/Caroline-County-Comprehensive-Plan. Previous community surveys in 2020 and 2022 highlighted residents’ main priorities: affordable housing, improved infrastructure, better healthcare and broadband access, and preserving the county’s rural character while supporting economic growth.
The plan will ultimately address a wide range of topics, the chapters being Resource Conservation, Mineral Resources, Land Use, Priority Preservation Area, and Water Resources. But the October 8 meeting was dominated by discussion on solar energy projects (or “solar farms”) on agricultural land.
Caroline County officials explained that recent state legislation, the Renewable Energy Certainty Act (HB1036/SB931), limits how much control counties have over solar development. The law, passed in April 2025, prohibits local governments from making zoning changes that restrict solar or energy storage projects. It caps solar development in designated Priority Preservation Areas at 5% of total acreage, which would be roughly 6,300 acres in Caroline County. For scale, the Cherywood solar farm between Greensboro and Goldsboro sits at almost 1,000 acres.
“This will impact the predominant landscape of farm fields that has been the vista in Caroline County for many decades,” county officials noted. They also warned farmers considering leasing their land for solar development to “carefully review the agreement and consult a land use attorney” to ensure their interests are protected.
Caroline County Commission President Travis Breeding said the county had previously imposed a 2,000-acre limit on solar projects and increased setbacks to 200 feet, but those restrictions were later preempted by the state. “Less than six months after the Commissioners set these regulations, the state swoops in and says, ‘no, counties, you are being too restrictive, we want green energy,’” Breeding said. He expressed concern that Eastern Shore counties could see more solar projects than those on the Western Shore, “It really is our concern that the 5% may disproportionately push more solar into Dorchester, Caroline, Queen Anne, and Kent counties, because of the amount of less expensive land that they could access here.” According to the state, solar panels on just 2% of Maryland’s farmland would meet the state’s green energy goals. Breeding raised concerns that the Eastern Shore could ultimately pay the price, while Western Shore farmland remains untouched.
To hopefully curb solar development, Caroline’s County Commissioners are exploring a “compensatory fee” that would require commercial solar developers to pay a percentage of the appraised land value if commercial solar projects are proposed on farmland deemed of statewide or national agricultural importance. Funds collected would go toward agricultural preservation in the county, but the question of how much to charge remains, as aiming for too high a charge may cause the state to step in again.
Public comments made during the meeting reflected both the frustration and uncertainty of residents. One farmer from Preston said, “Our motto was Green Garden County. We're going to be covered up with houses and solar panels. Lot of that, we can't help, but we've got to think long, long term.” Another attendee added, “Solar sprawl unfortunately, looks like it’s happening, whether we like it or not.” Those in attendance supported the proposed compensatory fee.
Throughout the discussion, county representatives emphasized that the comprehensive plan is intended to balance growth with responsible planning. “Growth is good and change is good,” Jackson said, “but then you have to do it smart.”
