The Caroline County Board of Commissioners voted on April 15 to draft a letter asking Maryland’s governor to veto Senate Bill 931 and to issue an executive order that the commissioners say would return more local control over utility‑scale solar siting.

Jay Falstad, representing the Farmers Alliance for Rural Maryland, and Rob Davis, a Kent County farmer and Alliance member, told commissioners they oppose the bill because, despite amendments, it would allow up to 5% of county acreage to be taken for solar projects on properties over 2 megawatts. Falstad said a 5% cap in Caroline County “could be up to 4,500 acres” and described the potential impact as significant for the Eastern Shore agricultural economy. The group said it will ask the governor to veto SB931 and seek an executive order to protect Eastern Shore counties from disproportionate siting.

Commissioners and presenters raised additional concerns: battery storage safety is not addressed in the bill, oversight of private solar developers (described by speakers as land speculators disguised as solar companies), protections for preserved farmland, and a perceived risk that eminent‑domain authority or other future measures could be used to acquire land. Multiple speakers said the state process and decisions by Public Utility Law Judges can preempt local zoning decisions.

Commissioner action: following the Alliance’s presentation, a commissioner moved that the board draft a letter to the governor asking him to veto the bill and to use executive authority to return more control to counties. The motion was seconded and approved by voice vote; no roll‑call tally was recorded in the public record.

Commissioners who spoke in the discussion included Franklin Bartz, J. Travis Breeding and one commissioner who said the county’s local cap (referenced during the meeting as 2,000 acres) should be defended. Commissioner Burks stated, “we’re at 2,000 acres. That’s our cap,” and said he would stand with farmers to defend it. Falstad and Davis urged sustained county engagement, noting the Farmers Alliance had grown to roughly 750 members statewide and had circulated video testimony.

Presenters also pressed safety and operational questions about battery energy storage systems, saying “there’s nothing in this bill that mentions battery storage safety.” One presenter said the administration had promised fire‑safety guidance but that the group had not received it. Commissioners indicated battery storage is an outstanding local concern and said they will insist on clear safety standards before allowing storage facilities.

The board’s voice vote to draft the letter does not by itself change county law; it directs staff to prepare a formal letter for signature and submittal to the governor’s office. Presenters said further legislative and legal work will continue whether or not the governor vetoes the bill.