In 2025, Halo solar developers submitted an application for a five megawatt solar project located on a 30-acre site in one of the only growth areas for the town of Betterton. The process continued this past Monday July 20 with a public hearing held by the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) which now has the ability to approve or deny the project regardless of local zoning. 200 of the town’s roughly 400 year-round residents showed up to the hearing. Presenters included Kent County commissioners, public safety officials, parks and recreation representatives, watermen, farmers, biologists, historians, teachers, attorneys, engineers, and members of the Betterton Planning Commission, ending with a final word from former U.S. Congressman, Wayne Gilchrest. No one from the public spoke in favor of the project. No public comments filed with the Maryland Public Service Commission supported the proposal. And many went unheard when the hearing was unexpectedly ended early. ESLC has formally submitted comments to the PSC in opposition. You can read our full letter here.

Simply put, Halo’s proposed commercial solar project is in the wrong spot. ESLC supports Maryland’s efforts to strengthen the state’s energy resilience, but not when that renewable energy is sited in a growth area that a town has spent time, energy, and money to prepare specifically for quality residential development. Kent County is beginning to experience increasing development pressures. At the same time, regional connectivity has improved and shortened travel times between northern employment centers and communities in Kent County. Betterton is one of the few places where infrastructure and a planned framework for growth already exist.

Solar panels can be located on numerous properties throughout the region and still contribute to Maryland’s renewable energy goals. But housing and mixed-use development opportunities are highly dependent upon infrastructure, location, and public services. Development of this site for housing and mixed-use would economically benefit the Town and its residents. Development of this site for solar would not.

ESLC respectfully urges the Public Service Commission to carefully weigh the long-term community and economic value of this property against the benefits of siting a solar facility at this location. In our view, the public interest is best served by preserving this parcel for the housing and mixed-use development opportunities that local planning, state investment, and community vision have contemplated for decades.