MPRP: Maryland Landowners Fight Back as Out-of-State Utility Seeks Forced Access

A proposed power line project is stirring controversy in central Maryland, as the utility company behind it, Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG), begins filing court orders to access private property along its intended route — with or without the landowners’ consent.

The move comes after PSEG’s application for the 70-mile Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project (MPRP) hit a bureaucratic snag last month. The Maryland Department of Natural Resources’ Power Plant Research Program (PPRP) rejected the application as “administratively incomplete,” citing a lack of critical details about environmental and economic impact — and insufficient justification for why alternative routes weren’t considered.

Now, to gather the environmental data needed to resubmit its application, PSEG is seeking access to private properties across Baltimore, Carroll, and Frederick Counties. The company has offered some residents up to $1,000 to survey their land. But many landowners have refused, unwilling to allow a New Jersey-based utility to disrupt their property — or their way of life.

Among the residents pushing back is Betsy McFarland, a member of the grassroots group StopMPRP, which is mobilizing against the project. McFarland says the proposed transmission line would cut a 150-foot-wide path near her home in Frederick County, with one of the towering electrical structures visible from her front porch. She declined PSEG’s access request — and was disheartened to learn the company may now attempt to force its way in through the courts.

“To have a company out of New Jersey take people to court to gain access to their land is just wrong,” McFarland said.

With PSEG initiating legal action, StopMPRP is preparing to meet with attorneys to defend residents who could be drawn into court battles over property access.

For many locals, this isn’t just about a power line — it’s about the right to control what happens on their land, and whether private citizens can be strong-armed into accommodating a corporate project with questionable benefits for their communities.

As the legal fight unfolds, the outcome could shape how infrastructure projects navigate local resistance in the years ahead — and how far companies can go in pursuit of progress.