The segments below provide a brief overview of MACo’s work on planning and zoning policy in the 2026 General Assembly session.
Planning and zoning decisions are an integral function of county government, shaping how communities grow, where infrastructure is placed, and how residents and businesses coexist. In its planning & zoning advocacy, MACo seeks to preserve the ability of local governments – those closest to the people and with the most insight into local needs for growth and reservation – to retain the tools needed to balance growth, preservation, and community character.
Maryland’s 448th legislative session convened amid a substantial concern over the State’s fiscal situation, with weakened revenues and cost increases for many services at every level of government. Despite fiscal limitations, planning and zoning policy took on renewed urgency as housing pressures, energy siting debates, and land use priorities converged.
Against this backdrop, MACo engaged extensively to safeguard local flexibility while supporting thoughtful approaches to statewide challenges. Working alongside legislators and stakeholders, the association helped refine key measures, elevate practical concerns, and reinforce the critical role counties play in translating policy into workable, community-level outcomes. MACo’s legislative committee guided the association’s positions on hundreds of bills, yielding many productive compromises and gains spanning counties’ uniquely wide portfolio.
Follow these links for more coverage on our Conduit Street blog and Legislative Database.
MACo supported HB 243/SB 197 – Land Use – Comprehensive and General Plans – Alteration of Elements with amendments. This legislation, introduced by the Maryland Department of Planning (MDP), aims to modernize comprehensive planning law by aligning certain provisions in Maryland state law governing comprehensive plans with prior legislation transitioning local plans from a “visions” framework to a new “principles” framework. County amendments were clarifying to ensure certain provisions aligned with current practice. This bill DID pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 1532 – Utility RELIEF (Reducing Energy Load Inflation for Everyday Families) Act with amendments. This bill was the main part of the presiding officer’s 2026 energy package. While the majority of the bill will have little direct impact on counties, there are two provisions which are import to local leaders. HB 1532 establishes new permitting requirements for counties which permit rooftop solar and directs the Power Plant Research Program to produce a study on streamlining energy zoning and permitting. This bill DID pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 894/SB 389 – Land Use – Transit-Oriented Development – Alterations (Maryland Transit and Housing Opportunity Act) with amendments. This bill proposes various changes to land use and taxation in areas surrounding designated Transit Oriented Developments (TODs). Counties offered clarifying amendments to ensure proper implementation and recognize on-the-ground realities of infrastructure capacity, local planning consistency, and predictable administration. This bill DID pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 1221/SB 624 – Public Safety – Short-Term Rental Units – Safety (Jillian and Lindsay Wiener Short-Term Rental Safety Act). This bill will ensure that short–term rental units meet baseline, common-sense fire safety expectations—clear egress information, functional smoke alarms, and readily available extinguishers. Counties sought clarifying amendments to ensure the legislation preserves local authority as jurisdictions continue developing regulatory frameworks for short-term rentals. This bill DID pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo opposed HB 1590/SB 807 – Alcoholic Beverages – Class 8 Farm Brewery and Class 10 Farm Distillery Licenses. This bill would eliminate a core element of local zoning authority by exempting certain license holders from compliance with local zoning requirements. However, Sponsor amendments addressed local concerns by providing clarity regarding state and local authority over the regulation of farm-based breweries. This bill DID pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo opposed HB 258/SB 178 – Chesapeake and Atlantic Coastal Bays Critical Area Protection Program – Standards and Procedures. This bill defines the definition of adjacent and extends review timelines under the Critical Area program. MACo amendments clarified certain provisions to aide in implementation. This bill DID pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo opposed HB 247 – Chesapeake and Atlantic Coastal Bays Critical Area Protection Program – Variances – Alterations. This bill makes significant changes to when a county can authorize a variance within their share of the critical area. MACo amendments preserved local flexibility and ability to support affordable housing. This bill DID pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 1607/SB 265 – Community Solar Energy Generating Systems – Prohibited Locations – Adjacent Parcels with amendments. This bill would have removed the existing prohibition on co-locating community solar projects on adjacent parcels. This bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo opposed HB 1411 – Data Center Planning and Transparency Act. This bill would have established a costly statewide approach to addressing data centers by requiring large-scale data center operators to report their environmental and resource impacts to certain State and local agencies and mandates that each jurisdiction with over 10,000 residents create formal plans for managing these facilities by 2027. HB 1411 would have undercut local land use authority and imposed an unfunded planning mandate. This bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo opposed SB 687 – Environment – Flood Risk Review Process – Establishment. This bill would have required the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) to establish a new “flood risk review process” for areas identified as being at risk of tidal or nontidal flooding, apply that process to MDE’s review of plans and permits, and then make MDE’s final determination binding within the local stormwater approval process. This bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo opposed HB 1560 – Forest Conservation – Incentives – Pilot Program and Fund. This bill would have authorized the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to assess a new ecosystem value impact fee to support forest conservation programs. It also would have preempted local governments from adopting ordinances or regulations that are inconsistent with the requirements of an ecosystem value-oriented forest management plan. This bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo opposed SB 733 – Land Use – Definitions and Boards of Appeals. This legislation would have significantly expanded the scope of appeals related to local zoning and development decisions. The proposal would have broadened who may challenge administrative actions, widened the range of decisions subject to appeal, and automatically paused projects while appeals were pending, adding new layers of delay and uncertainty to the development process at a time when the State and local governments are working together to increase housing supply. This bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo opposed HB 1517 – Land Use – Qualified Project – Retaliatory Downzoning. This bill would have required, in certain circumstances, that if a local elected official acknowledges or responds to constituent concerns regarding a development project, the local government may then be compelled to approve that project and allow a higher residential density than would otherwise be authorized under local law. Counties raised legal and policy concerns with tying development approvals to public statements by elected officials. This bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo opposed HB 779 – Natural Resources – Riverine Siting and Design Criteria – Requirements. The bill would have established new standards for the design and siting of state and county capital projects located within the 500-year river floodplain. These new requirements would have increased costs, added complexity, and potentially delayed the construction of public facilities without additional resources to meet heightened standards. This bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 1296 – Preliminary Subdivision and Site Plans – Safe School Route Reports – Requirement with amendments. This bill would have required certain residential developments to evaluate nearby walking routes to schools and identify potential safety hazards or infrastructure gaps as part of the development review process. Counties requested amendments to clarify decision-making roles and avoid unintended delays. This bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 1459/SB 986 – Public Safety – Stationary Energy Storage Systems with amendments. This bill would have required owners of stationary energy storage systems to fund specialized training and equipment for the local fire departments responsible for emergency response. Counties cautioned that extending the requirement to residential energy storage could unnecessarily increase housing costs and, therefore, requested clarifying amendments to ensure the proposed fee framework applies only to commercial and industrial-scale systems. This bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo submitted a letter of information on SB 992 – Public Utilities – Large Load Customers – Registration and Demand Response Program. This bill would have established a framework for requiring large load customers, primarily data centers, to provide certain information to the Public Service Commission (PSC) before interconnecting in Maryland. As Maryland evaluates how to accommodate rapidly expanding data center development, counties encouraged a framework that supports informed decision-making protects ratepayers, and accounts for local infrastructure capacity. This bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported SB 683 – Public Utilities – Solar Energy Generating Stations – Siting (Solar Siting and Preservation Credit Act of 2026). This bill would have clarified that solar projects located on certain sites within a Priority Preservation Area (PPA) count toward the five percent ground-mounted solar cap established under the Renewable Energy Certainty Act of 2025 (RECA). In doing so, the bill would have helped balance two important – and sometimes conflicting – State goals: expanding renewable energy and protecting working farmland. This bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 40/SB 201 – Public Utilities – Transmission Lines – Advanced Transmission Technologies. This bill would have required the Public Service Commission and applicants to consider advanced transmission technologies more deeply as a means to avoid unnecessary community, environmental, or ratepayer impacts. This commonsense legislation sought to address conflicts between Maryland’s growing demand for energy and billions invested into other pro-climate policies to date. This bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo opposed HB 1104 – Residential Solar Energy Systems – Local Inspections and Permitting. This bill would require counties to implement a highly prescriptive “solar permitting software” mandate for remote inspections (by recorded video or photograph) for projects permitted through that software, prohibit any manual review at any point in the permitting or inspection process for those projects, cap local permitting and inspection fees, and authorize the Attorney General to pursue judicial enforcement. Counties warned that a such a mandate could undermine local flexibility, strain budgets, and compromise safety safeguards. While this bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session, elements of this bill were combined into HB1532.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo opposed 1137/SB 829 – Residential-in-Commercial-Zone Laws – Study (Bring Back Main Street Act). As amended, this bill requires the Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development to study the practicality of expanding mixed-use zoning in Maryland. This bill DID pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
As amended, MACo took no position on HB 337/SB 31 – School Construction and Housing – School Zones and Adequate Public Facilities Ordinances. By requiring counties to partially process development applications even when they do not meet local Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO) standards, counties warned that this bill would divert limited county staff time, delay projects that are ready for approval, and potentially waste public resources. This bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 460 – Solar Energy – Construction of Generating Stations in Priority Preservation Areas and Study. This bill would have recalibrated guardrails within the Renewable Energy Certainty Act (RECA) of 2025 to better ensure that agricultural land within a county’s Priority Preservation Areas (PPAs) remains in productive agricultural use. In doing so, HB 460 better balances local agricultural preservation with renewable energy development. This bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 669 – State Highway Administration – Third-Party Road Improvements – Required Work Schedule. This bill would have prohibited a county from issuing a use and occupancy permit for certain projects located near State highways unless the required work has been completed to the satisfaction of both the State Highway Administration (SHA) and the county. As such, HB 669 would have strengthened accountability for developer commitments and helps ensure critical transportation improvements are delivered before projects move forward. This bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
MACo supported HB 1259 – Zoning Authorities – Operation of Family Child Care Homes – Prohibitions and Requirements with amendments. This bill limits local jurisdictions’ ability to regulate the siting of family childcare homes and large family childcare homes within residential neighborhoods. Counties’ amendment focuses on preserving the bill’s intent to expand childcare capacity while allowing limited flexibility to address localized impacts where they arise. This bill DID NOT pass the 2026 legislative session.
Bill Information | MACo Coverage
