Since the developers of the Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project have filed a lawsuit in the Maryland District Court, residents named in the lawsuit are now racing to respond.

The lawsuit, filed by Public Service Enterprise Group, asks the court to give the developers access to landowners’ property to conduct the surveys necessary to complete their project application with the state. According to the lawsuit, “the Company seeks an order … that permits the Company to access the Properties until the date that the PSC issues a decision on the CPCN to the Company so that the Company may perform the studies.”

“PSEG is a private corporation, and they are looking for unfettered access to our property,” said Baltimore County resident Charlie Bond.

“I think what they are requesting in this lawsuit is pretty egregious. I feel a little bit violated,” he added.

Bond, who owns more than 70 acres of land in rural Baltimore County, is named in the lawsuit. To date, he, like many others, has not granted PSEG access to his property. The line, as currently proposed, would cut across parts of his property.

“We have done nothing wrong here, but we are now being forced to engage with counsel and spend our savings to basically represent ourselves and defend our property rights,” he said.

The MPRP is being proposed to address growing energy needs in the region, and PSEG has argued that without the transmission line, there will be energy reliability issues. However, project documents filed with the PSC also show energy transported through the transmission line will be used to support data centers in Northern Virginia, which is why residents have pushed back on the project, trying to protect their Maryland homes.

While the court case plays out, attorney Kurt Nachtman said it is possible that a judge could issue an order allowing a private company on private property.

“About 20 years ago, there was a Supreme Court case that came out that said eminent domain may be utilized for private purposes and private profit,” Nachtman said. “So it is possible a judge could order these private homeowners to have someone forcibly survey their property.”

A spokesperson from the Maryland Public Service Commission said if a judge puts a court order in place in favor of PSEG, neither the PSC or Governor Wes Moore would have the authority to step in and stop it. The spokesperson added that while there is a pending case in front of the commissioners, they will not intervene in related court proceedings.

Previously, Governor Wes Moore said he would “stand with the people” impacted by the proposed transmission line.

A lengthy statement from his office said, “In the past several months Governor Moore has listened to concerns from local leaders, businesses, and residents about the Piedmont Reliability Project, and he appreciates and respects the many Marylanders who have voiced strong opposition—especially the farmers, small business owners, and residents whose livelihoods stand to suffer impact. He has been very clear since the very beginning of his grave concerns about how the study area for this project was determined and the lack of community involvement in the planning process.”

The statement continued: “The governor has directly met with PJM to share those concerns and also signed a letter with the governors of several states imploring PJM leadership to embrace, without delay, opportunities to work collaboratively on transmission planning. Governor Moore recognizes the need for sustainable and cost-effective infrastructure to ensure the reliability of our grid and build the economy of the future in our state. But, the approach must be one that puts people first. The governor will continue to share his expectations of the type of engagement our communities deserve with PJM Interconnection and PSEG.”

“Some of these aggressive tactics and this really aggressive assault on our property rights emboldens us. But this is a fight we never asked for, but sure enough, we are going to have to stay in it until the end,” Bond said.

In a statement, PSEG said they have previously tried to negotiate with property owners.

“We are willing to negotiate with property owners until a decision is issued by the court,” a statement said. “However, we will not be providing compensation for the temporary right of entry following the issuance of a court order to the property owners subject to the court action. To date, the current filing impacts ninety (90) parcels in this initial filing. There will be additional filings over the next few months.”

Have a news tip? Contact Jessica Babb at jessicababb@sbgtv.com.