During a contentious meeting in Hunt Valley, residents of Baltimore, Carroll and Frederick counties voiced their opposition to a 70-mile power transmission line proposed by PSEG, a New-Jersey based energy company.

Greeting visitors to the Embassy Suites by Hilton, where the meeting was held Tuesday, was a large sign bearing the words: “Don’t Pillage Our Land.” Protesters held signs reading “Just Say NO!”

The public meeting, which several times devolved into shouting from the hundreds of angered attendees, was the first to be held by PSEG since an official route for the power line was selected last month. Two more meetings are planned for Wednesday and Thursday in Carroll and Frederick counties, respectively. A campaign, called Stop MPRP, or the Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project, had already developed to oppose the line, and Tuesday’s meeting showed their strength.

Residents expressed concern about losing farmland and valued natural lands to the massive power lines, which would be surrounded by cleared land, 150 feet wide, known as a right-of-way. They expressed skepticism that PSEG and PJM Interconnection, Maryland’s electric grid operator, had adequately considered alternatives, like improving older transmission lines already operating in Maryland. Several expressed frustration that power-hungry data centers, largely in Northern Virginia, are driving up power demands, forcing rural residents to face alarming consequences to their land.

“You are tearing up the livelihood of a lot of farmers in Baltimore County, Carroll and Frederick,” said Weida Stoecker of Stoecker Farms in White Hall.

No resident spoke explicitly in favor of the proposed project.

The origins of the project trace back to PJM, the regional entity tasked with keeping track of power demands for an area that includes all or part of 13 states. Because of the planned retirement of several power plants, including coal-burning facilities, and because of large increases in demand, PJM held an auction for transmission projects.

“We’re talking about the supply going down, the demand going up — two things heading in the wrong direction,” said Jason Kalwa, PSEG project manager.

The Piedmont project was selected to carry energy between the Doubs Substation in Frederick County to an existing transmission line that runs through Pennsylvania.

“There is one line … that really connects that northern to southern region,” Kalwa said. “That causes that to be an extremely heavily trafficked corridor. And so any increased electricity demand really causes a lot of issues within that region.”

PSEG plans to apply for a critical approval from the Maryland Public Service Commission, which regulates state utilities, by the end of this year, according to its website.

After about 35 minutes of a presentation from PSEG Tuesday night, attendees began shouting at the panel.

“We’ve heard this before,” said one. “Let us ask our questions,” said another. “We don’t want to hear your nonsense anymore.”

Residents then took to the microphone one after another, voicing concerns about environmental impact, potential human health impacts of living near the power lines, and the loss of crops and farm revenue for more than a year at a time. They asked questions about how much PSEG would profit from the line’s construction.

Initially, there were 10 possible routes. In October, PSEG selected Route H, which begins roughly parallel to the Maryland-Pennsylvania border, and above the Prettyboy Reservoir, before turning south toward Westminster, and passing to the west of the city. The line continues in a southwest direction from there, passing under Frederick and ending at the substation.

The route was chosen because it was shorter than others and had fewer turns, reducing the cost and complexity, according to PSEG. It also impacted fewer conservation easements, and had fewer residences and community facilities nearby.

None of the routes selected had a minimal impact, according to PSEG.

After three public meetings in July and an online survey, PSEG reviewed 5,300 comments from the public about the various proposed routes, according to its website.

The company’s selected route has attracted concern from officials, including from the Baltimore County Council, which voted in October to condemn the power line, though the county doesn’t have the power to stop or alter the project directly.

At Tuesday’s meeting, attendee Rebecca Sparks asked how PSEG could reconcile its project with Maryland’s environmental programs, which speak to the necessity of forested lands.

“I see the data you all are putting forward. However, we need solutions that also benefit the communities, and don’t rip them apart,” she said. “You’ve seen time and time again what kind of world we create when we prioritize profits over people, and I’m sick of that world.”

Kalwa said that in addition to the process before the PSC, which involves an environmental review, the company will need to obtain “a dozen or more other permits” through the state to address the project’s impact.

PSEG officials said Tuesday that other alternatives, such as burying the transmission line beneath the ground, or retrofitting already existing power lines wouldn’t be feasible. Older transmission structures would not be able to support the newest technology, said Mike Kayes, a project consultant for PSEG.

“People say, ‘Well, why don’t you just reconstruct your existing lines?’” Kayes said. “The challenge you have here is that these — the lines that you’re looking at — can’t really handle the additional capacity. They’re designed 50, 60 years ago.”

Matt Moran traveled from Frederick County to attend the meeting out of concern for his family’s properties. Moran said his mother’s home is about 120 feet from the power line route. Designed to be off-the-grid, the home was built so that the surrounding forest could cool it in the summertime, Moran said. Now, that forest is threatened.

“It definitely affects us — our family — very personally,” he said.

PSEG real estate manager Roger Trudeau said Tuesday that landowners, tenants and farmers would all be compensated for the value of their losses, including lost crop yields and land holdings.

Moran expressed concern that Frederick County’s meeting this week was moved from New Market to Brunswick — further from the proposed line. PSEG staffers said their venue in New Market pulled out, forcing them to turn to Brunswick to find a location large enough to hold the crowd expected.

Toward the meeting’s end, one resident turned toward the crowd instead of the PSEG panelists, urging them not to negotiate with PSEG for the company to access their property or obtain any easements.

“Just say no,” she said, which the crowd echoed.

At the meeting’s conclusion, Joanne Frederick, one of the leaders of the Stop MPRP group that has formed among residents, walked to the microphone.

“There is no amount of information, nor is there any amount of money, that will make this project acceptable to the residents of Baltimore, Carroll and Frederick counties,” she said, before walking away.

Have a news tip? Contact Christine Condon at chcondon@baltsun.com.