Gov. Wes Moore’s key proposal to lower rising utility bills had its first hearing in both chambers of the Maryland General Assembly on Tuesday, but lawmakers are already poised to counter with some of their own energy policies.

Moore was set to testify on the “Lower Bills and Local Power Act of 2026” himself, but his Chief Legislative Officer Jeremy Baker stepped in during both committee hearings, noting something unexpected came up for the governor.

The bill has four key components as outlined by Baker: supporting local generation, modernizing infrastructure, holding utilities accountable and providing immediate ratepayer relief.

“Marylanders are frustrated, and rightfully so. They're frustrated by a grid operator that prioritizes utilities ahead of people. They're frustrated that local clean energy projects that they've been promised have not been delivered, and they're incredibly frustrated when they open their monthly bills,” Baker told members of the House Environment and Transportation Committee.

Baker is referring to the Mid-Atlantic regional grid operator, known as the PJM Interconnection, which has drawn Moore’s and lawmakers’ ire in recent years for its handling of electric supply and demand issues.

Lawmakers are already considering a study that would explore leaving the PJM altogether, which would require Maryland to develop an alternate method for how to manage its flow of electricity.

That bill is in early stages, and if passed and signed into law, it would only be the state’s first step in reviewing alternative grid operation models.

While that option is under consideration, the Moore administration is proposing supplemental funding for clean energy projects that are trying to connect to the grid in an effort to speed up new electricity supply.

Maryland Energy Administration (MEA) Director Kelly Speakes-Backman says the Trump administration’s 2025 decision to eliminate or cut back on most clean energy Investment Tax Credits (ITCs) has threatened the financial stability of solar and other renewable energy projects.

“The PJM Interconnection queue is dominated by solar and other renewable resources, and these projects are ready to be deployed. We believe that solar especially, and solar plus storage, is the fastest route to getting additional in-state generation online and reducing capacity prices to address the current funding gap caused by [the One Big, Beautiful Bill Act],” Speakes-Backman said.

The “queue” refers to energy generation projects that are waiting to connect to the grid so they can increase the region’s energy supply.

The Lower Bills and Local Power Act proposes $70 million for a solar gap funding program — dubbed the Solar and Energy Storage Market Stabilization Program — allowing potential generators to bid for bridge funding to support their most “shovel-ready” projects so they can be brought online faster.

Sen. Katie Fry Hester (D-Howard and Montgomery) noted solar companies provided testimony that signaled their higher-value projects are actually being hit the hardest by the Trump administration, versus their “shovel-ready” projects.

Speakes-Backman said Moore’s team would be open to exploring which types of projects to prioritize funding for.

House Environment and Transportation Committee Chair Marc Korman (D-Montgomery County) also noted there are various bills in the House and Senate that propose ideas similar to the Solar and Energy Storage Market Stabilization Program.

The bill would additionally require utilities to first consider upgrading current systems via “grid-enhancing and advanced transmission technologies” before resorting to building new, often more expensive infrastructure – the cost of which largely falls on ratepayers.

Another provision would require utility companies to be members of the PJM.

Even though all Maryland utility companies are already members, by mandating they do so under state law, it would close a federal “loophole” of sorts that allows companies to charge ratepayers for the voluntary participation incentives that they receive.

Speakes-Backman says this change would save Maryland families tens of millions of dollars annually.

Finally, the legislation authorizes a third round of energy relief rebates for Maryland ratepayers, which is expected to provide residents a roughly $40 credit on their energy bill.

That proposal has already received fierce backlash from Republican lawmakers – who argue $40 of relief is not enough – and House Environment and Transportation Committee Vice Chair Cheryl Kagan (D-Montgomery County) took to making the same argument during the bill’s committee hearing.

“I think they’re too small to be noticed by most people,” Kagan said. “Isn’t there some way that we could make this targeted to folks who need it, would notice it, would appreciate it, and not to wealthy customers who are not going to pay any attention to a modest election year ploy?”

“I think that’s strong language, Madame Vice Chair,” Baker responded. “Broadly speaking, we’re really open to working with the committee in both chambers on how best to deploy this $100 million for ratepayers.”

Funding for the rebates and other provisions within the legislation would be pulled from Maryland’s Strategic Energy Investment Fund (SEIF), a designated pot of money to promote statewide clean energy projects.

Moore already announced the state would be pulling $292 million from SEIF to help balance next fiscal year’s budget.

When all is said and done, SEIF is expected to be left with a balance of around $164 million..

Sen. Jason Gallion (R-Harford and Cecil Counties) asked if the governor’s office was concerned of “draining” SEIF and making it an unsustainable funding source in the out years.

Speakes-Backman pointed out SEIF has hit record levels of funding in recent years due to high capital gains revenues.

“I think that SEIF needs to be used for its original purpose, which is clean energy projects and bringing down ratepayers’ bills, and that’s exactly what we’re trying to use these funds for,” she said.

Hours prior to the bill’s committee hearing when asked for his thoughts on Moore’s proposal, Senate President Bill Ferguson (D-Baltimore City) said he looked forward to hearing “just how much relief it will ultimately provide.”

‘“I know the House is working on a supplemental plan as well, the Senate is also going to put forward a plan that we hope will provide substantial relief to all ratepayers,” Ferguson said. “And I think by the end of session, we'll have a joint effort amongst all of the parties that tries to pull the best ideas out of all of the different options.”

Korman made similar comments during a media availability prior to the bill’s hearing.

“We do know there are some things in there that we've seen in some other bills that we know there's a lot of broad interest in,” he said. “We don't walk in here on day one with all the legislation written, we have to hear the bills, hear the different ideas, work with our colleagues on both sides of the aisle and come up with the policies that make sense for Maryland, and that's what we're trying to do with energy.”

Moore’s legislation awaits a committee vote in both chambers, but as implied by legislative leadership, a conglomerate of various energy policies is likely to be introduced within the coming weeks.