I'm a strong supporter of renewable energy.  

I'm also a strong supporter of good government.

Those two beliefs are exactly why I have concerns about Councilman Julian Jones' recent proposal to bring Community Choice Energy (CCE) to Baltimore County.

At first glance, it sounds appealing. Who wouldn't want lower electric bills and more renewable energy?

The problem is that the proposal glosses over one important fact:

Maryland hasn't even proven that Community Choice Energy works yet.

The only Community Choice Energy program authorized in Maryland is a pilot in Montgomery County. Although first authorized by the General Assembly in 2021 and expanded through legislation adopted by the Montgomery County Council last year, the program is still not operational.

Five years after the State authorized the pilot, Montgomery County is still working through the lengthy regulatory process required by the Maryland Public Service Commission. The County must still obtain approval for its aggregation plan -- the detailed blueprint governing how the program would actually operate -- before a single resident receives electricity through the program.

That's not a criticism of Montgomery County. Large energy programs should be carefully vetted.

It does, however, raise an obvious question:

If the only pilot program in Maryland hasn't even begun delivering electricity yet, how can anyone honestly promise that Baltimore County should adopt it?

We simply don't know whether it will lower costs, improve reliability, or create unintended consequences. That's the entire purpose of a pilot program.

Government shouldn't skip to the conclusion before the experiment is complete.

There's another issue that deserves attention.

Energy regulation in Maryland is primarily the responsibility of the State, not county government.

The Maryland Public Service Commission regulates utilities. The General Assembly establishes the legal framework. Counties don't independently redesign Maryland's electric marketplace.

A County Executive should know the difference between advocating for changes in Annapolis and promising to implement policies that are outside the normal authority of county government.

Baltimore County has plenty of opportunities to reduce energy costs that are within our control.

We own hundreds of public buildings, libraries, schools, maintenance facilities, community centers, and other government properties. Many have rooftops that are ideal for solar installations.

Every kilowatt generated on those buildings directly offsets electricity the County would otherwise purchase. That lowers operating expenses, reduces taxpayer costs, and creates long-term savings year after year.

Just as importantly, distributed solar generation on County facilities can reduce demand on the electric grid, improve resilience, and position us to incorporate battery storage and other emerging technologies as they become economically viable.

Those are investments we can control.

Those are savings we can measure.

And those are projects that don't require Baltimore County to become the second jurisdiction in Maryland to gamble on a regulatory experiment that hasn't yet produced a single month's worth of operating data.

Good leadership isn't about chasing every new idea.

It's about asking hard questions.

Does this proposal actually work?

Has it been proven?

Is it within the authority of the office?

Is there a lower-risk alternative that delivers better results?

In this case, I believe the answer is yes.

Let's aggressively expand solar where Baltimore County actually has the authority to act. Let's lower County operating costs, strengthen our electric infrastructure, and demonstrate responsible environmental stewardship.

Then let's watch Montgomery County's pilot carefully, learn from the results, and make decisions based on evidence -- not campaign talking points.

That's the kind of practical, competent leadership Baltimore County deserves.