This article was republished with permission from WTOP’s news partners at .聽Sign up for today.
This content was republished with permission from WTOP鈥檚 news partners at Maryland Matters. Sign up for聽听迟辞诲补测.
The Board of Public Works will put off a discussion and vote on Gov. Larry Hogan鈥檚 highway widening proposal, which had been scheduled for May 8, an administration official told聽Maryland Matters聽Friday morning.
鈥淲e plan to postpone consideration of this item,鈥� Hogan鈥檚 communications director, Michael Ricci, said in an email. 鈥淭his will give the treasurer a chance to weigh in as we work to address one of the worst traffic problems in the country.鈥�
It was not immediately clear Friday morning when the item would return to the BPW agenda.
Hogan had been under pressure to delay the vote because State Treasurer Nancy K. Kopp, one of three members of the Board of Public Works and an avowed skeptic of Hogan鈥檚 plan to widen the Capital Beltway and Interstate 270, was going to miss the meeting due to a long-scheduled vacation. Kopp, who serves on the board with Hogan and Comptroller Peter Franchot (D), will be in Japan with her husband next week, celebrating their 50th wedding anniversary.
She said she informed her colleagues of her travel schedule months ago, and she has formally requested聽that action on the governor鈥檚 plan to increase capacity on the Capital Beltway and Interstate 270 be delayed until the panel鈥檚 May 22 meeting.
The item, one of dozens of decisions on the board鈥檚 long agenda, would officially designate Hogan鈥檚 road-widening plan as a public-private partnership and it would approve a proposed competitive bid process for selecting private-sector firms to handle financing and construction.
On Thursday, 36 state lawmakers from Montgomery and Prince George鈥檚 counties wrote to Hogan, urging him to delay the vote until Kopp could be present.
鈥淭hey need to [postpone] this,鈥� Del. Kumar P. Barve, D-Montgomery County, the chair of the House Transportation and Environment Committee and one of the signatories to the letter, said in an interview. 鈥淭his is bull—-. This kind of behavior is why people hate American government.鈥�
In an interview, Kopp said she has many questions and concerns about Hogan鈥檚 plan to widen the Beltway and I-270 two lanes in each direction. Even if she was going to be in attendance next week, Kopp asserted that she doesn鈥檛 think the issue is 鈥渞ipe鈥� for action.
鈥淭his issue is of such great importance 鈥� both because of the cost and the fact that we鈥檙e building an infrastructure that鈥檚 lasting for more than half a century 鈥� that it deserves more consideration,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t is appropriate for the state treasurer to be part of that discussion.鈥�
Ricci said the governor is scheduled to be out of town when the panel convenes on May 22.
In addition to their request that the Board of Public Works wait until Kopp returns from overseas, Montgomery and Prince George鈥檚 lawmakers said they want each phase of the project broken into its own separate public-private partnership, or P3.
鈥淓ach segment of I-495 and I-270 faces unique conditions and challenges and should be considered on its own merits,鈥� they write.
State leaders maintain that Maryland lacks the borrowing capability to fund road expansion and have decided to use a P3 approach instead. This will allow for private sector聽firms with deep pockets and global experience聽to fund,聽construct and maintain the聽new lanes in exchange for the right to charge tolls on the new express lanes.
But the financing scheme the state envisions is complicated. A key document, a supplement to the Pre-Solicitation Report, was just made public and delivered to the treasurer鈥檚 office this week 鈥� even though it is dated April 12.
Critics of the governor鈥檚 plan say there was insufficient time to digest the new information by May 8.
鈥淭his is a really complicated legal document,鈥� said Ben Ross of the Maryland Transit Opportunities Coalition. 鈥淭here is no way on earth that the public and even the state treasurer鈥檚 office can get to the bottom of all the implications of this before Wednesday morning.鈥�
Kopp said her staff is reviewing the document, which it received on Tuesday.
The legislators鈥� letter makes their concerns plain.
The Maryland Department of Transportation 鈥渉as itself represented at public meetings that it is not ready to share the support for its traffic model, and no detailed analyses of the costs and financial risks of the Program have been provided,鈥� the lawmakers wrote.
鈥淭here is great uncertainty involved for the state, taxpayers, and individual motorists in acting without full information on the choices for traffic relief in Maryland.鈥�
As elected officials in the two most affected counties stewed over what they claim is the state鈥檚 rush job 鈥� and its unwillingness to seriously consider alternatives 鈥� the top planner with the Montgomery County Planning Department, and the agency鈥檚 top lawyer, aired a series of concerns about the project in a memo to the Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission on Monday.
In the memo, Carol S. Rubin, special project manager for the I-495 & I-270 Managed Lanes Study, and Principal Counsel Debra Borden fault M-DOT and the State Highway Administration for not incorporating comments from local planners into a key state document.
鈥淚n fact,鈥� they write, 鈥淢-DOT SHA made almost no change from the Screened Alternatives to the [Alternatives Retained for Detailed Study].鈥�
The 鈥渓ack of any significant transit elements in the selected screened alternatives is unacceptable,鈥� they write in the first of 18 bullet points. In addition, they claim the state鈥檚 environmental screening criteria was 鈥渋nsufficient鈥� and that 鈥渕ore detail is needed on the noise impact evaluation process.鈥�
As for how the governor鈥檚 plan would affect the Beltway in the Temple Hills/Oxon Hill portion of Prince George鈥檚, the planners tartly conclude that 鈥渢he state apparently intends to rely upon Virginia to design and implement a segment of I-495 that provides access to the most significant economic assets in Prince George鈥檚 County.鈥�
鈥淚t鈥檚 a shocking letter, honestly,鈥� said Democrat Tom Hucker, chair of the Montgomery County Council鈥檚 transportation committee and a former state legislator.
鈥淗ighly unusual. I鈥檝e never seen one like it with such a damning criticism of a compromised state agency by a highly-respected, non-partisan expert government entity.鈥�
The State Highway Administration did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Thursday evening.
SHA is conducting a series of 鈥減ublic workshops鈥� at which state planners brief the public about the plans to widen the two roads, but many officials and residents have been frustrated by the lack of opportunity to make formal comments at these gatherings. (Comments can be submitted online on a dedicated web page the state has created.)
Hucker has organized an I-495/I-270 Town Hall for Sunday from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. at the Silver Spring Civic Building to give residents the chance to speak. Montgomery County Executive Marc B. Elrich and U.S. Rep. Anthony G. Brown, both Democrats, will be among the speakers, Hucker said.
Franchot has been invited, but his participation has not been confirmed.
In the meantime, opponents of the governor鈥檚 plan continue to pressure Kopp and Franchot to use their power on the BPW.
鈥淭hey鈥檙e the only people who have a say in the process,鈥� Barve said. 鈥淓verything else is secondary at this point.鈥�
鈥淐omptroller Franchot has spent a lot of time talking about how he鈥檚 the watchdog for the taxpayers. Now鈥檚 his opportunity to be a watchdog over what is reportedly the largest P3 in American history.鈥�
