March 15: Comptroller Franchot to Discuss I-495/I-270 Expansion
This is your chance to hear State Comptroller Peter Franchot address your concerns about the massive P3 tollway expansion on I-495/I-270 proposal and what will be done to avoid another Purple Line P3 fiasco and protect your wallets, community, and environment.
Comptroller Franchot sits on the three-member Board of Public Works – along with Governor Hogan and State Treasurer Nancy Kopp – which has jurisdiction over the I-495/I-270 P3 contracts. MDOT is expected to ask BPW to approve the first contract with tollway developer Transurban, despite the lack of a completed environmental review flagging public risks, costs and impact.
Here’s a short-list of some of our concerns:
- Will the BPW approve a deal before the developer names a construction partner?
- Do you approve of MDOT’s proposal to automatically hike tolls by 2.1% plus inflation every year?
- Will the BPW approve the first contract before MDOT completes the environmental review, as promised last year to the General Assembly?
- Shouldn't the BPW wait for the Final Environmental Impact Statement to know what the expansion will cost before approving the first contract? (The draft EIS estimated it would cost us as much as $482 million more than the no-net cost the Governor promised. More than 80% of the 3000 comments on the DEIS were negative.)
- Do you agree taxpayers, not the developer, should pay the cost of moving utilities and managing the runoff from the 550 acres of new road surface?
|
|
Senate Panel Reveals Support, Need for Outreach to Pass MDOT P3 Promises Act
The Senate Budget and Taxation Committee is scheduled to meet this morning to continue its Friday discussion S.B. 843, the MDOT P3 Promises Act. Last week's confab revealed significant support but also the need to step up outreach to pass this critical bill. (Click here to watch on the committee's Youtube Channel.)
Introduced by Senator Joanne Benson (D-Prince George’s) the bill would require MDOT to keep its promises about the I-495/I-270 for-profit tollway expansion. The House companion bill (HB 67) was introduced by Del. Marc Korman (D-Montgomery).
Key promises covered in the bills include completing the environmental review identifying public costs and risks before engaging a developer, setting aside 10 percent of net toll revenues for county transit projects, no-net cost to taxpayers, and paying construction workers union scale.
Here’s what we learned from the March 5 Senate panel meeting (video starts at 55:24).
- SB 843 has fans on the committee, especially in Senators Jim Rosapepe (D-Prince George’s) and Young (D-Frederick), who spoke out strongly in its favor.
- Sen. Nancy King (D-Montgomery), citing constituent pressure from Gaithersburg and Germantown, is opposed to a bill holding MDOT to its word.
- Chair Guy Guzzone (D-Howard) wanted to know the origins of the promises.
- Senators Melony Griffith (D-Prince George’s) and Craig Zucker (D-Montgomery) are unsure.
CABE has reached out to Senator Guzzone. We encourage everyone living in Senators Griffith’s and Zucker’s districts to contact the Senators and explain why it’s right and appropriate for the General Assembly to enforce the promises that public agencies make to advance publicly-funded expansions of public highways.
Here's their contact information:
Senator Craig Zucker (D-District 14) -- Olney, Damascus, Clarksburg, Calverton. Tel: 410-841-3625 | 301-858-3625 craig.zucker@senate.state.md.us
Senator Melony Griffith (D-District 25) -- Largo, Marlow Heights, Malow Village, Clinton. Tel: 410-841-3127 | 301-858-3127 melony.griffith@senate.state.md.us
Check out our talking points below.
Spread the word.
____________________________________
Talking Points: The Need for the P3 Promises Act
MDOT continues to walk back the promises it made to the public and General Assembly for the I-495/I-270 P3. If MDOT doesn’t fulfill these public commitments the impact to the State could be substantial and long-lasting.
State Treasurer Kopp has raised serious concerns about the financing of this project, but she is just one of three votes in the Board of Public Works (BPW).
It is up to the General Assembly to pass SB 843 to ensure MDOT keeps its public promises and protects the State and taxpayers from an even bigger P3 blow-up than the Purple Line. Without SB 843:
- The cost of the project to taxpayers could prevent the State from funding future stormwater management and transportation projects. While MDOT has promised that the project would have no net-cost to the State, the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) estimates that the State may pay the developer as much as $482 million. This doesn’t include the billions that will be needed to move utilities and manage new stormwater runoff. The General Assembly must pass SB 843 to ensure that MDOT fulfills its promise of no-net taxpayer payments to the developer.
- The State may waste $50 million by signing a pre-development agreement prematurely. MDOT promised that the environmental review would be completed before a contract with the developer is submitted to the BPW. However, MDOT plans to submit a $50 million pre-development contract to the BPW in May, months before completing the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) clarifying taxpayer costs and community risks. Information in the FEIS could cause the State or developer to abandon the project or prompt the federal government to withhold approval and trigger the $50 million taxpayer payout.
- The State will sign its first contract with the developer before the FEIS provides critical information about the expansion’s fiscal, environmental and social costs. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement had many deficiencies. Waiting for the FEIS will let taxpayers better understand the financial risks as well as the environmental threats and any disparate impacts on communities of color and low-income communities.
|
|
Monorail could take 10,000 cars off local roads, says MDOT report
Well, this is interesting. MDOT has issued a report that concludes a monorail connecting Frederick to Montgomery County is:
1. Feasible.
2. Would take at least 10,000 vehicles a day off of the region's roads
3. Draw anywhere from 34,800 to 47,800 riders a day.
The MDOT report, unsurprisingly, said 10,000 cars is not enough to make a dent in traffic. But, cutting as few as 2,280 vehicles could produce a 27 percent reduction in northbound congestion during 4-7 pm rush., according to a 2018 study from Dr. Lei Zhang, director of the Maryland Transportation Institute at the University of Maryland. So maybe removing 10,000 cars would make a significant difference.
The report adds the monorail could be built in the existing right-of-way. This would likely mean fewer impacts on surrounding neighborhoods and the environment than adding four additional highway lanes to I-270.
MDOT's report cautions that some of the 34,800 to 47,800 daily ridership would likely come from MARC's Brunswick Line, commuter bus lines and Montgomery County's Ride On bus network.
In other words the monorail won’t put commuters who are off the road back on it. On the other hand, adding tollways would likely to increase car trips -- the phenomenon known as induced demand.
So it seems to be a choice between a low-impact transportation model designed to take cars off the road versus a high-impact one that is designed to put more cars on it and depends on congestion to maximize toll revenues.
One more point: the monorail feasiblity report fulfills one of the promises MDOT made. Thank you.
|
|
Transurban Pick Draws Protest from Other Bidder
Whoa. We did not have "losing bidder protests Transurban's $11 billion I-495/I-270 deal" on our bingo card.
But here we are.
The Washington Post reports one of the bidders has filed a protest with MDOT, but doesn't say which bidder or what the protest is about.
One clue may be stories about Ferrovial, a Spanish-based competitor of Transurban, complaining about the score its bid received.
Whatever it's about, the complaint first goes through a dispute resolution process spelled out in the solicitation documents. If the protestor is unsatisfied with the outcome, it could go to court.
Stay tuned.
|
|
CABE Classifieds
Free CABE Sign Replacement Frames: If your CABE frame is bent, give us a shout for a free replacement courtesy of a generous member donation. Contact Arlene.
|
|
|
|
