House transportation committee advances $3.3 billion package, creates Neighborhood Roads Fund and funds local bridges

The Michigan House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee advanced a multi‑bill transportation package Thursday that includes House Bill 42‑30, which establishes a Neighborhood Roads Fund and directs $100 million per year to local bridge repairs.

The Neighborhood Roads Fund, as presented by Representative Brian Altman, would create a dedicated source of funding for neighborhood streets in cities, villages and townships and eliminates the requirement that townships match county road agencies on projects using those dollars. “This change eliminates a major financial hurdle, making it easier for townships to improve their roads,” Altman said in committee testimony.

Why it matters: supporters from cities, counties, townships and engineering and labor groups said the package shifts money toward local roads that “people use every day,” provides predictable funding for long‑term maintenance and would help avoid emergency repairs that cost more over time. John Lamaki of the Michigan Municipal League called the package “tremendous progress” toward a solution and said his group supports the inclusion of HB 42‑30. Robert George of the Michigan Labor District Council said long‑term funding would protect thousands of construction jobs and related pension and health contributions.

What the bill would do: the substitute version presented to the committee earmarks $100,000,000 annually for local bridges to be distributed by the local bridge advisory board. It also creates the Neighborhood Roads Fund specifically for local streets and removes a 50 percent local match requirement that townships previously faced when partnering with county road agencies on certain projects.

Testimony and concerns: local officials and associations — including the Michigan Municipal League, County Road Association, Michigan Association of Counties, Michigan Townships Association, the American Council of Engineering Companies and building trades representatives — testified in favor of the package. Several witnesses urged attention to how the package affects constitutional revenue sharing and county general‑fund finances; Dina Bosworth of the Michigan Association of Counties noted counties do not receive the same constitutional revenue sharing backfill that cities, villages and townships received under the amendment discussed in committee.

Committee action and next steps: after testimony, the committee adopted substitute language for multiple bills in the package and reported them to the House with recommendations. The committee adopted substitute H‑1 to House Bill 42‑30 and reported the bill to the House with a recorded vote. Committee members said the package will continue to evolve in the House and Senate and through discussions with the executive branch.

Votes at a glance (committee action recorded in transcript): - House Bill 41‑80 — Substitute H‑1 adopted; reported with recommendation as Substitute H‑1 (motion and roll call in transcript). Tally as read: 16 yeas, 0 nays, 0 pass (transcript language at roll call indicates unanimous yea vote to adopt substitute); reported thereafter with recommendation (see provenance below). - House Bill 41‑81 — Substitute H‑1 adopted; reported with recommendation as Substitute H‑1 (transcript roll calls recorded; motion prevailed). - House Bill 41‑82 — Substitute H‑1 adopted; reported with recommendation as Substitute H‑1. - House Bill 41‑83 — Substitute H‑2 adopted; reported with recommendation as Substitute H‑2. - House Bill 41‑84 — Substitute H‑1 adopted; reported with recommendation as Substitute H‑1. - House Bill 41‑85 — Substitute H‑2 adopted; reported with recommendation as Substitute H‑2. - House Bill 41‑86 — Substitute H‑1 adopted; reported with recommendation as Substitute H‑1. - House Bill 41‑87 — Substitute H‑1 adopted; reported with recommendation as Substitute H‑1. - House Bill 42‑30 (Neighborhood Roads Fund) — Substitute H‑1 adopted; reported with recommendation as Substitute H‑1. Committee roll call as read in transcript when the bill was reported: 10 yeas, 1 nay, 5 pass (see provenance lines below). The committee chair announced the substitute was adopted.

What supporters say: John Lamaki, Michigan Municipal League, praised the package’s focus on local streets and said the association moved to support the bills after staff and leadership briefings. Judy Allen of the Michigan Townships Association said many townships have had roads unmaintained for more than a decade and called the neighborhood roads money “critical for our members.” Robert George of the Michigan Labor District Council said union road builders rely on predictable funding and named underground utilities coordination as an area to include when repaving roads.

What opponents or caveats noted: some witnesses and commenters raised concerns about the fiscal effect on the state’s general fund and stressed the need to preserve or backfill constitutional revenue sharing for local governments. The committee recorded amendments and further negotiations will take place as the bills move through the House and Senate.

Ending: Committee members said discussion will continue and that the package will evolve as it moves through the legislative process. Representative Altman and other members urged continued coordination with local road agencies and the administration.