Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Digital Transit Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners decline to commit county match for regional Google transit mapping project
Summary
St. Mary’s County commissioners did not approve authorizing a cash match to join a Tri‑County Council application to create a Google‑transit style regional trip planner; Tri‑County staff said they will notify other counties that St. Mary’s will likely not join the application.
The St. Mary’s County Board of County Commissioners on Nov. 13 declined to authorize up to $5,000 in local match to support a Tri‑County Council application to develop a regional transit schedule database for inclusion in online trip‑planning services.
Wayne Clark, executive director of the Tri‑County Council, said the $100,000 project proposed purchasing consulting services to assemble schedules and route data from the three Southern Maryland counties so consumers could plan trips online the same way Google now provides driving directions. Clark described the proposal as a one‑time cost to prepare standard data files and said Google would maintain the service at no additional fee if local agencies agreed to provide schedule updates.
Clark said the project would include a maximum county cash contribution of $5,000 and a $5,000 Tri‑County Council contribution; Charles and Calvert counties had indicated support.
Commissioners asked whether a local mobility manager being considered by the county could perform similar functions; Clark said a mobility manager could help individuals by phone but would not replace a public, searchable regional schedule database that Google could host.
After discussion the board voted not to approve the county match and to withhold commitment to the regional application. Clark told the board he would inform the other two counties that St. Mary’s likely would not participate now.
Commissioners said regional tools could help riders and reduce phone inquiries if schedules are kept current, but several cited timing, cost and overlap with other recent transportation initiatives as reasons to decline the match at this time.
