Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Management Districts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Inspector General: Montgomery County not enforcing Transportation Management District survey and plan requirements
Summary
An OIG review found very low employer response rates to required commuter surveys and concluded DOT had not enforced county code requirements for Transportation Management Districts; DOT said it will begin enforcement steps pending possible code changes.
The Montgomery County inspector general told the council’s Audit Committee on Oct. 14 that the county’s Transportation Management District program has low employer compliance with required commuter plans and surveys, limiting officials’ ability to assess whether the program reduces single-occupancy vehicle trips.
Megan Lamarsy, presenting the Office of the Inspector General’s review, said the office looked at FY 2022–2024 activity and found response rates far below statutory targets. For employers with more than 100 employees, the county target is a 40% survey response rate; for smaller employers the target is 50%. The OIG found a roughly 4% response rate among larger employers and 27% among smaller employers.
The OIG’s two findings concluded that the Department of Transportation did not ensure employer compliance with county code requirements and did not publish the biannual reporting required by the code. “Failing to enforce and ensure compliance really does leave a void in the information the county was seeking to obtain,” Lamarsy said. The OIG recommended DOT implement a compliance strategy, pursue penalties where warranted, and develop alternative data-collection strategies to improve commuting data.
Director Beverly Conklin of the Department of Transportation told the committee the department has prioritized outreach and commuter services work to educate employers and employees about alternatives to driving alone and said the program’s principal benefit is community outreach rather than enforcement. Conklin said DOT has increased outreach around the most recent survey but response rates have continued to decline and that small sample sizes make employer-level conclusions unreliable. “As you try to be more specific about what that data means, it’s less and less reliable,” Conklin said, noting DOT is exploring other data sources to corroborate trends.
DOT said it plans to begin enforcement actions in December unless council changes to the code direct otherwise. The department’s most recent update to the OIG was Sept. 12 and it anticipates further progress by Dec. 12; DOT does not expect to complete some reporting recommendations until December 2026. The OIG’s recommendations remain open and in progress.
Councilmembers and DOT staff discussed whether the code’s current enforcement approach and survey method remain the right tools given modern data sources and uneven transit access across the county. Councilmember Balcom and others noted the law contemplates expansion of TMDs and different developer requirements; DOT said fees for commercial development in TMDs have existed since 2006 and that multifamily residential units are not charged the fee. Several council members urged DOT and the inspector general to coordinate as pending legislation moves to the Transportation & Environment Committee.
The committee did not take a formal vote during the presentation. DOT and the inspector general said they will continue to coordinate with council staff and T&E as the county considers whether to change the code, strengthen enforcement or adopt new data strategies.
