Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
House rejects floor limits on toll increases as it advances Key Bridge bonding increase
Loading...
Summary
Lawmakers advanced a bill raising MDTA bonding capacity for the Key Bridge rebuild but rejected floor amendments that would have required legislative approval for toll increases and that would have mandated public procurement comparisons with and without project labor agreements; sponsors warned about possible bond-rating and cost impacts.
The House on Feb. 11 considered House Bill 229, a measure to raise the Maryland Transportation Authority—onding cap to support rebuilding the Francis Scott Key Bridge. Sponsors said the bill raises the MDTA—orrowing authority so the state can forward-fund the project while federal reimbursement is expected.
A floor amendment from a delegate (speaker 11) would have prohibited the Maryland Transportation Authority board from increasing tolls without explicit approval from the General Assembly. The sponsor argued that adding $1 billion in bonding authority — on top of prior increases — makes toll increases "coming. Point blank." The floor leader and committee chair countered that the MDTA—oard's independent rate-setting authority is a major factor in maintaining a double-A bond rating; they warned that removing that independence could trigger downgrades and higher borrowing costs. After extended debate and member explanations, the amendment failed on a roll call (recorded as 97 votes in the negative).
A separate amendment from the Baltimore County delegate (speaker 17) would have required MDTA solicitations for financing and construction proposals to include both bids with a project labor agreement (PLA) and bids without a PLA, and to publish the comparative estimates. Proponents framed the change as a transparency measure to show taxpayers potential cost differences; opponents said PLAs and procurement policy are separate, complex matters and urged committee-level review. That amendment also failed on a roll call (93 votes in the negative).
Delegates also questioned the bill sponsor about cost increases for the Key Bridge, whether the federal government will reimburse the state (the floor leader said federal reimbursement is pledged but may take months), and whether lawsuits or insurance claims against the shipping company might reduce the state's exposure (the floor leader said the attorney general's office is pursuing those avenues but no final outcome is available).
Votes on the Key Bridge amendments were the clearest outcomes on the floor that day; the bill was ordered printed for third reading following the amendment votes.
Key details: The bill would increase MDTA bonding capacity toward a $5,000,000,000 cap to pay ongoing Key Bridge construction costs while the federal government processes reimbursement; sponsors repeatedly emphasized that forward-funding is required to meet construction timelines.
What happens next: HB229 proceeds toward third reading and will return with any committee or sponsor technical fixes before final passage.
