Maryland transportation bill would formalize project study and scoring; local leaders praise pilot

A Maryland Department of Transportation official and county leaders told the Senate Budget and Taxation Committee that SB 62 would make the state’s process for moving surface‑transportation projects from idea to construction more transparent and predictable.

“This act introduces changes to the Consolidated Transportation Program to make the process for selecting new surface transportation capacity projects more transparent, objective, predictable, and effective in achieving Maryland's transportation goals,” Joe McAndrew, assistant secretary for planning and project development at MDOT, said in testimony supporting the bill. McAndrew said the legislation establishes a formal feasibility‑study pathway, requires MDOT to publicize available expansion funding every other year, and directs the agency to publish scores and proposed funding in the draft CTP.

Howard County Executive Calvin Ball, who joined the panel, said SB 62 "reflects the input from the county stakeholders in several important ways," and that the clarified pathway for requesting feasibility studies will help local governments partner with MDOT and compete for project funding. "This bill creates a more transparent and accessible approach to advancing new projects and positions the prioritization process for success," Ball said.

Local planners and advocacy groups told the committee that they had participated in an 18‑month pilot with MDOT and found the scoring output provided actionable feedback. "The scoring that is coming out of this process is actually giving us more information," Haley Peckett, deputy director for policy at Montgomery County Department of Transportation, said. She said the information helped local staff understand past outcomes and better prepare future submissions.

But the bill drew cautions from contractors and materials suppliers. Chris Lawson of the Maryland Transportation Builders and Materials Association said the pilot covered about 48 projects and "was not tested under real funding pressures." He urged that the full pilot dataset, assumptions and methodology be publicly released and validated before embedding the approach in statute. Megan Owings of the Maryland Asphalt Association and other contractors warned that a statewide scoring regime could disadvantage pavement preservation and rural counties that cannot afford large local matches.

McAndrew acknowledged the concerns and told senators MDOT has been refining the approach, including a no‑funding pilot and outreach to counties. He said the department is working with the House subcommittee and stakeholders on technical refinements and supports amendments that would ease implementation where necessary.

If enacted, SB 62 would also update the Maryland Transportation Commission’s role to provide a public forum for review of project evaluation and funding decisions. Supporters said the change would help explain why any secretary‑level adjustments are made, and would publish the scoring metrics and proposed funding in the draft CTP to improve accountability.

The committee heard a mix of endorsements from regional transportation advocates and requests for more disclosure and stress‑testing from industry groups. No final committee action was recorded in the transcript during this hearing.