Debate erupts over long‑planned MD‑261 sidewalk: cost, purpose and SHA procurement draw scrutiny
Loading...
Summary
Council and residents clashed over whether to give staff consensus to seek a funding increase for the long‑planned MD‑261 sidewalk (Safe Routes/transportation alternatives). Concerns centered on a Rossi subcontractor quote that raised the project estimate, unclear final numbers, whether the project meets Safe Routes to School use tests, and alternatives if the state or contractor cannot deliver.
A contentious exchange at the Feb. 19 Chesapeake Beach Town Council meeting focused on a long‑standing sidewalk/rail‑trail project along MD‑261 that the town has pursued for years under state grant programs. Council members and residents debated whether to give staff consensus to request a project funding increase after Rossi (the prime contractor under SHA processes) submitted a proposal that county staff described as $608,000 — more than 10 percent above the original estimate.
Councilmember Laura and others said the sidewalk is a community priority; residents from Chesapeake Village and Bayside urged the council to move forward, describing the current condition as hazardous. “This project has been vetted over and over again,” one resident said during public comment, noting prior townwide support in 2019.
Opposing council members and some staff raised multiple concerns: the Rossi proposal included a subcontractor cost that the state and town deemed unreasonably high; the project’s eligibility and practical use as a “Safe Routes to School” project were questioned because the walking distance from many homes to Beach Elementary exceeds typical program ranges; and right‑of‑way and retaining‑wall work could significantly increase cost and complexity.
Council members pressed for contingency planning if SHA declines a funding increase or Rossi cannot deliver a reasonable final price. One councilor urged exploring alternate trail routes or community‑led options and suggested the town engineer and staff pursue additional procurement or design alternatives so the community still gets improved connectivity even if the state process stalls.
The meeting included a heated exchange about public outreach: several council members criticized an email blast sent on the topic for creating confusion; others defended communicating with constituents. The council did not take a final consensus vote to increase funding at the Feb. 19 meeting — staff said they would continue discussions with SHA and Rossi and provide updated numbers when available.
What’s next: The town engineer and staff said they are awaiting a definitive revised Rossi offer and SHA comment; council members asked staff to prepare contingency options and better community communication before any new consensus or funding decision.
