Lawmakers Hear Urgent Warnings on Local Bridge Backlog, New Federal Load-Rating Deadline

Local road officials and Michigan Department of Transportation engineers told the House Transportation Infrastructure Committee on the record that the state faces a widening local-bridge crisis driven by environmental requirements, aging structures and new federal data mandates.

"Local roads are in serious condition," said Ed, a presenter for the County Road Association, describing a recent rise in bridges on local inventories and warning that deferred maintenance has produced a roughly $1 billion backlog of critical and closed local bridges. Denise Donahue, the County Road Association's CEO, said counties added about 153 bridges to the local roster since 2015 as larger culverts now meet the federal definition of a bridge.

MDOT chief bridge engineer Rebecca (Becky) Curtis told the committee that federal rules require additional inventory and load-rating information in the National Bridge Inventory, and that many local owners lack permit-level load ratings for heavier, permit-authorized vehicles. "We have to reload rate all of the bridges to meet this new inventory requirement," Curtis said, adding that the agency and local partners are working on contracts and funding to complete the work.

Committee members pressed presenters about specific costs and timelines. County Road Association representatives estimated that the initial two-year effort to perform custom load-rating analyses will require roughly $22 million and that subsequent annual needs would be on the order of $21 million to establish a baseline for load-rating and inspection work across local, city and village bridges. Presenters also warned that MDOT and local agencies forecast a need of approximately $200 million to $250 million per year for the next decade to reach a target condition level for local bridges.

Presenters described limits and constraints in existing programs. The local bridge program is funded in part by a half-penny of the state gasoline tax and a roughly $5 million local bridge appropriations line that speakers described as stagnant; federal IIJA bridge allocations provided temporary increases but are expected to revert to lower baseline amounts. Denise Donahue showed that about $400 million in local applications were submitted this spring while available statewide funds remain a small portion of that need.

Culverts that now exceed 20 feet in bank-to-bank width typically become federally defined bridges; EPA and EGLE-related hydraulic and fish-passage requirements have increased the sizes of openings that counties must build, which in turn increases local costs. "If you just, you have to pay, the locals have to pay for that upgrade the first time," said Steve Purry, who represents municipal engineering interests, describing both federal and state environmental drivers.

Committee members asked about emergency funding and equity in application limits. Presenters said emergency repair options exist through Infrastructure Bank (SIB) loans but noted that the regular local bridge program restricts the number of submissions per county and requires local matching funds. Denise Donahue said the regional allocation structure and local-match rules can leave populous counties with many high-priority bridges but only a small number of funded slots.

Curtis described MDOT's bridge-bundling program as a delivery tool that has helped secure additional federal funds: MDOT secured $34 million in federal aid for bundling and used design-build and accelerated delivery techniques that, according to MDOT slides, have delivered savings and under-run scoping estimates. She said the department can assist local owners by contracting consultants to perform load-rating analyses and by offering technical oversight.

The agency also warned of a funding cliff: MDOT slides presented a projection that 2029 could be the lowest bridge funding year in more than a decade because specific IIJA bridge funds expire. Curtis said it will force difficult prioritization decisions and that even moving to full replacement would not close all projected gaps.

The committee heard multiple technical clarifications about bridge condition ratings, useful/service life and preservation techniques, and was told that typical two-lane county bridge replacements often take about three months of construction but require multi-year project timelines for design and environmental clearances.

What's next: members said they will continue to refine the House'passed road funding package that includes neighborhood roads and bridge components and to coordinate with Senate counterparts. Presenters agreed to provide additional county-level distribution data, lists of long-term closures and more precise comparisons to peer states on per-bridge spending.