Committee backs $199.5 million bond plan to fund Bus Rapid Transit on Maryland 355

The Montgomery County Government Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee voted unanimously to give a favorable recommendation to the full County Council on a resolution authorizing the issuance of grant-anticipation revenue bonds of up to $199,500,000 to support construction of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) along the central portion of Maryland 355. Chair Stewart called the item the committee's first agenda matter of 2026 and opened the presentation before turning the floor to county staff.

Mr. Ambinder, who presented the resolution and staff report, said the proposed bond series would be limited obligations of the county, payable solely from funds the county receives from the state BRT fund, and "shall not constitute a pledge of the full faith and credit and unlimited taxing power of the county." He told the committee the structure stems from a supplemental appropriation that allowed the county to securitize state BRT grant funding for long-term financing rather than treating the grants as PAYGO appropriations.

The Department of Finance flagged potential risks and mitigants. Nancy Feldman of the Department of Finance said a default is "highly unlikely, yes," but added that "if there is not funds to make payment, the bonds could default," with reputational consequences because "our name is on the cover." Feldman described tools the county could consider in an adverse scenario, including restructuring, reserves, payment mechanics, and bond insurance, and stressed that future debt-service payments on the bonds would be subject to state appropriation.

Finance staff also noted expected ratings for the issue could range within the double-A category ("double A plus, double A or double A minus"), and that debt service would be recorded in the operating budget as non-tax-supported debt service expenditure rather than as revenue.

After a short round of questions from committee members, including Councilman McCat and Council Member Evans, Chair Stewart asked for members to raise their hands in favor of recommending the resolution to the full council; the chair said the vote was unanimous. The committee record in this session does not include an individual roll-call tally in the transcript.

What happens next: the committee's favorable recommendation will be transmitted to the full County Council for consideration. The resolution authorizes staff to pursue the bond issuance up to the amount discussed and describes limits on county liability tied to the state BRT fund receipts.

The committee's discussion emphasized two points for the council to weigh: the structure limits county legal obligations (the bonds are not GO debt) but carries a dependence on state BRT fund appropriations, and the county intends to pursue structural mitigants to reduce default probability.