WeVote
Log In

Bill

WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 198

SB 198 — Transportation Investment Priorities Act of 2025

Status: Hearing 1/29 at 10:30 a.m. (Introduced Jan 8, 2025) — Effective date (as drafted): July 1, 2025

Main purpose

SB 198 revises how Maryland prioritizes, scores, documents, and selects transportation projects for the Consolidated Transportation Program (CTP) and updates related planning (the Maryland Transportation Plan, MTP). The bill requires a transparent, objective project‑scoring system and stronger asset‑management/state‑of‑good‑repair practices to guide funding decisions.

Key provisions

  • Definitions and project categories

    • Establishes terms such as “capacity enhancing project,” “major surface transportation project,” “small surface transportation project,” “locally managed capital project,” and “state of good repair.”
    • (Under the bill, “major surface transportation projects” generally include projects above the statutory cost threshold; the fiscal note references a $5.0 million threshold for related definitions.)

  • Project‑based scoring and prioritization

    • MDOT must develop (with MPO consultation and MTC review) a project‑based scoring system that uses objective, quantifiable measures tied to statutory policy goals and that considers project benefits relative to State costs.
    • MDOT must publish the guidelines used to develop the scoring system and review/update them in coordination with the Maryland Transportation Commission (MTC) at least every two years.
    • MDOT must solicit requests for major surface transportation projects at least every two years from MDOT units, local jurisdictions, and MPOs; each requester must certify that the relevant legislative delegation was notified.
    • Major surface transportation projects may be included in the CTP only if evaluated and scored under the required scoring program.
    • MDOT must make project scores and the list of projects recommended for inclusion in the CTP publicly available.

  • CTP and MTP content enhancements

    • The CTP must include expanded project descriptions (name, scope, map/limits, purpose & need, delineation of state‑of‑good‑repair vs. capacity elements, schedule, and funding by phase/source).
    • MDOT must identify funds available for each two‑year funding cycle after considering stated needs.

  • Asset management / state of good repair

    • Adds a new “Asset Management Practices” subtitle requiring SHA (and MTA for transit) to adopt asset management approaches, including a highway state‑of‑good‑repair program and formal state‑of‑good‑repair definitions and processes.

  • Governance/commission changes

    • Modifies the Maryland Transportation Commission’s composition, chairing, meeting frequency, and responsibilities (details in bill text) and requires a specified advisory committee to advise MDOT on the MTP.

Who is affected

  • State agencies: MDOT, State Highway Administration (SHA), Maryland Transit Administration (MTA), Maryland Transportation Commission.
  • Local governments, MPOs, transit agencies and project proposers (must respond to solicitations and meet new certification/documentation requirements).
  • Project stakeholders and the public (greater transparency of project scoring, scope, and funding).
  • Transportation program and budget decisions may shift as projects are reprioritized under the new scoring framework.

Fiscal and timing notes

  • Effective date in the departmental version: July 1, 2025.
  • Fiscal impact (per Departmental fiscal note): increased federal fund expenditures (flowing through the Transportation Trust Fund) of approximately $1.2 million in FY 2026 and $200,000 annually in FY 2027–2030 to implement scoring, publishing, and program changes. Long‑term administration costs shift to the Transportation Trust Fund beginning FY 2031.
  • MDOT must update scoring guidelines and solicit projects at least every two years.

Potential impacts

  • Greater transparency and consistency in project selection; potential reallocation of funding across projects and modes based on quantified benefit‑to‑cost and state goals.
  • Administrative costs for MDOT to implement and maintain scoring, public reporting, and asset management programs (covered largely by federal funds/TTF in the fiscal note).
  • Local sponsors and MPOs will need to align submissions to the new requirements and participate in the biennial solicitation process.

For full statutory language and technical details (definitions, MTC composition changes, asset‑management program requirements), see the bill text (Article — Transportation, §§ added/revised).

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.