1/ Let's talk about MD's plan to expand I270/I495 using a public-private partnership (P3) and why without fed. mandates to reduce GHGs and expand access to affordable transportation options, states can manipulate the environmental review process to produce a highway-only plan.

2/ States game the review process by defining the "purpose and need" in auto/highway terms. For instance, Maryland defines the top purpose as accommodating "Long-Term Traffic Growth." Once you've decided that moving cars is the goal, then highway expansion necessarily follows.

3/ The early list of alternatives included transit. But transit was eliminated b/c it fails to "meet the Study's Purpose and Need" (i.e., moving cars). But imagine if the goal was to connect people to destinations instead of moving cars? The AA list would look a lot different.

4/ Note that the DEIS states that building light rail transit wold improve service for transit riders. Yet, because it wouldn't move more cars, no dice. LOL.

5/ Now let's talk financing. MD is pursuing a P3 deals because it doesn't want to spend any public money or use its bonding capacity, if possible. But this choice has real environmental consequences b/c it leads you to design a project that generates MAXIMUM DRIVING.

6/ Climate change is an existential crisis and yet MD wants a project that produces the *MOST* driving possible. Why? Because travel demand models are the backbone of the financial analysis the P3 firm will use to justify issuing bonds and investing equity.

7/ In a sane world, roadway pricing would be used to ENCOURAGE transit use, carpooling, and EV adoption. Yet, because MD wants to rely exclusively on private financing, buses, carpools, and EVs become a problem to be avoided. Oh and the P3 deal will last for *50 years.*

8/ In addition, MD pushes for a P3 by arguing that it allows the state to transfer project delivery and revenue risk to the concessionaire. This is a bold claim considering that the Purple Line P3 just failed in spectacular fashion.

9/ To justify the project, MD makes dubious claims about reduced travel times. E.g., MD brags that vehicle throughput on 270/495 will be much higher after expansion. BUT magically delay on the surface arterials that feed vehicles onto the highway will get better. Sure guys.

10/ To summarize, MD wants to lock in vehicle dependence and maximize driving & GHG emissions for 50 years to avoid spending state money. Worth noting recent flooding of US 50 made worse by climate change and that Amazon chose NoVa for HQ2 because of transit, not highways.

11/ For more on the limits of transferring risk through P3s, check out https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/reports/2019/12/11/478265/limits-risk-transference-public-private-partnerships/