Proposal Canceling I-77 HOT Lane Project Headed To House Floor | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's note: The author of this post is Barry Smith, who is an associate editor for the Carolina Journal, John Hood Publisher.

H.B. 954 backers say state can get out of tolling contract with Cintra "for cause" because Spanish company failed to disclose litigation

    RALEIGH     Efforts to block the controversial high-occupancy or toll lanes on Interstate 77 in Mecklenburg and Iredell counties gained momentum on Wednesday as a bill to cancel the project cleared two committees.

    The House has scheduled a Thursday morning floor vote on House Bill 954. If it passes the House and Senate, the bill faces certain opposition if not a veto from Gov. Pat McCrory, who consistently has defended the project against stout local opposition.

    Motorists using so-called HOT lanes would be required to pay a toll unless at least three people are in the vehicle. Plans call for two HOT lanes each way along a 26-mile stretch of I-77. They'd run alongside two standard untolled lanes, according to the plan.

    "At no point have we stood up and said we're opposed to the concept of managed lanes," said Rep. Charles Jeter, R-Mecklenburg, one of the bill's sponsors, told the House Transportation Committee. "We are opposed to what we believe is an inherently flawed contract."


From left, Reps. Charles Jeter and John Bradford, both Mecklenburg County Republicans, explain their bill that would cancel the HOT lane project proposed for Interstate 77 north of Charlotte. (CJ photo by Barry Smith)

    The bill directs the N.C. Department of Transportation to cancel the I-77 HOT lane contract "for cause," which, if successful, would allow the state to escape monetary penalties to get out of the contract.

    Jeter said Cintra, the Spain-based company that contracted with the state to build and manage the HOT lane project, failed to disclose litigation in which it is involved. In case the "for cause" provision is not found valid in court, the bill also sets aside $250 million to cover the cost of breaking the contract. The measure also would suspend eight Mecklenburg County highway projects in case the "for cause" provision isn't found to be valid.

    Transportation Secretary Nick Tennyson urged lawmakers not to cancel the contract. He said he doubted that the "for cause" cancelation argument would hold up.

    "The NCDOT inspector general has already rendered an opinion and said there have been no errors or omissions in the documents that were submitted during the procurement process that would rise the level of being able to be canceled," Tennyson said.

    Tennyson said canceling the contract also would put the state transportation officials in a position of not knowing how to provide congestion relief in the I-77 corridor.

    "Nobody can give you anything but hypotheticals, including me, for what happens should the contract be canceled," Tennyson said.

    Rep. Rodney Moore, R-Mecklenburg, questioned the effect of canceling the contract.

    "What's the solution if we stop this project and we still have congestion and we still have traffic issues?" Moore asked.

    Jeter responded that by not canceling the project, Cintra would pocket $10 billion in toll charges over the next 50 years. "That's the equivalent of American Airlines leaving Charlotte," Jeter said. "That's the economic loss if we don't cancel the project."

    The bill cleared the House Transportation and Appropriations committees without prejudice, meaning the committees neither killed the bill nor recommended its passage.

    The project would run from the Brookshire Freeway interchange in Charlotte (Exit 11) to the N.C. 150 (Exit 36) interchange in Iredell County.

    The DOT signed the contract with Cintra in 2014. The project's price tag is $655 million, $88 million of that is the responsibility of state taxpayers.