A political stalemate over replacing the Woodrow Wilson Bridge was broken yesterday, less than a month before the first critical deadline, when Maryland Gov. Parris N. Glendening ordered that work begin this fall despite a shortfall of at least $600 million.
Glendening also said Maryland and Virginia should cover 20 percent of any cost overruns, raising the prospect that the states, partners in the project with the federal government, could pay more than the $200 million each has promised. The governor also agreed to a federal demand that the states take joint ownership of the federally owned span, but only after construction is finished.
Westbound traffic backed up into Maryland across the Wilson Bridge in April 1998.
(James M. Thresher - The Washington Post)
|
|
"We have to make some decisions and make them now, because we're at kind of an impasse," Glendening said. "We have a real crisis."
By directing that the initial dredging contract go out for bids within the next month, Glendening is trying to salvage as much of the coming construction season as possible and avoid a year-long delay in replacing the deteriorating bridge. Environmental regulations allow dredging in the Potomac River for only five months a year, starting in October.
The prospects for beginning work on the crossing, a vital link for both local commuters and long-distance travelers, had dimmed recently as state officials and Congress argued over who would cover the shortfall in funding.
The decision by Glendening, a Democrat, reverses his earlier refusal to start until full funding is identified and sunders the united front he had established with Virginia Gov. James S. Gilmore III (R) in insisting the project remain on hold until Congress antes up more money. Because the river is in Maryland, that state is entitled to give the green light.
Gilmore was on vacation and caught off guard by Glendening's telephone call yesterday--"This is a sudden change of position, and I was not consulted," the Virginian said--and expressed to his Maryland counterpart his concern about each state covering 10 percent of the cost overruns.
"My comment to him this morning was that if the federal government continues to define the scope of the project from this point on, the 10 percent can get pretty big pretty quick," Gilmore said.
Yet Gilmore generally welcomed Glendening's initiative.
"Start tomorrow: Go into the water and build this bridge," Gilmore said in an interview at the state Capitol in Richmond. "But . . . if we're not real careful here, we can get ourselves into a situation where we have to, basically, write a blank check" to finish.
He insisted that Congress must assure the two states that it will pay an additional $600 million toward the bridge costs and Virginia must exert full control over those funds.
Glendening's announcement does little to decide who will ultimately pay the balance of the project, estimated at between $2.2 billion and $2.5 billion. Congress has already earmarked $900 million, but it balked on providing an additional $600 million proposed by the Clinton administration. Maryland and Virginia have each agreed to spend $200 million.
Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.) and Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.) won congressional approval last month for a waiver that allows $170 million in federal money to be spent despite federal restrictions on starting highway projects until they are fully funded. State officials had adamantly rejected the waiver, fearing this would undermine their leverage with Congress.
Glendening said his decision to use the waiver for dredging and foundation construction was the only workable strategy for ultimately getting federal funds. "We're doing what Congress asked. The bridge is going to be coming out of the water," he said. "No one, regardless of whether it's the administration or Congress, will be able to prevent [finishing] a project which is two-thirds completed."
