Traffic Fuels Contrasts in Montgomery Race

Residents want the perks of development, such as a new gourmet market in the neighborhood, Silverman said. "What they don't want is the traffic that comes with it."

"If we'd just build the roads and transit promised," Silverman said, "we'd have less of a focus on the next housing project."

The challenge of offering more local money is that the needs -- and the price tags -- are vast. Duncan and the council have identified $7 billion in road and mass transit projects for the next 10 years. The blueprint relies on $6 billion in state money. And Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr. (R), for instance, has been noncommittal on Silverman's top transportation priority: the Purple Line.

Leggett takes issue with his opponent's approach to funding, saying it furthers the statewide impression that Montgomery is a wealthy uncle who can afford to go it alone. He considers Silverman's projections for state money unrealistic.

"We're leading with our chin by telling the state we're wealthy enough to do it," he said. "These are state roads and state projects. Why should the citizens of Montgomery County be burdened with these costs?"

County partnerships with the state have had varied degrees of success. State Highway Administrator Neil J. Pedersen said the state looks favorably on such offers and typically has provided a 50 percent match. Timing can be tricky because of state budgeting, but within a year or two of a proposal, the state has come through for counties, including Howard and Frederick.

"It obviously provides an incentive," Pedersen said, "giving us $2 of project for every $1 we're investing."

For his part, Leggett said he would be more selective in investing the county's money. He prefers to address traffic problems by focusing on curbing growth.

One of his ideas is to overturn the county's growth management policy -- fashioned by Silverman -- and reinstate building restrictions in the most congested areas. As is the case with Silverman, Leggett's ability to deliver one of his top priorities will depend on the balance of power after this fall's elections. If the council's pro-growth majority remains after November, it could block Leggett's efforts.

The 2003 policy that Leggett seeks to change imposed Maryland's highest tax on development and got rid of a traffic-review standard that restrained construction. The changes effectively lifted a moratorium on building homes in neighborhoods such as Fairland-White Oak and Aspen Hill.

At the time, the county Planning Board estimated that the new taxes would, on average, raise one-third to one-half of what was required for transportation needs under the old approach. The development taxes were projected to raise about $44 million a year to pay for transportation and school construction. But revenue has fallen short, with $16 million in fiscal 2005 and $13 million in the past budget year.

Silverman rejects the assertion from Leggett and other critics that the new policy has led to a flood of development. In fiscal 2005, 838 homes -- or 19 percent of the 4,388 total -- were approved beyond restrictions of the old policy, according to a county planning department analysis.