A last-minute maneuver to push the Metro board to support Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan’s funding proposal for the transit agency drew sharp rebukes Thursday, as representatives from the District and Virginia condemned the gesture as “political theater.”

Just days after Metro General Manager Paul J. Wiedefeld released his proposed budget for the coming fiscal year — including a request for an additional $136 million to pay for capital projects — the flare-up highlighted the lack of consensus about how the District, Maryland and Virginia should come up with the money.

With no advance notice, finance committee chairman Michael Goldman, who represents Maryland on the board, introduced a resolution saying the panel would “generally endorse the framework and principles” outlined in a four-year funding plan floated by Hogan (R) in September.

Under that plan, which so far has received little support, the District, Maryland, Virginia and the federal government would each contribute an extra $125 million a year to the ailing transit agency through fiscal 2022. That would amount to $2 billion to shore up Metro’s capital budget.

But the District and Virginia have faulted the proposal for failing to include a permanent, dedicated revenue source that they say Metro needs.

Goldman acknowledged that the plan is a stopgap.

“It is not a long-term solution. It’s not a dedicated funding solution,” Goldman said. “But I think we have to deal, as a board and as a committee, with getting over the hump.”

Goldman later pointed out there’s no hope for Maryland to decide on a dedicated revenue source before the state’s gubernatorial election next year.

But the resolution earned a frosty response from other board members. Some expressed concern over whether it was appropriate for the board to recommend funding solutions to lawmakers.

“I question whether it’s our role to direct the jurisdictions as to how they ought to deal with this problem,” said board member Christian Dorsey, who also is a member of the Arlington County Board.

“Whether this budget can be executed is going to be determined in large part by people outside this room, with powers that this board does not have,” said board member Steve McMillin, who represents the federal government.

Board members representing the District, who have repeatedly tangled with Hogan, took a harder stance.

“This is a resolution that the District of Columbia, 100 percent does not support,” Metro board chairman Jack Evans said. Hogan recently called for Evans to resign from the board, saying his outspoken rhetoric amounted to “juvenile outbursts.”

Board member Corbett Price, who also represents the District, called the Maryland resolution an act of “political theater” — a criticism that was echoed by Dorsey.

Discussion on the resolution was tabled.

The fracas was a preview of what is to come for the board, and for the region, which has five months to figure out how to pay for the budget for the fiscal year that begins July 1.

Following the meeting, Hogan’s office lambasted “a handful of obstructionist board members, led by Evans” for “actively working” to prevent potential progress on Metro.

“It’s time for the board to take action instead of talking about unrealistic tax increases that show no sign of materializing,” Hogan spokeswoman Amelia Chasse said in an email statement. “The governor is proposing an infusion of $2 billion additional dollars into Metro, and a number of board members are publicly opposing it. Can’t make this stuff up.”

In a separate development, Hogan’s plan won support from one influential Maryland lawmaker, Montgomery County Council President Roger Berliner (D-Potomac-Bethesda). Berliner has favored a regionwide sales tax to fund Metro, but he said Hogan’s plan was a realistic way to get the money Wiedefeld needs on a temporary basis.

“I do think [Hogan’s plan] is a bridge to a permanent solution,” Berliner said. “It’s got to be followed up by dedicated funding.”

Metro riders would face no fare increases or service cuts for the next 20 months, under Wiedefeld’s proposal, but the jurisdictions that fund the transit agency would pay more to subsidize its costs.

Metro is asking for a 3 percent increase, for a total of $29 million, in the operational subsidy from the District, Maryland and Virginia. That is significantly less than the $134 million that Metro sought last year.

He was able to hold down the request partly because the budget holds the line on expenses: The operating budget would increase by $12 million, or less than 1 percent, to about $1.84 billion.

But Wiedefeld is asking for a much bigger increase, $136 million, in the capital subsidy. He says the plan includes only the most critical projects required to keep the system safe and properly functioning.

Still, some jurisdictions have already said they cannot afford it. Some board members, however, still want the agency to provide more service.

The District’s acting director of transportation, Jeff Marootian, submitted a resolution Thursday for $1.2 million in new bus service that would be funded by the city and provide new routes along the 14th Street corridor and the Southwest waterfront.

Goldman, too, called for restoring some items — particularly increased bus service, eliminating the irksome Red Line turnbacks at Grosvenor-Strathmore station, and increasing funding for the Office of Inspector General.

“This [proposed budget] may be a little bit too bare-bones,” Goldman said. “We would like to look at additions.”

Price pointed out the irony of asking for more expenditures when the jurisdictions are already struggling with how to cover the original capital request.

“That’s poor governance, and that’s an insult to management as well,” Price said.

After the meeting, Goldman insisted there could be opportunities to restore some service without significantly affecting the budget.

“Look, this is a very big operating budget — over $1.8 billion,” he said. “What we’re talking about now are small amounts of money right on the edges.”

Wiedefeld said he’s happy to acquiesce to Goldman’s wishes — if someone is willing to pay for it.

“If we want to do more service, that’s great,” Wiedefeld said. “But we need to come up with the dollars to do it.”

The jurisdictions have stalled on finding common ground on a potential long-term revenue source that could funnel money into the system, with the District advocating for a 1 percent regionwide sales tax that has been rejected by Virginia and Maryland.

It is possible that the jurisdictions will be able to borrow much of the money to cover the capital costs for the coming fiscal year, though some local officials have said their municipalities have maxed out on borrowing capabilities.

It remains doubtful that the federal government will kick in anything extra.

“I think the feds would be willing to increase their funding of the system if they have confidence that the system is right-footed operationally and has adopted a sustainable operating model,” said board member David Horner, who represents the federal government. “They will not write checks for the status quo.”

Said Horner: “The question is whether the system can demonstrate viability and credibility to appropriators in Congress so that they have confidence the funds are well spent.”