Greater Greater Washington

Politics


3 questions with Md. delegate candidate Scott Goldberg

Scott Goldberg is a candidate for the Maryland House of Delegates, District 16, which includes Bethesda. Scott lives in downtown Bethesda, and founded his own small property management company.

At his campaign kickoff, he expressed his support for the Purple Line in addition to detailed visions for alternative energy initiatives in Maryland. After the event, he enthusiastically explained some of his positions on issues for southwestern Montgomery County and the state.

1. What do you foresee as the the largest challenge to bringing the Purple Line as endorsed by Governor O'Malley, a project that you support, to groundbreaking?

According to the Purple Line engineering team, the metrics are in place for the FTA to fund the Purple Line. I believe that both Montgomery and Prince George's Counties will come through with funding on their end. My biggest concern is the ICC's fiscal situation. Like you, I question whether the ICC tolls will pay for the road's debt service. If the tolls aren't enough, the bond payments will further eat away at Maryland's transportation fund. Currently, ICC construction is on schedule for completion as the Purple Line finishes its engineering phase. As a member of the Maryland House of Delegates, I will work to responsibly appropriate adequate state funding to ensure that the Purple Line moves from engineering to groundbreaking.

Montgomery County has recently put a lot of emphasis on job growth in the biotech sector. The Purple Line will provide a major competitive advantage for the county and state because it will connect the NIH and private biotech companies in western Montgomery County with the tremendous human capital and research initiatives at the University of Maryland, in addition to points in between and east.

2. On your website, you endorse using more solar power as part of our strategy to become energy independent and carbon-neutral. How would such a Goldberg Plan work?

We would use a part of Maryland's rainy day fund as collateral at Maryland banks to borrow money at low interest rates for Maryland businesses to install panels on the roofs of state buildings. The funds would be extended to all Maryland counties and Baltimore to install solar panels on county (and Baltimore City) buildings.

County buildings include schools, which use less energy when students are on summer break. In the long run, Maryland will make money from selling the energy from the solar panels back to the grid.

I am also against drilling for oil off the east coast of the United States. I like Old Bay on my [Maryland Blue] crabs, not crude oil. I want future generations to enjoy the bounty of the Chesapeake Bay.

3. Recently, the Washington Post took note that Maryland's smart growth laws have been "toothless." As a delegate, what steps would you take to encourage other Maryland jurisdictions to enjoy the successes of Bethesda rather than the current car-dependent gridlock in neighboring Fairfax County, Virginia?

The Maryland House of Delegates has the state's purse strings. We should use the power of the purse to encourage Maryland jurisdictions to engage in Smart Growth planning.

For example, Prince George's County wants the state to help funding their hospital system. If Maryland contributes funding to the county, they should look for something in return. The state should require Prince George's County to plan new sustainable, traditional human-scale towns around their Metro stations. Maryland spent billions in previous decades and also pays the yearly WMATA operating and capital subsidy. The state should get more return for the investments.

We have learned that car-dependent sprawl doesn't work here in Montgomery County because the road construction and maintenance costs are threatening to be more than we can afford. We know that Maryland won't be able to afford lots of new road projects to create more car-dependent sprawl 25 years from now. Investing in our existing traditional towns and transit-oriented infill is far more cost-effective in the long term, as our experience with Bethesda has shown.

Disclosure: I reside in District 18.

Cavan Wilk became interested in the physical layout and economic systems of modern human settlements while working on his Master's in Financial Economics. His writing often focuses on the interactions between a place's form, its economic systems, and the experiences of those who live in them. He lives in downtown Silver Spring. 

Comments

Add a comment »

I just thought about something: it doesn't make a whole heck of a lot of sense to drive to a mass transportation stop when apartments and single-family townhomes can be built in and around the (in this case Metro) area. Branch Avenue is already started in the right direction; they need to add shoppes and end the monopoly of car-dealer leases to the remainder of that sprawled-out strip.

(I know this has little to do with MoCo, but I agree with Goldberg's point about better development around Metro Stations)

by C. R. on May 27, 2010 6:51 pm • linkreport

Mr. Goldberg may want to sensationalize this issue for his petty political gain but he is misleading the public. The toll revenue portion of the ICC backs bonds that are issued by the Maryland Transportation Authority, which is an independent agency of the State of Maryland. Those bonds are issued for the facilities owned by the Authority and include all toll roads in the State, toll revenue pays for operation and debt service, no taxpayer funds are involved. The likely revenue shortfall in projected ICC revenue will be the responsibility of the Transportation Authortiy as it will become one of its facilities. If they cannot finance the ICC's revenue bonds through toll revenue, then tolls would have to be raised statewide. Considering that tolls have not kept pace with inflation, and only remain so low becuase the other facilities have expired their bonds, now is the time to raise toll rates statewide. $2.50 is a bargain to cross the Bay Bridge, and only in one direction. Toll rates could easily be doubled statewide to pay for the ICC and a host of next-generation transportation projects including the third bay bridge and Eastern Bypass. I feel bad for people like Mr. Goldberg who misunderstand that the ICC will drive billions in economic development in suburban Maryland, will lead to the creation of the "Biotech Triangle" with Science City/Gaithersburg West, Science City II/FDA, and NIH at the apex. A hundred thousand high paying jobs for Maryland residents are at stake, and these jobs will be easily accessible and NOT IN VIRGINIA. The Purple Line and CCT are essential as well and should be expedited over any improvements to the Baltimore transit system. I dont live in Bethesda, but if I did misleading liberals such as Mr. Goldberg would definitely not get my vote!

by Cyrus on May 27, 2010 9:29 pm • linkreport

Thanks for the article. I'm a new resident of Bethesda and I hadn't heard of Scott before. I like what I've read so far. Everything I've heard about the ICC sounds terrible and I'm probably 'radical' because I think the purple line should be built as it's planned now and also be extended to cross the potomac and connect to east falls church or wherever the silver line connects to the orange line.

by James on May 28, 2010 1:10 pm • linkreport

@Cyrus
Respectfully, I think you are incorrect in saying that the ICC is being funded out of MdTa tolls. That is only partially true. According to AASHTO, the ICC's funding sources are:

"Federal funds
GARVEE bonds - $750 million (backed by future Federal aid receipts)
Special Federal funds - $19 million (National Corridor Planning and Border Infrastructure Program funding, SAFETEA-LU National Corridor Improvement Program and high priority project funding)
Additional funds from GARVEE sale - $17 million

State funds:
MdTA Toll Revenue bonds - $716 million (backed by future MdTA system toll revenue)
TIFIA loan - $516 million (backed by future MdTA system toll revenue)
State of Maryland Transportation Trust Fund - $180 million (motor fuel tax receipts, motor vehicle excise taxes, motor vehicle fees, corporate income taxes, operating revenues)
State of Maryland General Fund - $265 million
Future Anticipated Funding - $103 million"
(http://www.transportation-finance.org/projects/inter_county_connector.aspx)

This breaks out to roughly 52% of the cost of the ICC coming from non-MdTa toll revenue sources.

Regardless of the ICC sucking up most of the state's future toll revenue to support just one highway, it crowds out other projects that the federal funds or the state's general fund could have been used for. This means a dimmer outlook for the new road projects you mentioned (as well as the transit projects I would prefer). All of this for a highway that will generate additional congestion, emissions, and frustration. Yes new jobs will be generated, however the benefits of alternative projects outweighed the benefits of the ICC. Your argument is using a false question, MD did not have to choose between the ICC or the status quo. MD chose the ICC from a menu of options that all had their marginal costs and benefits when compared to the ICC. Personally, I think Ehrlich chose incorrectly.

by AdamG on May 28, 2010 2:01 pm • linkreport

Ehrlich chose incorrectly in purpose. His resurrecting the ICC from the dead was his attempt to kill the Purple Line.

As candidate Goldberg says, we need to make sure that he doesn't get his wish by responsibly appropriating state funds.

by Cavan on May 28, 2010 2:06 pm • linkreport

AdamG, I never claimed that the ICC is being entirely toll funded. I took issue with Mr. Goldberg's claim that the toll revenue shortages will jeopardize statewide transit projects. You are misrepresenting my claims. In fact this is a common tactic employed by anti-ICC people to mislead those that do not understand the funding mechanism. TOLL REVENUE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TRANSPORTATION TRUST FUND BONDING CONSTRAINTS.

The ICC is crucial to the creation of 100,000 new jobs in Montgomery County. The Purple Line will create minimal new jobs from the office space already approved to be built in Silver Spring and Bethesda. I do not refute the benefits of the Purple Line for regional mobility and I support the project, however, it will not create significant new jobs in Montgomery County. The main benefit is to raise local property values and allowing for the redevelopment of low-quality low-income housing stock into luxury housing. Both projects will raise significant tax revenues for the county government and both projects are essential to economic prosperity in Montgomery County. Please do not use ACT/NBM tactics to marginalize other viewpoints.

by Cyrus on May 29, 2010 1:43 pm • linkreport

Cyrus- Sorry but I Strongly Believe that these people that display Extreme Prejudice against Highway Building in Maryland are complete Maryland Hating Communists that wish for ALL of the Employment Growth, Upscale Development, Modernize Freeway Building/Widening, and High Speed Subway Rails to mostly Remain in Northern Virginia....

Their main goal is to Sabotage ALL Forms of Revenue, Business, and Economic Growth in Maryland while promoting it in Virginia........

Soo this Character reppin' Bethesda is nothing but a Maryland Hating Opportunist possibly being sponsored by the Powers that be from Northern Virginia........

by tim on Jun 2, 2010 11:26 pm • linkreport

Add a Comment

Name: (will be displayed on the comments page)

Email: (must be your real address, but will be kept private)

URL: (optional, will be displayed)

Your comment:

By submitting a comment, you agree to abide by our comment policy.
Notify me of followup comments via email. (You can also subscribe without commenting.)
Save my name and email address on this computer so I don't have to enter it next time, and so I don't have to answer the anti-spam map challenge question in the future.

or