Regardless of their affinity towards public-private partnerships, every interviewee stated that in order for PPPs to come to fruition there has to be strong leadership from the top. The governor has to be a political champion and there must be corresponding support from the state's legislature. Over the years, Virginia governors have emphatically supported PPPs regardless of their political affiliation. They have also faced little opposition from their state legislature. Support for PPPs in Maryland in the past three administrations (Glendening, Ehrlich, and O'Malley) has varied and both the executive and legislative bodies lack consensus on the issue. Former Maryland Governor Robert Ehrlich and Transportation Secretary Robert Flanagan were more interested in addressing transportation issues with public-private partnerships than the current administration. Examples of their support include:
• In 2003, the Maryland Senate passed the Public-Private Transportation Act of 2003 (SB 497), however, the House version of the bill (HB 1162) never made it out of the Environmental Affairs Committee. A senior ranking official in the Ehrlich administration told us that they were interested in taking a PPP approach for the Intercounty Connector (ICC). However, because the bill failed in the General Assembly and they could not achieve consensus, the administration decided to abandon the PPP approach for the already controversial and long-awaited ICC project. In this person's opinion, political consensus between the executive and legislative bodies was critical for a project of that magnitude.
• In 2004, in order to gain a better understanding of PPP highway programs, the Department of Transportation, along with MDTA and the State Highway Administration, commissioned a review of highway PPP initiatives in various parts of the country (Current Practices in Public-Private Partnerships for Highways).
• In 2006, the Ehrlich administration initiated a Request for Expressions of Interest (REI) for private sector suggestions on adding capacity to the I-270 corridor. The administration envisioned using PPPs to expedite projects that the state could not fund. The state received numerous responses in December 2006 just before Governor Ehrlich left office. The current administration asserts that they are still reviewing the responses but we have not seen any evidence that the state is moving forward with any sort of PPP project for the I-270 corridor.
Governor O'Malley's administration has not exactly decried public-private partnerships but neither have they become a leading supporter of them. This past May, Congressman Oberstar and Congressman DeFazio sent a letter to state governors and legislators urging them to avoid rushing into PPPs for highway projects that are not in the long-term interest of the public (see Appendix E). MDOT officials told us that Maryland shares the same concerns of the Congressmen, but maintained that PPPs are a "tool for the toolbox" and they will always consider them as an option on a case-by-case basis. The leadership in Virginia had a different response to the Oberstar-DeFazio letter. Transportation Secretary Pierce Homer said that the letter had "good intentions" but disagreed with them on the need for tolling to generate critically needed revenue as well as the advantages tolling has in managing congestion. He also pointed to the success Virginia has had with PPPs and how they have been able to deliver highway projects on budget and in shorter timeframe than traditional means.46
Governor O'Malley's primary focus so far has been on resolving the state's budget crisis. While he has promised to put $400 million a year into the state's transportation fund, there is no mention of taking on new mega-projects beyond current commitments, most notably that of the Capital Beltway. There is also almost zero evidence pointing to support by Governor O'Malley's for PPPs for new highway projects. In a June 2007 speech to the Washington Board of Trade regarding the building of Maryland's transportation infrastructure, there was no mention of using or even considering the use of PPPs to finance new projects. He also did not mention adding capacity to the Capital Beltway, but instead discussed the Purple Line, the Intercounty Connector, and the Metro system. However, Maryland officials did acknowledge that if a "mega" project came forward and needed to be delivered quickly, they would more than likely need a vehicle other than what is currently in place to bring the project to fruition. Therefore, they would consider the option of financing the project through a public-private partnership.