Skip to main content

It seems like the NC Treasurer's Office has been against Perdue's I-485 plan since October

Though NCDOT asserts that the NC Treasurers Office was in support of Governor Perdue's design-build-finance plan to complete Interstate 485, recently released e-mails from the treasurer's office suggest otherwise.

In an article in the Charlotte Business Journal, a number of e-mails within the treasurer's office show a strong sense of skepticism to the non-traditional construction plan.

The strongest critic seems to be Deputy Treasurer Vance Holloman who considers the design-build-finance plan as 'wild'.

Holloman goes as far to say, "[NCDOT's plan] of paying interest and principal over 10 years is not permitted by GS (General Statute)."

The Governor's office has already stated that they have consulted with the State Attorney General's office and that the plan is legal.

It appears that the root of this squabble is how to finance the road. The treasurer's office prefers to use up to $400 million in GARVEE (Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicles) funds to fund the project. GARVEE funds do not go against the state's bond capacity. Something that the debt owed to the contractor in the design-build-finance plan would do.

However, the drawback with using GARVEE funds, NCDOT would have to reprioritize other projects. With Governor Perdue's campaign promise to Charlotte to start construction on the missing link of Interstate 485 in the balance, in addition to having limited transportation funds and a number of cities clamoring for completion of unbuilt freeway loops, it appears the NCDOT didn't want to anger Charlotte let alone the other cities again.

So now we wait for Attorney General Roy Cooper's office to come out and say whether or not this finance plan for I-485 is or is not prohibited by North Carolina's General Statutes.

Well it looks like Bev Perdue was right about one thing....she was going to get all parts of government and Raleigh and Charlotte working together...somehow I'd say this isn't exactly what she had in mind.

Story Links:
Legal concerns raised over I-485 financing plan ---WRAL
Documents: Treasurer was skeptical of I-485 Plan ---Charlotte Observer
Cat fight in Raleigh over I-485 -The CLog

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Yes, the color of your nearby fire hydrant matters...

...and here's why. You will find White, Red, Yellow and Violet colored fire hydrants pretty much everywhere.  But there's a reason for this - and it's because of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA).  This association has issued guidelines for color coding standards for fire hydrants.  These color codes from the body of the hydrant, top of the hydrant, and in some municipalities the outlet caps are designed to allow fire fighters to know what type of system, water flow rate (Gallons Per Minute or GPM), and level of water pressure.  This guideline is known as NFPA 291 and is intended to be used universally throughout the United States. The NFPA guidelines are specific to the body and the top cap of the hydrant.  If a hydrant is WHITE or YELLOW - it means that it is connected to a public/municipal water system.  If a hydrant is RED - the hydrant is connected to a private system, typically a well.  These are most common in rural or unincorporated areas

Phase 1 of the California State Route 132 West Expressway (in the making since 1947)

On September 15, 2022, the Phase 1 of the California State Route 132 West Expressway opened in the city of Modesto from California State Route 99 west to North Dakota Avenue.  Phase 1 of the California State Route 132 West Expressway was built upon a corridor which was tentatively to designated to become the branching point for Interstate 5W in the 1947 concept of the Interstate Highway System.  The present California State Route 132 West Expressway corridor was adopted by the California Highway Commission on June 20, 1956.  Despite almost being rescinded during the 1970s the concept of the California State Route 132 West Expressway corridor lingered on for over half a century and became likely the oldest undeveloped right-of-way owned by California Transportation Commission.  Pictured above is the planned California State Route 132 freeway west of US Route 99 in Modesto as featured in the May/June 1962 California Highways & Public Works.   The history of the California State Route

Aptos Creek Road to the Loma Prieta ghost town site

Aptos Creek Road is a roadway in Santa Cruz County, California which connects the community of Aptos north to The Forest of Nisene Marks State Parks.  Aptos Creek Road north of Aptos is largely unpaved and is where the town site of Loma Prieta can be located.  Loma Prieta was a sawmill community which operated from 1883-1923 and reached a peak population of approximately three hundred.  Loma Prieta included a railroad which is now occupied by Aptos Creek Road along with a spur to Bridge Creek which now the Loma Prieta Grade Trail.  The site of the Loma Prieta Mill and company town burned in 1942.   Part 1; the history of Aptos Creek Road and the Loma Prieta town site Modern Aptos traces its origin to Mexican Rancho Aptos.  Rancho Aptos was granted by the Mexican Government in 1833 Rafael Castro.  Rancho Aptos took its name from Aptos Creek which coursed through from the Santa Cruz Mountains to Monterey Bay.  Castro initially used Rancho Aptos to raise cattle for their hides.  Following