Road relinquishment proposal dead for now

“We will allow it to die for lack of a motion.”

Those were words uttered by Commissioner Brian Baird as the Johnson County Board of Commissioners decided to not approve a state road relinquishment agreement that had been heavily discussed for most of this month.

Last month, the Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) offered to relinquish control of portions of State Roads 44, 144 and 252 in exchange for about $35 million in federal funding to widen Smith Valley Valley Road near Interstate 69. The road would be widened to four lanes, which would cost about $55.6 million. Under this proposal, INDOT would pay for the majority of the project, officials said last month.

Control and maintenance of State Road 44 between Franklin and the Morgan County line; State Road 144 between Franklin and Bargersville; and State Road 252 between U.S. 31 and Trafalgar — 23.4 miles in all — would be transferred to the county from the state. Officials have been having discussions with INDOT for a while, looking at possible funding avenues for the project, and INDOT came forward with the proposal as an option, Highway Director Luke Mastin told the commissioners last month.

Under the proposed agreement, INDOT would pay for the design and construction of widening Smith Valley Road between Mullinix Road and Morgantown Road, with construction beginning in 2027-28. The county would have been responsible for the remaining $20.6 million, including $19.5 million for construction costs and $1.15 million for right-of-way acquisitions and any costs beyond the initial estimates, county documents show.

The proposal had caveats, however. If the roads were relinquished, INDOT would stop its work on construction projects currently planned for the roads, leaving the county to foot the bill. The highway department would need additional winter maintenance resources including two new truck drivers, at $63,000 a year each, and a new truck for the department’s main fleet — an estimated $200,000 expense, as well, according to county documents.

Since the agreement first came up, elected officials have expressed concerns about the timing of the agreement. On April 11, Mastin informed the commissioners and the Johnson County Council that a decision on the proposal had to be made by the end of the month. The short turnaround coincides with INDOT’s deadline for fund obligation, which is May, a month prior to the end of the state’s fiscal year, Mastin said. If the county had failed to meet that deadline and decided to go forward with relinquishment, the county would have to fund design and engineering for the project with local tax dollars, he said.

This short-time table and the need to discuss funding led to two special meetings on the agreement.

At the first meeting on April 20 – a special meeting of the county council – officials discussed how they would pay for the project if it was approved. The county council, after hearing from members of the public, highway department officials and commissioners, was ultimately able to say they had a way to fund the project if the commissioners chose to proceed.

During their regular meeting on Monday, the commissioners said they were hesitant to approve the proposal after further analysis showed the net benefits of the agreement would become outweighed by the costs in 112 years.

The commissioners also had questions about when the county would receive funds.

The county would have received about $24 million of the funds right away, Mastin said. The remaining $11 million would have been allocated for INDOT’s 2028 road work and those funds would not be received until 2028, he said.

Baird was concerned that the county would not receive the $11 million until 2028. Being that far out, something could happen to derail the federal government’s current plans to give the state money for road work, he said.

County council members expressed similar concerns during a second special meeting, when the council held a joint meeting with the commissioners Monday afternoon.

Council member Jim Ison said he was concerned that the $11 million allocation is not in a formal agreement. Walls said officials were confident that the INDOT officials they had been negotiating with would follow through, but acknowledged it is uncertain who would be in their position in six years.

Ison was skeptical of the road relinquishment proposal already, but the $11 million is a deal-breaker, he said. There might be a reason why the state wants to relinquish the roads that the county doesn’t know about, he said.

“We know that two of these three (state roads) are most likely going to have to be widened in the next 5-to-10 years,” Ison said. “I think we’re borrowing now for something we have to pay dividends on in the much nearer future than the 112 years.”

Council member Rob Henderson, who served on the Franklin’s city council when the city was considering an INDOT road relinquishment for State Road 44 through downtown Franklin, was initially in favor of this proposal. But after receiving the data and listening to the conversations officials have had, he is now against it.

The Franklin agreement allowed the city to have control of the timeline on improvements and was an overall benefit, Henderson said. However, the agreement presented to the county is too large of a scale, which outweighs any elements of control, he said.

“At the moment, I am not in favor of progressing with the relinquishment, especially knowing there’s an $11 million bogey out there right now,” Henderson said.

During a third special meeting on Friday, commissioners decided against proceeding with the agreement. The meeting began with Walls saying he was not going to move for approval of the agreement and an associated project coordination contract, and Baird allowed the motion to die. Commissioner Ron West was absent from the meeting.

Walls told Baird and other people in attendance at the meeting he had a long conversation with INDOT. While it was a good conversation, he did not believe the county was in a position to move forward with the current state of the contract, he said.

While the agreement is dead, Walls did say he plans to continue working with INDOT to see if a different solution could be reached. These discussions would likely not begin until June or July, Walls said.

“We’ve had a lot of good input from council, commissioners, highway department and I think we can move forward with the wants and the needs of the county at that point,” Walls said.

Baird said he appreciated the work everyone had done for the agreement and was disappointed officials couldn’t come to a better agreement. Maybe with time, officials could get there, he said.

Time was a major factor that ultimately led to the decision to not approve the agreement. The county ran out of time and the deal that was written was not advantageous for the residents of Johnson County, he said.