Theodore R. McKeldin, Governor                 1657

the future and ignores existing realities arising from various factors,
among which are the following:

1.   Actual construction costs are now approximately 30% in excess
of original program estimates. This results from the continued rise
in labor and material costs, changes in highway design effectively to
meet the needs of increased traffic flows, and similar items.

2.   Accelerated and added charges against current construction
funds for which there is no replacement source. A prime example is
the assumption pursuant to legislative enactment of seven million
dollars in costs for the Baltimore County Beltway to provide treat-
ment for that subdivision similar to that accorded to other areas,
but not originally contemplated by the 12-year program. Another
example is the accelerated redemption of Patuxent River Bridge
Bonds at a cost of $1,500,000. While most of this expenditure would
probably have been required ultimately, its payment in one year of
the program immediately depleted construction funds to that extent,
in accordance with legislative enactment.

3.   Maintenance, both ordinary and emergency, has been taken in
increasing amounts from construction funds pursuant to legislative
authorizations, as a necessary concomitant of the deferment of the
increase in registration fees, which was to have provided funds for
this work. The original authority for the Commission to transfer up
to two million dollars per year from construction and maintenance
funds has been successively increased to three million dollars, and now
to four million dollars. In addition, there has been created by statute
an annual fund of $1,500,000 for emergency work, likewise trans-
ferable from construction funds. These are some of the factors
which, of necessity, are slowly but surely cutting down the program-
ming of work within the scheduled periods of the program. Within
the next year, it is not only probable but a virtual certainty that the
continuing impact of these factors, and others, will be such as defi-
nitely to require imposition of the increased fees if the program is to
be maintained approximately within its schedule and the various
sections of the State accorded equal treatment in execution of road
improvements as proposed, and in effect promised, by the original
legislative enactment. The uncertain factor until recently has been
the question of effect of increased federal funds upon the program.
Although there is still uncertainty as to the ultimate amount of
Federal Contributions available for work which is a part of the pro-
gram, it is obvious that these contributions will be much more sub-
stantial than ever contemplated originally. However, the present ex-
perience of the State Roads Commission with State contributions for
highways in the Federal Interstate System makes it apparent that
our contributions will in many instances equal, and even exceed,
the cost of the program work for which the substitution is made.
In some instances, of course, our required contribution will be less,
but there is no reasonable basis, especially in the light of other
increased and added costs and changes as outlined above, to expect
that Federal funds will free any appreciable amount of construction
money for other purposes or lessen the ever increasing burden.

It would appear that the present policy of year to year review and
deferment which has just been sanctioned again by me should be
continued. No possible harm can result from continuance of this
program of continuing review while irreparable damage may well