In a prior post, Paul O’Malley posed a question about the non-compete provision in the proposed Toll Road lease. It was hard enough to find and is an important enough question, that I thought I’d make it the subject of a separate post.
One of the things that the State gives up in return for the $3.4 billion Toll Road payment is the right to improve US 20 such that it becomes a “comparable highway” or otherwise build a “competing highway.”
With respect to US 20, this means that the State cannot make that highway “a divided 4 or more controlled access interstate quality highway with interchanges, interstate quality bridges or combination or portion thereof.” With respect to other roads, the State cannot build any newly-constructed interstate quality, divided 4 lane roads, at least 20 continuous miles of which is within 10 miles of the highway.
The “non-compete” provision can be found at Section 14.1(e) of the Agreement, with the relevant definitions found at Section 1.1 (page 4).
Unless the construction constitutes a Competing Highway, development, redevelopment, construction, maintenance, modification or change in the operation of any existing or new mode of transportation (including a road street or highway) is not prohibited.
And (like the spice) the Governor’s bribes must flow. In today’s South Bend Tribune St. Rep. J. Walorski explained her support for the bill based on ” an amendment that diverts $100 million in lease proceeds to a new regional development authority in Elkhart, LaGrange and Steuben counties. Distributions would flow in annual increments of $10 million for 10 years.” I wonder whom the Governor is taking this chump change from?