logo
Is federal funding for Washington Bridge rebuild over troubled water? Depends who you ask

Is federal funding for Washington Bridge rebuild over troubled water? Depends who you ask

Yahoo14-02-2025

Traffic flows both ways on Interstate 195 on the eastern side of the Washington Bridge at 4:35 p.m. on Friday, Feb. 14, 2025. The progress of the demolition of the western side is shown. (Rhode Island Department of Transportation)
Twenty-three Democratic attorneys general, including Rhode Island's Peter Neronha, have spent 18 days in an escalating legal battle with President Donald Trump and his administration over an attempted federal funding freeze.
Front and center in the flurry of federal court filings: the fate of the Washington Bridge, which relies on $220 million in federal grants awarded under the Biden administration to cover the still-unknown final cost to rebuild the westbound highway.
The bridge funding was again featured in an updated complaint filed in the U.S. District Court in Rhode Island Thursday, in which the AGs sought Chief Judge John McConnell Jr.'s reinforcement to force federal agencies to release grants and aid, some of which have been inaccessible since Jan. 20. As of Wednesday, there has been no confirmation that the Washington Bridge funding is unaffected by the freeze, the AGs wrote.
Rhode Island Department of Transportation Director Peter Alviti Jr. struck a very different tone when summoned by lawmakers to provide an update on the bridge project at a hearing Thursday.
Eight things to know from a three-hour Washington Bridge oversight hearing
Alviti insisted the pair of U.S. Department of Transportation grants already awarded to Rhode Island for the bridge replacement were not subject to the funding freeze.
'We lobbied strongly with the Federal Highway Administration that our particular projects did not fall into categories that that pause was intended to,' Aliviti said. 'It was not intended to impact projects other than projects having to do with certain policies like the Green New Deal policies, DEI policies.'
In an email Friday, Charles St. Martin, a RIDOT spokesperson, said the Federal Highway Administration shares Alviti's view that the Washington Bridge is not among the federal programs and awards at risk of losing funding under the Trump administration's executive orders.
'In addition to the Attorney General's suit to lift the pause, the Governor and our congressional delegation continue to work at various levels of the administration to ensure the grants move forward, St. Martin said. 'We are confident that will happen.'
Still not enough reassurance for Sen. Mark McKenney, a Warwick Democrat and chair of the Senate Committee on Rules, Government Ethics and Oversight. A day after the hearing, McKenney said he appreciated Alviti's confidence but recognized the need for caution.
'I hope it's well-founded confidence,' McKenney said in an interview Friday. 'Whether it is, I don't know. If I were a betting man, I would not be planning on that being the case.'
Neronha was not available for comment Friday.
If I were a betting man, I would not be planning on that being the case.
– Sen. Mark McKenney, a Warwick Democrat and chair of the Senate Committee on Rules, Government Ethics and Oversight
Alviti's confidence contrasts with the widespread confusion that descended across the nation after the now-infamous White House budget memo was issued on Jan. 27, and rescinded two days later. Even after McConnell issued a temporary restraining order on Jan. 31, barring federal agencies from freezing funds, state agencies, research institutions and grant beneficiaries are still not able to access the money.
Take, for example, the Rhode Island Office of Energy Resources (OER), which has been locked out of $125 million to support energy efficiency and renewable energy incentives for nearly three weeks. The funding was awarded to OER as part of a pair of Biden-era funding packages: the Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
Daniel Schwei, a U.S. Department of Justice attorney representing the Trump administration in the AGs lawsuit over the funding freeze, contended the bipartisan infrastructure law and accompanying tax package was not subject to the temporary restraining order. McConnell dismantled that interpretation in a new order Monday, explicitly stating that funding from both Congressional packages must continue to flow to state agencies and other beneficiaries.
The Justice Department subsequently appealed McConnell's order, but the U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals declined its request for an administrative stay, which would have prevented McConnell's order from taking immediate effect.
And yet, trillions of federal dollars for environmental programs, infrastructure, education, research and health and human services remain blocked, the AGs' Feb. 13 complaint alleges.
Robert Beadle, a spokesperson for OER, confirmed in an email Friday morning that the agency still can't access federal funds for its programs. A separate U.S. Department of Agriculture grant that has helped Rhode Island improve competitiveness for specialty crops for the last four years was frozen on Jan. 30, with funds still not available as of Wednesday, according to the AGs' complaint.
A hearing on the request for a more permanent block against a funding freeze is scheduled in federal court in Providence on Feb. 21.
Whether Rhode Island even needs federal funding to see the Washington Bridge project through to completion was called into question during Thursday's oversight hearings.
Minutes after stressing the importance of federal funding for replacement bridge projects across the state, Alviti told state lawmakers that there's enough money even without the federal grants to complete the bridge project.
'We have always made it a practice at DOT to have a plan A, plan B and plan C in place on any of our projects, and to make damn sure that before we start a project, we have the assurance of having the funds in place to be able to execute that,' Alviti said.
By Alviti's calculations, the state already has $713 million available to cover the bridge rebuild, offering ample wiggle room beyond the $400 million price estimate as of May 2024 . That includes up to $334 million in borrowing against future federal transportation funding — $140 million of which was authorized by Rhode Island Commerce Corporation in July — plus $50 million leftover from a prior federal grant, $35 million in unspent federal pandemic aid, and up to $100 million available through the state's long-term capital projects budget, Alviti said.
'It would be extremely advantageous for us to have these two funds, and necessary for us to have these two grants, or these three grants, actually move forward and be provided to us, but in their absence, we have the funding in place … to be able to build a bridge,' Alviti said.
But debt taken on by the state and repaid with future federal transportation funding may rely on the assumption that federal transportation funding will be available —- which might no longer be a guarantee.
'The notion that anything is a guarantee under Donald Trump is pure folly,' Rep. Matthew Dawson, an East Providence Democrat and attorney who formerly served as deputy chief of the AG's criminal division, said in an interview Friday. 'If the director wants to have optimism, that's his business. But I am not looking to him for guidance on that.'
We are confident that will happen.
– Charles St. Martin, a RIDOT spokesperson on availability of federal funding
McKenney saw Alviti's optimism as an attempt to win back public trust that has steadily eroded since the bridge was abruptly shuttered nearly 14 months ago.
But, 'Trust is won back by actions more than statements,' McKenney said.
Olivia DaRocha, a spokesperson for Gov. Dan McKee's office, issued a statement Thursday touting the progress achieved in demolishing the derelict bridge and advancing a solicitation to find a contractor to build its replacement.
'We are committed to accountability, which is why we are collaborating with the Office of the Attorney General on legal action,' DaRocha said, referring to the state's ongoing lawsuit against 13 contractors hired for design, construction, and inspection services on the existing highway.
DaRocha did not address the separate, federal lawsuit over the Trump administration's funding freeze, or potential implications for the Washington Bridge.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Judge strikes reference to ex-Illinois speaker Madigan's personal fortune from sentencing record
Judge strikes reference to ex-Illinois speaker Madigan's personal fortune from sentencing record

Yahoo

time17 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Judge strikes reference to ex-Illinois speaker Madigan's personal fortune from sentencing record

CHICAGO — A federal judge on Tuesday struck from the court record a reference to former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan's personal net worth of more than $40 million, agreeing with the Democrat's defense team that it should have been kept private, even as the attorneys acknowledged the move was 'hollow' given that it was already widely publicized. U.S. District Judge John Robert Blakey said he didn't find any 'bad faith' on the part of the federal prosecutors who included the figure in a filing last week ahead of Madigan's highly anticipated sentencing on Friday, but found that common practice would be to file such personal information under seal. Blakey's ruling came before the attorneys delivered arguments over sentencing guidelines at the Dirksen U.S. Courthouse, technically kicking off the sentencing process. Blakey took the matter under advisement until Friday's hearing. Federal prosecutors made Madigan's net worth public for the first time in a response to a sentencing memorandum filed by his attorneys, arguing that the defendant's 'greed is even more appalling given his law firm's success.' Daniel Collins, an attorney for Madigan, called the inclusion of the former speaker's personal fortune improper and a 'gratuitous effort' to publicly identify his net worth. 'It is not necessary to include the number in order for the government to make an argument about greed,' Collins said. But Assistant U.S. Attorney Sarah Streicker countered to the judge that the defense left the door open by arguing in filings that Madigan was solely motivated by a desire to help people. She also said the figure is relevant as the government seeks a fine in the case. 'It's fair for the government to rebut that narrative and show the defendant was motivated by greed not need,' Streicker said. 'This is a defendant that enjoyed every advantage and significant financial wealth and still turned to bribery and fraud.' In February, Madigan was convicted of 10 of 23 counts, including marquee allegations that he agreed to squeeze lucrative, do-nothing contracts from ComEd for pals such as former Ald. Frank Olivo and Ald. Michael Zalewski and precinct captains Ray Nice and Edward Moody, all while the utility won a series of major legislation victories. Madigan was also convicted on six of seven counts — including wire fraud and Travel Act violations — regarding a plan to get former Ald. Daniel Solis, a key FBI mole who testified at length in the trial, appointed to a state board. Jurors deadlocked on all six counts related to Madigan's co-defendant former ComEd lobbyist Michael McClain. _______

Trump's Double Standard On LA's Protests Couldn't Be More Glaring
Trump's Double Standard On LA's Protests Couldn't Be More Glaring

Yahoo

time17 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump's Double Standard On LA's Protests Couldn't Be More Glaring

WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump is warning those protesting against his unprecedented immigration crackdown in Los Angeles against targeting police officers and thousands of National Guard troops he's deployed there, promising to exact retribution on anyone who commits violence against them. 'Nobody's going to spit on our police officers. Nobody's going to spit on our military,' Trump told reporters on Monday, before posting on his social media website: 'IF THEY SPIT, WE WILL HIT, and I promise you they will be hit harder than they have ever been hit before. Such disrespect will not be tolerated!' But Trump felt differently about violence against law enforcement when he issued blanket pardons earlier this year for hundreds of people who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 in an effort to keep him in office after his loss to Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election. His pardons included those convicted of assaulting or interfering with police officers, roughly 1,000 nonviolent offenders and around 200 people accused of assaulting police. A number of those pardoned have reportedly since been rearrested for other alleged crimes. 'These are the hostages. Approximately 1,500 were pardoned. Full pardon,' Trump said after issuing the pardons on his first day in office. About 140 police officers were injured in the attack on the Capitol, something that Trump has called a 'beautiful day' despite being impeached by the U.S. House for inciting an insurrection by spreading lies about election fraud. 'Their hypocrisy just smacks you in the face,' Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who investigated the Capitol attack as a former member of the House, told HuffPost in response to Trump's response to LA's unrest. 'Violence is never appropriate. It wasn't appropriate on Jan. 6 and it's not appropriate in LA or anywhere else. We need to be consistent about that.' Trump quickly deployed thousands of troops to California over the weekend — including 700 U.S. Marines — despite no request from the state's governor, Gavin Newsom, who has warned the president's actions will further inflame the unrest. The protests initially began after Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agents executed raids at a Home Depot store in Los Angeles at the direction of the White House. As president on Jan. 6, 2021, however, Trump issued no order or formal request for National Guard troops to aid beleaguered U.S. Capitol police who were overrun by hundreds of his supporters. 'On Jan. 6, both the Democratic and Republican leadership in Congress were begging Donald Trump to make a statement, to call off the MAGA mob that invaded the Capitol,' Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) told HuffPost. 'People were begging him to call out the National Guard, and he sat there and did nothing, and now he's acting in a situation where the officials in charge are telling him that federalizing the National Guard and sending in the Marines will only exacerbate a situation which is under control.' Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the House speaker at the time, also slammed Trump for federalizing the National Guard and sending troops to Los Angeles, something he refused to do when Congress was under attack. 'We begged the president of the United States to send in the National Guard. He would not do it,' Pelosi told reporters on Tuesday. 'And yet, in a contra-constitutional way, he has sent the National Guard into California. Something is very wrong with this picture.' While Democrats have slammed Trump's response to the protests, Republicans are broadly welcoming the federal intervention in California — even those who have long espoused the importance of state's rights and the ability of local governments to enforce their laws. In 2024, for example, a group of 24 conservative House Republicans warned then-President Joe Biden not to federalize the Texas National Guard as some Texas Democratic lawmakers had been urging him to do, saying it would be an 'encroachment on Texas' constitutionally protected sovereignty.' Asked Tuesday if Trump is being inconsistent by sending troops to Los Angeles after pardoning Jan. 6 rioters, meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) dodged the question entirely. 'The issue that's in front of us is the chaos in LA. The political leadership there wasn't up to the task,' he said at his weekly press conference. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who has disagreed publicly with Trump's pardons of Jan. 6 rioters, said Democrats aren't being consistent on the issue by not sufficiently condemning violence in Los Angeles. 'I think Democrats who feel like the president is wrong to bring out force would be on firmer ground if they denounce the actions of violence in Los Angeles, Kenosha, and Portland,' he said, without specifying which Democrats have refused to speak out. Even Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a Libertarian-leaning voice in the Senate, suggested Trump was within his rights to federalize the National Guard and send troops into California without approval from the state's governor. 'Democrats have failed to have law and order,' Paul said. 'I've always preferred local law enforcement to federal but this is a time in which it looks as though the state government is resisting enforcing federal law.' It's not clear what federal law the senator is referring to. Newsom has also condemned violent protesters and urged the demonstrations to remain peaceful. 'The federal government is taking over the California National Guard and deploying 2,000 soldiers in Los Angeles — not because there is a shortage of law enforcement, but because they want a spectacle,' Newsom said Sunday. 'Don't give them one. Never use violence. Speak out peacefully,' he added. Arthur Delaney contributed reporting.

Kansas commission nominates two judges, private attorney for vacancy on Supreme Court
Kansas commission nominates two judges, private attorney for vacancy on Supreme Court

Yahoo

time17 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Kansas commission nominates two judges, private attorney for vacancy on Supreme Court

A nonpartisan nominating committee recommended Gov. Laura Kelly choose from among three nominees to fill a vacancy on the Kansas Supreme Court. Justice Evelyn Wilson is retiring July 4. (Tim Carpenter/Kansas Reflector) TOPEKA — A state judicial nominating commission unanimously recommended Tuesday that Gov. Laura Kelly choose from among two eastern Kansas district court judges and a soft-spoken attorney in private practice to fill an impending vacancy on the Kansas Supreme Court. The nonpartisan commission completed two days of interviews with 15 applicants before several rounds of voting narrowed the list to Douglas County District Court Judge Amy Hanley, Johnson County District Court Judge Christopher Jayaram and Leawood attorney Larkin Walsh. It would be the Democratic governor's fourth appointment to state's seven-justice Supreme Court. Justice Evelyn Wilson, who was diagnosed with the progressive neurodegenerative condition known as Lou Gehrig's disease, plans to retire July 4. She was appointed by Kelly in 2019, but took the oath in 2020. 'We had very good candidates, and that's important,' said Gloria Flentje, chairperson of the merit-selection commission. 'I hope that every time in the future it will be a hard decision because there are good candidates who want to be on the Kansas Supreme Court.' Hanley, who was appointed to the district court in 2016 by Republican Gov. Sam Brownback, was among top vote-getters in each of the rounds conducted by the commission. Before joining the bench, she argued 20 times before the state Supreme Court or Kansas Court of Appeals. She was a a special assistant U.S. attorney in Kansas and an assistant attorney general for Kansas. She earned a law degree at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa. 'I believe litigation experience is crucial to this position,' said Hanley, of Lawrence. 'I believe strongly in precedent.' She said one of the biggest challenges before the state Supreme Court was to respond to the tarnished public image of courts and judges in general. 'Public perception is something I believe is best addressed through education,' she said. Walsh, senior counsel at Stueve Siegel Hanson and a 2004 graduate of the University of Kansas law school, clerked for U.S. District Court Judge Carlos Murguia and was a research attorney for state Supreme Court Justice Carol Beier. Walsh's legal practice centered on civil cases in state and federal courts. More recently, she worked on plaintiffs' rights in labor and employment cases. Retired Kansas Court of Appeals Judge Steve Leben described Walsh in a reference letter as someone with 'intellectual humility.' 'I found that to be so moving,' Walsh said. 'It really brings a tear to my eye that someone would describe me that way. I am not a self-promoter. This is not my scene, but I do think a critical attribute of being a judge is to maintain that sense that you don't have all the answers.' The Leawood resident said the obligation of a state justice would be to maintain fidelity to the law, conduct careful reviews of facts and examine issues in the way parties framed them. 'Ego doesn't play a huge role in that,' said Walsh, who suggested the same skill was important in forming consensus among justices. 'Being the loudest or being the most inflexible or being the most aggressive is never the most effective.' Jayaram, who was appointed a district court judge in Johnson County by Kelly in 2021, said his 20-year legal career before that point focused on business litigation and health care matters. He was an attorney at Horn Aylward & Bandy and earned a law degree at Northwestern School of Law at Lewis and Clark College in Portland, Oregon. He said the text of the Kansas Constitution ought to be reviewed from a pragmatic standpoint without losing connection to actual words contained in the document. 'I don't think that you should overlook original words that are there,' said Jayaram, of Lenexa. He was questioned by the commission about how judges or justices ought to to handle personal political views when deciding cases. 'My job as a district court judge is really to not pay attention to what's popular and not popular,' Jayaram said. 'I'm not a political animal.' The issue holds relevance given some district court judges in Kansas — not Johnson County — were elected by popular vote rather than appointed by a governor. In addition, the August 2026 ballot in Kansas will include a proposed amendment to the constitution requiring election of Supreme Court justices. On the commission's fifth ballot, Jayaram edged out on a vote of 5-4 Robert Wonnell, who also served as a judge in the Johnson County District Court. The commission conducted the one-on-one runoff to determine the third finalist after Jayaram and Wonnel tied on the fourth ballot.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store