Misplaced Pages

Opposition to Maryland Route 200: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:36, 13 March 2011 editUnscintillating (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users12,833 edits →See also: new section with links to I-69 controversy and protests← Previous edit Latest revision as of 02:40, 10 March 2018 edit undoThe Transhumanist (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers302,857 edits Add template{{R to section}} to categorize redirect using AWB 
(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
#REDIRECT ]
{{sections|date=March 2011}}
{{mergeto|Maryland Route 200|date=March 2011}}
<!-- Please do not remove or change this AfD message until the issue is settled -->
{{Article for deletion/dated|page=Opposition to Maryland Route 200|timestamp=20110306045320|year=2011|month=March|day=6|substed=yes}}
<!-- For administrator use only: {{Old AfD multi|page=Opposition to Maryland Route 200|date=6 March 2011|result='''keep'''}} -->
<!-- End of AfD message, feel free to edit beyond this point -->
{{rescue}}


{{R to section}}
''']''' (MD 200) has gained '''opposition''' from several groups, including the ] and the Prince George's County Council. MD 200, more commonly known as the Intercounty Connector or ICC, is a partially-completed toll freeway under construction in ], ]

Members of the Maryland General Assembly stated opposition in the Spring 2008<ref>{{cite news
| title = Opponents Want Legislature to Halt Construction
| author=Katherine Shaver
| publisher = Washington Post
| date = 2008-03-18
| url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/17/AR2008031702426.html
| accessdate = 2008-10-15 }}</ref> and Spring 2009 sessions, the 1998 session,<ref>{{cite web
| title = County's legislative delegation takes public's pulse at hearings
| publisher = The Gazette
| date=1997-10-29
| url =http://www.gazette.net/gazette_archive/1997/199744/montgomerycty/county/a63304-1.html
| accessdate=2008-12-05 }}</ref> and back to 1979, when a bill introduced in the General Assembly by Delegate ] proposed to eliminate funding for a study of the ICC and the never-built Rockville Facility highway project.<ref>{{Cite news
| author =Kathryn Tolbert
| title=Delegates to Join Highway Protest
| newspaper=]
| page=MD3
| date=1980-10-23
| accessdate=2009-04-16
| url= }}
''not available from the free ] site, but is available (for a fee) from the Post . ''</ref>
In 1980, a bill proposed by Delegate Idamae Garrott to forbid the Maryland Department of Transportation from even studying the matter of new highways running east and west between Montgomery and Prince George's Counties was tabled by the Montgomery County Delegation.<ref>{{Cite news
| title=Bill to Halt Study of Highway Rejected
| newspaper=]
| page=MD4
| date=1980-10-30
| accessdate=2009-04-14
| url= }}
''not available from the free ] site, but is available (for a fee) from the Post . ''</ref>

In the 1998 session, House Bill 817 was introduced to prohibit MDOT from spending funds or granting approvals to the ICC project, and House Bill 905 was intended to stop the operation of a toll highway altogether.<ref name=hb817>{{citation|title=House Bill 817|url=http://mlis.state.md.us/1998rs/billfile/hb0817.htm|year=1998|publisher=]|accessdate=March 7, 2011}}</ref><ref name=hb905>{{citation|title=House Bill 905|url=http://mlis.state.md.us/1998rs/billfile/hb0905.htm|year=1998|publisher=]|accessdate=March 7, 2011}}</ref> Both bills failed to pass. In 2004, House Bill 732 proposed a similar statement to House Bill 817, extended to include the MdTA.<ref name=hb732>{{citation|title=House Bill 732|url=http://mlis.state.md.us/2004rs/billfile/hb0732.htm|year=2004|publisher=]|accessdate=March 7, 2011}}</ref> The 2007 Special Session saw the offering of House Bill 37 to prevent construction of the road. Both of these bills also failed to pass.<ref name=hb37>{{citation|title=House Bill 37|url=http://mlis.state.md.us/2007s1/billfile/hb0037.htm|year=2007|publisher=]|accessdate=March 7, 2011}}</ref> In the 2008 session, two bills proposing to cancel or delay the project were introduced – House Bill 1416 and House Bill 1471.<ref name=hb1416>{{citation|title=House Bill 1416|url=http://mlis.state.md.us/2008rs/billfile/hb1416.htm|year=2008|publisher=]|accessdate=March 7, 2011}}</ref><ref name=hb1471>{{citation|title=House Bill 1471|url=http://mlis.state.md.us/2008rs/billfile/hb1471.htm|year=2008|publisher=]|accessdate=March 7, 2011}}</ref> House Bill 1471 proposed to elimiate funding for the road, and, if it had passed, would trigger "liquidated damage clauses that would require it to pay the contractors an estimated $80.0 million upon cancellation of the contracts," according to the Fiscal Note prepared by the state's Department of Legislative Services.<ref>{{cite web
| title = FISCAL AND POLICY NOTE - House Bill 1471
| publisher = Maryland
| pages =
| url = http://mlis.state.md.us/2008rs/fnotes/bil_0001/hb1471.pdf
| format = PDF
| author=Michael C. Rubenstein
| date = 2008-03-17
| accessdate = 2008-12-05 }}</ref> Both bills failed.

In the 2009 session, a bill proposing to cancel funding for the ICC was pre-filed by Delegate Barbara A. Frush – House Bill 27.<ref name=hb27>{{citation|title=House Bill 27|url=http://mlis.state.md.us/2009rs/billfile/hb0027.htm|year=2009|publisher=]|accessdate=March 7, 2011}}</ref> This bill had not attracted any co-sponsors nor had it been scheduled for a hearing.<ref>{{cite web
| title = Delegate: Maryland shouldn't fund ICC
| author=Kevin James Shay
| publisher = The Gazette
| date = 2009-01-21
| url =http://www.gazette.net/stories/01212009/burtnew213928_32480.shtml
| accessdate = 2009-01-25 }}</ref> A similar bill, Senate Bill 753, was filed in the Maryland Senate by Sen. E. J. Pipkin and others.<ref>{{cite web
| title = Fiscal and Policy Note - Senate Bill 753 (Senator Pipkin, ''et al.'') - Transportation - Intercounty Connector - Elimination of Funding
| author = Amanda Mock
| url = http://mlis.state.md.us/2009rs/fnotes/bil_0003/sb0753.pdf
| format = PDF
| date = 2009-03-17
| accessdate = 2009-03-28 }}</ref> The Maryland Politics Watch blog opined that Pipkin's co-sponsorship of SB 753 may be related to his possible desire to run again for the ] ] seat.<ref>{{cite web
| title = Pipkin’s ICC Gambit
| author=Adam Pagnucco
| publisher = Maryland Politics Watch
| date = 2009-03-12
| url =http://maryland-politics.blogspot.com/2009/03/pipkins-icc-gambit.html
| accessdate = 2009-03-28 }}</ref> Both bills failed in the 2009 session. House Bill 27 received an unfavorable report from the House of Delegates Appropriations Committee on March 28, 2009; and no action was taken on Senate Bill 753 prior to adjournment on April 13, 2009, though a hearing was scheduled on March 18, 2009 before the Senate Budget and Taxation Committee.

The position of the County Council of ] in opposition to the ICC has been repeatedly cited by opposition groups, and its 2003 resolution on the subject, CR-32-2003, was adopted on June 10, 2003, where it called for alternatives to the road.<ref>Not directly available on the Web, but the resolution (in ] format), can be found through a search of the for Resoution CR-32-2003</ref>
In 2007, the Prince George's County Council passed resolution CR-59-2007,<ref>Also not directly available on the Web, but the resolution (in ] format), can be found through a search of the for Resoution CR-59-2007</ref> which repeats much of what was stated in CR-32-2003, including the language endorsing the ICC in Prince George's County.

In November 2006, environmental groups announced that they were preparing to file suit in order to delay or stop the project,<ref> {{cite news
| author = Eric M. Weiss
| title = Clean Air Act Cited In Expected Lawsuit
| publisher = Washington Post
| date = 2006-11-02
| url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/01/AR2006110103155.html
| accessdate = 2009-07-23 }}</ref> and
lawsuits aimed at halting construction<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/traffic/bal-md.icc21dec21,0,6869717.story |title=Two lawsuits filed against ICC}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/20/AR2006122000931.html |title=Federal Agency Sued Over Environmental Study | work=The Washington Post | first=Katherine | last=Shaver | date=2006-12-21 | accessdate=2010-05-20}}</ref> were filed by environmental groups and affected residents, assisted in part by ] legal counsel from the Institute for Public Representation of the Georgetown University Law Center.<ref> {{cite web
| author = Sean R. Sedam
| title = Intercounty Connector foes file intent to sue
| publisher = The Gazette
| date = 2006-11-08
| url = http://www.gazette.net/stories/110806/montcou174917_31939.shtml
| accessdate = 2009-04-16 }}</ref><ref> For an extensive summary of the legal issues raised by the plaintiffs in the lawsuits, see: {{cite web
| title = State & Federal Agencies Violated Law on Protecting Public Health, Environment and Communities, Charge Residents and Environmental Groups in Legal Challenge.
| publisher = PR Newswire
| date = 2006-12-20
| url = http://www.articlearchives.com/environment-natural-resources/pollution/1945302-1.html
| accessdate = 2009-04-22 }}</ref> One of those lawsuits was originally filed in the ] (possibly as part of a ] effort to avoid having the ] hear the case on appeal <ref>{{cite web
| title = Sierra Club’s ICC Lawsuit Moved To U.S. District Court for Maryland
| publisher = The Montgomery County Sierran
| date=June/July 2007
| pages =
| url = http://maryland.sierraclub.org/montgomery/sections/June_July_2007_newsletter.pdf
| format = PDF
| accessdate = 2008-07-01 }} {{Dead link|date=November 2010|bot=H3llBot}} The article states, in part, "... some concern about having the matter heard in Maryland, ''because appeals of decisions reached by the District Court for Maryland are heard by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, which is one of the most conservative in the country on environmental matters''" (emphasis added)</ref> - though the ], which would have heard any appeals from the D.C. federal court, had ruled against the Sierra Club and allied groups<ref>The City of Alexandria, Virginia had been the lead plaintiff in this case, but settled out of court on 1 March 1999, leaving the Sierra Club and several allied groups as the plaintiffs/appellees, see the settlement agreement here: http://www.wilsonbridge.com/pdfs/rodReport/Attachment%204%20-%20Settlement%20Agreement.pdf.</ref> on similar legal issues in reversing a lower court on a case involving the proposal to reconstruct and widen the ] in 1999)<ref> {{cite court
| litigants= City of Alexandria, Virginia, et al., Appellees v. Rodney E. Slater, Secretary, U.S. Department of Transportation, et al., Appellants
| vol=198
| reporter=F.3d
| opinion=862
| court=United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
| date=1999
| url=http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199912/99-5220a.txt }}, see also for a discussion of the Wilson Bridge case here: http://www.achp.gov/book/case153.html</ref> but ] of the D.C. federal court ordered the matter transferred to federal court in Maryland on May 17, 2007 and the suits were consolidated. After hearings in October 2007,<ref>{{cite news
| title = Agencies Accused of Wrongly Approving Md. Highway Study
| author=Katherine Shaver
| publisher = Washington Post
| date = 2007-10-02
| url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/01/AR2007100101993.html
| accessdate = 2008-07-08 }}</ref> both lawsuits were dismissed in their entirety on November 8, 2007 by ] of the ] in a 105-page memorandum opinion.<ref> {{cite court
| litigants= Audubon Naturalist Society of the Central Atlantic States, Inc., Environmental Defense, et al. v. United States Department of Transportation, et al.
| opinion=AW-06-3386 and AW-07-1480 (Consolidated)
| court=U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
| date=2007-11-08
| url=http://www.mdd.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Opinions/06-3386%20Memo%20Op%20DENY%20PL%20MSJ.pdf |format=PDF}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
| title = ICC Construction Can Move Forward
| publisher = Associated Press (via WTOP Radio website)
| date = 2007-11-08
| url = http://www.wtop.com/?nid=25&sid=1288826
| accessdate = 2007-11-09 }} </ref><ref>{{cite web
| title = Judge Rules ICC Construction Can Go Ahead
| publisher = NBC4
| date = 2007-11-08
| url = http://www.nbc4.com/traffic/14538852/detail.html
| accessdate = 2007-11-08 }} </ref><ref>{{cite news
| title = Judge Paves the Way For Long-Delayed ICC
| publisher = Washington Post
| date = 2007-11-09
| url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/08/AR2007110801537.html
| accessdate = 2007-11-09
| first=Katherine
| last=Shaver}} </ref><ref>{{cite web
| title = Court throws out enviros' suit to block start on Maryland Inter County Connector tollroad
| publisher = TOLLROADSnews
| date = 2007-11-08
| url = http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/3239
| accessdate = 2007-11-09 }} </ref><ref>{{cite web
| title = Court Rules Against Obstructionists Gives ICC Green Light
| publisher = Northern Virginia Transportation Alliance
| date = 2007-11-08
| url = http://www.nvta.org/content.asp?contentid=1598
| accessdate = 2007-11-20 }} </ref><ref>{{cite web
| title = ICC is a go, judge says
| publisher = The Gazette
| date = 2007-11-09
| url = http://www.gazette.net/stories/110907/montnew121442_32378.shtml
| accessdate = 2007-11-09 }} </ref><ref>{{cite news
| title = Judge rules against environmentalists, for Intercounty Connector
| publisher = Washington Business Journal
| date = 2007-11-08
| url = http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2007/11/05/daily40.html
| accessdate = 2007-11-11
| first=Erin
| last=Killian}} </ref>

'']'' described the decision handed down by the court as a "victory for both Governor ], who backs construction of the road, and a measure of vindication for former Governor ], who made it the top transportation priority of his administration."<ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Md. gets OK for intercounty highway
| work =
| publisher = Baltimore Sun
| date = 2007-11-08
| url = http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/traffic/bal-icc1108,0,3186913.story
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2007-11-09 }} {{Dead link|date=November 2010|bot=H3llBot}} </ref>
After the opinion was released, environmental groups opposed to the ICC stated that they would "consider their legal options before deciding whether to continue their battle"<ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Environmental Groups, Local Residents Express Disappointment in Court Ruling on Intercounty Connector, Vow to Consider Legal Options
| work =
| publisher = Environmental Defense
| date = 2007-11-08
| url = http://www.environmentaldefense.org/pressrelease.cfm?contentID=7314
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2007-11-09 }}</ref>
and some homeowners near the selected route expressed disagreement with the ruling of the court.<ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = ICC neighbors decry ruling that allows road to proceed
| work =
| publisher = The Gazette
| date = 2007-11-14
| url = http://www.gazette.net/stories/111407/montnew63504_32356.shtml
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2007-11-15 }}</ref> On January 7, 2008, it was announced that Environmental Defense and the Sierra Club would appeal Judge Williams' decision to the ] in ], Virginia.<ref>{{cite news
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Environmentalists Plan an Appeal
| work =
| publisher = Washington Post
| author = Miranda S. Spivack
| date = 2008-01-08
| url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/07/AR2008010703246.html
| doi =
| accessdate = 2008-09-18 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Foes of ICC file appeal in U.S. court
| work =
| publisher = Baltimore Sun
| author = Michael Dresser
| date = 2008-01-09
| url = http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/traffic/bal-md.br.icc09jan09,0,478331.story
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2008-06-01 }} {{Dead link|date=November 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Environmental Groups Appeal Ruling on ICC
| work =
| publisher = Associated Press (via WTOP Radio website)
| date = 2008-01-07
| url = http://www.wtop.com/?nid=30&sid=1286119
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2008-01-07 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Environmental Defense Appeals Intercounty Connector Ruling
| work =
| publisher = Reuters
| date = 2008-01-07
| url = http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS213739+07-Jan-2008+PRN20080107
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2008-01-07 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Environmental groups appeal ICC ruling
| work =
| publisher = The Gazette
| date = 2008-01-09
| url = http://www.gazette.net/stories/010908/montnew84509_32363.shtml
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2008-01-11 }}</ref> In April 2008, persons and groups opposed to the ICC held an "Irish wake" to draw attention to the impact of the ICC,<ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Neighborhood 'wake' in Derwood will highlight impact of ICC
| work =
| publisher = The Gazette
| date = 2008-04-23
| url = http://www.gazette.net/stories/042308/burtnew210519_32363.shtml
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2008-05-05 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news
| last = St. George
| first = Donna
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Derwood Residents Rally Against Highway
| work =
| publisher = Washington Post
| date = 2008-04-27
| url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/26/AR2008042601983.html
| doi =
| accessdate = 2008-05-05 }}</ref> and an op-ed in '']'' was printed which raised objections to the ICC.<ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Mass Trans***
| author=Matt Dernoga
| work =
| publisher = ]
| date = 2008-04-03
| url = http://media.www.diamondbackonline.com/media/storage/paper873/news/2008/04/03/Opinion/Dernoga.Mass.Transhit-3299371.shtml
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2009-04-20 }} </ref>

In June 2008, protests against the ICC were held at Dr. Charles R. Drew Elementary School in Silver Spring. The participants claimed that ICC construction should be halted because of air pollution impacts on pupils at the school, though it was reported that Governor O'Malley has no plans to do so.<ref>{{cite news
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Students, Parents of School Next to Proposed Road Ask Governor to Halt Construction
| author=Katherine Shaver
| work =
| publisher = Washington Post
| date = 2008-06-25
| url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/24/AR2008062401150.html
| doi =
| accessdate = 2008-06-30 }}</ref> In August 2008, '']'' published a letter to the editor from the executive director of the ] calling on the ] to "cancel the ICC."<ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Md. can't afford to build the ICC
| author=Stewart Schwartz
| work =
| publisher = Baltimore Sun
| date = 2008-08-07
| url = http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/letters/bal-ed.le.letters07a0aug07,0,2152631.story
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2008-08-07 }} {{Dead link|date=November 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref> In September 2008, '']'' columnist Dan Rodricks wrote an anti-ICC opinion piece<ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = ICC? It's time to see to more urgent needs instead
| author=Dan Rodricks
| work =
| publisher = Baltimore Sun
| date = 2008-09-21
| url = http://www.baltimoresun.com/services/newspaper/printedition/sunday/ideas/bal-id.rodricks21sep21,0,416278.column
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2008-10-10 }} {{Dead link|date=November 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref> asserting that the ICC was the "Intercounty Anachronism". Rodricks' column was first rebutted by a letter to the editor by Montgomery County Councilmember (D-At Large)<ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Better mobility boosts economy
| author=Nancy Floreen
| work =
| publisher = Baltimore Sun
| date = 2008-09-29
| url = http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/letters/bal-ed.le.letters29s10sep29,0,7001146.story
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2008-10-10 }} {{Dead link|date=November 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref> and then in a longer op-ed by SHA Administrator Neil Pedersen.<ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = A worthwhile investment
| author=Neil J. Pedersen
| work =
| publisher = Baltimore Sun
| date = 2008-10-10
| url = http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.icc10oct10,0,6616972.story
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2008-10-10 }}</ref> Also in September 2008, '']'' published an op-ed by state delegate (D-District 20) suggesting that the ICC be canceled.<ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Scrap the ICC
| author=Heather R. Mizeur
| work =
| publisher = The Gazette
| date = 2007-09-25
| url = http://www.gazette.net/stories/09252008/princol144746_32471.shtml
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2007-10-16 }} </ref> The Mizeur op-ed was rebutted in a response (also published by '']'') by Neil Pedersen in October 2008.<ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = SHA administrator responds to ICC criticisms
| author=Neil J. Pedersen
| work =
| publisher = The Gazette
| date = 2007-10-16
| url = http://www.gazette.net/stories/10152008/montlet175501_32474.shtml
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2007-10-16 }} </ref>

In November 2008, it was announced that Environmental Defense had dropped its appeal with the ] of the decision handed down by Judge Williams of the ] about a year earlier. In exchange for dropping the suit, the State Highway Administration agreed to fund new emissions-reduction technology used by public school buses in Montgomery County; and the SHA will also "sponsor a three-year study that involves installing air quality monitors along a major highway selected for its similar characteristics to the ICC and I-95."<ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Controversial ICC clears major legal hurdle
| author=Adam Tuss
| work =
| publisher = WTOP Radio
| date = 2008-11-17
| url = http://www.wtop.com/?nid=30&sid=1519733
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2008-11-17 }} </ref><ref>{{cite news
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Maryland, Environmental Groups Settle Last Lawsuit
| author=Eric M. Weiss
| work =
| publisher = Washington Post
| date = 2008-11-18
| url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/17/AR2008111701312.html
| doi =
| accessdate = 2008-11-18 }} </ref> Press releases were issued by the ]<ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = MARYLAND STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND SETTLE INTERCOUNTY CONNECTOR APPEAL
| author=
| work =
| publisher = ]
| date = 2008-11-17
| url = http://www.sha.state.md.us/information/newsrel/oc/newstxt.asp?filename=08_11_17.76.z
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2008-11-20 }} {{Dead link|date=November 2010|bot=H3llBot}} </ref> and ]<ref>{{cite web
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title = Group Wins Public Health Benefits in ICC Suit Settlement
| author=
| work =
| publisher = ]
| date = 2008-11-17
| url = http://www.edf.org/pressrelease.cfm?contentID=8820
| format =
| doi =
| accessdate = 2008-11-20 }}</ref> discussing the details of the legal settlement.

== See also ==
*]
*]

== References ==
{{reflist|3}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Opposition To Maryland Route 200}}
]

Latest revision as of 02:40, 10 March 2018

Redirect to:

Opposition to Maryland Route 200: Difference between revisions Add topic