I-77 toll lanes are a potent political issue. Why isn’t anyone seizing it?

It's widely assumed this is Charlotte Mayor Vi Lyles’ fifth and final term. That means there will be a free-for-all to succeed her in 2027.

There are already many potential candidates in the mix. Charlotte City Council members Malcolm Graham, James Mitchell, Dimple Ajmera, Dante Anderson and Victoria Watlington have all had their names bandied about. .

But with the decisive Democratic primary in 17 months, no one is distinguishing themselves on the biggest issue before the City Council: Building more toll lanes on Interstate 77.

Council members have all said they are concerned about the impact on historically Black and low-income communities. They are concerned about the fairness and effectiveness of toll lanes. Many have said the current proposal is unacceptable. And they all want more community input.

But no one has made the issue their own and worked to actually stop the project and come up with something else. The potential candidates, it seems, all believe they can win with the cards they already hold.

Of course, only one can be right about that.

And as we will discuss below, perhaps a candidate to be named later will grab I-77 for themselves.

Support for easing congestion

Part of the timidity is that City Council members believe something must be done about the 11-mile stretch of highway from uptown to the South Carolina state line, which is in near gridlock much of the day. The state says it will only contribute $600 million to a $3.2 billion project, and that privately managed toll lanes built and operated by a contractor are the only option.

To their credit, many elected officials do not want to demagogue the issue if they can’t deliver a better solution.

But there are also a few opposing thoughts on that.

First, let's look at the issue through a purely political lens and why significant upside exists for a more vocal opponent:

1. About half of the voters in the 2027 Democratic city election will be Black. The loudest opposition to the highway is coming from Black residents on the westside, and many feel they aren’t being heard. Moreover, the Black Political Caucus, which bestows one of the few local endorsements that carries weight, is against the project.
2. Setting race aside, most people in Mecklenburg County do not like toll lanes — especially privately operated ones. They have seen how much the toll rates are in north Mecklenburg County, and they see how I-77 north is still congested six years after those lanes opened.
3. Is there a true pro-toll lane constituency – outside of the Charlotte Regional Business Alliance? There doesn’t appear to be. (That’s not to say there isn’t a lot of frustration with the congestion — it’s tempting to wonder what kind of support a project to build general-use, toll-free lanes would garner.)

Over the last four months, west Charlotte neighbors have protested the project intensely. To placate residents, the North Carolina Department of Transportation announced last month it would delay issuing a Request for Proposals from four contractors until June. The state would spend more time listening to the community, and it said it would encourage contractors to come up with creative ways to lessen the impact of the highway expansion.

The City Council celebrated the nearly four-month delay — but didn’t extract any guarantee that much would change.

On Monday, the DOT released newly tweaked maps of I-77. The design is almost identical to the recommended plan of elevated toll lanes from earlier this year, although this proposal saves six additional homes from demolition. Thirty-six homes would still likely be torn down.

The Charlotte City Council is the key decision-maker on I-77 because the city has more than 40% of the vote on the Charlotte Regional Transportation Planning Organization.

Here are a few questions for council members to ask — and get answers to before it’s too late to stop the current project:

1. Could the DOT build the project with one toll lane in each direction instead of two?
2. Could I-77 be built with one toll lane and one free lane?
3. How is the DOT widening 10 miles of Interstate 85 in Gaston County for $1.5 billion without toll lanes, while that highway is subject to the same $600 million corridor cap for state funding as I-77? (The answer is that the Gaston project is being broken into three phases over seven years. Could I-77 be broken into smaller segments?)
4. How much would it cost to place a concrete cap over a small section of I-77 near uptown and build a park, greenways or other community amenities?
5. Could the city of Charlotte use money from the newly passed 1-cent transportation sales tax to help fund I-77 and not rely on toll lanes? (The answer is yes.)

Council members have struggled to ask questions like this, in part, because they have been told borderline misinformation about the project.

It started in the fall of 2024 when pro-toll lane City Council member Ed Driggs assured his colleagues that a vote for the project could be reversed. After the maps were released last fall, Driggs then told them it was too late and they couldn’t vote again. (Under pressure, he has since acknowledged that Charlotte could change its mind.)

The Charlotte city attorney didn’t spell out for the City Council its full options when briefing them about I-77 in late February. In her initial summary, attorney Andrea Leslie-Fite didn’t tell council members they could direct the Charlotte Regional Transportation Planning Organization to remove I-77 from a list of approved projects. An attorney for CRTPO offered a vague legal opinion saying there was no way to stop the project, without citing any reason why.

A N.C. Department of Transportation board member, Stephen Rosenburgh, last week told elected officials that if Charlotte rejected the toll lanes, it would lose the $600 million earmarked for I-77. He also said that he personally would question whether the state should be funding other transportation projects in the city.

(If Charlotte rejects the toll lanes, the $600 million would indeed go back into the pot for other statewide highway projects. But there is no reason I-77 couldn’t be resubmitted and rescored, and become eligible for the $600 million again. It’s also worth noting that DOT board members do not decide what projects are funded; under a 2013 state law, that’s done under an elaborate scoring system.)

Wildcard for mayor?

There is one local elected official who has been aggressive about questioning the conventional wisdom on I-77: Mecklenburg County Commissioner Leigh Altman.

Altman was originally a toll lane supporter, even though her colleagues on the Commission were against it. But has since soured on how the project was sold to residents and elected officials. She has said the DOT did a “bait and switch” in not releasing maps to the public until after a supposed deadline had passed.

Mecknc.gov

She has poked holes in the narrative that there is no turning back, pushing officials like Driggs to acknowledge the project could be stopped.

Altman just won reelection to the County Commission and hasn’t said anything about running for mayor.

But she would be a formidable candidate, starting with demographics: She could be the only white candidate in the race. If other candidates split the non-white vote in the Democratic primary, that’s an opportunity.

That might sound harsh, but it’s the reality of electoral politics.

And then there is I-77.

If she becomes the face of toll lane resistance, will voters reward her for that?

Bonus I-77 issue: Council breaks state open meeting law?

At its March 23 meeting, the City Council held two closed sessions. In one, they discussed I-77.

State law allows for council members to meet with their attorney for issues that fall under “attorney-client privilege.” It’s possible City Attorney Leslie-Fite gave council members legal advice about potential litigation should they stop the toll lanes. That would likely be OK under the state’s open meetings law.

But at a CRTPO meeting two days later, Driggs described the City Council’s work on I-77 in terms of crafting a resolution or a list of demands to the DOT: “My (council) colleagues in a closed session said, ‘I would like to see something like this, or I would like to see a little more of that.’ They made suggestions for edits and changes, none of which I thought would cause NCDOT any big heartburn.”

Driggs made it sound as though council members were negotiating the future of westside neighborhoods — something that should be done where the public can watch.

And if his characterization is correct, that could be a violation of open meetings law. The statute that allows for elected officials to meet for “attorney-client privilege” also states: “General policy matters may not be discussed in a closed session and nothing herein shall be construed to permit a public body to close a meeting that otherwise would be open merely because an attorney employed or retained by the public body is a participant.”

Driggs declined to comment. City Attorney Andrea Leslie-Fite said in an email that “Council was advised to and did avoid general policy matters, as such discussions must be held in open session. Discussions were limited to the strategies related to the legal advice tendered, and no actions were taken.”

Leandro vacated

The conservative majority North Carolina Supreme Court on Thursday ended the long-running Leandro school funding case, which began in the 1990s. The heart of the question: How does the state ensure every child has a “sound basic education?”

Here is The Assembly’s overview story and The Charlotte Observer/News & Observer story. Their editorial board called the court’s reversal “shameful,” while the Carolina Journal sums up what Republicans and Democrats are saying about the ruling.