HB5711, the Metropolitan Planning Enhancement Act, amends federal and federalized transportation planning statutes to demand a publicly available, transparent process for selecting transportation projects. The bill ties project-selection criteria to factors in statutory goals and national transportation objectives, and it requires categorizing projects by performance so the highest-performing projects are publicly identifiable.
It also extends these transparency requirements to metropolitan and statewide planning and investment programs, with specific rules about how lower-ranked projects are described when they’re included in priority lists.
At a Glance
What It Does
The act adds a new PROJECT SELECTION TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY standard, requiring transparent criteria and publicly visible processes to categorize and select the highest performing projects for transportation plans and priority lists.
Who It Affects
Metropolitan planning organizations, state Departments of Transportation, regional transportation authorities, and local governments that develop and manage transportation plans and improvement programs.
Why It Matters
Public decision-making becomes auditable and aligned with national goals, potentially improving equity and the efficiency of investments.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Metropolitan Planning Enhancement Act introduces a formal transparency regime for how transportation investments are chosen. It requires the agencies that prepare metropolitan transportation plans to use publicly available criteria that directly support the statutory factors, national goals, and state goals when evaluating and selecting projects.
Projects must be publicly categorized according to performance, and the highest-performing projects should be the focus of adoption and funding decisions. This framework is designed to make the rationale behind investments more visible to the public and to policymakers alike.
The act also requires that when a priority list includes a lower-performing project over a higher-performing one, a public description be provided to explain the decision. This description must cover geographic balance and investments in economically distressed areas to ensure that equity considerations are explicitly addressed.The transparency provisions apply across the metropolitan planning context (Section 134 and 5303) and the statewide planning context (Sections 135, 5304).
The bill therefore creates a unified standard: project evaluations must be based on measurable, publicly available criteria tied to national and state goals, and any departure from the highest-performing category must be justified in public, accessible terms. In short, it formalizes performance-based, publicly explainable decision-making in transportation planning at multiple levels of government.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill requires a publicly accessible, transparent process for selecting transportation projects.
Projects must be categorized by performance, with the highest-performing projects publicly identified.
A public explanation is required when a lower-ranked project is chosen over a higher-ranked one, including geographic balance and distressed-area considerations.
The transparency framework applies to metropolitan plans, metropolitan TIPs, statewide long-range plans, and statewide TIPs.
The bill ties criteria to national goals under Section 150(b) and to applicable state transportation goals to guide project selection.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Metropolitan planning—public project-selection transparency
This section adds a new requirement to Section 134(i) of Title 23, introducing a publicly available, transparent process for selecting projects in the adopted transportation plan. The selection must use criteria that directly support factors in subsection (h), align with the national transportation goals under Section 150(b), and satisfy applicable state goals. The criteria are to be used to publicly categorize the highest performing projects, enhancing accountability and public visibility into how investments are prioritized.
Metropolitan TIP—priority list transparency
Section 134(j)(2)(A) is amended to add a requirement that projects in the priority list come from the highest performing category identified in the transportation plan’s subsection (i)(7). If a lower-categorized project is included, there must be a public description explaining why, including considerations of geographic balance and projects in economically distressed areas, ensuring that equity factors are integrated into prioritization.
Statewide long-range plan—transparency and accountability
Section 135(f) is amended to insert a new paragraph (9) requiring that projects in the long-range statewide transportation plan be selected through a publicly available transparent process. The process must use criteria that support factors in subsection (d), align with national goals under Section 150(b), and meet applicable state goals, with publicly cataloged categorization of the highest performing projects.
Statewide TIP—priority methodology
Section 135(g)(5)(A) is amended to require that projects in the statewide transportation improvement program be drawn from the highest performing category identified in the transportation plan; if a lower-categorized project is included, a public description must explain why, including geographic balance and economic distress considerations.
Metropolitan planning—public transparency in 5303(i)
Section 5303(i) is amended to insert new subsection (7) for project selection transparency, mirroring the metropolitan planning transparency framework in Section 2(a). The adopted plan must use publicly available criteria that support national and state goals, and the criteria must publicly categorize the highest performing projects.
Metropolitan TIP—transparency in 5303(j)(2)(A)
Section 5303(j)(2)(A) is amended to require that priority lists follow the same higher-performing category rule and include a public description if a lower-ranked project is chosen over a higher-ranked one, including geographic balance and distressed-area considerations.
Statewide long-range plan—5304(f) transparency
Section 5304(f) is amended to insert a new paragraph (9) for project selection transparency, aligning the long-range statewide plan with the criteria-based, publicly visible process described in Section 2(a). The highest performing projects must be publicly categorized.
Statewide TIP—5304(g) transparency
Section 5304(g)(5)(A) is amended to require that statewide TIP projects come from the highest performing category identified in the plan, with a public description when a lower category is used, including geographic balance and distressed-area considerations.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Transportation across all five countries.
Explore Transportation in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) and state Departments of Transportation gain clearer, standardized criteria and public accountability for project selection.
- Local governments within metropolitan regions benefit from clearer prioritization rules and visibility into investment decisions.
- Transportation equity advocates and community groups gain access to public criteria and rational explanations for prioritization, aiding advocacy and oversight.
- Regional planning entities and residents in economically distressed areas see explicit emphasis on geographic balance and targeted investments.
- Public users gain transparency about how transportation dollars are allocated and which projects are prioritized.
Who Bears the Cost
- State DOTs and MPOs must develop, maintain, and publish transparent criteria and public descriptions, creating data-management and reporting burdens.
- Local and regional agencies may need additional staff or contractors to produce public descriptions and maintain transparency portals.
- Consultants and private firms involved in planning analysis may face increased workload for documenting methodology and performance categorization.
- Public agencies might incur costs to ensure accessibility of data and processes for diverse communities.
- There may be ongoing administrative costs to monitor and enforce compliance across multiple jurisdictions.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is whether mandating transparent, performance-based prioritization will improve equity and accountability without hampering the agility and local relevance of transportation investments.
The act sets in motion a governance shift toward measurable, publicly visible criteria for project selection across metropolitan and statewide planning. While transparency can improve accountability and equity, it also imposes data-collection, reporting, and public communication obligations that may require new staff, improved data systems, and changes to existing workflows.
Agencies must establish and maintain the underlying performance metrics, ensure data accuracy, and publish timely public explanations for decision-making. Implementation will test the balance between rigorous public accountability and the flexibility needed to address local planning realities.
Potential challenges include metric definitional disputes, data quality concerns, and ensuring consistency across jurisdictions with varying capacity for transparency.
A core tension is whether public explanations for prioritization could inadvertently slow decision-making or invite political interference. The bill proposes a centralized logic (public criteria tied to national and state goals) to reduce ambiguity, but the real-world application will depend on how metrics are chosen, validated, and updated.
Finally, the law presumes that higher-performing projects are the best proxies for value, which may raise debates about non-quantified social and economic benefits that are harder to capture in performance data.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.