Vol. 78 No. 5 October 2002

The Virginia NEWS LETTER

The Regional Sales Tax Referendum: A Flawed Approach

By Patrick M. McSweeney

t its April 17, 2002, reconvened ses- distributed monthly, based on the place of sion, the Virginia General Assembly collection, to accounts of the Northern A enacted extraordinary legislation Virginia Transportation Authority and the proposed by Governor Mark R. Warner that Hampton Roads Planning District submits a ballot question to the voters in Commission. and Hampton Roads ask- Proponents claim that the revenues gen- ing whether a sales and use tax will be erated by the new sales tax in Hampton imposed in each region to fund specified Roads and Northern Virginia, if approved by transportation projects.1 The proposed tax in the voters, would be used exclusively to fund Hampton Roads is an additional one-cent per the projects listed in the legislation. dollar. In Northern Virginia, an additional Proponents also represent that the projects one-half cent per dollar would be added to the will be financed through a mixture of pay-as- sales and use tax rate. The outcome of the ref- you-go funding and bond financing.2 The erendum in each region will be determined by Patrick M. McSweeney legislation caps the amount of bonds that may majority vote of those participating through- be issued by the Northern Virginia out each region, rather than on a jurisdiction- Transportation Authority at $2.75 billion and by-jurisdiction basis. The revenues will be by the Hampton Roads Planning District collected by the State Tax Commissioner and Commission at $5.99 billion. Ignoring the lessons of history for mobility, and even greater maintenance costs because of the overall increase in lanes miles. During his 2001 campaign, Warner repeat- edly argued that the state budget is structurally imbalanced, but he failed to explain the imbal- COMPARISON OF GROWTH INDICATORS5 ance in detail. Virginians were left to wonder (increases from 1970 to 1999) what, if anything, Warner proposed to do to cure Population 44% Tax increases the problem. Since taking office, Warner’s only Motor vehicle registrations 145% notions to address the budget imbalance have Vehicle miles traveled 161% induced been increases in taxes and fees (e.g., income and substantial sales tax hikes and a new landfill fee). In per- So long as this failed transportation policy is suading the General Assembly to enact the pursued, the trend will continue. As taxes sprawl regional sales tax referendum legislation, he may increase and new highways are constructed in have contributed to the worsening of the heavily populated regions, the funding problem Commonwealth’s most troubling structural will not only continue, but worsen. budget imbalance. That imbalance is caused by Virginia’s mis- 6 guided approach to transportation, an approach UNMET TRANSPORTATION NEEDS (in billions) that has produced an ever-widening gap 1980 $5.0 1986 $10.0 between the demand for new roads and available 1991 $24.0 revenues to fund them. Instead of proposing a 1994 $34.7 shift in transportation policy to prevent that 1997 $57.8 funding gap from widening further, Warner 2002 $80.0 supported the regional sales tax referendum leg- islation that will lock the Commonwealth’s two The current transportation policy is based most populous regions and the Commonwealth on several faulty premises. The first is that every itself into the same failed approach for another new wave of highway construction will provide 35-50 years. long-term relief from congestion. In fact, most In 1986, Governor Gerald Baliles persuaded new urban highway construction induces even a special legislative session of the General more traffic than it relieves.7 Any relief is likely Assembly to enact one of the largest tax increases to be short-lived. That is why transportation in Virginia history to fund construction of new officials seem to be pleading for even more con- transportation projects that Baliles claimed struction funding soon after each new tax is would meet Virginia’s needs into the 21st cen- imposed.8 tury.3 The Baliles tax increase, which involved Another faulty premise is that mass transit raising the statewide sales and use tax rate, came and highway projects should be funded simulta- just six years after another tax had been enacted neously to produce “balanced transportation.” for the same purpose. In 1980, at the urging of Mass transit is cost effective only where conges- Governor John Dalton, the General Assembly tion exists. To the extent new highways actually enacted an increase in the gasoline tax to provide relieve congestion, they make it less likely that construction funding for transportation mass transit will be successful.9 When conges- projects.4 Dalton also claimed that approval of tion reappears after completion of new highways, his plan would provide a long-term solution to it is a type of congestion seldom susceptible to the Commonwealth’s transportation needs. A mass transit solutions. dramatic decline in funds available for project A third flawed premise is that the taxpayers construction prompted both the 1980 and the can afford to pursue the goal of assuring every 1986 tax increases. Dalton and Baliles chose to person in a heavily populated region unencum- address that funding problem by raising new tax bered, round-the-clock and all-points mobility revenues for the Transportation Trust Fund by automobile. The result of trying to achieve rather than by reshaping state transportation this goal has always been frustration because policy to produce a more efficient system. providing such mobility for hundreds of thou- Neither of these tax increases succeeded as sands of automobiles is physically and financially promised. The principal reason was that the con- impossible. There will never be enough space struction of new highways in Virginia’s most and funding for all the crisscrossing roads needed heavily populated regions funded by these tax to accomplish that objective. Contrast Los increases induced substantial sprawl, resulting in Angeles and Atlanta, where the automobile is longer trips, greater dependence on automobiles dominant and freeways have been the favored 2 Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service • October 2002 solution, with New York City, where pricing and circumstances, the take-it-or-leave-it approach of other alternatives to freeways have produced the proponents is not a responsible one. greater mobility. There are essentially two ways to address Virginia’s transportation policy has been con- gridlock: government solutions or market-based tributing to urban sprawl for decades.10 As sprawl solutions. The former includes essentially two expands, transit alternatives become more costly types of government approaches. One is the old and less feasible. Fixed rail and bus options are not program of “free” roads, which is what the propo- attractive transportation solutions to the mobility nents favor. The other is a mixture of land control Government needs of most suburban dwellers because the set- and government-financed mass transit with fares solutions vs. tlement pattern is far too dispersed to be served bearing only a small portion of the cost of con- effectively by either. struction and operation. In contrast, the market- market solutions In Virginia’s heavily populated regions, the based approach depends on increasing use of tolls, commuting pattern no longer resembles the spokes private transit and para-transit, and thousands of of a wheel (i.e., suburb-to-central-city), but is dis- private decisions. persed and increasingly suburb-to-suburb.11 As The mass transit/land use option and the sprawl expands, dependence on automobiles has approach of Chapter 853 (the act of the General grown dramatically. New vehicle registration and Assembly that authorized the transportation refer- the length of daily trips are rising four-to-five endums) share the appeal of a blueprint or master times faster than the population.12 The plan. This feature of a massive government pro- Commonwealth cannot afford to continue fund- gram has bedeviled conservatives and libertarians ing a program of highway construction that gener- for centuries. A plan that involves top-down gov- ates such an expanding gap. ernment planning and resorts to government’s coercive powers (i.e., taxation, eminent domain and regulation) appears rational, while an alterna- Ignoring Alternatives tive that depends on a complex, bottom-up process In April, Warner insisted that the referen- involving private decisions by thousands of actors dums give the voters of the two regions “the right cannot be so easily explained.16 By its very nature, to decide for themselves the best way to speed up the market-based option has no blueprint and new transportation projects for their region.”13But requires faith in the free enterprise system and the that is not the choice presented to the voters. They problem-solving ability of the people left to their are merely permitted to accept or reject an option own devices. This presents the classic contrast that proponents concede is only a partial solution between Adam Smith’s Invisible Hand and gov- and will not be fully implemented for approxi- ernment’s heavy hand. mately 20 years.14 The old-style, blueprint approach will not Nothing illustrates better the flaw in the meet our complex mobility needs. Transportation approach taken by the Governor and the General policy has been shifting for decades from the heavy Assembly to address the transportation problems role of government in transportation programs to in Hampton Roads and Northern Virginia than greater reliance on market-based solutions. This their approach to alternatives. First, they argue shift can be seen in the deregulation of rail trans- that it is the electorate, not elected officials, that portation (both freight and passenger), air trans- must identify and fully develop an alternative to port and trucking. On a related note, the the proposed projects before voters can justify a Governor’s Commission on Transportation Policy “no” vote.15 Second, the proponents present their reported in December, 1999, that toll-financing preferred alternative as the only alternative, rather has greatly expanded nationwide and allows proj- than providing the voters with an objective assess- ects to be built faster than if funded by traditional ment of various alternatives so that they can make government methods.17 Unfortunately, elected an informed choice. Third, the proponents refuse officials and bureaucrats continue to give inade- to provide information about their proposal and quate attention to toll-financed alternatives and to alternatives to it that the voters need to make an private transit and para-transit. They also ignore informed decision. the fact that the heavy involvement of government It is fair for the voters to conclude that the pro- in transportation financing, construction, opera- ponents have no fallback or other alternative. tion and regulation has the effect of crowding out Because the Governor and other proponents have private solutions. acknowledged that their proposed solution is only a A French company, Cofiroute, recently partial one, consideration of more than a single pro- invested $135 million in a toll road project known posal is particularly appropriate. Under these as 91 Express Lanes that parallels the perpetually 3 The Virginia News Letter

clogged Route 91 in Orange County, Calif. It not tied to the individual’s decision to under- was the first such toll facility in the United take it. States designed to compete with an adjacent free The escalating cost of pursuing Virginia’s public road.18 Earlier this year, Fluor Daniel, tired, free-highway transportation policy in Inc. proposed a toll facility to parallel the Capital heavily populated regions should long ago have Beltway.19 A private consortium has proposed prompted a radically new approach. In January, construction of new, toll-financed truck lanes state Secretary of Transportation Whittington along Interstate 81 in Virginia.20 In August, Clement acknowledged that “Virginia needs to 2002, VDOT summarily rejected that and four be more creative in finding solutions to trans- other private proposals, including proposals to portation” and that “[w]e know we can’t pave our construct the Third Crossing connecting the way out of Northern Virginia’s transportation Peninsula and Southside Hampton Roads as a problems.”23 Unfortunately, state leaders appear toll facility.21 to be incapable of making a break with the past. This toll-road solution is now actively pro- Instead, they have passed the decision to voters moted in other countries, particularly in Eastern in two regions in the form of a referendum ques- Europe nations that lack the financial and tech- tion. The take-it-or-leave-it character of the nical capacity to construct government roads. In question constitutes a failure of leadership. The Great Britain, where roads are the most con- choice presented to these voters is not much of a gested in Europe, leading transportation experts choice at all. If these voters prefer to follow a dif- strongly favor imposing tolls and congestion ferent transportation policy, they have no choice pricing notwithstanding opposition from but to vote “no.” motorists who have become accustomed to free roads. These British experts have concluded that some form of transportation pricing is unavoid- Ignoring prior expressions able. One expert, David Begg, who chairs the of Virginia voters British Commission for Integrated Transport, Governor Warner and legislators who sup- wryly observed: “A big road-building pro- ported the 2002 sales tax referendum legislation gramme without pricing is as ludicrous as giving insisted that they simply wanted the voters in a heroin addict a last fix.”22 Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads to Some opponents of the proposed sales tax decide for themselves whether taxes will be contend that existing state revenues can be increased in those two regions to fund new trans- found to pay for the transportation projects portation projects. Yet, these elected representa- listed in the sales tax referendum legislation. But tives utterly disregarded the unmistakable relying on seemingly painless budget adjust- expressions of these same voters in referendums ments will not provide enough funding. held in 1990 and 1998. Those voters overwhelm- Capping or reducing spending on programs tra- ingly rejected the 1990 proposal that the ditionally paid for with General Fund revenues, Constitution of Virginia be amended to allow tax while diverting General Fund revenues to revenues to be pledged without specific voter finance transportation facilities is a political approval as security for the payment of debt non-starter. There simply is not enough support incurred to pay for construction of transportation to expect serious consideration of the idea, par- projects. The sales tax referendum legislation, ticularly since Virginia already ranks above the however, provides for such tax-supported pledge national average in transportation spending. bonds. The voters of Northern Virginia and This suggestion will not solve the problem of an Hampton Roads also soundly rejected a 1998 ever-increasing funding gap caused by the ballot measure that would have amended the flawed nature of Virginia’s current transporta- Constitution “to allow a combination of localities tion policy. Until we change that policy, the to contract debt as part of an agreement to share share of the budget devoted to roadbuilding and the revenues, tax base, or the benefits of eco- maintenance will continue to rise at an unac- nomic growth and exempt this class of debt from ceptable rate. the ceiling on local debt for cities and towns and Whatever the option selected, it should from the requirement for a local referendum for promote efficiency. User charges such as tolls counties.” impose market discipline and, hence, encourage Again, the 2002 legislation provides for the greater efficiency. On the other hand, funding very outcome the voters had previously through tax revenues (from whatever source) rejected—regional debt without local referen- encourages abuse because the cost of a trip is dums in all affected counties and cities. 4 Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service • October 2002

Ignoring the Constitution As noted above, the question in each case If the Governor and legislative proponents is a take-it-or-leave-it proposition. It gives vot- of Chapter 853 (the act authorizing the referen- ers no practical option other than raising the dum) paid any serious attention to questions regressive sales tax to fund transportation. They about the constitutionality of the legislation, are not given a choice between different funding there is no evidence of it. They have issued state- methods or different transportation programs. ments saying they are confident that the legisla- By contriving such a Hobson’s choice and tion is constitutional, but they refuse to release addressing it to a regional vote, rather than to a any legal opinion demonstrating that the ques- locality-by-locality vote, a majority of members tions raised have been answered.24 The voters of the General Assembly hoped to obtain deserve better. through a referendum the result they want but The constitutionality of Chapter 853 is in lacked the political courage to attempt directly. Complex issues doubt in several respects. First, the General Determining which projects to build and are reduced to a how to fund them over several decades are ques- Assembly’s very act of delegating to any person simplistic choice the decision as to whether a tax will be imposed tions far too complex to be reduced to a ballot appears to violate the constitutional provision question. Submitting the problem to the voters vesting legislative power in the General in this manner was an abdication of legislation Assembly. Second, all revenues of the responsibility. But, once the Governor and the Commonwealth must be deposited in the State General Assembly decided on a referendum Treasury, and cannot be paid directly to bodies approach, they had an obligation to provide vot- such as the Northern Virginia Transportation ers with the information necessary to an Authority and the Hampton Roads Planning informed decision. They have failed to discharge District Commission without an appropriation that obligation. In addition to refusing to answer by the General Assembly. Third, if the sales tax constitutional questions, they have declined to revenues are not revenues of the Commonwealth, provide any cost estimates for the projects and they must be revenues of the localities in basic information about the nature of the pro- Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads because posed projects. taxes may be imposed under the Constitution only by the General Assembly or units of local Misleading voters about the potential government.25 Taxes may be imposed by local for diversion of revenues governments only upon a majority vote of mem- bers of the governing body, which is not provided In the future, the General Assembly has the for in Chapter 853. Finally, the bonds authorized power to divert any sales tax revenues generated by the legislation are a type of bond—pledge by Chapter 853, if approved by voters, to pur- bonds—that the Virginia Supreme Court has poses other than funding projects listed in that ruled violates the Constitution.26 legislation. It may also choose to repeal the tax. There is nothing in the Constitution of Virginia that gives special treatment to legislation that Misusing the referendum device becomes effective if voters approve. It is merely a Apart from questions about the constitu- legislative enactment that is always subject to tionality of a legislative delegation of the decision repeal or modification by a future General to impose a tax, there are questions about the Assembly. The past treatment of other sales tax wisdom and propriety of such a delegation, par- revenues dedicated to transportation provides an ticularly when the question on the ballot refers to illustration. Although the General Assembly in complex legislation providing for the issuance of 1986 earmarked sales tax revenues for trans- bonds and the implementation of the multi-bil- portation, it diverted $200 million of those rev- lion dollar construction program over several enues in the 1990s from the Transportation Trust decades. Unforeseen changes in circumstances Fund to the General Fund to balance the state will likely prompt modification of the list of proj- budget.27 The General Assembly has repeatedly ects during that period. Future conditions may diverted other statutorily earmarked funds to the even prompt the General Assembly to repeal the General Fund.28 Those diversions also cost the legislation in its entirety. Some questions are sim- Transportation Trust Fund approximately $112 ply unsuited for a referendum. The questions million in interest.29 Earlier this year, the placed on the ballot in Northern Virginia and General Assembly again diverted $317 million Hampton Roads by the sales tax legislation are of those sales tax revenues from the among them. Transportation Trust Fund to balance the 5 The Virginia News Letter

budget.30 When asked recently if he would Transportation Authority and the Hampton guarantee that the revenues generated by the Roads Planning District Commission, not to the bonds would never be diverted to the General Commonwealth or any of the local governments Fund, Governor Warner responded that he has in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads. If so, an obligation to balance the budget.31 Chapter 853 provides for an irresponsible and Despite the General Assembly’s unques- deceptive method of financing. The bonds will tioned legal right, and its propensity, to divert be issued with a wink to bondholders that they earmarked tax revenues, proponents of the new have no need to worry about being paid. If the sales tax have insisted that revenues from the tax Commonwealth is unwilling to stand behind would never be used for any purpose other than debt issued by one of its political subdivisions, it Referendum funding the listed projects. Such an assurance should guarantee an adequate revenue stream to question cannot be reconciled with the Virginia which the bondholders can have legal recourse. Constitution or with the mandates of federal is ‘grossly law, which, among other things, requires consid- misleading’ eration of alternatives. Some, if not all, of the Building projects, forgetting people listed projects must receive further federal review In evaluating proposed solutions to urban and approval without which they cannot pro- transportation problems, it makes sense to con- ceed. Obviously, the proponents cannot guaran- sider issues other than how particular projects tee that all of the projects will be constructed might improve mobility. Some solutions will before federal review is concluded. have negative effects on communities and on val- To summarize: The referendum question in ues other than mobility. That is indeed the case each region is itself grossly misleading. The lan- with solutions such as those proposed in the ref- guage of each question explicitly assures voters erendums. The preoccupation of Virginia’s lead- that the revenues generated by the sales tax will ers with building more and more massive be dedicated to funding the program described highway projects has produced an unbalanced in the legislation authorizing the referendum. policy that favors asphalt and concrete over liv- But the General Assembly is constitutionally ability. prohibited from binding itself to any such long- The sales tax proponents contend that vot- term program. Every future General Assembly is ers should vote “yes” to improve their quality of free to amend this legislation as it sees fit. life, but these proponents measure quality of life only in terms of mobility. The projects they pro- Authorizing a deceptive method pose will induce more sprawl and, with it, another round of induced travel. If the new proj- of financing ects do reduce travel time at all, it will be for only The only source of payment for bonds a short period. authorized by the sales tax referendum legisla- The Commission on Transportation Policy tion is the new sales tax revenue stream. If a reported in 1999 that only 25 percent of travel in future General Assembly concludes that some or the Northern Virginia suburbs is commuting all of these revenues should be used to fund more travel. The break between commuting and non- important programs or to cover a budget deficit, commuting travel in Hampton Roads is compa- the diversion of those funds will risk a down- rable. The projects proposed for both regions, grading of the Commonwealth’s credit rating. however, do little or nothing to improve the Neither the Northern Virginia Transportation mobility of the approximately 75 percent who are Authority nor the Hampton Roads Planning not commuting. In fact, these projects may District Commission has the legal authority to worsen the situation for non-commuters by impose taxes or the practical ability to generate inducing heavier traffic on other roads. revenues sufficient to service the bonds. Neither The price of marginal improvement in com- entity can require the General Assembly to keep muting time comes at a heavy price. The envi- the tax in place or to preserve the earmarking for ronmental impact of constructing the proposed specified projects. In short, the Northern projects is not adequately considered by the pro- Virginia Transportation Authority and the ponents. Other negative effects are also ignored, Hampton Roads Planning District Commission particularly the adverse impact of massive high- cannot assure bondholders that the bonds will be way projects on existing communities. These repaid. The proponents claim that the bond- large projects make the natural evolution of inte- holders can look for payment only to the entities grated, human-scale and pedestrian-friendly that issue the bonds, the Northern Virginia communities all but impossible. These are com- 6 Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service • October 2002 munities where people actually interact and Heanue, “Highway Capacity and Induced Travel: where the pace is generally slower and less stress- Issues, Evidence and Implications,” prepared for the ful. Consider the impact on Springfield of the Transportation Research Bd. Ann. Mtg. ( Jan. 1997); gargantuan Mixing Bowl project, where Alan Sipress, “More Lanes Better? Not Necessarily: Interstates 95, 395 and 495 converge. Access Traffic Increases, Studies Find,” Washington Post between any point in Springfield and another ( Jan. 13, 2000); Katherine Shaver, “Road Projects point there, whether on foot or by automobile, is Wouldn’t End N. Va.’s Misery,” Washington Post (Sept. 19, 2002). so difficult that the notion of having an inte- grated community or a viable commercial center 8 Bill Byrd, “Baliles seeking new exit from road there is out of the question. problems,” Virginian-Pilot ( Jan. 15, 1989). 9 Report of the Year 2020 Panel to the Chesapeake Executive Council, Population Growth and Conclusion Development in the Watershed to Voters should reject both referendum meas- the Year 2020 (Dec. 1988) at 18-19. ures and force their elected officials to address 10 Id. at 18-33. the serious transportation problems in Virginia’s 11 Robert Cervero, Suburban Gridlock (New urban areas with a fresh perspective and the bold- Brunswick, N.J.: St. U. of N.J., 1986) at 9-10. ness required to solve them. More of the same 12 Comm’n on Transportation Policy, Interim simply will not do. Report (1999) at 36; Editorial “$7 Billion Road Vote Faces Political Potholes,” Virginian-Pilot (May 19, ABOUT THE AUTHOR 2002). Mr. McSweeney, who practices law in Richmond, is 13 R. H. Melton, “Sales Tax Ballot Bill for N. Va. a former chairman of the Republican Party of Approved,” Washington Post (Apr. 18, 2002). Virginia. He served as staff attorney for the state 14 At his April 5, 2002, news conference announc- Commission on Constitutional Revision and has ing his proposal, Gov. Warner acknowledged that the been chairman of the Richmond Regional Planning projects constituted only a partial solution — a District Commission. “down payment.” Notes 15 See, e.g., Editorial “Road referendums: Warner takes a needed swipe at the nonsense,” Daily Press 1 Senate Bill 668, Acts of Assembly 2002, c. 853 (Sept. 29, 2002). (referred to in this Newsletter as “Chapter 853” or 16 See Friedrich A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom “the sales tax referendum legislation”). (Chicago: U. Ch. Press, 1944) at 34-35. Hayek 2 Material provided to members of the General advocated reliance on “the spontaneous forces found Assembly in support of Governor Warner’s substitute in a free society” rather than on “collective and ‘con- for Senate Bill 668 by Secretary of Transportation scious’ direction” through government. Id. at 20-21. Whittington Clement on April 9, 2002. 17 Commission on Transportation Policy, Interim 3 Acts of Assembly 1986 (Special Session), cc. 11, Report (1999) at 7 & 22. 12 and 13; Gov. Gerald Baliles, “Special Session 18 John Tagliabue, “The Private Road to Riches,” Addresses Future,” Richmond News Leader (Sept. New York Times ( Jan. 2, 2000); see also Jerry Taylor 15, 1986). & Peter VanDoren, “Pricing the Fast Lane,” 4 Acts of Assembly 1980, c. 227. Washington Post ( July 12, 2002); Bart Hinkle, “This 5 Governor’s Commission on Transportation Policy, HOT Idea Could Resolve the Congestion Interim Report (Dec. 1, 1999) at 36. Conundrum,” Richmond Times-Dispatch ( July 23, 2002); Editorial, “Innovative ways to escape grid- 6 JLARC and SJR 50 Subcommittee, Organization lock,” Wall Street Journal (April 1, 1989). and Administration of the Department of Highways and Transportation, S. D. No. 7 (1982) at 14; 19 Michael D. Shear, “Toll Road Proposed to Virginia Forward, Virginia’s Fiscal Future: A Long Widen Beltway,” Washington Post ( July 13, 2002). Term Perspective (1998); Gov. Gerald Baliles, 20 Rex Bowman, “VDOT declines unsolicited “Special Session Addresses Future,” Richmond News offers,” Richmond Times-Dispatch (Aug. 3, 2002). Leader (Sept. 15, 1986); Remarks of John Milliken to the Arlington Commission of 100 ( June 10, 2002); 21 Christina Nuckols, “VDOT rejects toll proposals Robert Blake, “Why referendums aren’t enough,” for building of third crossing,” Virginian-Pilot (Aug. Virginia Business (Oct. 2002). 3, 2002). 7 Lewis M. Fulton, et al., “A Statistical Analysis of 22 “Tolled you so,” The Economist (Apr. 27, 2002). Induced Travel Effects in the Mid-Atlantic Region,” 23 Peter Basque, “Finding VDOT boss is job one,” J. Transp. Statistics (Apr. 2000). See also Kevin Richmond Times-Dispatch ( Jan. 28, 2002). 7 Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service • October 2002

Past issues of 24 Statement issued by the Office of Governor 28 Commission on Transportation Policy, Interim Warner on July 23, 2002; correspondence between Report (1999) at 21, 25. The Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall and the Office of the 29 Commission on Transportation Policy, Interim News Letter are during 2002. Report (1999) at 21. available in the 25 The Constitution provides that the General 30 Memorandum from Anne E. Oman, House Assembly may authorize the creation of regional gov- Appropriations Commission staff, to Delegate Bob publications section ernments, which can have taxing power; however, the Marshall ( July 31, 2002); see Michael D. Shear, General Assembly has not seen fit to do so. A “Warner Tries to Tap Special Road Fund; Angered of the Cooper regional government cannot be established without Lawmakers Fear VDOT Will Steer $350 Million Center’s Web site: an affirmative vote of the people in each city and Account Toward N. Va.,” Washington Post ( Jan. 29, county involved. Const. of Va., Art. VII, § 2. 2002) (“Gov. Mark R. Warner (D) wants permission to www.virginia.edu ignore promises that Virginia made two years ago to 26 Terry v. Mazur, 234 Va. 442, 362 S.E.2d 904 spend money on specific road and transit projects . . . .”). /coopercenter/ (1987). 31 News Release of Fairfax County Taxpayers 27 Memorandum from Robert Vaughan, House Association, “Warner won’t rule out another raid on Appropriations Committee staff, to Delegate Bob transportation sales tax revenues” (Sept. 4, 2002).

Marshall (Sept. 20, 2002).

.M10 8.0M

22904-4206.

..Bx400,Caltevle Virginia Charlottesville, 400206, Box P.O.

Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service, Public for Center Cooper Weldon

otatr ed drs cags o the to changes address Send Postmaster:

Virginia.

eidcl otg pi a Charlottesville, at paid postage Periodical

Cooper Center for Public Service. Public for Center Cooper

duction permission, write or call the Weldon the call or write permission, duction

mailing list or to request reprints or repro- or reprints request to or list mailing

L h Vrii N Virginia The on get To ETTER EWS

Center or the University. the or Center

o te fiil oiin f h Cooper the of position official the not

views expressed are those of the author and author the of those are expressed views

iioso h nvriyo igna The Virginia. of University the of Visitors

oyih ©02 y h Rco and Rector the by ©2002 Copyright

TDD: (434) 982-HEAR. (434) TDD:

igna 20-26 44 982-5704, (434) 22904-4206; Virginia

igna ..Bx400,Charlottesville, 400206, Box P.O. Virginia,

etr o Pbi Srie nvriy of University Service, Public for Center

Charlottesville,Virginia

0271) is published by the Weldon Cooper Weldon the by published is 0271)

PERIODICAL

IS 0042- (ISSN L h Vrii N Virginia The ETTER EWS

dtr ila .Wood H. William Editor:

ENTERED AS ENTERED

L The Virginia N Virginia The ETTER EWS

2002 OCTOBER 5 NO. 78 VOL.