Transportation: McDonnell reaches an agreement with the General Assembly?
By JR Hoeft | Tuesday, January 25th, 2011 | Policy
Well, this is certainly anti-climactic. Given the fight over ABC privatization, I would have expected the transportation debate to have gone the distance and into a special session. Guess legislators are tired of that dead horse and it looks like there is broad bipartisan support for Virginia to borrow its way to building roads.
The governor announced yesterday that a bipartisan transportation plan has been cobbled together, based largely on the suggestions he outlined in his State of the Commonwealth address. The plan is likely to pass in the House, as its chief sponsor is Speaker of the House William Howell. In the Senate, several Democrats have signed onto the plan, and many Republicans have signed on as co-sponsors, but it still doesn’t pass the 20 vote threshold.
The 17 senators publicly supporting the bill include:
Sens. William Wampler (R-Bristol), Chuck Colgan (D-Prince William), Edd Houck (D-Spotsylvania), Steve Martin (R-Chesterfield), Ryan McDougle (R-Hanover), Jeff McWaters (R-Virginia Beach), Steve Newman (R-Lynchburg), Tommy Norment (R-Williamsburg), Ralph Northam (D-Norfolk), Phillip Puckett (D-Tazewell), Roscoe Reynolds (D-Martinsville), Bill Stanley (R-Moneta), Walter Stosch (R-Glen Allen), Richard Stuart (R-Westmoreland), Jill Holtzman Vogel (R-Winchester), Frank Wagner (R-Virginia Beach), John Watkins (R-Midlothian)
Some of the details of the transportation deal include:
· Create the “Virginia Transportation Infrastructure Bank” (VTIB) to multiply transportation dollars. The bank will be initially capitalized with $150 million from the 2010 budget surplus and $250 million from VDOT audit-identified funds; The bank will reach $1 billion total during the McDonnell Administration.
· Modify Virginia Code to authorize Direct GARVEE bonds. This would allow the Commonwealth to issue up to $1.1 billion in direct GARVEE bonds and utilize toll credits for state match.
· Accelerate the sales of bonds from 2007 transportation legislation to a maximum of $600 million per year, providing ability to issue up to $1.8 billion in bonds during remainder of the Administration.
· Increase the availability of revenue sharing, specifically eliminating the $1 million cap per project and $50 million program maximum.
All told, the plan will inject $4 billion into Virginia’s transportation network over just the next three years. 900 projects have been identified that can begin construction within the next three years if the legislation is approved, including:
· Widening of I-66 for Gainesville to Haymarket as well as the installation of an active traffic management system on I-66 to dynamically control lanes in order to reduce congestion
· Widening a key section of Rolling Road in Fairfax County to address the expected traffic impacts of BRAC
· Major interchange improvements on I-64, I-81 and I-95, in Frederick, Augusta, Stafford, and Louisa counties
· Widening Route 7 in Loudoun County
· Rebuilding the Route 460 Southgate Avenue intersection in Montgomery County
· Widening Lynnhaven Parkway, Indian River Road and Witch Duck Road in Virginia Beach, as well as replacing the Lesner Bridge
· Widening Route 28 in Fairfax and Prince William counties
· Investments in Washington Metro, Hampton Roads Light Rail, and other transit providers, including VRE to extend to Spotsylvania County.
· Several major projects throughout the Route 58 Corridor, a critical link for southern and western Virginia
· Advancing PPTA projects such as the widening of Dominion Boulevard in Chesapeake; the constructing of a new tube for the Midtown Tunnel between Norfolk and Portsmouth; advancing the HOV/HOT lanes on I95/395 in Northern Virginia
**A complete list of all projects supported by this legislation can be found here: http://www.virginiadot.org/news/resources/Statewide/sectran/Combined_Master_1-13-11_V10_SOT-No_Phase.pdf
If my credit score is very good and I have a supportable debt-income ratio, I can borrow to pay for a house (provided it’s one I can afford). That’s what Virginia is going through: its AAA bond rating is not in jeopardy, it balances its budget every year, the current interest rates are currently very low (so it makes sense to borrow), and these bonds were approved in 2007.
On first glance, this looks like a good plan. We’ll see if it stands up to scrutiny.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Conservative to the core; liberal with his opinion! J.R. has been involved in politics for over a decade and has worked on several campaigns in Hampton Roads. He has served on the Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Chesapeake and the Central Committee of the Republican Party of Virginia. He is also the director of “Blogs United” in Virginia. E-mail J.R.. Follow J.R. on Twitter.
Comments
24 Responses to "Transportation: McDonnell reaches an agreement with the General Assembly?"
Great article JR. The return on investment will be orders of magnitude more than the cost of this ambitions project.. Funds are scarce but so are jobs.. By restoring our transportation network now we put our state in a more competitive position to eek out more new business and and to keep more of what we have now. Bob is giving it his best and one term just won’t be long enough..
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Bearing Drift and Richmond Patriots, Jeffersoniad. Jeffersoniad said: Transportation: McDonnell reaches an agreement with the General Assembly? http://bit.ly/hpo72i [...]
This plan is better than I thought it was at first. There is a funding stream to service the debt– part of the recordation tax that the legislature pinpointed when the bonds were initially authorized.
They should make sure the transporation package has clear claim on that revenue.
This certainly beats continuing to do nothing.
Infrastructure spending is about the best economic development tool we have, along with investments in improving our workforce.
Both are better than the “coroporate welfare” incentive packages that we often offer companies to move here, because the state nearly always gets screwed on those deals. Investment and job creation seldom matche the ocmpany’s initial claims.
Frankly, I am perplexed about the funding stream, and more to the point, what gets cut from education and public safety in order to fund these bonds. The whiff of disaster by Gimore’s use of anticipation notes is still in the air, and here is another Virginia Governor using, you guessed it, anticipation notes again. Of course, when the bill becomes due, the next Governor finds that our federal money has already been committed by the previous Governor. I’m told that the funds pledged to the trust fund from insurance fees will be pledged, but how do we replace what those funds had supported? Complicated proposal with many moving parts; I don’t believe the hype until I fully understand what gets cut to get this done. The use of a portion of the sales tax revenue will definitely cut education and public safey; who’s ox will get gored by this proposal?
How about 264 that is the main tourist road to the beach?? The first impression a visitor going to their hotel is going to be the pothole filled route thst will make a lasting memory and maybe second guess coming back next year.
Mike, I guess transportation is only a crisis when you’re pushing a tax increase.
When it comes to making transportation a spending priority within the budget, you’re opposed?
Frank: Given that there’s now a pot of money available, I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s some pretty intense debate about which projects to finance with it. Even legislators who are on the governor’s team as far as the funding package are going to want to tout their own pet projects. Peninsula legislators will certainly want to push widening of I-64 from Richmond to Newport News … although you could only make a down payement on that with this amoount of money.
Brian K. is right, Mike. Either we have a “crisis” that stands to doom our economic well being or we don’t. Further, there appears to be several projects to be funded in the Hampton Roads area.
Don’t we have a crisis in transportation infrastructure, Mike? I thought you have said as much on multiple occasions…….. How do you oppose this now? Partisan politics? Just to protect special interest funding despite an “emergency”?
Wow, how amazing that you guys fold your cards and become cheerleaders for $4B in debt before you even know what has been proposed. Yes, we have a crisis in funding for transportation infrastructure; does that mean we all jump in unison even if the numbers don’t add up? Apparently it does for you. So if you both know so much, explain it to me. Answer the simple questions I put forth above, tell me how many of the 900 projects on the “illustrative list” would actually be funded. Tell me how much in general fund transfers get cut from our local school divisions to pay costs that should be funded by the transportation trust fund? Clearly, since you have both made up your minds, you know the answers. Enlighten me. Thanks in advance.
Fold your cards, Mike? This isn’t a game.
It’s a CRISIS, remember?
I remember you telling me to raise my taxes for the Southeastern Parkway, and now no matter how much money we have, we can’t get that road approved by the Army Corps, the FHA or anyone.
If you think we need more transportation spending, and you oppose more transportation spending, I’m going to start wondering what your real goal is that you aren’t saying.
For the record, Mike, you have repeatedly said there is a transportation crisis. You have NEVER said that there is an education crisis. But you’ll let that stand in the way of addressing your admitted CRISIS???
Which is it, Mike?
Thanks Brian; your failure to even attempt to explain how we will pay for the debt, and its impact on the programs of the general fund, speaks volumes about your ideology. You will make quips and insults about anyone who proposes to borrow, but when your guy does, with little or no understanding nor comprehension, you blather on like a member of the governor’s staff. Moments like this tell it all; you are nothing more than an apologist.
And you want nothing less than higher taxes.
Fair enough to bring up the usual objection to borrowing. However, this is a crisis and evidently a once in a life time opportunity to see Hampton Roads get some of the infrastructre improvements that the state OWES us. Been a damn long time coming!
The proposal does have repayment addressed. Sufficient? I don’t know yet.
If you are that uncomfortable with the debt level, I would be open to reducing it and increasing money coming from the General Fund.
If McDonnell and company are lying and we don’t see sufficient funding here in Hampton Roads, I don’t mind joining you in holding him, the GA, and specifically local GA members accountable. VB state senators are on board as are other locals. Must not be too bad.
I want the truth. When a proposal sounds too good to be true, it usually is. The explanations of this initiative, announced with great fanfare, and a list of endorsements before the funding plan was released, ought to be the tip off; no one really understands what projects will be funded, how we will pay off the debt, what will be cut from the general fund to pay the debt service, and what the next Governor will do to continue the projects since we have “borrowed” the federal allocation during this Governor’s term. When the PR campaign begins before the facts are known, watch out for the BS factor. Perhaps all of this does add up, but last time a Governor used anticipation notes to fund all the projects in the six year plan, it resulted in two straight democratic governors because Gilmore’s plan was too good to be true.
Mike, you advocated billions of debt “off the state books” in a regional scheme managed by Art Collins, so don’t give me your piousness now.
Well yes, the only difference is that we had the political courage to indicate the taxes and fees that would be used to pay the debt service. It was not stolen from other programs, nor “borrowed” in the form of anticipation notes. Thanks again for showing that you don’t really have a clue about how this debt will be paid back nor the effect of the transfer of funds from the general fund on education and public safety.
Britt, don’t you realize that general fund money that supports local government expenses for education and public safety will be subtracted from these programs and used to pay transportation debt service? Do you care? Do you approve of subterfuge or transparency? Never mind.
MB- I’d argue with your comment that this “sounds too good to be true.” It doesn’t sound all that good. A dedicated stream of revenue would be better. But this sounds better than nothing. Which is what we’ve done for the past ten years while the parties…actually that’s not fair because the Republicans couldn’t agree with each other when they held the Senate and the House..when the politicians, bickered.
As far as debt goes, if the state is going to take on debt, there could’t be a better time. Interest costs ..and building costs … are lower than they have been in years and lower than they’ll likely be again in the near-term future.
I think an increase in the gas tax would be the best way to fund roads. But I’m realistic enough to know that isn’t going to happen in the current political climate. We do need the infrastructure. This is the only way we’re going to get it.
You can’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
I kinda agree with Steve.
Mike, you are correct, other budgets will be hurt. I do care, but a crisis is a crisis and the job must get done. Besides, you know full well that they have been stealing from transportation for those budgets, for years. Chickens have come home to roost.
A lot of people have their names on this that were on YOUR side on other transportation issues. HRTA? The “Yes” campaign? Now they’re either dummies or deceptive scoundrels? If this bill is that bad then you can take comfort in the idea that that they will be rewarded with sitting on the sidelines for 2 more administrations.
I do care about transparency. I am not advocating that we be like Nancy Pelosi and say we have to pass it to find out what is in it! That is real transparency, lol.
However, things have to be initiated. Answers will come. And ya know, I care about the truth too. I have often taken McDonnell to task for for things like the HRTA, pushing total BS legislation labeled Eminent Domain reform, and wanting to saddle people with felony charges for engaging in oral sex.
If this is just fakery and we’re being cheated again, you don’t think I and others won’t be screaming about it? C’mon Mike. They have more to lose by messing this up. Give it a chance. Even if he does have an “R” after his name.
I would simply say memories are too short. These are the same arguments made by those who refused to think through the effect of Gilmore’s borrowing on FRANS. Is is really the position of this page that those who created a crisis by the countenance of $8 B in deferred transportation maintenance should be forgiven and rewarded by doing the same for education and public safety? Is our Commonwealth so short sighted that it is willing to substitute a crisis in local government funding for the one the House of Delegates created in transportation? Apparently so, but for me, that is not good enough.
What was going on before wasn’t good enough.
That and Gilmore was a great Governor. Even after the economy was ravaged by 9-11 and other issues, Virginia again went into surplus swiftly under Warner BEFORE HIS TAX INCREASE. Proving the tax increases weren’t needed.
Mike, your arguement with Gilmore just doesn’t make sense as related to this proposal. Your concern about borrowing and other budgets suffering are well taken. This isn’t perfect. Our economy is so bad, we don’t even have the luxuary of perfect budgeting. As Steve mentioned, there is no need to make perfect the enemy of the good in this situation.
Hopefully the economy will improve and revenue gains from that and a more efficent infrastructure will be had. If something needs funding, nobody wants to under fund it,but this is a crisis and something must be done. They will surely be pressured to repair damaged budgets when possible. In a crisis you prioritize. It is just that simple.
No Britt, it is a crisis you acknowledge and pay for, not by stealing from Virginia’s children.
Mike you are having way to much fund, but you need to give it up. My friend Brian nor Bearing Drift will ever support a highway funding proposal that is self funded that most importantly takes care of the needs everyone agrees are there. PAY AS YOU GO WAS THE MOST CNSERVATIVE IDEAL EVER PUT INTO PRACTICE. The most conservative Governor for all times his Excellency Governor Byrd and the equally revered conservative Governor Reagan would turn over in their graves if they witnessed what is sold as conservatism these days. Pass the debt on and make it that much tougher for future Governors to put a real solution forward. That keeps their hands clean.
No, Mike. The people stealing from children in this crisis are the guys that raided our transportation money to artificially pad those budgets, some of which are the ones you have mentioned. With such dishonest accounting we ended up with this “crisis” because THEY didn’t pay for it in the first place.
And Mike…….the answer is not to replace STATE obligations with some idiotic regional self hatred organization like the unconstitutional HRTA. The answer is to prioritize emergencies and any crisis until we can afford to return to proper accounting and distribution. The chickens have come home to roost. Borrowing is practically forced unless you want to just gut the General Fund even more.
…….oh……..a big hello to Marty Williams. Obviously we disagree. Too bad there wasn’t pay as you go, or we wouldn’t have had this mess. There would have been no emergency call for an unconstitutional taxing authority if we were pay/go. Too much pandering and creative accounting for that.
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.