General Assembly Sine Die, Part Two

In Part One of this year’s recap on the Virginia General Assembly, I took a look at popular session sound bites, Second Amendment legislation, Air B&B, and Farm Bills. Issues making the cut for this series are not necessarily those bills which successfully made it through both houses. I think it’s important to know what’s on the mind of your elected officials. I am looking at trends and to provide insight on what legislation your elected officials feel is important enough to present to the body.

One of the recurrent themes over the last few years has been legislation that dismantled the authority of local government, either in unfunded mandates, removing taxing authority without offering substitutes, or placing citizens in uncomfortable positions through what is essentially forced zoning.  The journey of the “Cable Bill” through the GA this year is a pretty strong example of how far these can go and what they entail before they are done.  

This bill, which demonstrates on many levels the lack of respect for local government, was Delegate Kathy Byron’s HB2108. This was essentially a hissy fit from the cable lobby who sought to prevent localities from initiating their own internet authorities.

Local governance from around the state mobilized to fight HB2108, including an intrepid group from rural Orange County who simply would not give up. My hat’s off to Orange County, who last year created, with the help of a consultant, a new strategic plan for economic development for their county. The plan addressed a number of issues standing in the way of business development, including internet. Their overall plan, created by needs only local government can identify, and financed by bonds, was not limited to internet, but did use the idea of extended connectivity to various areas of their county as a platform for smart growth and business development. Their sheer pluck by being unwilling to give up on what they knew to be bad for their county, and the derailing of their strategic plan, benefited everyone in Virginia.      

This bill, too, masqueraded under the auspices of something it clearly wasn’t, and that was providing more transparency in local government and, even more fantastical, looking out for the tax payers’ dollars (yes the cable lobby says it will do this for you). In real terms, any money spent on a local authority would already show up in a county budget and is broken down by projects. Transparency is already provided at the local level. If it isn’t, a new Board of Supervisors is called for, chosen by local citizens and at their behest at election time. This is a citizen fix, not a General Assembly fix.        

In a step further, it is also of note that the cable industry sought to take away the authority for local government to make proper contracts. A part of the bill called for any negotiations for contracts between counties and cities to build and install internet with private entities to be open to the public in their initial phases. However, due to persistent efforts by citizens, Boards of Supervisors and the Virginia Association of Counties, as well as the Virginia Municipal League, this was gutted, as was most of the bill. No other such contract negotiations in any other sector are public in this phase.

Most localities expressed frustration at the idea of entering the internet business in the first place and did so reluctantly when companies refused to provide it, citing their bottom line. In reality, when such options are exhausted, local government is in the best position to understand where internet is needed, where it can piggyback with other localities, or where it can link up one rural area with another via smaller local authorities. If the governor signs this one, it can be thought of as a “best practices” bill that localities already pretty much follow presently, and a complete waste of the General Assembly’s time.

This kind of obstructionist and invasive legislation, just like the “dog bill,” are unfortunate and do nothing to bring and foster services for citizens of the Commonwealth. Instead of “picking” on localities like Orange County, the GA might do better to actually study and get educated on what good, creative governance looks like in their own state.

Moving on, let’s look at a series of bills from one legislator who is not afraid to dive right in and tackle both pertinent, timely, and controversial issues. His name is Delegate Mark Cole, and he represents the 88th District in parts of Fredericksburg, Stafford, Spotsylvania, and Fauquier. I like his legislation because it is clearly crafted in response to local constituent issues or aimed at processes that are no longer conducive to electing conservative candidates in Virginia. He introduced a proposed constitutional amendment which would make major changes to how candidates are placed on the ballot. HJ635 would award that spot to the top two political candidates, regardless of party. Although it was left in Privileges and Elections, it’s worth the read and is a process followed in other states.

In response to rural citizens who feel their votes are not counted due to the turn out in more populous areas like NOVA, Delegate Cole went on to introduce HB1425, which would change how Virginia allocates electors. This one, too, was tabled in Privileges and Elections by voice vote. 
    
Cole also floated an interesting constitutional amendment to give authority to elected school boards to impose real property taxes. HJ634 was passed by for the year, yet it opens the door to the discussion at the General Assembly level of the interminable and ugly battle which takes place between Boards of Supervisors and School Boards every spring all over Virginia. For the most part, School Boards in Virginia and the superintendents who run the show lobby every year, sometimes very aggressively, for a “money pit” solution to the issues in public education. In other words, throw money at the problem and it will go away. When governing bodies refuse to give a blank check, they are deemed hostile to public education and school board budgets enjoy almost a protected status in Virginia, akin to, “Don’t ask, Don’t tell.” 

It is novel to contemplate how many Virginia citizens would be unable to pay their real estate taxes if school boards were able to tax real property. This would certainly show once and for all exactly what the mindset is with school boards. The casual attitude toward public money of many (not all) elected school boards would be disastrous and, with everyone I spoke to, it was a non-starter. The next step, I have gathered, is for legislation which would aim at bridging the disconnect between the boards by having appointed school board members statewide. This would provide a shared vision with appointees who actually understand county budgets, the various services government must provide besides public education, and how to balance accordingly. Constitutional amendments must pass two years in both houses, including an election year, in order to be added to the Virginia ballot.    

Looking at the issue of voter fraud in Virginia, Cole had two bills worth mentioning. The first was HB1431, and in its first reading was probably one of my favorite bills of the session. It would have required these very questionable mystery voter groups who have appeared in the last several elections to apply to the State Board of Elections for a unique number. They then in turn, according to the bill verbiage, must assign each of their employees a number and both must appear on every form they turn in to the registrar. In this way, it would track who actually turns in fraudulent documents. Citing the costs associated with registering and tracking the unique numbers, it was amended into a bill which prohibited the compensation of those who register the most voters during a drive or election season. This is a huge step in the right direction, passing both houses.

Another Cole bill aimed at voter fraud was HB1399, an effort to reconfigure how electoral boards are appointed, and was narrowly defeated on the Senate side. This was an effort to level the playing field and give us some relief from what has happened to the state electoral board, as well as some local boards under McAuliffe, where the trend is to look the other way on fraudulently registered voters.       

Senator Mark Obenshain also championed the problem of illegal voter registration. A really great bill targeting voter fraud, which passed both houses, called for local registrars to be able to investigate voter rolls that carry more names than 100 percent of the voting population. There are eight such localities in Virginia where it would be impossible for this many citizens to actually be legally  registered to vote. There are a number of localities who carry 80 percent of the voting population, which is questionable as well. This has, sadly, already been vetoed by the governor.

Senator Obenshain’s much talked about HB902 Party Registration Bill, which got so much buzz online in early January, was left in Privileges and Elections.

Of course, in characteristic fashion, unfortunately for the third year in a row, Governor  McAuliffe has already vetoed Delegate Rob Bell’s HB1578 Tebow Bill which would allow home schooled students to participate in public school sports. 

The Opioid epidemic was also on the minds of the GA this year and on the 23rd of February, Delegate Dave Larock, who represents parts of Frederick, Loudoun, and Clarke Counties, watched Governor McAuliffe sign his HB1453. This legislation, which has an emergency clause, will increase access to the opioid overdose antidote, Naloxone, by allowing state-certified overdose reversal instructors to give it out at their training events throughout the Commonwealth.

Stay tuned for Part Three of my 2017 Virginia General Assembly recap while Governor McAuliffe alternately picks up and puts down his pen. Some of the legislation McAuliffe will reject can be overturned by a two-thirds vote of the body at the annual Veto Session in April.  

  • Pingback: Virginia General Assembly Sine Die - Bearing Drift()

  • MD Russ

    Susan,

    Thank you for the rundown, esp. the nod to my own Delegate Dave Larock for pushing the Naloxone bill. That is probably the first positive thing that he has done since he primaried Joe May for supporting the McDonnell transportation plan. As we like to say in the country, “God bless his heart.”

    As to appointed versus elected school boards, there has been at least one academic study that has demonstrated that there is no difference in school district spending per student in Virginia between those districts that have an elected school board and those that have one that is appointed by the BOS. Having an elected school board does not increase the school budget or, consequentially, improve schools. I doubt that allowing elected school boards to directly tax county residents would survive the next election.

    http://webapps.roanoke.edu/businessweb/SEINFORMS%202008%20-%20Proceedings/proc/p080526004.pdf

    • Susan Sili

      My take from talking to a number of GA members was it was meant not to survive but to signal that it’s time to address the problem. I like to use Caroline as an example but just about every locality that borders us is in the same battle every time budget rolls around. While the figures demanded are different in the region, they mirror in percentage what they demand in Caroline, Our school board wants 2.6 million more from the bos again this year and last year got $500.000 more in additional funding. So there are no plans to submit a realist budget, only the protracted PR war with the same results. Delegate Cole represents the region which adjoins us so he is familiar. And yes having an elected school board will not automatically increase spending because the localities are saying no, just as Caroline has had to. With arrears at an all time high for raising taxes for the High School renovation several years ago, we would have to go 8 cents per hundred more just to meet the demand for this year. This does not include the millions demanded in the last five years with no accountability. Had the bos agreed to 2-3 million more a year every year, I would have to sell my house and move. In 2014, the superintendent built himself a state of the art cafeteria within the school only for himself and staff members to use and brand new flower boxes leading up to his office with the surplus they said they did not have. And totally agree, there is no relation to money and improving schools. I have seen however at the local level how appointments by good bos members benefit the citizens in the way of planning commission, redistricting committees, Board of Zoning Appeals and Industrial Development Authority. The thought process is the same synergy could benefit counties.There was also a bill to force the school boards to put the check book online so to speak but not sure how far it got. , , .

      • MD Russ

        There is a direct relationship between increasing school budgets and improving public education, but only if the budget increase is used to improve teachers’ compensation and not to paint rocks. There seems to be a correlation between salaries and the quality of the people that are attracted and retained. Funny how that works.

  • old_redneck

    As we move into the House of Delegates election season, here’s a candidate

    Republicans in the 31st HOD district can get behind.

    A Virginia man is running for House of Delegates after spending 16 months in jail for threatening to kill then-President Barack Obama in 2009.

    Nathan Daniel Larson told WUSA that he is running for Virginia’s 31st House District. Election officials confirmed that Larson had collected the required number of signatures to appear on the ballot.

    In 2009, Larson sent Secret Service an email saying he wanted to kill President Obama. As a result of being convicted of a felony, Larson lost his voting rights, which Virginia lists as a requirement for running for office. But his rights were restored by Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) after he was released from prison.

    Larson, however, believes that women should not have the right to vote, and he is running on a platform of suppressing the rights of women. He also believes that fathers should be able to marry their daughters.

    “I think women want male leadership, and so men have to be strong,” Larson explained to WUSA. “Men have to take the stances they believe are right, and women will respect that.”

    http://www.wusa9.com/news/local/virginia/man-convicted-of-obama-death-threat-runs-for-va-delegate-seat/420240548

    • MD Russ

      Larson has neither the endorsement of the Democratic nor the Republican Party. He is running as an Independent and has previously sought office as a Libertarian. The Libertarian Party is actively seeking to remove his association with their party, proving that even the party of Ron Paul has some standards, weak and ineffectual as they might be.

      But that is the beauty of American Democracy. Even Socialist Bernie Sanders can contend for the Democratic nomination for President and a New York Democrat like Donald Trump can be elected in the Rust Belt states as a Republican President on a series of failed campaign promises. (Have you seen his latest draft budget on who is going to pay for the southern wall?)

      • Turtles Run

        MD Russ

        I have to correct your statement in part. Trump has been a Republican far longer that he was a Democrat. From 1987 to 1999 hes was a registered Republican. From 2001 to 2009 he was a Democrat then switched back to Republican in 2011. President Trump is a true blue Republican.

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/deebc454b5f8b78f9163fb6e7701af97ad08d4c31949d4524bd686d2d0f446e6.png

        Matt Suarez

        • MD Russ

          No argument, Matt. You have the facts. However, I contend that if Obama and Hillary had been Republicans (just for the sake of argument), Trump would have run in 2015-16 as a Democrat. He is neither a true blue Republican nor a Democrat. He is just an opportunistic phony with no principles.

          That is the unfortunate aspects of the Trump movement. I have a certain amount of sympathy towards the populist movement. Some of the great watershed historical events of American history have been driven by populism, from Andrew Jackson to the early 20th Century Muckrakers. But the inevitable failure of Donald Trump, a man who will be hoisted on his own petard sooner or later, will be a significant setback to needed reforms that we must undertake before our democracy is bankrupt. Reform of entitlements spending is number one on that list. But the emperor will never take away the free bread and circuses from the masses. And the backlash to Trumpism will be an orgy of Pelosi-style social spending.

          • Turtles Run

            I have no doubt that if Trump felt he needed to join the Leopards Eating Faces Party he would have done so.

            I would contend that what Trump is offering is even worse than an orgy of Pelosi-style social spending. He has sold the Trumpanzees that they can get all the entitlememts they desire, increases to the military, and at the same time get a tax cut. Pelosi would at least pass tax increases to pay for her programs.

            Matt Suarez

  • Pingback: General Assembly Sine Die, Part Three - Bearing Drift()

  • Pingback: General Assembly Sine Die, Part Four - Bearing Drift()

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.