Fundamental Change = New Virginia Constitution

In the Aug. 16 edition of The New Republic, Sarah Williams Goldhagen explores the causes of America’s collapsing physical infrastructure. (You can read the first paragraph here; then you have to subscribe.) She posits a number of causes, including the difficulty in a democracy of constructing large-scale public works without trampling on peoples’ rights, and the abdication of the federal government as a funding source. But the third point she raises should be of interest to anyone familiar with Ed Risse’s call for Fundamental Change in governance structures.

Goldhagen writes:

The country has undergone a structural transformation from city-suburb-exurb-farmland, a constellation that does not necessarily conflict with the tripartite local-state-federal structure of government, into metropolitan regions, a constellation that does conflict with that structure. We are stuck with the existing political, legal, and institutional structures of states (usually bigger than metropolitan areas), and municipalities (smaller and self interested) through which almost everything must be organized and funneled. Neither is the right kind of entity for managing a metropolitan region, but together they inevitably organize our thinking and, more important, our policy planning, which turns out to be too unfocused (in the case of states) or too hyper-focused (in the case of municipalities).

The recent creation of transportation authorities in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads partially addresses the issue here in Virginia. The authorities allow the state’s two most populous metropolitan areas to address their transportation needs on a regional basis

At this stage of development, however, there are two mega problems with the Virginia solution. First, regional transportation authorities have the power to raise taxes but are not accountable to the public in the same way that local governments are. Representatives are not elected directly, and the rules of open, transparent government do not necessarily apply.

Secondly, because transportation and land use decision making is so closely intertwined, it should be made at the same level of government. I know that the idea of transferring land use decisions from municipal to regional governments would strike some people as a horrifying prospect. Keep government close to the people, they would argue. (A valid point, I would add.) On the other hand, the munipical government boundaries we have now are artifacts of the 19th century, devised to serve a largely agrarian economy, not the economy dominated by sprawling metropolitan areas.

The writers of the Virginia constitution originally envisioned two types of municipality: cities to serve urban areas, which required a higher level of government services, and counties to serve rural areas. Cities were given more taxing power and legal authority, and counties less. As development spread beyond city boundaries, cities annexed the developed portions of their neighboring counties and extended urban infrastructure and services to them. The animating idea was that a single governmental entity would preside over a single urbanized area. For a variety of complex reasons, however, cities lost the right to annex. Thus, as urbanized areas grew, they came to encompass multiple jurisdictions.

The system we have today is not what the architects of Virginia’s system of local government intended. It is time for Fundamental Change in the institutions of governance. It is time to revise the Virginia Constitution. Virginia adopted a new constitution in 1971 to reflect the new realities of the Civil Rights revolution. Thirty-six years later, it’s time our system of local government reflect the realities of 21st century human settlement patterns.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

50 responses to “Fundamental Change = New Virginia Constitution”

  1. Anonymous Avatar

    JB: An outstanding, insightful, constructive post. If I had knighthoods to hand out, I’d give you one on that post alone (although the entirety of your work in this spot merits recognition also). Many thanks.

  2. Shaun Kenney Avatar
    Shaun Kenney

    You know, I’ve always wondered whether a “mock constitutional convention” done online by selected Virginia notables/bloggers would produce something quite innovative.

    I know there’s Mock Congresses that operate on similar (tech) principles… an online Virginia Constitutional Convention would be a splendid idea.

    Just a thought. And I have zero idea on how to implement something like this.

  3. Jim Bacon Avatar

    The scary thing about a new constitutional convention (mock or otherwise) is that you never know what zany direction it might go. That could be a very good thing or a very bad thing…

  4. Barnie Day Avatar

    Is this the same Fairfax County that complains incessantly about growth and congestion and lobbies without end for growth control legislation? BKD

    GOVERNOR KAINE ANNOUNCES VOLKSWAGEN TO LOCATE U.S. HEADQUARTERS IN FAIRFAX COUNTY

    ~ Volkswagen to invest more than $100 million, create 400 jobs ~

    RICHMOND – Governor Timothy M. Kaine today announced that Volkswagen of America, Inc. will invest more than $100 million to relocate its U.S. corporate headquarters to Fairfax County. The new 185,000-square-foot facility in Woodland Park business park will serve as the U.S. headquarters for Volkswagen of America, Inc., and will include the U.S. headquarters for Audi of America, Inc., Audi Financial Services, Volkswagen Credit and other affiliated operations. The project will create 400 new jobs in Fairfax County.

    “Volkswagen’s decision to locate in Virginia is a strong affirmation of the Commonwealth’s business-friendly environment, location, market access and infrastructure,” said Governor Kaine. “The caliber of companies already located in this region and the proximity to Washington Dulles International Airport were significant factors in the company’s decision.”

    Founded in 1955, Volkswagen of America, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, headquartered in Wolfsburg, Germany. Volkswagen is the world’s fourth largest producer of passenger cars and is Europe’s largest automaker.

    “This move is part of our company’s new corporate strategy of connecting even more closely with our customers, and encouraging fresh ideas and bold thinking,” said Stefan Jacoby, CEO of Volkswagen of America. “Virginia’s workforce and business culture are in line with that strategy, and its location is convenient to vitally important markets for all our brands. We are excited to become part of the Virginia community.”

    The Virginia Economic Development Partnership worked with Fairfax County to secure the project for Virginia. Governor Kaine approved $1.5 million from the Governor’s Opportunity Fund to assist Fairfax County with the project. The Governor also approved $4.5 million in funds from the Virginia Economic Development Incentive Grant (VEDIG). VEDIG was established as a self-funded program of performance-based incentives that the Commonwealth awards to exceptional economic development projects with large numbers of employees and very high wages relative to average wages for that particular area. The Virginia Department of Business Assistance will provide training and training assistance through the Virginia Jobs Investment Program.

    “Fairfax County is delighted to welcome Volkswagen of America to our community,” said Gerald E. Connolly, Chairman of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors. “Volkswagen of America will find Fairfax County to be an excellent U.S. headquarters because of the highly skilled workforce, access to Europe and the world through Washington Dulles International Airport, and the high quality of life we enjoy here.”

    In July, Governor Kaine announced that Virginia again led the nation in Forbes.com’s “Best States for Business” ranking, achieving top honors for a second consecutive year. The Forbes review examined multiple objective measurements, including business cost, regulatory climate, quality of the workforce, and economic growth. Forbes.com is the official Internet site of the Forbes family of business publications.

    # # #

  5. Shaun Kenney Avatar
    Shaun Kenney

    Of course, zany ideas are typically either the very best or the very worst…

  6. Jim:

    Great post and great comments. I’d add a couple of points:

    1. The regional philosophy for Northern Virginia is better than the state / municipal philosophy. However, our metropolitan area also includes Maryland and Washington, DC. It would be interesting to hear EMR’s thoughts on how far he thinks the governance restructuring needs to go. Does it stop with the Virginia Constitution or continue to require a revamping of the US Constitution.

    2. The regional authorities may be opaque but so is the state. A lot seems to go on behind closed doors in Richmond.

    3. The growth at all costs philosophy of Fairfax County does need re-thinking, especially as transportation programs such as the extended Metro bog down in debate and political wrangling. However, 400 jobs at a North American HQ is probably a good thing that can be pretty easily absorbed by a county of over 1 million people. However, I have are real problem with Gov. Kaine taking any credit. Anything good that happens in Fairfax County happens in spite of the governor and state legislature – not because of them.

    4. As you know, I put a lot of blame for dysfunctional governance in Virginia at the feet of the state legislature. It is, in my opinion, a group which values its own power far more than the welfare of the Commonwealth’s residents. Virginia remains one of only 5 states with virtually no provision for home rule. The matter has been brought up on multiple occasions and silently killed by the power hungry merchants of greed in Richmond. What might compel the state legislature to revamp the Virginia Constitution giving away some of the state’s power?

    I am afraid that it will take a replacement of the incumbents to get the change you discuss. And it will take a crisis to get a voter revolt sufficient to replace the incumbents.

  7. Jim Bacon Avatar

    Barnie, the phenomenon you describe has been called “jobilism” — the pursuit of jobs for the sake of jobs, regardless of whether the region receiving those jobs needs them or not. Bringing new jobs to Patrick County is a great thing: It puts people to work and/or allowsbetter opportunities for the under-employed. Bringing jobs to NoVa makes less sense. Unemployment is essentially non-existent, and jobs can be filled only if new people move into the region to take them, or to replace the people taking them in their old jobs, thus putting more pressure on transportation, housing, schools and other infrastructure.

    Groveton, You are right, people rarely make difficult changes until they reach a crisis point. Virginia has not reached a crisis point. Our job is to articulate a better way until such time as the people and powers-that-be are willing to make the necessary changes.

  8. Jim Bacon Avatar

    P.S. Subsidizing Volkswagen of America with $6 million in public funds makes even less sense.

  9. Barnie Day Avatar

    The bald-faced double-speak is staggering:

    “What is clear from the statistics is that we can’t continue our current patterns of development in the region without exacerbating the problems we already have – sprawl and congestion,” Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Chairman Gerald Connolly said Wednesday.
    Assoiciated Press, March 31, 2005

    “Fairfax County is delighted to welcome Volkswagen of America to our community,” said Gerald E. Connolly, Chairman of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors. “Volkswagen of America will find Fairfax County to be an excellent U.S. headquarters because of the highly skilled workforce, access to Europe and the world through Washington Dulles International Airport, and the high quality of life we enjoy here.” Today’s press release from the governor’s office.

  10. Replacing the incumbents won’t help get home rule, the democrats ran the state for some time and they had no more interest in ceding power than the republicans in the senate seem to.

    As to jobs in Fairfax, it’s good to put more jobs in the county, because if it means 400 people who now commute to DC instead drive somewhere in Fairfax, that’s 400 fewer cars on 66.

    There’s nothing wrong with replacing jobs, we need our northern virginian communities to put more jobs into the communities, so we can stop shuffling our population back and forth every day.

    Of course, it would be better if the federal government moved the jobs out away from DC, since SOMEBODY has to do those jobs.

  11. Anonymous Avatar

    Doesn’t EMR advocate a multilevel government, something like six additional layers (dooryard, courtyard, etc.)?

    It’s one thing to have a government designed to recognize the facts on the ground, to manage our metropolitan areas (sprawling or not), but that’s a lot different from adding several new layers.

    As it is now, we have the senate wich is organized to represent by area, and the house which is organized to represent by population. Maybe we could have a tricameral body with the third body to be represented by areas of equal economic clout. You might have only six or seven of these: Central NOVA, Central HR, Richmond, Exurbia (could be noncontiguous), Southern ROVA, and Northern ROVA.

    That way a bill would have to get through three houses before it went to the governor. Populist bills with heavy handout provisions might not make the economic cut, and regional bills would have to meet both economic and populist criteria to have a chance to succeed.

    RH

  12. Anonymous Avatar

    Thank you, Charles.

    When I first started making comments similar to your here I was told that I was almost alone in my thinking.

    If we start thinking of sprawl as housing absent jobs, then the governors doublespeak looks a little less cheezy. Anyway, the way things are now, if they are talking about near Dulles, what that means is Downtown Loudoun as much as it means suburban Fairfax.

    Too my way of thinking, it would have been better for VW to choose a place around Barnie’s house, where the jobs are really needed. VW explained that away by saying they wanted to be someplace where cars other than the big three are driven.

    RH

  13. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I agree. Very excellent Jim!

    some comments:

    * – The governance issue is “more” than Virginia and/or Dillon … it extends to Home Rule jurisdictions also.

    * – Regional issues needs regional approaches to solutions.

    Virginia does HAVE Planning Districts as well as Fed-mandated MPOs … as well as hundreds/thousands of Regional Libraries, landfills, water/sewer authorities, etc.

    How about Regional economic development authorities?

    * – we current do not elect _any_ existing regional authority governances (like MPOs … library, landfill, etc) as far as I know.

    I’m not advocating that we don’t need to – only observing that we do have regional authorities that apparently “do work”.. without direct election.

    *. – major fly in the “fundamental change in governance” ointment…

    right now – existing regional authorities … do not “match” up with their boundaries…

    for instance, MPO boundaries do not match up with Virginia planning district boundaries.. much less the plethora of other regional authorities….

    should they? or not … or if they don’t.. is that okay… but we still need to elect the “governors” of each and every regional authority?

    how about taxaction authority?

    School boards cannot currently tax in Virginia… should they be allowed to if they convert to regional school authorities?

    I suspect that I’ve asked waaayyy too many questions here but what the heck.. if we want to .. pontificate… let’s do it justice.

  14. E M Risse Avatar

    Did I hear someone knock?

    Jim Bacon: Good eye, good post.

    Barnie: Good to have you back! I nearly choaked (that is choked and croaked) over the VW decision.

    Charles is partly right. It is good to have jobs in Fairfax but not more jobs in one of the nine Beta Communities (Greater Reston) that already has an imbalance of jobs over housing, services, recreation and amenity. (aka J / H / S / R / A)

    No public money should be spent for infrasture or for incentives that does not support the evolution of Balanced Communities.

    New Urban Regions are the fundamental building blocks of contemporary civilization but they cannot function as amorphos blobs of urban stuff.

    NURs are composed of organic components and the most important one is the Balanced Communtiy.

    This reality addresses Grovetons point too, and Jim B’s observation about the level of decision on transport and land use (aka, settlement pattern).

    The first principle here is that the level of decision should be at the level of impact.

    Since there is impact at all levels (Dooryard, Cluster, Neighborhood, Village, Community, Subregion (both the VA Subregion and the National Capital Subregion) as well as the Washington-Baltimore NUR of every major decision there is an obvious need for a different governace structue than the one that almost worked for the economic, social and physical reality of 1790.

    (Do not toss bricks, it was the best in the world 1790 and for most of the time since but it was already starting to be out of date because the Industrial Revoltuion was already 40 years old.)

    First there needs to be some form of governace at every level or economic, social, and physical structure (Jim’s Economy 4.0 starts the explore this)

    Second there needs to be a democratic process for making decisions that fairly allocates the costs and benefits of the infrastructre and settlement pattern decisions among all the levels.

    Jim B. is right, no one (including EMR) will stand for just moving decision to the “region” (what region or subregion?)

    UNTIL AND UNLESS THERE IS FUNDAMENTAL REFORM TO GIVE EVERY CITIZEN A WAY TO BE INVOLVED IN THE DECISION PROCESS.

    Difficult? Only when you think of NURs in terms of existing “political” (sic) borders and the interests of those who would lose power in a Fundamental Change from Business-As-usual.

    Stay tuned.

    EMR

  15. E M Risse Avatar

    Larry:

    I was writing when your post went up.

    First good to have you back.

    How was the Canadian Rockys?

    Hope there was not too much smoke in the air. I know it is bad below the 49th.

    All your questions are good ones but cannot be addressed until there is a recognition of the need for Fundamental Change.

    For example “School Board” assumes a municipal structure with a “school system.” Do you mean Fairfax with 1.1 million people or Rappahannock with .02 million?

    Every level of governance should have an educational function is the place to start. (It takes a Dooryard to raise an infant, it takes a cluster to raise a todler, etc.)

    EMR

  16. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    EMR … thanks. The Nahanni River is 200 miles west of Fort Simpson in the Northwest Territories. The river trip was 300 miles in 18 days and every night was supper over a campfire and sleep-time in a tent with all kinds of weather then back up the next morning… breakfast then donning foul weather gear (or suntan if we were lucky)…

    On the way to Fort Simpson – there are a LOT of communities and all of them with their own version of settlement patterns… including Edmonton which is promoting TOD with it’s light rail system… DOH!

    Your bigger communities … and who knows exactly what their governance structure is… walk/talk/act much like U.S. communities in terms of highways and commuting patterns to cheaper housing…

    the availability/non availability of electricity has a stark and telling impact… between where housing is… and where it is not.

    places beyond the reach of electricity use propane and it is NOT delivered so you go get it those vertical cannisters and most homes using it have multiple cannisters as backup.

    talk about locational costs… propane cannisters require large pickup trucks. The Ford 250 is the vehicle of choice… Minivans and fuel efficient vehicles are viewed as for those who cannot afford “real” vehicles…

    much more… but I’ll finish this by letting folks know that electricity in Fort Simpson is generated by oil.. and costs more than 30 cents per killowatt hour and as a result – EVERYTHING that uses electricity.. results in a more costly product. For instance, an ordinary hamburger plate with fries is $10….

    and some real irony… boomtown Edmonton and environs… is booming because of oil shale deposits…. and plans for a Canadian pipeline … from way up North where the Canadians hope to beat us to ANWR .. and ship the oil via their new pipeline to the US…. sigh…

  17. Jim Bacon Avatar

    Larry, welcome back from Canada. I’m looking forward to hearing more about your experiences there.

    Regarding your comments about regional authorities. In my original post, I had overlooked the fact that Virginia already has regional planning authorities — they’re called planning district commissions and MPOs. And guess what. Even the regional authorities don’t conform to human settlement patterns. Rarely do regional authorities make a snug fit with metropolitan statistical areas.

    On the bright side, the functions of the regional planning authorities could be lumped in with the regional government. So, in addition to taking on responsibility for transportation and land use, they could take on the function of planning for, if not paying for, other types of infrastructure like water and sewer, as well as doing all the other things that PDCs do.

  18. Barnie Day Avatar

    Jim, don’t fret the $6 million in public funds. NOVA’local government stick-up men will soon shakedown the homebuilders for that chump change in proffers, sending the cost of living there spiralling ever upwards. Joe Six Pack is already shut out. Joe Wine Spritzer is next. By Christmas only Joe Dom Perignon will be able to lay his head down and dream of sugar plums in Fairfax! BKD

  19. Jim Bacon Avatar

    Joe Wine Spritzer — Barnie, you’ve coined a new name for an entire socio-economic class!

  20. Barnie Day Avatar

    The prototype for me was Bob Brink, right honorable delegate from the Peoples Republic of Arlington. The Ds would often huddle up after hours at some good dive–the lower the better–when the GA was in session. I’d order a double Jack Daniels with extra ice. Brink would inevitably go for the wine spritzer. I didn’t know there was such a thing before then. The point is this: if the cost of living continues to be driven up by policy–policy–in these NOVA counties, even their delegates will have to commute. They won’t be able to afford housing there either. Then again, maybe they’ll put up some of these nice day-laborer sheds for them. BKD

  21. Anonymous Avatar

    Wow. This woman is an muddled writer. Good grief, read that first sentence (The country has undergone a structural transformation from city-suburb-exurb-farmland…)

    Did she say something coherent? Who knows. That the rest of you think she did strikes me as a Rorschach inkblot test.

  22. Anonymous Avatar

    Having separate tax authorities may be news in Virginia but has ben the norm for years elsewhere. And it’s not a lot of fun.
    I worked in the Cleveland area for a few years. I ended up paying FOUR sets of income taxes. I paid federal and state. But I paid two LOCAL sets of taxes because my office was in one tax district and my home was in another. There are similar, confusing and onerous situations in the New York City area where people might work in Manhattan but live in New Jersey, Connecticut or even Pennsylvania. They get hammered taxwise.
    I must say that I much prfer the current Virginia system. But you might find it enlightening to look and see the experience of other areas before you start your musings.

  23. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Virginia also allows special tax districts…. though I have no clue how they are allowed in Va law.

    See this link:

    http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dta/special_district.htm

    know also that CDAs (Community Development Authorities) are also special tax districts….

    CDAs are created (I think) when 51% or more of the landowners in the proposed area agree to the tax.

    As a practical matter – CDAs are often created by a single landowner – the developer of a parcel (or acquired multiple parcels) who agrees to the CDA as a condition of rezoning.

    Then.. he/she sells.. leases.. the subdivisions… to those who accept the provision of the additional taxes as part of their purchase/lease agreement.

    again.. as far as I know..none of these special tax districts have elected governance…. and basically – you are taxed… if you agree to buy a property located within that district.

    I’m quite sure we have readers of this blog who are well versed in Va law.. with respect to this subject… weigh in please if you can…

  24. Jim Wamsley Avatar
    Jim Wamsley

    Each of EMRs six levels of Government can levy taxes. Each district would provide services at the level that the taxpayers desire. Many taxes, each for a separate taxing authority is the norm in some places. Here is a little bit of a Cook County Illinois treasurers Pamphlet.

    “Cook County property taxes provide crucial support for
    many vital services and programs including:
    ▪ schools and community colleges
    ▪ police and fire protection
    ▪ public health
    ▪ parks
    ▪ libraries
    ▪ water filtration
    ▪ forest preserves
    The property taxes originate with over 2,000 local and
    suburban taxing authorities (i.e., school, police and fire,
    parks, library boards, etc.), which hold annual hearings
    and set taxes for their specific needs. Meanwhile, the Cook
    County Assessor sets taxable values for each property
    parcel. Following various appeals processes, the final
    assessment values are given to the Cook County Clerk.
    The Clerk calculates the actual property tax rates, based
    upon the local taxing districts’ levies and the Assessor’s
    property valuations within those districts. Relying upon
    these computations, the Cook County Treasurer prepares
    and mails the tax bills.”
    http://www.cookcountytreasurer.com/CCTOAssets/pdfs/pamphlets/English/PINPOINTENGLISH.pdf

  25. Good post and comments…lots of food for thought…well worth rereading and more cogitation.

    Approve of the idea of electing heads of regional authorities, though doubt lifers such as HRPDC’s head Art Collins would concur. In the same vein, the 12 HRTA tax targets are not the same as the 16 HRPDC members…Gloucester, Surry, Southhampton, and Smithfield got a pass (lucky them!…Poquoson’s pass was rescinded on the 7th version of HB3202…unlucky us!) Now we are the same 12 jurisdictions as rejected S668 in 2002. Some surprise.

  26. Anonymous Avatar

    JW

    Wouldn’t 2000 annual hearings pretty well eliminate any meaningful public participation?

    Do those departments actually set taxes, or do they submit a budget request that is then met by taxes?

    What do you do when one district desires one level of services and another district not?

    The way this is written it sounds like your property tax would be the sum of many different levies, and which levies applied to your home would depend on which boundaries you were inside of. Add them all up and divide by your assessment to get your tax rate. In effect, your tax rate is subject to 2000 levels of gerrymandering.

    Compared to that, EMR’s scheme would seem far preferable. But no one is in all 2000 districts, so the question is how many tax bills do Cooke county residents really get? How many districts are they in? In the end it might not be far different from EMR’s description of six or so.

    I would change EMR’s scheme so that only the lowest level can levy taxes. The next five can assess each other and leave me out of it. Why should I pay six tax bills? Then when I want to complain to someone about taxes, it is someone I can go see face to face, toe to toe. Someone local.

    Here is an interesting thought project. Cook county has over 2000 taxing authorities. Presumably, for each of these tax districts the user is paying for what he gets. And each user is paying for the sum of whatever districts he is in.

    Now add up all the district bills and divide by the total population to get a level, per head tax rate. then apply that tax rate to the value of the houses lived in.

    There are probably some areas of the city where people would pay more under a level head tax than by the sum of the districts method, and there are probably some areas that would pay less.

    How big would the differences be?
    How big are the discrepancies in level of service? Which way do the discrepancies point? Is the money flowing from the rich side to the poor side, or vice versa?

    The nice thing about user pays is, that then you can justify poor service even when good service is necessary: those with lousy service are not paying for good service. With a level head tax, you would be under some pressure to supply equivalent services everywhere.

    No conclusions here. Just random thoughts.

    RH

  27. Anonymous Avatar

    “and basically – you are taxed… if you agree to buy a property located within that district.”

    And that is why downzoning is wrong, when compensation is not offered. By having a district relocated from around you, you have paid for something that you no longer have.

    When you agree to buy a property and pay the higher tax, you do so because of some other features the area or property offers. you probably pay a higher price, too.

    Suppose thatlater the district is redrawn and those features are no longer available to you. You would expect reimbursement.

    RH

  28. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    “user pays” =
    “special tax district”

    “user pays” = “private development charging for ALL services provided”

    you don’t pay – you don’t get

    government _could_ … provide a minimum level of service across the jurisdiction… and anyone who wanted “more” would be free to make whatever arrangements they could to obtain better services.

    in my recent travels – I saw thousands upon thousands of acres of cheap land… just there for anyone who wants it… and your right to develop it… boundless…

    you can do your own roads, your own fire/rescue service, your own electricity, your own water/sewer without one wit of “interference” from government.

    so .. let’s be clear… land..by itself is not worth that much if infrastructure and services are lacking… and we all know that others are not going to provide you with those things..just to be helping you out… so of course..the last refuge is to claim that the government “owes” you the “right to develop” your property – which is… in my view -doublespeak.. not restricting you – but instead – helping you pay for the infrastructure/services that you need to actually develop that property.

    right?

    If you really want unfettered property rights… there are places to satisfy that craving..

  29. Anonymous Avatar

    You guys sound like a bunch of old farts whining about the world from your rocking chairs.
    What in God’s name is so wrong about providing incentives for Volkswagen? It’s a plus for the state.
    And before JAB starts pontificating about his “Economy 4.0” and pointing out that Richmond is competing against Jakarta as much as Raleigh, keep in mind that a lot of foreign governments and corporations see abolsutely no problem with paying big time bribes to get what they want. Puritanical Americans are babes in the woods in this regard.
    What’s next among you old farts? Complaining about the internal combustion engine?

  30. Anonymous Avatar

    Larry

    “so .. let’s be clear… land..by itself is not worth that much if infrastructure and services are lacking… and we all know that others are not going to provide you with those things..just to be helping you out… so of course..the last refuge is to claim that the government “owes” you the “right to develop” your property “

    I never said they owe the right to develop, only that if that right once existed and they take it away do they owe.

    If your argument is correct, then why would government refuse or delay the right to develope where infrastructure already exists?

    I could make ANY offer to my government in exchange for modest development rights, and the answer would be No.

    It isn’t about money, it is about power.

    As it stands now, I do my own road, my own sewer, and my own fire protection. Meanwhile the rest of the state is free to drive across six lanes of highway that were built across what was once part of the farm.

    Your statement that if you really want unfettered property rights sounds very much like the comment made in public by one of my (former) county superviors: “If you don’t like the rules, get out.” It’s hardly a democratic position to take.

    My father was once run out of a jurisdiction, at gunpoint, because he tried to change the rules there. As a result, I don’t take too kindly to the “go someplace else” argument.

    I’ll say it again. What has been imposed on my wife’s family is wrong. Period. It is wrong, and it needs to be fixed. Her family is not alone in this either.

    As it happens, I have neither the need or the desire to develop her property, but that doesn’t mean that what has happened still isn’t wrong. Public officials freely admit that they are overcharging her, and have been for decades. If the time ever comes that her property is developed, those that argue as you do will conveniently forget that, and ask for “development fees”. It is nonsense.

    I realize there are two ways of looking at nearly everything, but your doublespeak arguments will never convince me otherwise.

    After all, if you really want a place where development is unlikely, there are places to satisfy that craving.

    RH

  31. E M Risse Avatar

    At 7:09 AM, Anonymous said…

    You guys sound like a bunch of old farts whining about the world from your rocking chairs.

    What in God’s name is so wrong about providing incentives for Volkswagen?

    It’s a plus for the state.

    SHOW US THE NUMBERS

    And before JAB starts pontificating about his “Economy 4.0” and pointing out that Richmond is competing against Jakarta as much as Raleigh, keep in mind that a lot of foreign governments and corporations see abolsutely no problem with paying big time bribes to get what they want.

    AH! THERE IS SOMEONE FROM “NEW JERSEY” OR PERHAPS “LOUISIANA.”

    Puritanical Americans are babes in the woods in this regard.

    YOU MIGHT ENROLL IN ETHICS 001 AFTER YOU TAKE ENLIGHTENED SELF-ITEREST 001. YOU ARE NOT READY FOR THE 100 LEVEL COURSES YET.

    What’s next among you old farts? Complaining about the internal combustion engine?

    AS A MATTER OF FACT, YES.

    THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE IS NO BETTER THAN THE HORSES IT REPLACED WHEN USED IN A WAY THAT DESTROYS THE PROSPECT OF A SUSTAINABLE TRAJECTORY FOR CIVILIZATION.

    RELYING ON LARGE, PRIVATE VEHICLES POWERED BY INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES TO PROVIDE MOBILITY AND ACCESS IN CONTEMPORARY, TECHNOLOGICALLY ADVANCED URBAN SYSTEMS IS A DEAD END.

    ANYONE BUT AN OLD FART KNOWS THAT AND THEY JUST HOPE THEY GET THERES BEFORE THE DOOR CLOSES.

    EMR

  32. Ray:

    You think that the government overcharges (in taxes I assume) for your wife’s farm. I think the governemnt overtaxes residents of Fairfax County.

    In fact, you and I can think what we like but we don’t really know.

    And why don’t we know?

    Because the politicians won’t disclose the facts.

    Corporations routinely determine profit and loss statements for their many subsidiaries. They allocate shared overhead and determins what the costs for each subsidiary are.

    Question: Why can’t the state of Virginia define revenues and costs by location?

    Answer: Because they don’t want to.

    We need to push the political candidates to start telling the truth.

    Until then – I guess we’ll both just assume we’re being over-taxed.

  33. Jim Wamsley Avatar
    Jim Wamsley

    Ray:
    You apparently missed the post that inspired my note about Cook County.

    The question I addressed was how would taxes be collected if you have EMR’s levels of government. The Cook County example could be used.

    The 2000 districts included many school districts in Cook County. Most areas have township schools. This keeps counties like Fairfax from only building new schools in developing pyramids. Each pyramid would have its own school board and tax rate. Money would not flow from older areas to new developments.

    I remember about a dozen or two tax districts on the tax bill. You get one bill from the county that has a separate figure for each district based on the districts budget and the assessed valuation in each district.

  34. E M Risse Avatar

    Anon 2:54

    Actually the opening sentence that you quoted is quite straight forward and should be clear to any fourth grader.

    It is simplistic and assumes pure concentric expansion of urban places which is not the case. The US of A is afflicted with a Helter Skelter Crisis.

    Anon 2:54, if you really are confused by this description blame the educational system and MainStream Media not the author.

    EMR

  35. Anonymous Avatar

    “I remember about a dozen or two tax districts on the tax bill. You get one bill from the county that has a separate figure for each district based on the districts budget and the assessed valuation in each district.”

    That’s what I thought you meant.

    But two dozen is a lot more complicated than EMR’s six.

    I just wonder if the additional complication and many levels of overhead makes the whole thing worthwhile, or just more expensive.

    I don’t know how you would ever sort it out. Cook county is pretty big, but 2000 taxing entities?

    I’m sure glad computers make it possible to make things so easy. This may be an example of whare all the “productivity” computers were supposed to give us went.

    RH

  36. Anonymous Avatar

    “Cook County property taxes provide crucial support for
    many vital services and programs ….
    ▪ water filtration
    ▪ forest preserves”

    Gee. Maybe if I moved the farm to Cook County then I could get paid for what I have to pay extra to provide here for free.

    RH

  37. Anonymous Avatar

    “I think the government overtaxes residents of Fairfax County.”

    I own property in Fairfax, too. Compared to Fauquier, it is a bargain, based on my general sensibilities and observations.

    Otherwise, you are right. Any bank that ran the way the government does would be shut down for nondisclosure. Any bank that ran as Fauquier does would be shut down for fraud and / or false advertising.

    RH

  38. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    re: multiple tax districts…

    hmmm…. think about what might happen … if ANY power or phone provider could sell you service and overlapping districts would result.

    What I am talking about is the physical lines and poles.

    First – you’d have a whole crapload of multiple poles and lines occupying a huge right-of-way .. so that customers could “select” which one to get power/phone from.

    But then… ask yourself .. where the right-of-way itself would come from and what would happen if a landowner refused to sell right of way….

    So … my point is .. that the right-of-way is deemed important for the “public benefit” and therefore the right of emminent domain.. comes into play… and, in turn, how wide/big the ROW would have to be.

    In effect, we have chosen to allow a monoply to provide phone/electric distribution service so that we won’t have dozens of separate companies power lines and poles.

    right?

    … now back to tax districts… and “overlapping” boundaries and services….

    depending on whether what is being provided is infrastructure or services…

    for instance, you can buy propane or fuel oil from ANY provider – i.e. overlapping territories

    but … what about water, sewer,

    obviously we don’t want multiple providers… (or do we?)

    …. the main point here is that we already have a situation where we pay .. many different providers… for services… both public and private but infrastructure… physically requires some level of accomodation unless we want our streets to look like 3rd world countries with powerlines as thick as clothes lines..

  39. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    re: development rights and downzonings.

    first.. the law states that per the public need – as determined by elected officials .. BOTH upzones and downzones are permitted.

    second.. is that the law also states that elected government has the right, indeed the duty, to designated WHERE they will invest in infrastructure and where they will not.

    If they grant one land owner an exception then a legal precedent is set that grants all others in the same situation are entitled to equivalent rights.

    otherwise known as “spot zoning”.

    so as long as Ray cannot demonstrate that he.. as an individual is not being treated any different than a similiar class of landowners… might have a substantial hill to climb to make his case.

    That would mean… on a map… all the properties around his .. that walked/talked/acted like his would have “rights” different from his property…

    which would be a no-brainer – legally.

    but .. if a locality (elected officials) … decides that an entire area of a locality will NOT be designated for certain land-uses… and they follow legal and legislative process…

    this happens .. all the time… across Virginia… where .. quite often.. rural land is designated – as not to be developable and further than infrastructure and services for higher-density development, as a consequence of the rural designation.. will not be made available…

    I myself… have seen a parcel that I own… go from being subdividable into two lots to a more restrictive designation of not being subdividable.

    my understanding.. of Va law.. is that .. the county.. has the legal right to do that..

    I’m free to challenge it legally – but from what I’ve learned… it would be futile….

    .. and believe me… I’m sure that owners of larger parcels… who used to being able to subdivide 10, 20 or more times.. and now restricted to 5 or 10 acre limits have also comptemplated similiar legal thoughts… and abandoned them.

    Not to say.. there can’t be a first time… and/or a Va Supreme Court ruling and/or a legislative change in the GA…

    .. but to this point.. it is.. what it is…

    we are all free to complain about what we think is “fair”.. and even challenge what we think is “unfair”… though…

  40. Anonymous Avatar

    More doublespeak, Larry.

    It is stealing and you know it.

    The county has the legal right to do that, but it doesn’t make it right. Slavery was legal once, too, and what they have done to me and others like me is not too different. I can either do what they want me to do, or I can pay them more for the privilege of stopping.

    Avoiding the problem of spot zoning by creating a larger class of people who have been stolen from is not the way to fix the problem.

    If they do not wish to invest in infrastructure, fine. Then tell me what the required infrastructure or contribution to infrastructure is, and I’ll provide it or not. That isn’t the case here: it isn;t about infrastructure.

    It is about a bunch of other people getting want they want, and having me pay for it, and then having me pay more than other people for the privilege of reamining in this condition. Even if I elect to get out of tis condition, they will back bill me still more, just for getting out. In other words, they will have gotten what they wanted for five or ten years and still bill me asif they didn’t get it.

    It is stealing. You will never convince me otherwise.

    If I was restricted even to a twenty acre limit, that would be something. If there was a way to buy out of the restrictions, then I could decide if the cost was worth the gain. but I have no options – zero. 180 acre minimum lot size.

    I don’t even want to or care to subsidize but what happened here was wrong. What happened to you was wrong on a smaller scale, but it is just as wrong. The county and other county residents got something they wanted from for reasons they thought were valuable – and they paid you nothing for what they took.

    It is stealing.

    RH

  41. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Is .. considered stealing.. by a majority of voters in your county (who would presumedly vote out the offenders)?

    is it stealing according to the Va Supreme Court or the Va GA?

    I’m not arguing that it is not – necessarily – only that in order to get traction on the issue – you have to have supporters of your view.

    this sounds a lot like… something that is .. not right… and festers… until .. someone or a group confront it.. and get relief either through the courts or the GA.

    but again.. in most places.. even beyond Va.. it is considered legal for a locality to designate land-uses – which would include designating fairly restrictive development rights – all based on the need to provide infrastructure – which, in turn, means money collected as taxes and spent on stuff to benefit the public.

    there certainly can be disagreement about talking money from everyone and then deciding that infrastructure will be restricted to only some places but it is .. a legal concept – so far.

    You know.. if you are a developer – you pick places which are allowed to be developed .. and avoid places that are not… and then you succeed at your profession…

    on the other hand.. if you own a piece of land.. and your only interest is that piece of land – then it’s not unusual for there to be a difference of opinion between the landowner and the local government.

    I know.. for instance.. more than a few folks.. who own farms.. who believe that they should be able to build ponds and/or “re-arrange” a creek for their own purposes and those dang Army Corp of Engineers are always interfering….and “restricting” those landowners.. in their mind “unfairly”…

    Go North Young Man.

    Sell your property and go buy a 1000 acres in Alberta – and do whatever the heck you want on that land.. almost no restrictions… and certainly no problem with the rich and famous…

    🙂

  42. E M Risse Avatar

    For those that may be interested:

    In The Shape of the Future we outline a continual governace change process where by lower organic components can choose between higher components thus giving the higher componets a reason to compete to provide better services and keep their critical mass to contiue to exist.

    The root cause of a lot of problems with the current governance structure is that with frozen borders there is no incentive to imporve services.

    EMR

  43. Anonymous Avatar

    And you can equally go north to Albeerta and live someplace where you have little to worry about from development. There you can pay your own cost for what you need, and you do not have to offload your costs on your neighbors, as mine have done to me.

    The fact that the farms are paying twice as much in taxes as they get in services means that those in the more developed areas are having their phyisical infrastructure subsidized by those thay pay excess on open space. At the same time, they get their green infrastructure free, no cost, because they have frozen it in the hands of thier neighbors.

    No matter what the law or the courts say, it is wrong. It’s not unusual for there to be a difference of opinion between the landowner and the local government when the local government through majoritarian rule can take what they want from the minority at no cost.

    It’s as if we learned nothing from slavery and civil rights. The government has an obligation to protectthe minority.

    Anyway, who am I going to sell it to? All the value has been taken out of it. The only person to buy it would be someone willing and able to step in and pay extra to support their neighbors, just for the private amenities the farm offers. In other words the county has written rules that guarantee the property will eventually end up in the hands of someone wealthy enough to keep it without complaint, and that they will be able to acquire the property at far below its intrinsic value because its “use” is artificially frozen.

    It is snob zoning.

    You mentioned ponds. Heres a story. At one time I wanted to add a room to the house. I was told that my office would count as a bedroom, and therefore I would be required to increas the drainfield. I could’nt increase the drainfield, they said because I hadn’t enough room and the ground doesn’t drain well enough.

    The same day, I went to a different office to get permission to re-excavate on old silted in pond. I was told I could not put a pond there because the ground drains too fast.

    Just like with the army corp of engineers, the problem comes down to bureaucracy. some one looks at the rule and the rule is interpreted as NO. End of story. I still have no office and no pond.

    In fact, if there were two reasonable people involved some way could most likely be found wherein both sides are satisfied. But EMR is right: there is no incentive to improve, and no incentive tyo accomodate, which is what allows people like you to be so smug and self complacent.

    If you are a developer and you pick a place to be developed, which is allowed to be developed, and then the county changes the rules, such that it cannot, you might get compensated. There is a famous case concerning South Carolina Beach front where just that happened. In that case he was able to sue and win. there are other examples.

    But the rules for suing are extremely onerous. Only the most egregious cases make it to court. Basically you must apply for every conceivablue use for your property and be turned down on all of them, and go through the entire appeal process for each one before your case is considered “ripe”. Most people won’t live that long.

    Yes, if I was a developer, I would go find places where development is allowed. But I am not in that business. My wife has a place where development was allowed and now isn’t. If she and her mother had been smart they would have recorded the lots when they were allowed, once recorded they cannot be taken away. But there are moves afoot to go after them, too. You often heare people complaining about the thousands of lots approved and in the pipeline.

    But, that little drawing and a note in the courthouse makes all the difference, doesn’t it? It’s the difference between a promissory note and a handshake. As long as the guy on the other side is honest, it makes no difference, but once he decides to steal from you, it makes all the difference.

    With the note it is recognized as stealing, without it, tough luck, even though it is still stealing.

    I’m not in the business of being a developer, and have no interest in it, and no need for it. I’m also not in the business of paying extra to support services my neighbors use. I’m not in the business of doing work they want done for free. I’m not in the business of providing valuable commodities that they want so badly that they are willing to steal to get.

    But that is what is happening, and they freely admit as much.

    It is wrong, Larry, it is wrong. Open your eyes and get outraged over what happened to you.

    There is plenty of precedence for the issues I have raised. Just this week I seee that there are a number of homeowners in the county who have failing septic felds. They are now eliglible for grants to have them repaired. Rather than just fining them for having a failed system, the people downstream want clean water enough to see that it is paid for.

    So, I don’t have any problem, if the county wants to have 90% of the land in open space, then they are free to raise the taxes on themselves enough to go buy the land. Take it out of the tax base. Stop sucking up free money for services not provided, from farmers who can’t afford it and go pay what is required to get what it is you want.

    Don’t just steal it. I don’t care what the rationale is, or what the current law is, what is happening is just simply wrong. Anyone with a mother ought to have been taught that.

    RH

  44. Anonymous Avatar

    Suppose you are playing cards with three of your friends, in the park.

    Suddenly twelve people arrive unanticipated and uninvited. The tell you they are joining the game, only it will be a new game according to their rules. They are not going to add anything to the pot, nad they are going to deal a new hand from their deck. Among the new rules is that they have raised the ante such that you can’t afford to play.

    You have already placed your bet, with the rules in place and the cards you have been dealt.

    Probably youy won’t like this new development, but since they outnumber you three to one, there isn’t much you can do. You try to object, but they silence you saying, hey, its our park too.

    That’s a pretty fair analogy to what is going on here.

    You seem to think it is OK, because it is “legal” and they have the force of numbers.

    I don’t.

    As long as I am paying the excess bils, as long as I am doing work others want done and won’t pay for, and as long as I periodically have my nose rubbed in the situation by public officials who say, “Hey, look at all the free money we got from the farmers” I’m not changing my mind.

    RH

  45. Anonymous Avatar

    And then, just to rub salt in the wound, if I ever was “allowed” to build something worth while, those same officials would conveniently forget about decades of free money, and demand proffers.

    If I ever refuse to do the work they want done, They’ll send me a bill for more than it costs me to do the work. And even though they got what they wanted for free, they would back date the bill for five years (soon to become ten).

    And yet, the smug people benefiting from all this have convinced themselves that wealthy landowners are gettind some kind of a break.

    AARRGGHH.

  46. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    one might think… that NoVa is a vast, undeveloped pastureland because of onerous policies that restrict development to the point that it is considered “stealing”.

    we all know that not only is this not true – but we have many folks who believe that NoVa has actually gone way too far in the other direction and allowed way too much development.

    So… the point is that there are hundreds of developers around and thousands of parcels of land that have either already been developed or will be.

    Are there restrictions?

    you bet there are.. and usually, the urbanized areas have many more than rural areas. Try to build a pond or expand a drainfield in Fairfax…

    I will agree along the lines of what EMR alludes to.. in frozen boundaries and inconsistent land development/preservation policies with respect to adjacent jurisdictions….

    … and indeed.. Facquier is not alone in their attempts to prevent the county from becoming a bedroom housing community – for NoVa – where NoVa gets the jobs – and Facquier gets to provide schools and other costly services… and have their roads maxed.. with almost no way to mitigate… without raising taxes on everyone.

    so.. you have a bunch of current landowners, residents, taxpayers (rich though they are) that have decided through elected government – to no take the Fairfax Path (for now)….

    … from what I understand… Facquier DOES ALLOW development – but only in certain areas under certain conditions – designed to (in their minds) “protect” the county from the harmful impacts of careless development.

    thoughts?

  47. Anonymous Avatar

    First of all, developers don;t go buy land where development is allowed, they go buy an option on the land and then go through the process to see if the development will or won’t be allowed, before they commit.

    I don’t care what Fauquier does anyplace else, and I wish the rest of Fauquier would treat me the same.

    Fauquier freely admits that they are subsidizing services to the residential protion of the community on the backs of extra taxes paid by farmers.

    That is wrong.

    If the farmers are going to pay extra taxes, then those taxes should be used for services to the farming community.

    Fauquier requires me to engage in a certain business, or else pay a higher tax.

    That is wrong.

    No other group in the county suffers under such regulation.

    If I refuse to engage in that business, the county will back bill me for five years of extra taxes, even though I was engaged in their preferred activity during that time.

    That is wrong.

    Fauquier doesn’t only not want to become a bedroom community, they don’t want jobs or businesses either, because they will bring people and development they don’t want. I know of several business that were effectively turned away, and others that have been harrassed because they were not the desired type of business.

    I’m convinced that this has nothing to do with infrastructure, and nothing to do with finances. What is going on is the some people wish mosdt of the county to remain a vast nature preserve. I’m entirely in favor of that, in fact. I hope they succceed.

    But the way they are going about it is wrong. It is dishonest, and it is unethical. They want people like me to support their wildlife preserve AND contribute excess money to support their urban services. AND, as an extra added benefit, they also get cost avoidance for new infrastructure, at my expense.

    You have a bunch of current landowners, residents, taxpayers (rich though they are) that have decided through elected government to seize control over what their neighbors can and cannot do. Not because it is actually dangerous, unhealthy, unsafe, and certainly not because it would break them financially, but because they want what they want, and they don’t want to pay for it. They don’t care what the cost is to someone else.

    This is wrong.

    In Alexandria I have a house that has been there for 20 years. Doesn’t cause anybody any trouble. But if I trid to build that same house today I would not be permitted to. Not because there is anything wrong with the house or the lot, but simply because those that already have houses have decided they don’t want anyone else with a lot to have a house. They can rationalize it with crap about infrastructure and crowding and costs, but what it boils down to is that they are getting the benefit of additonal space they never paid for at someone else’s expense.

    It is wrong.

    I don’t understand what it is about wrong and dishonest that you don’t get.

  48. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    “God… grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference.”

    you pays your money and makes your choices….

  49. Anonymous Avatar

    No. Landowners paid their money, and later, somebody else made the choices, specifically to bend the rules to their advantage.

    There is no requirement to be serene when something is blantantly and outright WRONG. In Oregon, this went on for 30 years before the rules were changed, and now the argument being pushed by land use control devotees is “Hey, you can’t change the rules retroactively.”

    Here is another example. The state came and took 60 acres and ran six lanes of highway through the farm, for which they paid the princely sum of $200/per acre.

    There is a certain irony in now being told that development on the rest of the farm can no longer be allowed because there isn’t enough infrastructure, or that roads only benefit the landowners (soon to be developers).

    Aside from that, the state didn’t use all the land they took for the road. As a result there is a nice little parcel next to the farm that the stae uses to dump road millings, and park construction vehicles on.

    Maybe, I’d like to rent out space for construction vehicles on my side of the road. It isn’t a bit different from what is already going on there, and it might bring in multiples of waht the farm does.

    I could ask for permission to do that, and I would be turned down cold.

    It isn’t about infrastructure, or rising taxes, or avoiding sudden capital costs on account of growth, even though each of those areguments are partially valid.

    This is about those in power staying in power, getting what they want and making someone else pay. If you believe in user pays, then you must see that this is wrong.

    RH

  50. Anonymous,
    Get some balls and give out your true name. Its easy to be a deep throat, and unaccountable for your pontifications.

Leave a Reply