Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

Groping toward a New Formula for Distributing Maintenance Dollars

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

A Commonwealth Transportation Board subcommittee seems to be making progress in deciding how to make Virginia’s formulas for allocating road maintenance dollars more equitable and efficient. In a meeting yesterday, the five-member group agreed upon the following statement:

The most equitable approach to distribution of scarce maintenance funding may be a formula that incorporates a prioritized needs-based factor along with a commitment to maintain statewide assets, regardless of maintenance responsibility.

State funding formulas are balkanized and inconsistent. One set of rules, based upon lane-miles of roadway, applies to cities and towns. Another set of rules applies to Arlington and Henrico Counties. And yet a third governs the distribution of maintenance funds to all other counties, whose roads are maintained by VDOT.

The subcommittee is moving toward a single set of criteria for dispensing maintenance dollars. However, the group resolved to gather more data on the condition of roads in cities, which VDOT currently does not collect, and to convene again with city and county stakeholders to hash out the issues. Inevitably, any change in the formulas will create winners and losers.

A consensus appeared to emerge, however, around the idea that maintenance dollars should be distributed according to the basis of need, with “need” being determined by a composite of factors such as the condition of the roads, the number of people who use the roads, and the economic value of the roads. Sheppard Miller, an urban at-large member from Hampton Roads, spoke of a mile-long road that he lives on and shares with only two or three other families. Regardless of its physical condition, his road just isn’t as important as a road that carries thousands of drivers. Maintenance on other roads should take precedence, he said. “I’d look at the needs across the state, serve the most critical needs first, and look at which roads have the most value.”

The subcommittee report received a positive response from other CTB members. Virginia should not be hamstrung by 80-year-old legislation, said Cord Sterling, the Fredericksburg district representative. “We need more resources. But we also need to more effectively manage the resources we have.”

— JAB

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

11 responses to “Groping toward a New Formula for Distributing Maintenance Dollars”

  1. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    “Shepard Miller, an urban at-large member from Hampton Roads, spoke of a mile-long road that he lives on and shares with only two or three other families. Regardless of its physical condition, his road just isn’t as important as a road that carries thousands of drivers. Maintenance on other roads should take precedence, he said. “I’d look at the needs across the state, serve the most critical needs first, and look at which roads have the most value.”

    Whoever this guy is … can you please ask him to run for governor? I will vote for hom based on that simple, sensible statement alone.

  2. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    “A consensus appeared to emerge, however, around the idea that maintenance dollars should be distributed according to the basis of need, with “need” being determined by a composite of factors such as the condition of the roads, the number of people who use the roads, and the economic value of the roads. “.

    “Say … there … un … uh … Arlington old friend. We know you’ve taxed the bejeezus out of your citizens. Built mass transit. Kept to sensible land use rules. Built an interconnected grid street. Managed you own roads since 1932.

    Yeah … well …. we’ve met and decided that you’ve done such a good job we’re going to cut your “per lane allocation”. Say, maybe from $16,000 to $6,000.

    By the way, have you seen my good buddy Henrico around?”.

    This is a step in the right direction. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

    However, it does not go far enough.

    The state should just let each locality keep all the transportation related taxes paid in its jurisdiction. The locality can then do whatever the heck it wants with the money.

    The nanny state can direct localities to keep roads of state-wide significance maintained up to a certain level or pay fines.

    The more I think about it, we don’t need the greasy fingers of greed in Richmond touching the transportation taxes.

    The nanny state has failed the citizens when it comes to transportation. Time for Mary Poppins to open her umbrella and fly out of our lives on this topic.

    De-evolve responsibility for the roads, the establishment of all transportation taxes, the collection of all transportation taxes and the spending of all transportation taxes. Direct the General Assembly to spend all of its time and energy on finding a new state song. The outrage of being the only state without an official song has gone on long enough. Time for the GA to undertake something for which they are at least partially qualified.

  3. larryg Avatar
    larryg

    remember the General Assembly DID try to get additional taxing authority for NoVa – TWICE once in 2002 and then again with .. I can’t even remember the bill number now… but the Va SC threw it out because there was no accountability to taxpayers… (makes me wonder if the GA knew that from the get go and passed what they knew would be a doomed law).

    would the GA be that smart?

    but VDOT is not going to give up the gas tax – that it needs to maintain the state roads nor should they delegate that to the localities. No state does that and it would be a recipe for trouble.

    If we actually KNEW how much they actually spend on county roads – we’d have a point to negotiate from for a PART of the gas tax.

  4. larryg Avatar
    larryg

    re: prioritizing.

    we have unpaved roads built by jack-leg developers in the county NOT to state standards.

    years later the residents who bought the cheap lots come to the BOS demanding that their subdivision roads be paved because “we pay taxes”.

    this is the mentality that we are dealing with.

  5. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    Inevitably, any change in the formulas will create winners and losers.

    ++++++++++

    Sounds like my argument about zoning, for which I have the same answer.

    Why should there be winners and losers? There ought to be only winners. After all the goo has declared there is no reason for any law or regulation that does not provide a NET public benefit. It OUGHT to be pretty easy for the winners to PAY the losers for their losses and STILL be winners.

    And there you have it. If you want ONLY good laws, just require that the winners pay off the losers.
    Presto. Guaranteed net benefit every time.

  6. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    This line of thinking goes to show what is wrong with grovetons argument that localities should keep their tax revenue to spend.

    If Fairfax can put the money to use many times better, then they ought to be willing to share that gain by buying dollars from localities that cannot make the same level of gain.

    It is a matter of setting priorities, and the way to do it is with the same kind of reverse auction I described for managing development rights.

  7. larryg Avatar
    larryg

    I think we have a fundamental disconnect here.

    😉

    when someone pays taxes – that makes them a loser unless they get something back for the tax they pay.

    that’s the basic reason why now 80% oppose a gas tax increase at the state level.

    but we already know that people will pay more money for more/better roads – willingly – if they believe their taxes will come back to them in the form of more/better roads via referenda.

  8. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Damn. LarryG gets it. Of ourse, I’d put it a bit differently …

    The Clown Show’s long running effort to redistribute money paid by local taxpayers around the state has failed and failed again. It is time to take the power out of the Clown Show’s hands and give that power to the government closest to the people paying those taxes.

  9. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Although, I will say that if the Clown Show were competent then Hydra’s plan might work. However, you might as well give my youngest son’s kindergarten class money to allocate as to give it to the slippery political rats’ nest in Richmond. At least my son and his classmates would allocate money for candy and soda. The “magicians” in Richmond would just make it disappear.

  10. larryg Avatar
    larryg

    I don’t think the clown show is necessarily incompetent all of the time but when you create slush funds for roads – it attracts the development community likes flies to horse manure…

    Many localities end up with BOS who (until VDOT went broke) who are in bed with the development community who help them “decide” how to spend their allocations and it would almost never include fixing existing roads, improving safety, reducing bottlenecks… etc.. but new venues for development.

    the true irony is that the money that developers were deciding how to spend was coming from the same people in that country but sent to Richmond and sent via special pipeline back to the local BOS/development community.

    when we talk about winners and losers – those who pay their gas taxes to only see it go for things that don’t benefit them – are surely losers.

    transportation is always political even in the other 46 states with local road funding but Va is particularly vulnerable to funds being shanghaied in ways that if people had a direct vote – would never happen.

  11. TMT Avatar
    TMT

    Let’s look at a comparison of Tysons Corner and the Tri-County Parkway. We say that Tysons is one of the key economic engines of the State. Right? If so, why is the CTB wanting to put money into the TCP instead of Tysons road improvements? That is plain corruption.
    What is the affect on state income tax revenues of widening Route 7 west of Tysons and building the TCP? I suspect they are not even close.
    What is the matter with the CTB? Does it feel that it owes certain landowners access to taxpayer money? Does it feel it needs to meet the demands of all landowners for access to taxpayer money?
    Virginia’s transportation funding system is so broken that we could triple the gas tax and not provide any meaningful relief to commuters, shippers and anyone else expect a few well-placed landowners.

Leave a Reply

Read More