Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

How to Save $200 Million Without Even Trying

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

Chesapeake City officials say it would cost $300 million to replace the aged Jordan Bridge across the South Branch of the Elizabeth River.

Philip Shucet, the former commissioner of the Virginia Department of Transportation, says he can replace the bridge for $100 million — without a penny of local, state or federal funds.

Shucet, who recently retired his post-VDOT job as chief development officer for the Dragas Cos. in Virginia Beach, has aligned himself with Florida-based Figg Bridge Developers, a company that specializes in designing, engineering and constructing bridges.

You can read the background of the story on Pilotonline.com. But what I want to focus on right now is the vast disparity between those two numbers. Is it truly possible that a private firm can replace a major bridge for one third the cost of what the city of Chesapeake expects it to cost? Could the privately built and funded bridge possible meet the same performance standards?

Shucet does have credibility as the commissioner who wrestled the VDOT construction management program to the ground and vastly improved its on-budget/on-time performance, so I’m inclined to believe the numbers are defensible.

Assuming the numbers are, in fact, believable, here’s what I want to know. First, how is it possible that a private sector group can erect a new bridge for one-third the price that a municipality would incur? Someone please identify the savings and efficiencies for me. Second, what other potential savings are lurking out there? Third, why the h*$% isn’t the Commonwealth of Virginia aggressively seeking similar opportunities instead of wringing hands about insufficient tax revenues?
Update: Philip Shucet has provided brief email answers to some of the questions raised in this post and in the comments. Bottom line: the $300 million and $100 million numbers do not represent an apples-to-apples comparison. Click on comments and scroll to the 13th comment for details. Scroll down farther for a second update.

(Photo credit: Pilotonline.)

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

29 responses to “How to Save $200 Million Without Even Trying”

  1. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    Very excellent questions!

    I had the same exact thought when I read the story.

    Where did the “govt” estimate come from?

    Is it possible that a VDOT-managed (design, build, operate, maintain) is more expensive that a private entity?

    It’s a question that needs an answer.

    It could be as simple as the VDOT/city replacement was a low bridge with a lift whereas the proposed private project is a high bridge that won’t need a lift (or other type moveable mechanics).

    The other thing that struck me was that the City and residents have a choice.

    Either come up with the tax money to build a new bridge or operate it from tolls.

    Final question – which Groveton has asked is why VDOT or the City could not be the entity that builds and operates it.

    All questions that need answers IMHO in order for citizens to better understand the choices and perhaps even help decide which path they’d prefer (via a referenda or other participatory method).

  2. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    According to the Pilot, the tolls wil be a hefty $2 for a bridge journey that’s not terribly long.

    So much for the grandeur of privatization! Everyday shipyard workers and other commuters are going to get screwed!

    Peter Galuszka

  3. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    but gee..

    if that’s how much it actually costs to provide that bridge .. who else should pay ?

    I’m sensitive to the issue of “balkanization” but the other end of “balkanization” is who should expect someone else to pay for a road or bridge that someone uses besides the people that use it – and why?

    In other words, should the good folks of NoVa pay for the bridges that the good folks of HR/TW need?

  4. Darrell -- Chesapeake Avatar
    Darrell — Chesapeake

    Here is a perfect chance to see how this private road stuff works before the state starts pushing these things up north. The Jordan is closed, there are no plans in the TIP to replace it. No money is available and won’t be any time soon. That means the MPO is out of the picture on a project that doesn’t compete with their pet projects for taxpayer funding. No where else in the state can you have such isolation from political intrigue as this project enjoys. And the time frame for completion is extremely short, lending itself to immediate operational scrutiny. I say build it and study the hell out of it, before jumping on the bandwagon for more expensive projects.

  5. Paul H Avatar
    Paul H

    How much money did VA save when it privatized their I.T. services?

  6. Bob Avatar
    Bob

    This is an abuse of language. There is no money “saved.” The article’s claim that no public money will be used also seems false — is the private company going to pay for the public right-of-way used? Somehow, I doubt it.

    So, as Mr Galuszka pointed out, everyone who uses the bridge and everyone who benefits from the commerce that will take place because of the bridge, will end up paying hundreds and hundreds of millions MORE than they would otherwise have paid over the life of this scam. There is no savings, except to the feckless nitwits in Richmond.

    If you think this is a good deal, I have a bridge to sell you. Oh, wait…

    And since I’m on a rant, I want to point out an “I told you so” to Larry. Looks like your friend Mrs. Peters has been lying about the gas tax revenue being down. In fact, it’s up. And on the HOT lanes are scams front, isn’t it nice to know that Blagojevich was caught on FBI wiretaps explaining the only reason he created an HOT lane project was to get $500k in campaign donations? You know — just like Transurban’s illegal donations?

    How much evidence do you need to realize these deals are pushed by crooks and liars?

  7. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    at the end of the day…sans any increase in the gas tax…if you want a new bridge or road – what to do?

    Okay…so you say you don’t like the idea of a for-profit doing it.. then create an authority like the CBBT,

    but like I said.. no money = no bridge so figure it out for yourself.

    further thought – are the folks that hate the idea of a private entity to build a toll road or bridge – in favor of raising taxes on everyone else to pay for it?

    as far as Mrs. Peters and the gas tax…

    yes..we are still bringing in net revenues but they have dipped to the point where there is very little money for new projects anymore.

    Unless one wants to promote more conspiracy theories.. explain how ..if the gas tax is doing just fine.. that VDOT just cut yet another billion dollars from the six-year plan …and is warning that there may be more to come?

    For edification – go to the six year plan for your area and take a look at what has been cut and how much remains and you’ll gain a much better appreciation for the revenue situation.

    what is coming in right now.. is being used primarily for maintenance ..with precious little left over for new stuff.

    the choices are – tolls or higher taxes….

    pick your poison

  8. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    The difference is cost between the two proposals likely results from several factors:
    – different scope for the project
    – savings in money and time (read more money) from avoiding NEPA and other environmental reviews by not using federal funding
    – other factors I haven’t thought of at the moment

    The argument that a $2 toll to cross the bridge is okay because only people that use the bridge should pay for it is balony. There are many people and businesses (read more people) that benefit from the bridge crossing than those that actually use the bridge. For example, a restaurant on the left side of the water benefits from workers on the right side of the water that drive across the bridge for lunch. These workers may decide crossing the bridge is not worth it at $2 each way and the business on the left side suffers.

    It could also be argued that the business on the left side would suffer more if the bridge was not replaced.

    My overall point is that the idea that a toll is a complete user based fee to pay for something like a bridge is false. Many more people and businesses benefit from infrastructure like a bridge than those that use the bridge on a daily basis. A toll road is a different story as there generally a free parallel facility.

  9. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    I think you have two basic choices though I’d not rule out some others.

    But basically, you can tax folks or you can toll folks.

    If the restaurant (or others) might benefit from the bridge then put it on a local referenda and let folks decide if they want to pay higher taxes for it.

    When it comes to taxes themselves, I think more folks are wondering if a generalized increase in taxes will actually get the bridge they want – built – at least in the same timeframe if they taxed themselves or opted for tolls.

    and I think that’s going to be the essential choice for many places if there is not a generalized gas tax increase.

    Let me re-emphasize that I DO support generalized taxes for roads and infrastructure that connect the state – interstates and primary roads that connect one place to another.

    The question is .. how much of a statewide tax is needed for these kinds of things verses roads and bridges that are more local in use and need.

    No locality should expect MORE back from the state for transportation than what their citizens pay into it – right?

    So you get down to how much was paid in taxes by a locality that they should get back from the state in the form of infrastructure that they need.

    Otherwise.., are we not essentially endorsing some variation of a ponzi scheme for roads?

    In other words.. you pay into it year after year and then at some point – you get all of your money back in the form of infrastructure?

    But why do that in the first place if you could borrow the money locally.. build your bridge.. and pay it back – either from taxes or tolls – whatever the local folks prefer?

  10. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    “the choices are – tolls or higher taxes….

    pick your poison”

    I am not so sure. As I recall, Virginia spends something like $4B per year on road transportation out of a $36B / year state budget.

    If my recollection is right – there is $32B per year being spent on things other than roads. And roads, bridges, etc seem to be something the state can actually get done. The projects may last too long and cost too much but at the end there is nearly always a road or bridge or whatever. Can you say the same for other government programs?

    As for the $300M vs. $100M – shouldn’t that be something that Gov. Kaine needs to address? Because if one bridge costs 3X what it should – I have to start wondering about the whole state budget. No?

  11. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    to a certain extent Groveton has asked a good question – which is, in essence, “how much” is “enough” ( or not “enough”).

    Of course one could ask the same question about education and health care, etc.

    but the problem that I have with the current approach is twofold:

    1. – first, it is not transparent and accountable by a long shot.

    we don’t really know, for instance how much of the total pot, VDOT keeps as their share to roads of statewide significance and how much gets passed on to the localities for allocation.

    Take your own county – and tell me how much gas tax revenue that your country generates and then tell me how much in dollars – infrastructure you get each year or whatever time period you want to choose.

    2. – without citizens knowledge of how much money they pay – and thus how much their county is actually entitled to – the counties make land-use decisions that almost always have very expensive infrastructure consequences and they tell their citizens – not the true story of the revenues that the county is entitled to and therefore how much they have to pay (and not pay) for the new roads – but instead they tell their citizens that it is VDOT’s responsibility to do the roads – and VDOT dutifully puts them on a list that is so huge that it never will have enough money to build even part of it.

    Then folks like Groveton and others will say that because we have such huge backlogs that we are not adequately funding transportation and that – without coming right out and saying it as Ray has – that we need a tax increase.

    But the funny thing is that even the folks who advocate gas tax increases – don’t know how much the increase will actually provide in real infrastructure where they live much less what roads would be improved or built where they live from say a 5 cent or 10 cent increase.

    And this is what I find – curious. Advocacy for higher taxes – not based on specific needs – but just an advocacy for higher taxes – on the premise that it must help…

    that’s about the most nebulous and untransparent thing I’ve even heard from – even from folks who say they want specifics and accountability for spending.

    that’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

    Until we actually have a system where I can see how much money my county citizens actually generate in taxes and then how much road infrastructure it will buy and what choices my elected have made with those limited funds.. I’ll not agree that we have a system that deserves higher taxes.

    and ya’ll should too… you should be advocating for a more honest and transparent process before we throw more money at something without really knowing how much is needed and how it will be spent.

  12. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    and for the folks that advocate state-wide gas tax increases instead of local county referenda increases –

    do you know.. per penny of gas tax increase – how much money such an increase would generate for your county and thus have some clue of how much that amount of money would actually help your county (or region)?

    If you don’t this this – then how do you know what is the “right” amount of tax increase to advocate for?

    would you just advocate for a number that “seems acceptable”?

    If this is what you would do – then why should the State, VDOT and your local country pursue better accountability if you are perfectly willing to sign up for a tax increase without a clue as to what it would actually pay for?

  13. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Details provided by Philip Schucet: The $300 million vs. $100 million estimates is not an apples-to-apples comparison. The city’s $300 million proposal essentially represents an upgrade from the two-lane Jordan Bridge: a 4- to 6-lane replacement bridge, with a vertical lift, plus a connector highway to Interstate 264 in Portsmouth.

    The Shucet proposal calls for a fixed bridge with two lanes initially. The development team would purchase the old bridge and remove it, eliminating that liability for the city of Chesapeake, and it would purchase the right of way from the city as well.

    What I have not been able to ascertain from my brief email correspondence is whether the private proposal contains any innovative features that the City had not considered, or whether it assumes that a private entity assumes design breakthroughs, management efficiencies or other cost savings that allow it to build the bridge for less than it would cost the City to build a comparable facility.

  14. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    An interesting aside: The Jordan Bridge was originally built as a private facility, and was handed over to the (then) city of South Norfolk. From what I can glean from various reports, the city did maintain a toll on the facility — though probably considerably lower than the proposed $2.

    I find it interesting that some commenters lament the prospect that bridge users would have to pay $2 per crossing. Ah, the injustice! Drivers should have the right to travel everywhere for free!

    (Well, not actually for free. Instead of paying a toll when they crossed the bridge, they would pay taxes to the City of Chesapeake, which would use the money to repay bonds to build a replacement. So, the cost would simply be hidden — and shared. Those who didn’t use the bridge would help pay the cost of its replacement.)

  15. Bob Avatar
    Bob

    First of all, stop saying the “cost” of the bridge under this proposal is $100 million. It isn’t. It’s $2 multiplied by the number of daily trips multiplied by 365 multiplied by the number of years tolls are collected (i.e., infinity), plus the annual toll increase beyond the rate of inflation. That sum is far more than $100 or $300 million. Of course, we’ll never really know what that figure is because it’s hidden behind a wall as a “trade secret” because the public would be pissed if they actually knew the true cost. (At least, VDOT won’t provide access to the HOT lane cost.)

    “So, the cost would simply be hidden — and shared. Those who didn’t use the bridge would help pay the cost of its replacement.”

    Or, to put it more accurately, most of those who benefit from the bridge and its commerce would not have to pay for it.

    “The development team … would purchase the right of way from the city as well.”

    That does take away the element of scam, as long as they’re paying full market value and not getting any other “incentives” like tax-free bonds, etc. It’s still a rip-off to the public, though.

    To Larry:
    “Is it possible that a VDOT-managed (design, build, operate, maintain) is more expensive that a private entity?”

    This is absolutely, positively impossible. The middleman’s cut in these private toll deals far exceeds the added cost of VDOT incompetence and bureaucracy. Plus, VDOT contracts all the work out anyway.

    “we are still bringing in net revenues but they have dipped to the point where there is very little money for new projects anymore.”

    Um, yeah, because the money is being diverted from motoring taxes into irrelevant nonsense. And before you start saying it’s different with tolls: DULLES RAIL. Tolls are no solution to monetary diversion. Not to mention the toll money diverted to Australia.

    “Unless one wants to promote more conspiracy theories.. explain how ..if the gas tax is doing just fine.. that VDOT just cut yet another billion dollars from the six-year plan …and is warning that there may be more to come?”

    Larry, the numbers do not lie. “If the gas tax is doing just fine” is not an assumption, it is fact. Why is VDOT cutting road building? Because Kaine and Homer hate new roads. They cater to the patchouli-scented trolley riders who are responsible for putting them in office. DULLES RAIL.

    “the choices are – tolls or higher taxes…. pick your poison”

    No, the third choice is re-orient priorities to get the best bang for the buck. But, if that is not an option given the worthless windbags who represent us in Richmond (and thanks to the lack of referendum power in our horrible state constitution), I’ll take taxes because tolls would take 50% more out of my pocket for the same project + diversion to Dulles Rail.

    Dulles delenda est.

  16. Bob Avatar
    Bob

    I begin to wonder whether those who think this is a good deal also stay up late at night to watch those ShamWow! infomercials. I mean, it’s a bargain — instead of paying $99.95 it can be yours for four easy payments of $29.95. But only if you Act Now!

    In the days of free-flowing credit, this would just be garden-variety madness. Now that the ponzi schemes of the financial world have been exposed for all to see, it’s just beyond belief that anyone could buy into the snake oil being peddled by Transurban, Macquarie and their paid advertising agency, Reason Foundation.

    Check out this heart-warming Christmas story from down under. A toll road company fooled a bunch of Bruce the Plumbers into investing $500 in a little toll scam. Now Bruce owes $1 million to Macquarie Bank for each $500 invested, so Macquarie will be seizing Bruce’s life savings. Bernie Madoff, eat your heart out.

  17. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    “Either come up with the tax money to build a new bridge or operate it from tolls.”

    What is the difference? You have to come up withthe money either way.

    “replace the bridge for $100 million — without a penny of local, state or federal funds.”

    You think TOLLS are not local funds?

    Please, give me a break, and go look at the WHOLE picture for once.

    Apples to apples.

    RH

  18. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    “sans any increase in the gas tax…if you want a new bridge or road – what to do?

    Okay…so you say you don’t like the idea of a for-profit doing it.. then create an authority like the CBBT,

    but like I said.. no money = no bridge so figure it out for yourself.”

    You start off with the idea that a fgas tax can’t happen, yet you still promote tolls, as a better more efficient way to pay.

    Any toll can be calculated as an equivalent gas tax: there is essentially no difference, except the toll is far more diffucult to collect, and many tolls in many areas will be far harder to manage and just as prone to balkanization of funding.

    Promoting tolls is equivalent to promoting fiscal chaos, and it has NOTHING to do with free market arguments.

    It is a dumb idea, and we should give it up, just like we did last century.

    RH

  19. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    “”the choices are – tolls or higher taxes…. pick your poison”

    No, the third choice is re-orient priorities to get the best bang for the buck.”

    Well said, except to be truly honest about this, the best bang for the buck may also require tolls (in some special cases), taxes, and Metro fare hikes.

    The problem is that NO ONE is looking for the best bang for the buck, and EVERYONE is promoting some special interest, whether it is EASY PASS, so-called private road eneterprises, killing all autonomobiles, some favorite road, or some favorite rail extension.

    I’m in favor of the best bang for the buck – even if it means we have to spend more bucks. What I’msick of is one sided partisan bickering.

    RH

  20. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Another update: Philip Shucet has communicated additional facts and perspectives about this project. Perhaps at some point I can pull all the information in a coherent narrative. For now, I’ll have to settle for letting the facts dribble in. — Jim

    The $2 toll under the private sector proposal would supplant a $0.75 on the bridge before it was closed. The extra coin gets Hampton Roads residents:

    – The same two lanes
    – An 8-foot shoulder instead of no shoulder
    – A barrier-protected pedestrian lane instead of an unprotected lane
    – A bridge built high enough (145 feet) that traffic doesn’t have to stop for drawbridge lifts like the old bridge did.
    – A bridge that carries all legal loads, as opposed to the old bridge, which was posted for a three-for limit

    The old bridge carried about 7,000 cars per day, Shucet argues, and the new bridge would carry the same. A companion bridge can be built when the traffic warrants.

    To quote Shucet: “It’s not unusual for public entities to scope out an ‘ultimate project.’ The standard public transportation project usually tries to look out 30 years ahead. The private sector doesn’t have to do that. The private sector can make incremental investments and incremental gains. In other words, we can make a commitment to spend the money for the right thing, at the right time, at the right price.”

  21. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    “1. – first, it is not transparent and accountable by a long shot.”

    Well, as JIM points out in the thread above, it’s a problem of representation, not funding.

    —————————

    “Take your own county – and tell me how much gas tax revenue that your country generates and then tell me how much in dollars – infrastructure you get each year… “

    If thats the problem, lets kick the state out of it and let each county pay for their own roads. Farmvill will be hurting and Fairfax will have tones of money.

    What you are proposing is more balkanization instead of more priority setting on a larger, statewide scale. Some things we just do bbetter at by pooling ourt money, even if some find that to be “unfair”. The extreme version of this would be GPS tracking and full cost accounting with everyone payin their own individual full persoanl costs for their share of the rods they use.

    Again, Farmville would be hurting and Fairfax would have plenty of money. True, Fairfax roads would cost more, but it might still be less per person using them. True, Fairfax couldn’t get more roads because of EPA, but thats another issue.

    And of course, if you did that you would cahrge each driver full proportionate cowsts for their actual use. That would not allow for additional funds to be diferted for METRO, and then METRO would have to pay its own way under similar rules. That would be the virtual end of Metro, except for the downtown loop.

    So if you go down the path of balkanization by county and getting only what you pay for, you may find you don;t like the logical conclusion.

    RH

  22. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    “…without coming right out and saying it as Ray has – that we need a tax increase.”

    Not exactly my position.

    I think we need more money for roads. we have failed to index the taxes we use for roads for decades, in spite of known problems. Whether that is a tax increase or catching up for pas bad behavior and underfunding is a matter of perspective.

    Where the money comes from is problematical. But if it comes from tolls or some other method than gas taxes, I still call that what it is: a tax increase.

    We could offset the increase with other decreases, but someone will have to set priorites, and we seem to have a total falire in representative leadership.

    RH

  23. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    “If you don’t this this – then how do you know what is the “right” amount of tax increase to advocate for?”

    VMT and cmmerce are almost directly related. You advocate for road projects that can pay their own way through increased commerce: the projects that show a net public benefit – even if you have to borrow the money you come out ahead.

    In order to do this you have to stop complaining that roads just lead to more congestion and concede that what you WANT to build are roads well traveled. Such roads will pay their own way, and we can stop quibbling about who came first or what happens to existing residents.

    RH

  24. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    First of all, stop saying the “cost” of the bridge under this proposal is $100 million. It isn’t. It’s $2 multiplied by the number of daily trips multiplied by 365 multiplied by the number of years tolls are collected (i.e., infinity), plus the annual toll increase beyond the rate of inflation. That sum is far more than $100 or $300 million. Of course, we’ll never really know what that figure is because it’s hidden behind a wall as a “trade secret” ….”

    Bob is entirely correct about the true cost. But if you are going to calculate the cost that way, then youneed to caclulate the benefits the same way.

    Unfortuntely, the costs accrue to the public and the benefits accrue to the operator. This is a case of the state taking a short term profit (cost avoidance) and the expense of long term costs to its citizens. Whoever thinks this is a good idea should be fired.

    RH

  25. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    Bob: Nice Christmas story.

    “This is an unprecedented circumstance where an investor can click a button, spend $500 and end up with a $1 million debt without any warning,” he said.

    Mr Wilson has asked the regulator, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, to force brokers to warn investors about any future liability associated with their purchase.”

    How can you ethically sell something without full disclosure of what you are selling?

    Notice the call for “more regulation”.

    You could easily say buyer beware, and they should have looked at the prospectus. On the other hand, here is a case where someone is selling full obligations in shares that they have not paid for fully.

    If the original buyer paid one of three one-dollar installments for a share, then he only owns one third of the share. He cannot rightfully sell the share for one tenth of a cent, because he still owes two dollars for it.

    He effectively has a contract to buy the shares, and he can sell the contract, but that would require disclosure.

    I seriously doubt that the shysters will wind up taking people homes over this. If you sold a home that you still owed money on, the mortgage doesn’t mysteriously transfer to the new owner, just because you old at a loss. That mortgage would have to be paid off before you can transfer ownership, or else the obligation would have to be disclosed and included as part of the sales price.

    Yuck.

    RH

  26. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Just when I was about to close out 2008 with the “Best of Bacon” quotes, I read this gem from Bob:

    “I begin to wonder whether those who think this is a good deal also stay up late at night to watch those ShamWow! infomercials. I mean, it’s a bargain — instead of paying $99.95 it can be yours for four easy payments of $29.95. But only if you Act Now!”.

    A classic BaconsRebellion comment.

  27. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Ray – I’m lost!

    I hear the RoVA crowd say over and over again, “We aren’t going to pay for NoVA’s roads” whenever increasing the gas tax is discussed.

    Then you write:

    ‘”Take your own county – and tell me how much gas tax revenue that your country generates and then tell me how much in dollars – infrastructure you get each year… “

    If thats the problem, lets kick the state out of it and let each county pay for their own roads. Farmvill will be hurting and Fairfax will have tones of money.

    What you are proposing is more balkanization instead of more priority setting on a larger, statewide scale. Some things we just do bbetter at by pooling ourt money, even if some find that to be “unfair”. The extreme version of this would be GPS tracking and full cost accounting with everyone payin their own individual full persoanl costs for their share of the rods they use.

    Again, Farmville would be hurting and Fairfax would have plenty of money. True, Fairfax roads would cost more, but it might still be less per person using them. True, Fairfax couldn’t get more roads because of EPA, but thats another issue.”.

    Isn’t Farmville in RoVA and Fairfax in NoVA?

    Who is paying for the other’s roads?

    Shouldn’t this be documented?

  28. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    I’m suggesting that farmvill and ROVA have long beenthe beneficiaries of state money that comes primarily from the urban areas. That THEY have less congestion problems as a result.

    Fairfax has been exporting money for decades, and now their infrastructure suffers as a result.

    IF each county paid for their own roads, Farmville would be hurting and Fairfax would be flush. Even if their roads cost more,they cost less per user.

    But, road money won’t fix Fairfax problems, even if they had it. You still have EPA and NIMBYS to deal with. Neither can they fix their problem wiyh METRO money.

    Suggesting each county pay their own way is just more balkanization, which will help NO ONE. It does nothing to solve the problem of how do we best distribute the reources we have to solve the problems we have: it just breaks that problem up into pieces with artificial jurisdictional boundaries. This guarantees we cannot properly prioritize and deploy whatever resources we allow ourselves.

    And if you keep going in that direction, you wind up with the ultimate alkanization, which is Larry’s view that each person should pay their own exact full cost. If that was the case, the FARMville would REALLY be hurting and Fairfax would REALLY be flush, (they’d collect money from every outsider that uses their roads) but it still won’t fix Fairfax problems.

    THAT is going to involve tearin down a bunch of houses and businesses and replacing them with roadways and transit, until you get the riht balance.

    Those houses and businesses are going to have to go somewhere – like Farmville.

    RH

    RH

  29. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    Even if their roads cost more,they cost less per user.

    I meant “Even if Fairfax roads cost more, they cost less per user.”

    RH

Leave a Reply

Read More