Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

Son of Frankenstein: HB 3202 Part Deux (Duh)

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

Here is the Republican con in the special Transportation Session. HB 32o2 is back like the son of Frankenstein, or any other horror film remake unto ridiculousness, as the Republican transportation ‘answer’. But like the original HB 3202 it is just a con game for the Commonwealth. It is more about political corruption of politicians and the corruption of the political process for good governance – two separate but connected issues, than transportation.

Much to my dismay, Del. Phil Hamilton, R-Newport News, who knows much about medicine and government policy, is the co-author from The Peninsula.

Here is a Hampton Roads/Tidewater perspective on the bad bill before the House.

HOUSE BILL NO. 6055
Offered June 25, 2008
———-
Patrons– Hamilton and Albo
———-

The General Assembly declares it to be in the public interest that the economic development needs and economic growth potential of Hampton Roads and Northern Virginia be addressed by special transportation revenues to provide for the costs of providing an adequate, modern, safe, and efficient transportation network in Hampton Roads and Northern Virginia and hereby enacts the following legislation to provide for the same.

First fallacy: existing revenues – raising taxes – are needed.

The newest Regional Government for Hampton Roads isn’t the HRTA, but the MPO. Google and check out to see how many of the same people are in the MPO/HRPDC/HRTA. The MPO is an appointed body – not elected.

§ 33.1-391.17. Hampton Roads Transportation Revenue Fund established.

There is hereby created in the state treasury a special nonreverting fund to be known as the Hampton Roads Transportation Revenue Fund, hereafter referred to as “the Fund.” The Fund shall be established on the books of the Comptroller. The Fund shall consist of fees and taxes imposed pursuant to §§ 46.2-755.1, 46.2-1167.1, and 58.1-2402.1 in the Counties of Isle of Wight, James City, and York and the Cities of Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg, and any other funds that may be deposited into the Fund. Interest earned on moneys in the Fund shall remain in the Fund and be credited to it. Any moneys remaining in the Fund, including interest thereon, at the end of each fiscal year shall not revert to the general fund but shall remain in the Fund. Moneys in the Fund shall be used solely for new transportation construction projects in the Counties of Isle of Wight, James City, and York and the Cities of Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg, as required by law; and then as determined by the Hampton Roads Metropolitan Planning Organization.

Our MPO has been cited for violating Federal Law in its functioning. It is one of the worst performing MPOs in the Nation.

Some money will come from the Port.

(Editor’s note: Follow this link to the full text of Jim Bowden’s post. The original post was so long that it visually disrupted the display of previous posts. Readers are invited to comment on the legislation or Jim’s commentary by clicking on the “comments” link immediately below.)

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

  1. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    That’s not a post; that’s an epic.

    I’m afraid you have permanently raised the bar for EMR and myself.

    This may take a while to digest.

    RH

  2. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    basically what I got out of it is that if the GA allocates money to the HR/TW Region – that it will fall into the hands of an unelected/unaccountable group of people who are not interested in citizens views.

    I’m not sure I saw an alternative proposal – though.

    Is the idea to get rid of the MPO also?

    and then what?

    It appears that at least some of the GA and Kaine are willing to listen as they killed the TA.

    What else should the GA do to further reform the process in HR/TW?

  3. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    LG: I’ve written the answer to HR/TW.

    RH: I included all the legal language to show what we citizens need to pay attention when the GA is session.

  4. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    JAB – how about a synopsis?

    I think after plowing through your epic post – I, for one, would like to see your version of a bottom line.

    And then instead of telling us what legislators will get unelected – tell us which ones allies to the path you might suggest.

    Help the rest of us understand – not only what your view of the problem is – but what should your legislators be pursuing in the GA to best serve HR/TW.

    I think for NoVa – there is general support for what their reps are pursuing but I have a real hard time figuring out what the majority of folks in HR/TW support.

  5. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    LG: I’ve written it so many times that you should be repeating it in your sleep.

    Fund the top priorities in HR/Tidewater with existing revenues, user fees (tolls and container fees), and bonds.

    No regional government.

    The top three that could be funded today are:
    1. HRBT addition
    2. Port of Virginia – 460 corridor
    3. Midtown Tunnel

    The way to pay for these is:
    1. Take a fair share of what HR/Tidewater sends to the Transportation Trust Fund every year.
    2. Fund with General Fund if you can (you won’t) contribution
    3. Tolls
    4. Private-Public partnership
    5. Bonds

    When more revenue comes into the treasury consider additional projects.

  6. Leslie Carbone Avatar
    Leslie Carbone

    Jim, thanks for posting the sausage recipe, um, legislation.

  7. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I now better understand and I thank you for the info.

    I think the real Frankenstein in HR/TW is apparently the MPO.

    The Federal Review pretty clearly demonstrated that the MPO has been taken over by people who have no intentions of operating it as intended by the law and in fact use it as a shield to make insular decisions with respect to transportation priorities.

    More than a few MPOs operate in a similar manner but are not as overt about the intentions.

    The average citizen in NoVa has no more understanding and involvement in transportation decision-making than their counterparts in HR/TW though the Wash Metro MPO itself does have substantial citizen outreach efforts.

    I think the MPO law was an honest attempt to put together a framework for more effective regional cooperation on transportation issues that extend beyond the jurisdictions.

    VDOT is no more electable and accountable though. If they do priorities for HR/TW, would citizens have any expectation of a different outcome?

    The obvious question is who decides the priorities?

    JAB lays down his priorities – perhaps priorities of a lot of the citizens but how were these priorities determined and by who?

    There is a total disconnect between how priorities are decided and who is involved in deciding them, much less that there is effective citizen involvement.

    and having been involved in our own local MPO is efforts to design an objective process for prioritization… I can easily see different points of view as to how to do metrics for priorities.

    Not that VDOT has any more of an open and transparent process either.

    VDOT prioritizes essentially by deciding what projects to fund and which one’s not to fund.

    If they want one project built and another one delayed or not built – all you need to do to confirm that is look at their 6 yr plan and ask yourself what process is being used to allocate dollars to one project instead of another.

    All the MPO system has done is to transfer the same non-transparent process from VDOT to local leaders – many of whom are supporters of economic development and more tuned to that arena than congestion reduction and removing bottlenecks.

    How to fix this?

    That’s what I would like to see.

    How do you develop a process that directly involves citizens with the prioritization of projects?

    Until we do that – there is going t continue to be serious distrust, cynicism and outright hostility.

  8. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Thank you Jim Bacon!

    If you were to institute an editorial policy that grants contributors 250 words and a link to any words beyond that threshold – you’re probably get some approving murmurs.

    Having said that – I’ll bet someone could add that you limit the amount of comments from individual commenters as some of them apparently believe that they are also being paid by the word.

    ( and yes, I DO recognize my own habits)!

  9. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    Thanks, Jim Bacon.

  10. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I wasn’t complaining, just admiring the effort.

    I just could not handle it at 10:30 after being on the tractor all evening.

    RH

  11. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    If you have a problem with the HR MPO or any MPO, then contact congress. It is a federal MANDATE to have them. Federal, not state.

  12. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Having MPOs is a federal mandate but the states, the municiplaities and especially the congresspersons elected from districts within the states have a big roll in deciding the boundaries, memebership, board members and staffing.

    Having a Region-wide transportation advisory group in not a bad idea until there is a comprehensive system of Regional and especially Subregional governance.

    However the way MPOs are constituted, bounded, peopled and staffed is a crime in almost all cases.

    Anon Zeus

  13. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I was reading a public comment about the CLRP in the Charlottesville MPO.

    Same problem was the HR MPO – more projects than there is identified funding…

    .. and the response was that these projects are important and need to stay in the plan…

    .. Across Virginia, there is a building backlash on MPOs – which are perceived as having been co-opted by members of the business community as their personal economic development funding ….method…

    .. Guess how MPOs are funded?

    you got it – from your Federal Gas Tax….

    almost just as low on the radar screen is Virginia’s mandated Planning Districts – which also have wide influence on local policies and again little understood by most citizens even though they have been around for decades and are just as much unelected and unaccountable as the MPOs and the TAs.

  14. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    1. All state funds are appropriated by the General Assembly with a framework under which non-elected officials may use such funds – transportation is no different. Same process at the local level – except substitute city council or board of supervisors. It seems that some of you are unhappy because elected officials biases and priorities do not mirror yours, I would suggest you run for office.

    Transfering the responsibility either from state, regional or local levels is not going to change the fact that everyone has an agenda.

    2. MPO boundaries are set by the local governments involved and approved by the Governor. Federal officials have no role in designating boundaries of the MPO. see Section 134 of Title 23 of the US Code

    3. The boards of MPOs, PDCs and the transportation authorities are elected officials. No they are not elected to serve on those boards but when you vote for officials for local governments – i hope – it is with the understanding that they will serve in these roles and that should play a part in your voting choices.

  15. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    Anon: HB 3202 created the HRTA as a political subdivision of the Commonwealth. It had taxing authority. That is why it was ruled Un-Constitutional by a unanimous decision of the Virginia Supreme Court.

    HB 6005 tries to do the same thing with a shell game on the money. Read the bill and see if tolling authority isn’t taxing authority – and the local taxes send their money (through the shells) to an unelected body.

    If HB 6005 simply set up a commission like the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel Commission with the authority to sell bonds and build within a narrow mission, that would be different.

    When it comes to actually building things, VDOT is accountable to the Governor and GA. This MPO as a Regional Government will be accountable to no one.

  16. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I’m a believer in the mission of the MPOs – Regional Planning.

    When you build a tunnel connecting two jurisdictions in HR/TW – that is, by definition – a regional plan.

    When the road that has that tunnel send heavy traffic into a 3rd jurisdiction – to NOT plan for it is dumb.

    HOWEVER, Many MPOs are NOT operating as they are supposed by the same Code as provided –

    TITLE 23 > CHAPTER 1 > § 134.

    The two biggest failing IMHO – a common theme with MPOs:

    1. – they do NOT prioritize projects in a constrained funding process – which is a fundamental intent – to stop using wish lists and to focus on the projects that you have assured funding for.

    2. – a genuine public outreach that actually results in the publics involvement.

    Instead – we end up with wonderfully written “plans” that basically talk about all the different ways that they “allow” the public to participate.

    When you have an area with a population of hundreds of thousands of people and billions of dollars of their money spent on road projects – and that don’t know the process for determining priorities for spending THEIR money then the MPOs are perceived as organizations that do not effectively represent the interests of citizens.

    And the fact of the matter is that the elected officials (and the appointed ones) have shown a propensity to NOT focus on congestion reduction and removal of bottlenecks and the very type of customer-service that frustrates many drivers.

    My view is that all MPOs should undergo an annual certification review and is they are not maintaining the required constrained funding list and their public outreach plan is not actually producing an involved public that a referenda be held to disband the MPO.

    We need a way to get rid of the MPOs if they are not serving the interests of citizens – and that determination is made by – citizens.

    Right now – there is no way on earth to get rid of an MPO board that is not serving the interests of citizens and anyone familiar with the HR/TW situation can see just how corrosive this erosion of trust has harmed the entire process of regional planning.

    What I’d like to see right now, is a rating system for MPOs in Virginia and other states.

    MPOs in Virginia – for the most part are aloof from citizens and, to be honest, wary of being “too visible” to citizens.

    I’m not going to use the fox-in-the-henhouse analogy except to say that the way that MPOs currently operate – ask yourself – what are the protections against the Fox getting into the henhouse and staying there?

    so I’ll finish as I started.

    I’m a believer in the mission of the MPOs but the implementation – to date – to destroying public trust not building it and that’s not a good thing.

  17. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “When you have an area with a population of hundreds of thousands of people and billions of dollars of their money spent on road projects – and that don’t know the process for determining priorities for spending THEIR money then the MPOs are perceived as organizations that do not effectively represent the interests of citizens.”

    Like I keep saying. You need a better decison process. That is not the same as a process that allows unlimited debate, or a process that allows vocal individuals or groups to swing a virtual veto for thirty years or more of study.

    It means a process designed to actually produce a decision. One where people can agree with the decision process, even if they don’t like the decsion that results.

    MPO’s are not that process.

    RH

  18. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    MPOs can be that process.

    MPOs can do what the law says to start with – which is put together a fiscally constrained plan then they can deal with the public to see if they can gain support from a majority.

    You will never get 100% concurrence, probably never 75% but if you think you will shove down the public’s throat something they do not agree with – then you’re gonna lose.

    You may lose on one project – but in the longer run – when you need the public to support – something like higher taxes – you lose.

    There is no shortcut here.

    You must do right by the public.

    You must gain their trust and concurrence or else they will be your enemy – and you made that choice when you decided to ignore them.

    MPOs WERE designed to connect with the public.

    One of their BIG certification elements is how well they deal with the public.

    If you do three things:

    1. present an honest fiscally constrained plan.

    2. honestly meet with the public – not just provide “opportunities” to comment

    3. incorporate the things that a majority favor – again.. not 100 or even 75% – but a majority

    you will succeed .. and everyone will win…

    things go astray when we try to bamboozle, smoke & mirrors and do end-runs…

Leave a Reply

Read More