Fairfax County's Program Auditor - One Office That Works

John Adair, Fairfax County's program auditor, reporting to the BoS, is one unsung hero. The last time I checked, John had but a three-person staff, including himself. A new WaPo story indicates that the Office has been working to identify and remedy county employee thefts of gasoline and diesel fuel. The story indicates that, possibly, as many as 75,000 gallons could have been stolen. At $3 per gallon, that's $225,000 -- hardly equivalent to taking home paper clips or making unauthorized use of a county copier for one's daughter's school report. This is serious, big-time theft.

John's office has also been involved investing other thefts and embezzlements. They proposed the plan to reduce the size of the county motor vehicle fleet -- which has been flouted by employees, including county sheriff Stan Berry (shame on you) and worked with Gerry Connolly and the other supervisors to solve with vendors that have failed to deliver the goods.

This is one county office that pays for itself many times over. The office was created a number of years ago at the behest of citizen groups, including the McLean Citizens Association.

Supervisor Dana Kauffman -- West Group's Lackey Boy

Fairfax County Supervisor Dana Kauffman (D-Lee) has written a letter in support of the multi-billion Silver Line boondoggle that shows that he, along with most of his colleagues, are lackeys for West Group and the other big Tysons Corner landowners. His letter is available at www.tysonstunnel.org/images/pdfs-articles/DanaKauffman_Letter.pdf

The letter argues for taxpayer funding of a tunnel for the Silver Line through Tysons Corner. Standing alone, a tunnel is better option than the elevated track. But the tunnel does not stand alone. It is part of a multi-billion dollar construction project that does not provide any significant traffic relief. See my post for September 6, 2006. What it will do, however, is permit Kauffman and his colleagues to grant West Group and the other big Tysons Corner landowners rezoning, which, in turn, will bring them billions in windfall profits. Needless to say, Kauffman's letter does not address the traffic issue. Good lackey boy, Dana!

Kauffman argues that the tunnel is "a real, economically justifiable option." However, he does not address the fact that the cost projections for the entire project are several years old and, given the high rate of inflation in construction costs, totally out of date and too low. Needless to say, Kauffman's letter does not address the inflation issue or who will pay those added costs. Good lackey boy, Dana!

Next Kauffman complains that Congressmen Davis and Wolf have failed to override the Federal Transit Agency's cost-benefit guidelines to fund the Silver Line regardless of the facts. Kauffman implicitly argues that the new Democratic Congress will override the FTA's standards. I thought the Democrats campaigned against earmarks! Shouldn't the federal government limit spending to projects that provide benefit, rather than fund those supported by lobbyists? Needless to say, Kauffman's letter does not address the influence-peddling issue. Good lackey boy, Dana! Or should we start calling you "Dana DeLay Kauffman"?

Then Kauffman argues that, because the Silver Line plan's have reincluded facilities for disabled access that were previously eliminated to meet the FTA's cost-benefit standards, adding the costs for a tunnel would not cause a problem. Kauffman's lack of logic is staggering here. The removal of the facilities for disabled access to meet cost-benefit standards, which is both repulsive and illegal, shows how desperate the Silver Line's sponsors are to deliver the goods for West Group, et al. The likely truth of the matter is that Governor Kaine looked at the facts and determined that, given the high level of inflation in construction costs, the marginal benefit to traffic congestion, it was touch and go that the project would pass the FTA's test -- even without a tunnel. Needless to say, Kauffman's letter does not adequately address this issue either. Good lackey boy, Dana!

Supervisor Kauffman adds the frosting to his letter by saying: "We owe it not only to ourselves but to our children to stop making shortsighted decisions. Now, more than ever, the project must be put to bid with a fair review of the tunnel option." If Kauffman were not West Group's lackey boy, he would have called for a review of the entire project that demanded taxpayers receive a Silver Line proposal that resulted in traffic congestion improvement, met FTA cost standards and put the burden of paying for cost-overruns on West Group and the other big Tysons Corner landowners that benefit from this project. But then, Kauffman would be taking care of the public interest and not that of his master, West Group. Good lackey boy, Dana!

Virginia's Economy is Too Dependent on Defense and Homeland Security Spending.

The state Senate Finance Committee just held a retreat for its members. That's a good thing, IMO. Staff reports indicated that the state's economy continues strong, but it is slowing. First quarter collections from personal income tax withholding and sales tax are lower. Non-withholding revenues (estimated tax payments) that come mainly from small business owners are slowing also. Needless to say, proceeds from the real estate industry are down substantially, especially in the area of the state recording tax. (But then, it's fair to say that the real estate boom pushed those revenues into windfall territory. It's time for an adjustment.)

Here's Virginia's previous strength that is now becoming a liability. "Virginia’s reliance on federal spending has increased. - Homeland security spending is leveling off and wartime defense contracts will eventually follow the same course." (Interestingly, I suspect that many of the people who earn their livings with these "hard government" contracts voted for Jim Webb, who gave the "soft government" Democrats a US Senate majority. But that's a subject for the future.) The state Senate Finance Committee sees the big growth in federal spending for Virginia slowing.

The report continues: "Signs of a softening economy, especially in the housing market and federal spending, may be more apparent this time next year as you begin to craft the 2008-10 budget."

"Fewer discretionary dollars will be available than in recent years. To the degree that discretionary funds are available, caution should be exercised to: - Avoid expanding obligations; - Avoid partially funding initiatives with major outyear costs; and - Continue to employ volatile, hard-to-project revenues for one-time uses."

What do people think this means? IMO, Governor Kaine's big, expansive plans to fund pre-school education are dead.

What about the Other Tunnel?

The good people at tysonstunnel.org are making one last push for a tunnel for the Silver Line through Tysons Corner. They argue that the tunnel would be affordable and offer to perform some engineering studies to back-up their position.

They should also examine the costs for digging a second tunnel under the Potomac River to accommodate the added trains. The existing tunnel, which carries both Orange and Blue Lines, is essentially at capacity today. Even with the rerouting of some Blue Line trains across the Yellow Line bridge (which, of course, degrades Blue Line service for many Virginians who will need to cross over to D.C., rather than simply travel through Rosslyn), the tunnel will not likely be able to handle the added traffic. A second Potomac River crossing will soon be needed. What will it cost? Who will pay?

Don't expect any answers -- until it's too late.

Transferring Risk to Taxpayers is Wrong

America just lost one of its best thinkers - economist Milton Friedman just died at age 94. Friedman was a passionate believer in free markets. I agree with him. But free-markets are not just free of excess government regulations. They are also free from government subsidies.

We need to end government subsidies of the commercial real estate market in Fairfax County. Today, real estate firms are building new commercial space that is not pre-leased on the hopes that the defense & homeland security contracting booms will continue and on the trust that Fairfax County taxpayers will continue to subsidize advertising for companies and new residents to come to our already overcrowded community.

Betting on future demand is consistent with a free market. But so is acceptance of the risk that the demand will not come or will trickle in slowly. It seems pretty clear that the new Congress will slow the rate of growth in government contracting that has fueled NoVA's economy. That means less demand for real estate. Lower rents and lower earnings. It should not mean that taxpayers must pay for their advertising. Let's end the subsidies to real estate by defunding the Fairfax County Economic Development Authorities advertising budget. Let the commercial real estate business fund its own advertising. Let the risks of business fall go with those who would reap its rewards,

Downzoning - Part III (Tysons Corner)

Would it make sense for the typical resident of Fairfax County for the Board of Supervisors to adopt a new Comprehensive Plan for Tysons Corner that included some level of downzoning? I suspect that, if they thought about it from a purely analytical perspective, the supervisors would not increase density at Tysons Corner, but would decrease it. Since Gerry Connolly has received more than $160,000 in campaign contributions from the real estate industry, I doubt that facts and analysis will play much of a role. But if they did, a rational BoS would likely conclude that the level of existing buildings and those already approved exceed the capacity of our infrastructure to support them. A sensible person would not vote to add more people and cars that would choke the area to death. Ten sensible supervisors would most assuredly vote to downzone the area.

If we already have more jobs at Tysons than can be filled by local residents, adding new jobs in that location means even more people will commute to the area. Why should existing businesses and residents suffer further degradation in their quality of work and life so that people living outside the county can drive to and from Tysons? The added tax revenues won't pay for the costs of the infrastructure. County data show that, despite the huge building boom and a much lower office vacancy rate, the percentage of real estate taxes paid by commercial properties is at its lowest level in many years. The rate is around 17.3% and has dropped for six or seven years straight. This is a situation where taxpayers loose money on every new building, but make it up on volume.

It is certain that builders will construct some very nice new condos at Tysons, but it is equally true that those units will be very expensive. Land costs are high; construction material costs are going up much faster than inflation; and the cost of constructing any building above three or four stories is excessively expensive. In sum, the builders cannot afford to construct any housing that does not carry a high price tag. Proffers in the range of 8% affordable housing units won't permit worker housing. Only executives, professionals and middle management would likely be able to afford to live at Tysons. The rest of the workers must still commute. Moreover, Census Bureau data show that most people don't want to live in dense, urban locations. They want single family homes. Expensive, dense housing at Tysons will not meet the needs of many people.

The roads cannot handle today's traffic, and the Commonwealth states that the Silver Line will not reduce traffic volumes. Why would anyone want to add traffic to Tysons?

The current crop of supervisors regularly puts the interests of developers and large landowners ahead of those of small business and ordinary citizens. Fairfax County does not even attempt to collect sufficient proffers to construct the infrastructure necessary to support additional people. It won't happen at Tysons.

Under these circumstances, the average resident of Fairfax County would be best served if the BoS were to reject any requests for more density at Tysons and amend the Comprehensive Plan to take away density for those locations where new construction has not started or plans been improved. Let's downzone Tysons Corner.

Silver Line Tunnel Meeting -- Honest Discussion or Thick PR - Bet on the Latter

Wednesday evening (11/15) at 7 pm, the ad hoc tysonstunnel.org is holding a community meeting on its last-ditch effort to resurrect a tunnel for the Silver Line at Tysons Corner. The big question in my mind is: Whether the meeting will be an honest discussion of the complicated issues associated with the construction of heavy rail or whether it will be thick with PR?

At one level, it is impossible to disagree with Scott Monnett, McLean Chamber chief, who is pushing the tunnel. A tunnel would be more aesthetically pleasing than the ugly old elevated track. A tunnel would also last longer and could present fewer traffic nightmares during construction. But those factors do not address the more important questions: Why are we spending billions on the Silver Line without receiving traffic congestion relief? Will the added costs for constructing a tunnel kill federal funding because the project would clearly fail the mandatory cost/benefit test? Given the huge inflation in construction costs, just what would it cost to build the Silver Line with or without the tunnel? Who will pay for the added costs to build the tunnel, along with the certain future cost overruns?

I doubt that those questions will be addressed. That's not the Fairfax County way. What a shame!

We need honest and thorough answers, not more PR. We need to see data, not hear from lobbyists. I don't expect much from this meeting beyond PR spin. If you have other things to do on Wednesday evening, do them, rather than attend the tysonstunnel.org meeting.

Silver Line Supporters Hinting Residential Real Estate Tax Hike Will be Needed

Tunnel or no tunnel, escalating costs for materials likely means that construction of the Silver Line will cost much more than the projected $4 B. (That's a lot of money for no traffic relief.) With the federal and special tax district shares limited, that certainly means a residential real estate tax hike to pay for construction. Actually, it will be more than one tax hike as the project is built over time.

Silver Line supporters have moved from their less-than-honest position that the project will be built on budget. They have started to drop hints that additional funds must come from the Fairfax County general fund. Well guess who puts money into that account? Real estate taxpayers, the bulk of whom are individual residents of the county.

One alternative might be "tax increment financing" where only tax revenues from increased valuations within the specific area to be served by rail would go to pay for Metro's excess construction costs. Apparently, however, the business community doesn't like this approach. Since the Connolly Administration represents "government by campaign contribution," expect this wish to be carried out with all due speed. Remember that Gerry has previously worked for the West Group companies and now works for another big Tysons landowner, SAIC. Expect to see your taxes raised to benefit a few big campaign contributors.

What's the difference between Gerry Connolly and Tom DeLay? Gerry's still in office!

Downzoning - Part II (Tysons Corner)

Now that we have established downzoning is permissible under Virginia law (even in Fairfax County, Mr. Connolly), let's examine whether it should be considered for Tysons Corner. Yes, rather than add density, should the existing density be reduced?

As our Supreme Court indicated, downzoning should not be undertaken on a whim. As the judges said in the Snell case, "The Virginia landowner always confronts the possibility that permissible land use may be changed by a comprehensive zoning ordinance reducing profit prospects; yet, the Virginia statutes assure him that such a change will not be made suddenly, arbitrarily, or capriciously but only after a period of investigation and community planning." The BoS has appointed the "Tysons Task Force" from a cross-section of county residents. They have been meeting for well over a year to study and discuss land use at Tysons. We have established a prima facie case that we are satisfying the concerns of the court as to deliberation.

The Task Force must consider the impact of any growth at Tysons on public infrastructure. To do otherwise would be to neglect its responsibility to the county and its residents. Key, but not exclusive, to this analysis is traffic, transit and road capacity. It is very likely that the data and analysis would conclude that the existing size of Tysons Corner without building a single new structure, whether by right (as it would conform to the existing Comprehensive Plan) or by request for either rezoning within the Comprehensive Plan, as is being requested for Tysons I, or by amending the Plan, as is being sought by many landowners, overwhelms the capacity of the existing transportation infrastructure. In more blunt language, we cannot handle what we have today.

If the existing roads cannot handle the existing number of automobiles, why add more to the mix? Moreover, we already know that adding the multi-billion dollar Silver Line does not fix the traffic problem. Absent a solution to the traffic problem, adding any more buildings to Tysons Corner would have a negative impact on the public health, safety, or welfare. According to state law, the county is permitted (and morally required) not to take action that would have a negative impact on such concerns. Would we find it acceptable for the BoS to eliminate the requirement that children have already received certain vaccinations before entering school? Of course not. That would harm the public health, safety, or welfare.

So why is traffic any different? It's not. Fairfax County would have ample evidence not only to deny Plan amendments and rezoning applications, but also to amend the existing plan with downzoning. The legal case is solid. Later, I'll discuss the policy issues. It may be lawful to downzone Tysons Corner, but would it also be a wise thing to do?

Watch the Push for another Big Earmark for the Silver Line

The great thing about the U.S. is that the voters always get the final say. Some of my votes were on the winning side, while others lost. But people voted for change yesterday. They are sick of their elected officials listening first and foremost to lobbyists.

We need lobbying reform. While I don't expect the Democrats in Congress to do any better than the GOP on this issue, I'm willing to give them the chance. One of the first places for reform is to reduce earmarks substantially. No more big funding for special projects in appropriations bills.

This includes the ongoing attempt by the big Tysons landowners through the McLean Chamber of Commerce and tysonstunnel.org to run around the Federal Transit Authority's cost-benefit rules to get an earmark for the construction of a big and expensive tunnel through Tysons for the Silver Line. If the tunnel supporters can demonstrate that the tunnel would cost no more than the elevated line and provide adequate assurances that residential taxpayers would not foot the bill for the project that does not improve traffic congestion, more power to them. But that is unlikely. What many fear is that they are really seeking an earmark. That's wrong whether done by Republicans or by Democrats. Let's hope that all elected officials let the process work. No Silver Line earmark.

Downzoning Is Permitted under Virginia Law - Part I

The law in Virginia is what our Supreme Court says it is; it's not what Gerry Connolly says in his regular attempts to tread the thin line between keeping his two groups of constituents -- developers and ordinary citizens -- happy. The former want more and more density, and the latter want protection against development that drives the quality of life down and taxes up!

I've heard Gerry Connolly (and other elected officials, for that matter) claim that the Dillon Rule ties his hands. He has no authority but to approve zoning requests. Not so, Chairman Connolly, not so. The Virginia Supreme Court says that, with appropriate findings, county supervisors have the legal authority to downzone, even in this Dillon Rule state.

The leading case is Board of Supervisors of Fairfax County v. Snell Construction Corp., 214 Va. 655, 202 S.E.2d 889 (1974). That case involved an attempt by our supervisors to downzone an individual parcel of land from what was permitted in the Comprehensive Plan for Annandale. In this instance, the court rejected the downzoning because "since enactment of the prior ordinance there has been no change in circumstances substantially affecting the public health, safety, or welfare, the burden of going forward with evidence of such mistake, fraud, or changed circumstances shifts to the governing body. If the governing body produces evidence sufficient to make reasonableness fairly debatable, the ordinance must be sustained. If not, the ordinance is unreasonable and void." Fairfax County failed to make this showing, such that the court determined the Board's actions unlawful.

However, our Supreme Court made it clear that: the revision of a Comprehensive Plan for a specific area of a county CAN include DOWNZONING; and, with the proper showing, even an individual parcel CAN be DOWNZONED. The Dillon Rule is not a barrier.

The case states that downzoning, as a part of a revision of a Comprehensive Plan, “is presumed to be valid so long as it is not unreasonable and arbitrary. The burden of proof is on him who assails it to prove that it is clearly unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious, and that it bears no reasonable or substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare. The court will not substitute its judgment for that of a legislative body, and if the reasonableness of a zoning ordinance is fairly debatable it must be sustained.”

Moreover, had Fairfax County demonstrated that, since the Comprehensive Plan for Annandale was adopted by the supervisors, there had been a "change in circumstances [that] substantially affecting the public health, safety, or welfare," even a single parcel of land could lawfully be downzoned.

The following paragraph from the Snell case summarizes the law: "Under the private enterprise system, land use is influenced by the profit motive. Profit flows from investments of time, talent, and capital. Landowners venture investments only when the prospects of profit are reasonable. Prospects are reasonable only when permissible land use is reasonably predictable. The Virginia landowner always confronts the possibility that permissible land use may be changed by a comprehensive zoning ordinance reducing profit prospects; yet, the Virginia statutes assure him that such a change will not be made suddenly, arbitrarily, or capriciously but only after a period of investigation and community planning."

Thus, it is very clear that the Dillon Rule does not tie Chairman Connolly's hands on land use matters as he suggests. His attempt to reward campaign contributors, while appeasing the rest of us, is dishonest and cynical.

A Thumb on the Scale - Zoning Subsidies in Fairfax

I strongly believe in markets. When no one has a thumb on the scale, the free market tends to produce better results than government decision-making in the economic realm. Generally, most people, be they Republicans or Democrats, tend to agree. However, there clearly is role for government to play in policing markets against fraud. What government should not do, however, is place a big thumb on the scale to favor (or disfavor) market participants.

Needless to say, Fairfax County puts a big thumb on the market scale in the area of taxpayer subsidies for the real estate industry. In addition to the $6.8 M annual subsidy for the Economic Development Authority's advertising program that benefits commercial real estate, county taxpayers subsidize land development and zoning services. From July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2007, taxpayers will have paid more than $43 M in subsidies for these services. Granted, state law prohibits local governments for setting these fees above cost, but it does not require a huge subsidy. Indeed, the Spotsylvania County board of supervisors has set their fees at cost.
What's the difference? In Fairfax County, we have Gerry Connolly and his colleagues and their government by campaign contribution. Apparently, in Spotsylvania County, elected officials make an attempt to govern in the public interest. Move over Chicago and New Jersey, Fairfax County's corruption is on the rise.

Isn't it time to get government's thumb off the real estate market scale?

Why Can't the Press Move beyond Tax Increases on Transportation?

The area press, including my favorite local papers, simply cannot see beyond their liberalism -- increased government spending and taxes solves problems. This is especially true with respect to the transportation issue in Virginia. That just doesn't cut it! We need more complex thinking and reporting. Let's consider the following.

Environmental groups have filed a lawsuit challenging the proposed construction of the Inter-County Connector (ICC) highway in Maryland. They argue that the D.C. Metro's air quality problems would be exacerbated by the construction of a major new highway and, thus, the road is unlawful, as proposed. I'm sure that there are good arguments in opposition to that position.

But let's assume for the moment that the environmental groups are correct. What if the air quality laws would not permit construction of the ICC? It's not rocket science. If a major new road could not be built lawfully in Suburban Maryland, a major new road could not be built lawfully in Northern Virginia either. If the ICC cannot be constructed, why would any reasonable, thinking person (that excludes lobbyists, of course) believe that an outer beltway segment could be built?

If we cannot lawfully build any major roads or add substantial capacity to existing ones (except, perhaps, HOT or HOV lanes), why should NoVA legislators vote for a transportation tax increase? If we pay more in NoVA, but don't get to use most of the proceeds from a tax increase, aren't we just increasing the amounts of subsidies we send around the state?

Again, I'm not ready to concede that the Maryland lawsuit would necessarily be successful. But if NoVA residents, including the press and elected officials, care one bit about how our tax dollars are spent, shouldn't we be asking these questions now? Before the General Assembly meets? Shouldn't someone be asking Governor Kaine and the tax-happy senators from both parties to explain this issue? Can't we have some editorial writers move beyond knee-jerk liberalism and the automatic support of tax increases and more spending? Might ordinary citizens and business executives think before they react?

What is the relationship of federal air quality issues and transportation in NoVA?

Web Site Counter

Safety - Another Issue for the McLean Chamber to Answer

The McLean Chamber of Commerce is supporting a Tysons Corner tunnel for the Silver Line. The group's affiliate has scheduled a public meeting for November 15 at the McLean Community Center. That's a positive step if the meeting goes beyond PR and addresses the real issue, including those raised by tysonstunnel.org. The Five-Legged Dog has previously suggested three questions that should be addressed by the Chamber.

Here is one more. The press reports that the National Traffic Safety Board has just released a finding that Boston's Big Dig tunnel, which collapsed earlier killing a motorist, was "designed with a smaller margin of safety than other tunnel ceilings in America." The engineers failed to design sufficient redundancy into the tunnel's fasteners for the heavy concrete blocks. There was no backup for a fastener failure. The result was an unnecessary death.

Hopefully, this would not occur with the proposed Tysons Tunnel. But, realistically, the tunnel's (and, indeed, the entire Metro expansion's) supporters are faced with severe pressure to reduce costs. The current proposal has seen scaled-back features, including the critical pedestrian bridges. Given this existing tendency to cut corners, the strong inflation in construction costs, and the desire of some supporters to build the Silver Line at any cost, we need to be concerned about safety.

One would hope that the Chamber would address this issue at its November 15 meeting with more than mere words.