Silver Line versus Schools

I just skimmed FCPS' Capital Improvement Plan for 2008. It identifies a need for $1.9 billion in new capital investment to construct and, mainly, to remodel and update schools and related facilities. This is through 2016. It also notes that $1.3 billion has not been funded (i.e., bonded). Even by Fairfax County standards, this is a lot of money, especially for a school system that will not see increases in its total student population.

But can we afford not to keep our facilities current, safe and efficient? Wouldn't it be nice if we could actually have hot water at Longfellow Middle School?

Here's a serious question that Scott Monett and his Silver Line crowd should answer: What happens to the schools' capital needs when Fairfax County taxpayers are forced to fund cost-overruns for the construction of the Silver Line? Remember that's the big project that will cost billions, but not reduce traffic congestion.

Will we see a battle over funding West Group's train versus updating our schools? If not, why not?

Ramsey Pricing & Transportation Finance

The local business community is rather fond of arguing that, because of our proximity to the federal government in Washington, this area will grow and grow. This might be a bit of an overstatement given the high costs of doing business here, the ever-deteriorating quality of life, the concern of the federal government about locating too many resources too close to area of possible terrorist attack, etc. But, in any event, this area will continue to grow.

We also hear the same people argue that we need more transportation facilities. Probably so -- although it would make good economic sense first to try to use what we have more efficiently. But we will probably continue to need more infrastructure.

How do we pay for it? Let's try Ramsey Pricing. Ramsey Pricing is "second-best" pricing, whereby classes of customers with inelastic demands pay a higher markup over marginal cost than those with more elastic demands. The basic goal of Ramsey Pricing is to recoup the fixed costs from those customers who have the fewest alternatives, while minimizing the distortion associated with prices in excess of marginal costs.

Fairfax County's best asset is probably its close proximity to Washington, D.C. Businesses with a desire to influence or sell to the federal government want to locate in or near the District of Columbia. Our second best asset is probably the fact that D.C.'s government charges higher taxes and is generally incompetent, while suburban Maryland also imposes higher taxes than Virginia (but, at least, is relatively competent).

Therefore, Fairfax County, indeed, Arlington, Alexandria and Falls Church, should impose new and substantial fees on commercial property, or at least, commercial property that is attractive to government contractors and lobbyists/trade associations. These groups want to be near Washington and will pay substantially higher rents/fees for the privilege. Those fees should be set just slightly below what is charged in Washington, D.C. and suburban Maryland. The proceeds should be used to fund local transportation.

Let's use Ramsey Pricing principles to fund some of our transportation needs. It makes good economic sense.

Merry Christmas to the Posters at baconsrebellion

I offer my best wishes to the regular posters at baconsrebellion for the merriest of Christmases. Jim Bacon, Ray Hyde, Larry Gross, Ed Risse, NoVA Middle Man, Jim Wamsley, Gold H2O, and several others bearing the name "Anonymous." You've made me laugh, made me snarl, but most of all, made me think. I hope I've returned the favor.

Merry Christmas!

Kaine to Give Away Control over Dulles Toll Road

The hottest rumor is that Virginia Governor Tim Kaine will take advantage of the upcoming Christmas holiday, where most people are not watching public issues, to turn over control of the Dulles Toll Road to the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA). This would be done as a part of Kaine's effort to see road tolls raised to fund construction of the Silver Line.

While many people, including me, do not oppose this transfer in concept, there are too many unanswered questions. Both Republicans in the General Assembly and Democrat Gerry Connolly have also raised concerns about the transparency and accountability of the MWAA. Indeed, this entity has members from Maryland and D.C. on its board. Do we want nonresidents of Virginia making policy decisions about the Dulles Corridor?

All of the MWAA board members are appointed. How will they be held accountable to the residents of Virginia? I do not believe, but could be wrong, that basic "openness-in-government" laws apply to the MWAA. At a minimum, the MWAA should be subject to FOIA, Open Meetings (Sunshine) and other fundamental protections that ensure fair and open government. Also, who will oversee the ratemaking powers of the MWAA? What if it decides to set the tolls at $5? Who can regulate the MWAA?

Transfer of the Dulles Toll Road may be a good idea in the long run, but Governor Kaine should first address these fundamental issues being raised by Democrats and Republicans alike. He shouldn't make this transfer during the distractions of the Christmas holiday season.

Which is the Biggest Number?

Which is the biggest number -- 580,000 or 626,000? The obvious answer is "626,000." But why am I asking what seems to be a stupid question?

The new proposed budget for WMATA states (p.10) that Metrorail reduces 580,000 car trips each day, which, in turn, benefits other commuters who drive. Sounds reasonable to me.

However, an informal study of the many proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for Tysons Corner estimates that, if the Silver Line is constructed and if the Fairfax County BoS approves the Plan amendments, we could expect to see an additional 626,000 car trips each day, in and around Tysons Corner. In other words, adding "density," "transit oriented development," "mixed use," etc. to Tysons Corner would likely put almost 8% more cars on roads in and around Tysons Corner than Metrorail takes off the roads throughout all of Metropolitan Washington, D.C., Virginia and Maryland.

The informal study examined each and every proposed Plan amendment, assumed that the BoS would approve Floor Area Ratios of only 3.0 (three square feet of floor space for every one square foot of lot size), and extrapolated car trip data from the recent Plan amendment for the McLean Commons Apartments. The study then assumed that 20% of these potential car trips would be captured by the Silver Line, leaving an additional 626,000 car trips each day in and around Tysons Corner.

They study is conservative because many of the applications are seeking FARs that are higher than 3.0. It also assumed a "capture rate" that is higher than Gerry Connolly has been touting for the Silver Line. Therefore, we could see even more than 626,000 additional, daily car trips in the Tysons Corner area!

Spending billions to build a new rail line that will trigger rezoning approvals, which in turn will add more traffic to Tysons Corner than the entire Metrorail system takes off the roads today just seems foolish to me.

Dana Kaufmann & WMATA - Asleep at the Switch

WMATA, the agency that operates Metrorail & Metrobus, is promising reduced service and higher fares. I suspect that the agency will also request higher taxpayer subsidies to boot.

WMATA wants to reimburse all of its employees' higher medical costs and give everyone a five percent raise. Then, of course, there are all of those settlements paid to "people injured by Metrobus." Where's the public oversight? Where's some consideration for the public interest?

In the real world, companies and nonprofits alike don't reimburse all of their employees' higher medical costs. Only government agencies do that. When times are tough, employee wages aren't increased at rates higher than inflation. In the real world, there are many times when employees don't receive any raise at all. How about contracting for more administrative and maintenance services? It happens regularly in the real world.

If specious claims are gnawing at the budget, WMATA leadership needs to fight for tort reform as hard as it seeks higher taxes each year. We should pay legitimate claims, but we aren't running a giveaway business.

Where's the WMATA Board's oversight? Instead of worrying about how it can persuade legislators to raise taxes for WMATA to waste, the Board's Bozos, including Fairfax County's Dana Kaufmann, should find ways to deliver better service and reduce costs at the same time. It happens regularly in the real world. But then, no one would ever accuse Kaufmann of living in the real world. He's asleep at the switch.

Dana Kaufmann should resign immediately from the WMATA Board. Virginia should chose its new representative by drawing middle schoolers' names from a hat. We'd get better results from an 8th grader chosen at random than from Kaufmann.

Democrats to Eliminate Earmarks - Will Moran & Webb Go After One for the Silver Line?

As a fiscal conservative, I applaud the announcement by the new Democratic leadership in Congress to strip earmarks from the appropriations bills. As one who has lived in this area and dealt with the federal government for many years, I strongly suspect that this new anti-pork barrel "religion" will soon be dropped by the Democrats, just as it was by the Republicans. But I'll cheer any attempt to eliminate earmarks.

My big question is: Whether Congressman Jim Moran (D) and Senator-elect Jim Webb (D) soon be seeking an earmark for the Silver Line? Will they be true to principles of reform or heed the call of lobbyists and local government rummies for pork? As we know, earmarks are end-runs on a government system of checks and balances. We pay taxes and fees for transportation, but then expect the executive branch to apply standards set by the legislative branch to determine which specific projects are funded and which fall by the wayside. A decision not supported by facts should be subject to judicial review. Earmarks toss out the standards and fund projects based on successful lobbying. Earmarks damage citizen trust in government.

It's clear from Governor Kaine's decision not to support a tunnel for the Silver Line -- something that otherwise makes good sense -- that it is questionable whether the entire project will pass the federal government's cost/benefit test. Those old government standards again. The project may be so costly that the addition of a tunnel might well result in no funding from the federal government. In that event, the Silver Line's sponsors could forgo $900 M from the feds, make changes to reduce the costs (such as moving the line back to the Toll Road median where it was originally proposed), or try to get an earmark.

The recent election reduced Frank Wolf (R), Tom Davis (R), and John Warner (R) to minority party status. It elevated the Democrats, including Moran and newcomer Webb, to majority control. Thus, if the earmark-pork barrel approach is to be taken, it will be done by Democrats. Thus, the question is: whether Moran and Webb are really reformists or whether they too are earmark politicians?

West Group & Tom Sawyer -- Two Cases of Brilliance

It behooves us all to recognize brilliance when we find it. Thus, I take off my hat to salute the sheer genius of West Group's public affairs team. Its performance is in a class with Tom Sawyer's whitewashing the fence.

We are all aware of the Mark Twain story of Tom Sawyer and the fence. Tom was ordered by his Aunt Polly to whitewash a long fence when he would have rather spent the Saturday with his friends having fun and adventures. Moreover, he feared that his friends would mock him for working on a beautiful day. Tom thought about trading his valuables for his friends' labor, but soon realized that the price would be too high. As we all know, as friends came along, Tom pretended that whitewashing the fence was the greatest thing he could do on the Saturday. Better than Ben Rogers' offer to go swimming. Tom's friends quickly bought into his agenda. Not only did they all take over Tom's work, but they also gave him valuable consideration for the privilege.

Sawyer was able to get his fence whitewashed without much of his labor and he obtained a large number of "valuables" to boot: part of an apple, a kite, " twelve marbles, part of a jew’s-harp, a piece of blue bottle-glass to look through, a spoon cannon, a key that wouldn’t unlock anything, a fragment of chalk, a glass stopper of a decanter, a tin soldier, a couple of tadpoles, a kitten with only one eye, a brass door-knob, a dog-collar-but no dog - the handle of a knife, four pieces of orange-peel, and a dilapidated window-sash."

Just as brilliant as Tom Sawyer is West Group's public affairs team. West Group needs an underground Metrorail through Tysons Corner to maximize the value of its landholdings. The Company probably felt secure that Governor Kaine would propose an underground line. But he didn't for fear of jeopardizing federal funding. Now the Company has enlisted local businesses and neighbors to carry its water.

West Group has persuaded many people that, in order to avoid an admittedly ugly elevated line through Tysons, they should champion the added costs for a tunnel that could jeopardize federal funding. Just as Tom Sawyer was able to obtain valuable consideration for the chance to do his job, so too may West Group be able to persuade citizens to pay higher taxes to make up for potential loss of federal funding. Also standing in the way of a tunnel is the behemoth Bechtel that has the existing fast track to build the elevated line if and when federal funding is approved. Given its success in marshaling business and citizen support, I would not be surprised to see West Group be able to persuade us to pay for a court fight with Bechtel. Keep in mind that all this is happening to build an expensive rail system that will likely result in even worse traffic congestion around Tysons Corner.

I truly believe that this is the work of very talented people. I salute the brilliance of West Group's public affairs team. You are one of the very best around.

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words

This wonderful editorial photo was emailed to me. It speaks volumes.

Half-Witted Logic That Fairfax County Will Likely Accept

As most readers know, the Macerich Co., owner of the Tysons Corner shopping mall, has proposed to withdraw part of its rezoning request to Fairfax County so that the impacts can be considered by the Tysons Corner Task Force, which was appointed by the BoS to plan Tysons Corner.

Opponents of the massive request that would add 3.5 M square feet of development to ring the existing mall have argued that it makes no sense for the Planning Commission and the BoS to consider the zoning changes until after the Task Force makes its recommendations. Nothing like prejudging a complicated set of policy decisions. It only makes sense for the Task Force to develop a proposal for all of Tysons Corner and for such a plan to go through the public review and approval process before ANY zoning decisions are made. What if the Task Force were to decide that Tysons Corner were already overdeveloped, such that adding 3.5 M square feet of new condos, offices and a hotel would was simply too much?

The Macerich group has decided to withdraw consideration of the the last two phases of a four-phase proposal until after the Task Force finishes its work. That would still propose about 2.5 M square feet to be approved before the county figures out what changes, if any, should be made to the Comprehensive Plan for Tysons. Duh!

It is totally illogical to split the "baby" in half so to speak. This is no compromise. We need to let the Task Force complete its work and make its recommendation to the BoS and the residents of Fairfax County before the Planning Commission decides anything about upzoning requests for Tysons. The logic does not support splitting the baby. Macerich's argument is half-witted and flawed. It should be rejected out of hand. However, this is Fairfax County where campaign contributions speak lounder than facts and analysis. Here's betting the Planning Commission approves Macerich's "half-a-baby" proposal. But then no one would ever confuse anyone on the Fairfax County Planning Commission or the BoS for King Solomon.

The Phrase "We Need to Fix Transportation" Makes Me Gag

Every few months, we hear people who should know better mouth the phrase "we need to fix transportation." That makes me gag.

I'm not arguing that NoVA's transportation network is anything but a disaster. I won't argue that there's nothing we could do to make any improvements. I won't even argue that VDOT doesn't need more funds.

I do submit, however, that "we need to fix transportation" is meaningless gibberish that should be translated "if we could raise taxes and build more roads, we could increase real estate development." Wasn't that what the failed 2002 sales tax referenda were all about?

We need to flush this phrase and substitute some meaningful and measurable statements about what tangible benefits spending $X millions, $Y tens of millions, or $Z hundreds of millions will produce for specific projects. Even saying "we'll add a lane to Route 7 in each direction between the Dulles Toll Road and the Fairfax County Parkway" doesn't tell the taxpayer what she or he will receive.

We do need to know what specific improvements would be made, but also what level of improvement, if any, in traffic conditions would result from the investment. For example, if spending $75 million improves busy hour LOS from F to C, that might well be a good investment of tax dollars. On the other hand, if spending the same $75 million makes no measurable improvement in LOS -- F stays F -- because the wider road would enable more development, which, in turn, would generate more traffic, maybe we'd be better off by keeping the $75 million for other projects and simply declining to grant permission to build the extra houses, etc. (Remember that local governments in Virginia have much more authority over land use decisions than they like us to know.)

We need more and more honest disclosure about transportation projects, including statements about what they would and would not produce in terms of measurable results.

More on Proffer Problems

Another problem with Fairfax County's failure to track and monitor developer compliance with their proffers and zoning conditions is that the County has been well aware of this problem for years and has not addressed it. Citizens groups, including the McLean Citizens Association and the Fairfax County Federation of Citizens Organizations, have complained about this issue for a number of years to deaf ears. Also, the currently effective county budget includes a $124,472 expenditure for two positions to handle developer defaults. (Fiscal 2007 Adopted County Budget, Vol. I, page 347.) In fact, the same document states in justification for the new spending: "Due to the increasing volume of developer projects going into default, these positions are necessary in order to bring projects to completion in a timely manner."

So why the surprise on the part of the planning staff or commissioners? Do they try too hard to please the developer community instead of trying to track and enforce the bargain for citizens of the county? This problem needs to addressed now. Wouldn't it be a better use of taxpayer money for the county to fund a system of proffer and zoning conditions than to pay $6.8 million for the Economic Development Authority's advertising for more businesses and people to move to Fairfax County?

Undoing Proffers

I happened to watch the Fairfax County Planning Commission meeting last night on cable TV. Even I thought this was a strange way to spend my time. However, I am glad that I did.

The meeting included a discussion of an application by a builder to amend its proffers. It seems that the original proffers for the rezoning included a restriction that no decks could be built closer than 15 feet from any lot line. This made sense apparently because the new development would contain approximately 3.6 dwellings per acre. That is dense housing that requires protection of neighbors' privacy and security interests. This commitment was a part of the "deal" between the developer, the county, the neighbors and the rest of the residents of Fairfax County.

However, it seems that several homeowners in this community later applied for, and received, building permits to construct decks that exceeded the size permitted by the proffers. Some decks extended to within five feet of lot lines. Even later, several other homeowners sought building permits to construct similar decks, but were rejected because the county realized that the proffers prohibited them. Thus, we have some homeowners with illegal decks and others who cannot build the same deck as their neighbors. The developer has now proposed to amend its proffer to permit decks within 5 feet of a lot line.

The Planning Commission was unable to reach a decision and deferred the matter for one week. This is a mess! There are equitable arguments on both sides of this issue. A homeowner who followed the rules and obtained a building permit for deck has likely spent thousands of dollars. Should those decks be torn out? Other homeowners seemingly want to build similar decks, but cannot. Is that fair? What about a resident who doesn't want his/her next door neighbor's deck in clear view and expected at least 15 feet of privacy and security protection? Does such person have no rights?

But the issue of proffers goes beyond the immediate homeowners. The proffers are part of a bargained social contract between the developer and the county, acting on behalf of its citizens. The developer received permission to build more densely and to make greater profits in exchange for some promised behaviors. The developer received benefit, but the residents of the county are being denied theirs in return. While this dispute is just about decks, it is still symptomatic of the larger problem -- no one monitors whether proffer and other zoning conditions are being met. Who is protecting the public interest by ensuring that proffers conditions are met? To their credit, several commissioners expressed concern about this problem. Also, there are no quick fixes, but action is needed.

Will the Planning Commission escalate this problem to the BoS? Will the BoS act? Will our supervisors spend less time trying to promote more development in the county and more time making sure that development occurs in compliance with all zoning and proffer conditions? This situation is simply not acceptable. We need action now.