Four for NOVA
By Chris Braunlich
11/20/2006 – “We have to do something about Northern Virginia.”
In the wake of a third election loss in Northern Virginia, that seems to be the mantra of
Republicans and conservatives around the Commonwealth. But short of the old joke about
sawing the region off and letting it float into the Chesapeake there have been few policy ideas for
making Northern Virginia a competitive two-party region again.
Part of the challenge is the party’s emphasis on “turning out the base.” The strategy
follows national polls showing that – until this most recent election -- the percentage of swing
voters had shrunk to a miniscule fraction of the electorate. Between 1980 and 2000, the
percentage of swing voters (those who truly voted for candidates of different parties) fell from 24
percent to just 6 percent of the electorate.
But in Northern Virginia, “turning out the base” is rarely enough. Even after combining
all of the “anti-tax,” “pro-life,” and “second amendment” voters it’s hard to come up with 51
percent of the electorate. Candidates running on nothing more than bumper sticker slogans
found that independent voters hungering for more substance – even those who may agree with
them – turned elsewhere for solutions.
After all, Northern Virginians pay more in local real and personal property taxes than
anywhere else in the state. They are taxed more heavily – and their taxes are sent elsewhere to
the rest of the Commonwealth. They are stuck in traffic, yet probably receive less state
transportation money per car on the road than anywhere else in the state. Immigration, growth
and development – all of these are challenges for which voters want answers – not a rote
repetition of the latest sound bite.
So what would a sound platform look like in Northern Virginia? Here are four ideas –
Link Land Use and Transportation: Counties decide where developments are placed,
but responsibility for the road building is up to the state. The result: More traffic jams.
Delegate Bob Marshall proposed allowing impact fees, dedicated to transportation, on new
development. This isn’t “new taxes.” It’s a recognition that the taxes on new development
rarely pay for the new infrastructure it requires in transportation, and imposes the cost for that
new transportation infrastructure on the entity creating the demand.
Take the Roads Back: Virginia is one of only four states where the responsibility for
secondary roads rests with a state bureaucracy – a 75-year-old system long outdated for
population centers like Northern Virginia. The result: Decreased quality. That’s why the City
of Suffolk took over responsibility for maintaining its own secondary roadways this year, and in
return they’ll get VDOT’s budget for those roads and an opportunity to do it cheaper and better.
There would be start-up costs to consider, but Virginia’s counties should get the same right and
the same funding formulas.
Stop Giving Away Money: Everyone knows Northern Virginia is the economic
powerhouse that funds the state. Not everyone knows how other localities use that money.
Answer: To cut their own budgets. When the General Assembly raised the sales tax in 2004,
half the funds were sent back to localities for education purposes. But legislators changed the
formula in 2004, so that Northern Virginia received even less than they would have under the old
formula. Fairfax County taxpayers, for example, paid in nearly $70 million in new taxes. Under
the old formula, they would have received $53 million back. Under the revised formula, they got
back only $32 million.
Adding insult to injury, 40 percent of state localities used the extra money they received
from NOVA taxpayers to cut their own per pupil support. It’s not the first time that’s happened,
which is why legislators started insisting on a “Maintenance of Effort” clause a few years ago to
prevent localities from doing that.
There was no such insistence this time. There should be.
End the NOVA Tax: Gubernatorial candidate Jim Gilmore was smart when he
proposed to “end the car tax.” Not only does it affect everyone; not only is it the most painful
tax to pay (all at once); but it affects Northern Virginians more than most and gave him an issue
to ride hard in building a GOP majority. The “fix” was to have state government reimburse local
governments for part of the tax car owners paid. But when the reimbursement reached 70
percent of the bill, the General Assembly “froze” the state’s reimbursement.
Except they didn’t freeze it at 70 percent – they froze it at whatever dollars each locality
was receiving at the time. That means that, two years later, growth areas like Prince William,
Fairfax and Loudoun Counties have the same amount of money, but spread it out over more cars.
The more cars that come in (and the more those cars cost), the less relief taxpayers see.
At the very least, the General Assembly should “unfreeze” the dollars and keep the “real
cap” at 70% – and stop penalizing economic growth in Northern Virginia.
Northern Virginians may be the “wealthy cousins” in Virginia, but that doesn’t mean they
don’t feel it when gas prices go up, the housing market goes down, taxes go up, and
transportation grinds to a standstill. A platform for Northern Virginia doesn’t have to be
“liberal.” But it does have to offer more than just platitudes, and it does have to address the
challenges that touch voters every day of their lives.
Chris Braunlich is a former member of the Fairfax County School Board, and vice president of
the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy. The views expressed here are his own and do
not necessary reflect the opinions of the Institute or its Board of Directors. He may be reached
at c.Braunlich@att.net.