Partisan Gridlock Both Democrats and Republicans have plans for additional transportation funding, but critics say the proposals miss the mark.

Carl Ackerman, who spends at least 30 minutes commuting to work each day, is counting on the General Assembly for some relief. Photo by Mark Rhodes

By Courtney E. Miller
Much of Carl Ackerman’s commute is spent close enough to other vehicles to read bumper stickers and ponder the meaning behind personalized plates. Ackerman routinely spends 30 minutes or more plodding the 15 miles from his home in Sterling to his office in Chantilly.

The average Northern Virginia commuter spends nearly three days a year stuck in traffic, according to a recent survey by the Texas Transportation Institute. Only drivers in Los Angeles spend more time getting to work.

Six years ago, Ackerman’s commute was even longer and the traffic more problematic, prompting his move to Sterling in Loudoun County. "I thought it would be a big improvement," he says. "I thought, ‘Now that I’m closer to work, I’ll have more time and it will be an easy drive.’ And for a while it was." But then it was back to 30 minutes on the road.

The 35-year-old computer technician couldn’t keep changing his address, so he began to analyze why traffic was getting worse and concluded the cause was unrestricted growth and poor planning. "It’s now difficult to get around here at any time during the day."

Ackerman took his concerns to the voting booth in November. He was among those who helped re-elect Delegate Richard Black of Loudoun County. Black, a Republican, made transportation a cornerstone of his campaign. "People here are very focused on transportation because it is a commuter area," he says. "You can’t run a campaign in Northern Virginia and not talk about transportation."

Northern Virginia Republicans were not the only ones talking about transportation this election. Democrats came up with a funding plan. Gilmore responded with his own. The issue also has struck a chord with commuters in Hampton Roads, where transportation is among the top three political issues.

Because both parties jumped in the fray, the 2000 session of the General Assembly should be bumper-to-bumper with proposals to fund transportation projects and get Virginia moving.

*   *   *

The state’s annual budget for transportation is just under $3 billion, with most of the money coming from transportation-specific taxes, federal funds and small allocations for specific projects. That money covers, not just the state’s 56,000 miles of pavement, but airports, rails, ports and public transportation.

At a meeting held by Gov. Jim Gilmore’s Commission on Transportation Policy this summer, speakers made clear the gap between localities’ needs and available funds. According to the Aug. 31 Richmond Times-Dispatch, requests included $5 billion in road projects for Southside Virginia; $20 billion for Northern Virginia; $10 billion for Hampton Roads; and more for Richmond to expand its airport, extend bus service to Henrico and Chesterfield counties, complete state Route 288 and introduce high-speed rail between Richmond and Washington.

Yet transportation funding has remained fairly static. Occasionally a specific project will get a bump in its allocation, but there hasn’t been a significant increase in overall transportation dollars since 1986, says Ed Matricardi, executive director of the Virginia Republican Party. "This isn’t a problem that developed overnight," he says.

In fact, it has been 14 years since the last significant transportation initiative — when then-Gov. Gerald L. Baliles called legislators to a special session on the issue. "We are evolving into a different state than we were when the last financial boost was given to transportation. That was supposed to take us into the 21st century," says Dan Shoemaker, Gilmore’s transportation policy analyst.

Business leaders, particularly in Northern Virginia, are encouraged by the debate. Many believe the legislature has been in a gridlock of its own over transportation funding. "We’ve been involved in this issue for many years," says Sandy Bowen at the Virginia Chamber of Commerce. "It became apparent 10 years ago that transportation funding wasn’t keeping up with transportation needs. ... We must, we simply must make some significant steps toward solving this problem."

The problem persists today, in part, because of bad decisions made 25 years ago, says Secretary of Transportation Shirley J. Ybarra. "Now we’re playing catch-up." Virginia Department of Transportation engineers planned roads that were not built. Localities’ development decisions set up roadblocks. "The likelihood of going back and building those roads 30 years later is not a possibility," Ybarra says. "We couldn’t even afford the right-of-way."

But before the transportation department can map out a new plan, it needs cash. "A nice infusion of money will help us play catch-up," Ybarra says.

*   *   *

A group of mostly Northern Virginia Democrats began addressing the question of transportation funding in late June. Many, including those at the Democratic Party’s headquarters, are taking credit for putting transportation at the top of the agenda this year.

"I think we really put the issue out there," says Craig K. Bieber, executive director of the Virginia Democratic Party. "There are some differences between our plan and the governor’s, but the bottom-line dollar amounts are the same."

The Democrats’ plan puts approximately $2 billion in new money into transportation over the next four years. The money would come from budget surpluses, the general fund and $1.7 billion in bonds that would be repaid with money from the tobacco settlement and real estate filing fees.

"This is an excellent start on projects that are long overdue," says Delegate William Robinson, a Democrat who represents parts of Norfolk, Chesapeake and Virginia Beach and who co-chairs the House transportation committee.

Gilmore responded with a Republican plan to spend an additional $2.5 billion on transportation projects during the next six years. The plan, released in late August, focuses on reducing congestion. It would apply $900 million in general fund money toward transportation needs and collect the gas tax from wholesalers rather than retailers — a change Gilmore says will increase revenues by $210 million over six years.

Gilmore’s plan calls for $590 million in accelerated federal funds to be used for 90 projects statewide that need cash to get them moving. Of the 90 projects, 10 are in Northern Virginia and would be given a total of $137.8 million. In that region Prince William County would see the largest block — $86.1 million — for the Interstate 66 interchange in Gainesville. While Northern Virginia would get the largest chunk of the money set aside for specific projects, the Richmond area would get money for the largest number of projects — 20.

Sen. Linda "Toddy" Puller, a Fairfax Democrat, wanted the Springfield interchange, where Interstates 95 and 495 converge, to be a part of Gilmore’s list. "I am very, very concerned about the mixing bowl, which is right in the middle of my district. ... I’d like to see that included in the list of projects that move ahead."

Like the Democrats’ plan, Gilmore proposes putting tobacco settlement money toward transportation. He incorporated tobacco money into the plan because he is against raising taxes to fund transportation improvements, says Lila Young, Gilmore’s deputy press secretary.

Virginia could get about $4.1 billion from the tobacco settlement over the next 25 years. The state already has pledged that 50 percent of the settlement will go to help tobacco growers and their communities, and 10 percent will be spent to fight teen smoking. It’s that remaining 40 percent — $1.6 billion — that Gilmore and some Democrats propose to spend on transportation im-provements.

Several health organizations — including the American Cancer Society and a statewide coalition of doctors, health groups and drug companies — decry the use of the tobacco settlement money for transportation projects. They say the funds should be set aside for health care, such as research into smoking-related health problems and diseases.

Black, the Loudoun County Republican, sees it differently. "It is clear that the money being taken from the tobacco companies has nothing to do with health," he says. "It is simply additional money for the trial lawyers and various governments. ... The best thing I can do is try to use it in an appropriate manner that will benefit the citizens of the commonwealth."

*   *   *

Democrats and Republicans may be behind different plans, but they both support using tobacco settlement money on transportation projects. After the elections, the politicians switched from pointing out the differences between the two plans to finding a compromise.

The recent Republican sweep of both the House and Senate races nearly ensures that Gilmore’s plan will be favored during this year’s session. "The governor’s plan has bipartisan support, albeit grudging support by the Democrats," Young says. "[The Democrats] said, ‘Gee, that’s pretty good. ... Having a Republican majority will make sure that we will not have to face the specter of raising taxes for road dollars.’"

Because Gilmore wants a fix that doesn’t involve raising taxes, he’s looking for more than new roads. "He ... is getting together with the leaders of the high-tech industry to find ways to increase telecommuting, which would decrease the traffic flow and help workers in the technology industry be more efficient," Young says.

Others say the state shouldn’t rule out tax hikes, with the main target being Virginia’s 17.3 cent per gallon gas tax. "Certainly there are needs beyond money," says Bowen, "but there is a consensus that we need to put more revenues into transportation. ... No one wants to have their taxes raised, but I think that there is a significant portion that believes, in the long run, we may not have any choice but to go that route."

Bowen is quick to point out that although Northern Virginia is wrestling with congestion, transportation is a statewide concern. It’s an issue for businesses that rely on roads, not only to get their employees to work, but also to get their products to customers, says Bowen, who heads the chamber’s lobbying effort.

Once legislators agree to increase funding, they still need to attack the question of where the money will be spent. Black, along with Delegate Puller of Fairfax, argue that while the partisan politics have lessened in recent months, the plans to increase transportation funding may also split along geographic lines. "I think that is a very real possibility," says Puller. "It shouldn’t be that way. There should be a comprehensive enough plan that gives enough funding to cover all of our concerns. I think the people in Northern Virginia are going to stick together on this despite our affiliation."

For many communities in southern and western Virginia, suburban Washington’s traffic congestion is far removed. Some communities are lobbying for safety improvements and others for additional interstate and state highways.

"It is difficult for people in an impoverished area to sympathize with the problems brought on by our enormous prosperity in Northern Virginia," Black says. "They simply cannot comprehend it, and I think we need to be realistic. ... If we are going to get political support from these other areas, there has to be some benefit to them."

*   *   *

Already the critics are lining up at the gate. The state has drawn fire from environmental groups such as the Warrenton-based Piedmont Environmental Council for focusing strictly on building more roads and more lanes.

Of the billions spent each year on transportation, nearly 80 percent goes to highways. The remaining 20 percent is split among aviation, ports and transit, with 14.7 percent devoted to public transportation, Ybarra says.

"We basically think that the appetite for road building is unending, and we have to look at another way to solve these problems," says Josephine De Give, the council’s director of planning services. "The more roads you build, the more people that drive them."

De Give supports initiatives that increase public transportation and limit sprawl. As congestion increases and suburban creep expands, the council’s ideas are moving out of the grass roots and into the mainstream.

Ackerman, the Loudoun County commuter, considers himself part of a majority that supports growth restrictions in Loudoun County and improvements to public transportation in suburban Washington, D.C. "I would get out of my car if public transportation were truly accessible," he says. "I wouldn’t even mind increasing taxes. ... I just want something done."

Because of the funding fury that led up to the elections, the General Assembly has all but promised to do something this session about transportation funding. But neither the Democrats’ four-year plan nor the governor’s six-year proposal provide real answers, critics say. Until there’s a real long-term solution, any legislative action will be only a temporary fix.

"There are a lot of good ideas floating out there," Bowen says. "The thing is that there isn’t any silver bullet. ... There is no one solution that will fix the problem. We need to take a good look at a lot of the suggestions and find the mix that will work."