“When you have a big slush fund, everybody has to get in on the act,” McSweeney says, “It depends on where the political power is; it has nothing to do with transportation priority.”
A Private-Sector Solution
A bust of Teddy Roosevelt rests on a bookcase in McSweeney’s meeting room. It represents the attorney’s belief in free-market innovation.
“If we dispelled the notion that the state is the ultimate payer for all of the demands that the public makes in the form of transportation, things would start happening immediately. There would be investors, entrepreneurs, just as there was when we deregulated communications,” McSweeney said.
He believes that transportation infrastructure should be a private venture and that new roads should be paid for the localities that want them instead of by taxpayers across Virginia.
McSweeney maintains that transportation can be funded without tax increases by encouraging more investment and by imposing the costs of specific projects on those who will directly benefit from them.
“I think we would have more money to spend on transportation if it was left to the private sector and you didn’t have the political log jam in Washington and Richmond,” McSweeney said.
An obvious mechanism for a private company to make a profit from road construction is by charging tolls, but opponents of such an option say paying tolls is about as unpopular as raising the gas tax.
Chase says the private sector’s role should be limited. At most, he says, private-sector solutions can meet only 20 percent of the state’s transportation demands.
“You can’t toll every neighborhood street or main street – most transportation authorities can’t be done that way. And if you did, no one could afford to use the system,” Chase said.
McSweeney believes that tolls are best suited to major highway construction and that secondary roads, those within and between subdivisions, should be paid for by developers, not taxpayers at large.
“We need to abandon the idea that wherever you build it, it will be publicly financed. The burden of internal road maintenance is the responsibility of people who live there,” McSweeney said.
His recommendation is to make secondary roads the responsibility of counties and cities, instead of the state.
Same Idea, New Approach
Republicans in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads find themselves in a dilemma. On one hand, they are members of a party that traditionally resists increasing taxes. But on the other hand, they live in heavily congested areas with constituents demanding more money for transportation.
That may be why Delegate Albo thinks last year’s approach needs to be revisited.
“All we need to do is fix the bills, by going back to the version that left the House and Senate,” he said.
Albo says Kaine caused the problems that doomed last year’s HB 3202 by amending the bill. It was the governor’s amendments, Albo said, that exempted out-of-state drivers from the driver fees and that rendered the transportation authorities unconstitutional.
The authorities’ boards were made up partly of elected officials from other governmental entities. In Marshall vs. NVTA, McSweeney successfully argued that because voters did not directly elect members to the boards, the authorities therefore were unconstitutional.
“I think that was their biggest fault, and that’s what we won our lawsuit on,” McSweeney said.
Albo’s district in Northern Virginia is among the most heavily congested areas in the state. He believes that because of the region’s special needs, localities must be able to raise revenue for their own roads. He opposes what most Democrats are advocating – a statewide tax.
“As long as people who want a statewide tax demand that the money from Northern Virginia be sent somewhere else, you will not have a single Republican vote up here,” Albo said.
Part of last year’s compromise, Albo says, is that Republicans agreed to a tax increase, but only if those revenues remained in the region that raised them. Now that the Democrats control the Senate, hashing out a similar compromise may be more difficult.