Bacon's Rebellion

  • One Man’s James River View

    Posted on

    by

    James A. Bacon

    Mrs. Leahy and I are members of the Friends of James River Park. Recently, an email was circulated to the membership regarding a number of trees that Stuart Siegel had removed from Science Museum of Virginia property along the James River in order to improve his view. It seems someone either didn’t follow, or possibly even ignored, the rules about removing trees from the River. An email from Ellen Wolf of the FoJRP to Rex Springston of the Richmond Times-Dispatch lays out the problem:

    Thanks for taking the time on a weekend to come talk about the clearing of the Science Museum property below the Siegel house. I plan to call the Department of Conservation and Recreation first thing in the morning to report what certainly appears to be a violation of the regulations promulgated under the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act. The James River is certainly a resource protection area, which requires a 100 foot buffer (VAC10-20-80, p. 4). On page 12, “permitted modifications” to this buffer are described:

    5. Permitted modifications of the buffer area.

    a. In order to maintain the functional value of the buffer area, existing vegetation may be removed, subject to approval by the local government, only to provide for reasonable sight lines, access paths, general woodlot management, and best management practices, including those that prevent upland erosion and concentrated flows of stormwater, as follows:

    (1) Trees may be pruned or removed as necessary to provide for sight lines and vistas, provided that where removed, they shall be replaced with other vegetation that is equally effective in retarding runoff, preventing erosion, and filtering nonpoint source pollution from runoff.

    (2) Any path shall be constructed and surfaced so as to effectively control erosion.

    (3) Dead, diseased, or dying trees or shrubbery and noxious weeds (such as Johnson grass, kudzu, and multiflora rose) may be removed and thinning of trees may be allowed, pursuant to sound horticultural practice incorporated into locally-adopted standards.

    (4) For shoreline erosion control projects, trees and woody vegetation may be removed, necessary control techniques employed, and appropriate vegetation established to protect or stabilize the shoreline in accordance with the best available technical advice and applicable permit conditions or requirements.

    The Science Museum Foundation did not seek approval by the local government, allowed the removal of far more vegetation than necessary for “reasonable” sight lines, and made no attempt to replace the vegetation removed.

    Their professed lack of knowledge of the extent of what was being done in no way mitigates their failure to follow the law, nor their failure to oversee, or even once inspect, what was happening on their property and with their permission. In fact, their casual treatment of the Siegel request demonstrates negligence, and an irresponsible lack of stewardship for the valuable resource so generously endowed them, and for river health and aesthetics in general. This from an agency of the state, one of whose missions is “to foster a love of nature and a concern for its preservation.” (from its mission statement.) (The quibble that the foundation is a private entity, not a state agency, is hair-splitting that not many citizens and environmental groups are likely to take seriously.)

    That there even is a law that governs the establishment and protection of a 100 foot riparian buffer along the banks of the James is not widely known. Ralph White did not know of it, Helen Tansey of Virginia Forever (a Nature Conservancy spin-off) did not know if it, and the Science Museum did not know of it. The many James River Park visitors and recreational boaters who over the summer watched the progressive destruction of one of the Park’s most beautiful views did not know that what they were bemoaning is, in fact, illegal, and could have been stopped had they known to report it and to whom.

    There IS a story here: 1.) a conservation law has been broken by a state agency whose mission is to educate the public and foster a love of nature 2.) that law was broken at the request of private citizen who also failed to oversee or inspect work he had contracted for, and 3.) the complete obscurity of that law means that this is probably happening every day.

    This is one side of the story and I don’t know if it has appeared in the RTD (or at least I could not find one this morning). It is entirely possible that the Science Museum did all that it was required to do, under law, to ensure the cutting was properly handled. If anyone has more information on this matter, please pass it on.

  • The End of Cheap Gasoline — Even the Big Oil Companies Can See It Now

    Posted on

    by

    James A. Bacon

    Pardon my broken-record routine, but once again we are forced to confront the challenge of adapting Virginia’s economy to a petroleum-constrained world. Says the Wall Street Journal in a front-page story today: “A growing number of oil-industry chieftains are endorsing an idea long deemed fringe: The world is approaching a practical limt to the number of barrels of crude oil that can be pumped every day.”

    Current global oil production runs about 85 million barrels daily. Industry experts are now pegging the upper limit of oil production around 100 million per day. That still allows some slack for growth in global demand — but hardly enough to accommodate China, India and other Third World economies as they reach a level of prosperity where masses of people can afford to buy automobiles.

    Says the Journal:

    The emergence of a production ceiling would make a monumental shift in the energy world. Oil production has averaged a 2.3% annual growth rate since 1965. … This expanding pool of oil, most of it priced cheaply by today’s standards, fueled the post-World War II global economic expansion.

    The problems: the aging “giant” fields are playing out. New “giants” are increasingly difficult to find. And when they are, they’re located in increasingly challenging conditions, typically off-shore. Meanwhile, because of low-moderate oil prices in the 1980s and 1990s, the oil industry didn’t develop enough geologists and other skilled workers to meet today’s needs. The industry is increasingly constrained by manpower shortages and steep prices for drilling rigs and other equipment. Combine those economic factors with political decisions in many oil-rich countries to under-invest in their production infrastructure, and there is little hope that global supply can continue accommodating the growth in demand without steep increases in price.

    In a few years, we’ll be looking back on $90-per-barrel petroleum and $3-per-gallon gasoline as the good old days.

    I am optimistic that the U.S. economy can adapt. We’ll buy cars that get better gas mileage, or don’t use gas at all. People will find ways to drive less. But the “driving less” part of the equation is heavily dependent upon the shape of our human settlement patterns and the design of our transportation infrastructure. Infrastucture and buildings, which are slowly depreciating assets, are much slower to adapt — all the more so when the special interests who profited from the cheap energy era still dominate the political process and continue to push development into the outer edges of our New Urban Regions as if nothing had changed.

    Sooner or later, we Virginians will have no choice but to change. The only question is how ugly things get — how much we will have compromised our living standards in a vain effort to put off the final reckoning — before we do.

  • Traffic Circles: To Know Them Is Not Necessarily to Love Them

    Posted on

    by

    James A. Bacon

    The City of Lynchburg has installed its second traffic circle, at the cost of $100,000, in a series of street upgrades meant to offset the impact of the nearby Wards Crossing West shopping center. But some neighbors are griping, reports The News & Advance. “Complaints range from confused drivers who don’t know how to negotiate the new crossing to a wider, westbound lane that allows traffic to pass with little braking.”

    Traffic flow should improve as people get accustomed to the circle, responds City Traffic Engineer Gerry Harter. “I think a lot of the criticisms came before we even finished the project. … I think now, though, people are getting used to it.”

    The width of the roads, Harter said, was determined after consultation with the fire department, which wanted to ensure that it trucks could get through. Ah, ah! As Bacon’s Rebellion readers know well, fire trucks are the root of many of our urban planning problems!

    When in doubt, cherchez le camion de feu!

  • Trip to Kentlands — Intriguing but Not Definitive

    Posted on

    by

    James A. Bacon

    Four Stafford County planning commissioners took a trip to the Kentlands development in Gaithersburg, Md., last month to inspect what New Urbanism planning concepts look like in practice, and Kafia Hosh with the Free Lance-Star went along with them to describe what they observed. “We see all of these plans, and we read all of the theories,” said commission member Steve Pitzel. “We really just wanted to go see what these things look like after they’ve been developed.”

    Kentlands is the most established New Urbanism development in the Mid-Atlantic; enough time has passed since construction for the paint to start peeling and the asphalt to crack. By and large, the project delivered the goods — it has a mix of uses, pedestrian-friendly streets, service alleys in the back of houses, and fairly small lot sizes. On the other hand, Kentlands is located several miles from a Metro stop and residents still rely on automobiles for much of their travel.

    What’s not clear from the story — probably because no one has compiled the information — are two critical datapoints: (1) Even though Kentlands residents still need their automobiles to function in suburban Maryland, do they drive fewer, shorter trips, as predicted by New Urbanism theory, thus reducing the number of Vehicle Miles Driven on state roads? And (2) Is the compact, moderate-density development more economical to serve with other public services?

    Smart Growthers and Traditional Growthers can argue until they’re blue in the face about which development patterns are more transportation efficient, but there is not enough hard data to settle the issue definitively. Planning commissioners can visit Kentlands and get a better “feel” for New Urbanism, but such visits provide only anecdotal impressions, not factual proof, that one pattern of development costs less to serve and maintain than others.

    The debate is not likely to advance very far in Virginia without more conclusive data. That’s why it’s high time to start gathering solid information. The task is easily and relatively inexpensively accomplished.

    Step one: When automobile owners take their cars to a garage for state inspections, the inspectors take the odometer readings and report them to the Department of Motor Vehicles. That way, the state gains an accurate count of Vehicle Miles Driven every year. (If this duplicates some process already in effect, and we already have precise data, then so much the better.)

    Step two: Break down the entire state by census tracts. Characterize each census tract by key variables — zoning, density, housing type, prevalence of retail, commercial and other land uses, access to Metro, bus or other mass transit, types of streets and roads, etc.

    Step Three: Hand the data to scholars at Virginia Tech, Virginia Commonwealth of Virginia, the University of Virginia, or wherever, to start crunching numbers and establishing relationships between Vehicle Miles Driven and different human settlement patterns. Let the professors ascertain which patterns are the most transportation efficient, and let their studies inform public policy at the state and local level.

    Right now, Virginia is largely flying blind on land use. People make all kinds of claims and there is no definitive way to sort through them. For a couple million dollars per year to administer a program like this, we could potentially save ourselves billions in transportation expenditures. The only people who could possibly oppose this is those who make their living bamboozling the public.

  • Kalahari and the Politics of Interstate Interchanges

    Posted on

    by

    James A. Bacon

    Grab your front-row seats and load up with popcorn. The politics behind a proposed new interchange on Intestate 95 in the Fredericksburg area will be fascinating to watch. The impetus for the project, which could cost an estimated $21 million to $32 million, is the announcement of plans by Kalahari Resorts to build a $200 million indoor water park on 49 acres of the Celebrate Virginia development. Kalahari is expected to open in December 2009.

    The Fredericksburg Area Metropolitan Planning Organization is conducting a study of the interchange and related toll road to be called the Spotsylvania Greenway. Of the interchange, Matt Kelly, Fredericksburg Councilman and MPO chair, says: “It’s not whether it will happen, it’s how best to do it.”

    The Federal Highway Administration requires a study to gauge the impact the interchange would have on traffic patterns over the next 20 years, reports Kelly Hannon with the Free Lance-Star. The obvious question is: Who pays? The Free Lance-Star suggested that state and federal funds are expected to pay for 98 percent of the interchange. The next obvious question is this: If the state and feds are expected to foot the bill, does the project jump to the head of the line, ahead of literally hundreds of other road construction priorities, or does it wait until the other regional priorities have been addressed?

    If private real estate interests were paying for an accelerated build-out of the interchange through tolls, a community development authority or some combination thereof, I wouldn’t have any objection to the financing piece of the interchange.

    However, any traffic-impact study worth its salt would do more than examine the impact of traffic generated by the waterpark and Celebrate Virginia. It would consider the long-term impact that the interchange would have on development in the vicinity — including nearby subdivisions and shopping centers induced by the addition of an interchange — and the impact that development would have on regional traffic patterns. I don’t take it as a given that even a privately financed interchange would be a good idea — it’s not hard to imagine I-95 getting even more overloaded than it already is, thereby creating new demands upon the Virginia Department of Transportation — although I don’t rule out the possibility either.

    Needless to say, various development interests, business interests, local governments and citizens groups will have a lot to say. I expect this proposal to be highly controversial. I’m looking forward to the show.

  • Say Goodbye to the Old Power Grid. The New One Is So Much Cooler.

    Posted on

    by

    James A. Bacon

    When you start talking about electric power grids, peoples’ eyes glaze over. But the shape of the United States electric grid is fast emerging as one of the critical infrastructure issues of the 21st century. As a nation (and a state) we have two broad alternatives. One is to maintain the “Big Grid” paradigm of ginormous power plants connected to population centers through ginormous, high-voltage electric transmission lines. The other is to evolve to a “Distributed Grid” that is more decentralized and capable of accommodating electric power contributed by a host of homeowners, neighborhoods, commercial establishments and electric power entrepreneurs. Intuitively, I think, the idea of a distributed grid appeals to most Americans — as long as the system can be made dependable. Nobody likes blackouts.

    As Virginia adopts regulatory policies affecting the electric power industry, lawmakers and regulators must keep those alternative paradigms firmly in mind. Right now, the Distributed Grid model seems a bit impractical because of the difficulty of ensuring system reliability. But new technologies and business models could change the picture very quickly.

    The Peak Energy blog draws attention to two interesting articles. One article, “Gridpoint: The Last Green Mile,” highlights a Washington, D.C.-based company, Gridpoint, that is marketing the SmartGrid Platform, an intelligent network of distributed resources that controls load, stores energy and produces power.

    With distributed sources of electricity now arriving in new, innovative forms, and capacity increasing exponentially, distributed storage is the final step necessary to completely transform our energy landscape. Wind power is intermittant, solar power peaks between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. – but with distributed storage available, it doesn’t matter. …

    There are several benefits to distributed storage. During power outages, stored electricity can be discharged back into the grid beyond the break in the line, maintaining reliable constant power. In markets where energy pricing is tiered, electricity can be stored during low off peak rates and discharged when rates are higher. Flattening the load by pushing power into the grid during peak hours of demand from distributed sources can relieve congestion on the grid. And, of course, distributed renewable energy sources such as wind and solar can be captured during their limited hours of collection, and utilized 24 hours per day from storage systems.

    How much might these electricity storage units cost? About $10,000 per customer.

    Given the current prices of multi-family dwellings or light commercial buildings, that really doesn’t sound like very much. But as a tool to arbitrage between higher peak demand rates and lower off-peak rates, at $10,000 a pop, the unit has a fairly long payback. As a tool to flatten demand for a utility in order to prevent spot prices from spiking, however, the unit is already economical. It is also already economical for new land developments, where the storage capacity offered by Gridpoint’s products, combined with on-site sources of electricity from (for example) photovoltaics, significantly reduces the need for infrastructure to connect to the existing electrical grid – paying for itself immediately.

    The other article, “Creating a 21st Century Grid,” discusses a new technology that could shift the balance back in favor of Big Grid. Researchers are working on electric wire made from carbon nano-tubes one 100,000th the width of a human hair. In theory, nanotubes can conduct 100 million amps of current over thousands of miles without much loss in efficiency, compared to today’s wires, which conduct around 2,000 amps of current over hundreds of miles, losing 6 to 8 percent of the electricity in the form of heat. The nanotubes also will weigh one-sixth the weight of current wires, and they’ll be so strong they won’t need support mechanisms. Say bye-bye to the high-voltage transmission line as we now know it!

    New transmission lines would be less conspicuous, vastly diminishing their impact on the landscape, potentially bypassing acrimonioius battles like the one over Dominion’s proposed transmission line in northern Virginia. Dr. Wade Adams of the Richard E. Smalley Institute for Nanoscale Science and Technology envisions nano-wires carrying electric power “from vast solar farms in the desert to the Northeast, or maybe from wind farms in Montana or North Dakota down to Florida – and in fact, even from continent to continent.”

    The technology of electric power transmission hasn’t changed much since the time of Edison and Westinghouse. That’s all changing. This is a very exciting time to be a power grid wonk.

  • Republicans Defeated Themselves

    Posted on

    by

    James A. Bacon

    As a counterpoint to my last post, “Republican Realignment in the Post-Chichester Era,” it’s worth reading a column penned by Zachary D. Moore, an aide to Sen. Brandon Bell, R-Roanoke, and director of his PAC, in the Manassas Journal-Messenger.

    Moore argues that the Republicans defeated themselves in the last election through a series of damaging primary challenges to moderate legislators. Not only did conservative challengers cause GOP candidates to burn through $2 million in cash, they defeated Sen. Marty Williams, R-Newport News, who would have gone unopposed in the general election. Democrats wound up winning the seat from conservative Tricia Stall.

    The result of the GOP defeat is as damaging to conservatives as it is to moderates. Writes Moore:

    I want to highlight what this loss means for the Republican social agenda. Bills relating to everything from abortion to school choice to gay rights come before the Senate Education and Health Committee. Historically, many socially conservative bills have died on an 8-7 vote. With the retirement of committee Chairman Russ Potts, many observers thought the committee was on the verge of moving in a more conservative direction. I can virtually guarantee that won’t happen now. Republican Senators Bell and Rerras, both of whom were consistent conservative votes on the committee, will now be replaced with Democrats.

    It’s interesting how Moore plays this as a loss for social conservatives. If Republicans react to electoral defeat by re-defining themselves as a socially conservative party, they are dooming themselves to minority status.

    I wouldn’t define Virginia as a socially “liberal” state. I would describe the philosophical center of gravity as more of “social libertarian” state. Most people have a live-and-let-live attitude. Everybody be cool. Tolerate minority values and lifestyles, but show some respect for mainstream values. Let people do their own thing — keep the state out of it. Adapt the law to changes in social mores in incremental steps that doesn’t get anybody’s nose too bent out of shape.

    Conversely, if Republicans redefine themselves as a fiscally conservative party with innovative solutions to the problems we all share — taxes, education, transportation, the environment — while permitting a range of views on the culture-war issues, it can emerge from defeat much stronger. If the GOP fails to reinvent itself along these lines, a large chunk of the electorate will feel perfectly comfortable in the socially moderate/fiscally moderate wing of the Democratic party.

  • Republican Realignment in the Post-Chichester Era

    Posted on

    by

    James A. Bacon

    Here’s more evidence that General Assembly political dynamics will look very different in the post-Chichester era. Conservative Republicans in the state Senate are talking about challenging Sen. Walter Stosch, R-Henrico, for leadership of the GOP caucus. Writes Examiner.com:

    Two conservative Northern Virginia Republican lawmakers plan to challenge the GOP leadership in the General Assembly, saying the Democrats’ victory in the Senate demands change.

    The Republicans’ loss of four seats and the party’s majority in the state Senate and four seats in the House of Delegates revealed a weakness at the top, Sen. Ken Cuccinelli and Del. Bob Marshall told The Examiner Thursday.

    “I think this party needs new leadership from top to bottom,” said Cuccinelli, R-Fairfax. He plans to be part of a challenge at the leadership elections Nov. 26 against current Senate Majority Leader Walter Stosch.

    Stosch is looking weak right now. Not only must he, as former Senate Majority Leader, assume some responsibility for the loss of four seats, his willingness to play ball with retiring Sen. John Chichester, R-Northumberland, on tax and budget issues alienated a large segment of the voters back home. Despite his long-term incumbency and elevated status in the General Assembly hierarchy, he barely fought off a tough primary challenge by Joe Blackburn last summer.

    I don’t follow Senate backroom politics very closely at all, but it doesn’t take a Larry Sabato (or a Not Larry Sabato) to note that the make-up of the Republican caucus will look very different this year. Gone are several bona fide members of the Axis of Taxes: Chichester, Russell Potts, R-Winchester, Marty Williams, R-Newport News, and Jeannemarie Devolites Davis, R-Vienna. Although Chichester will be replaced by a hand-picked moderate, no one can replace his commanding presence in the Senate.

    However the dust-up between Cuccinelli, Marshall and Stosch transpires, we will see a very different GOP in the General Assembly. Three predictions:

    (1) The 19-person Republican caucus will become significantly more conservative on issues relating to taxes and government spending. As such, it will become much more closely aligned with the fiscal conservatives in the House of Delegates.

    (2) The GOP in the General Assembly will present a more unified face on tax-and-spending issues, in marked departure to the fractious years of the Chichester era, in which genuine conservatives like House Speaker William J. Howell made compromises on tax-and-spending decisions that badly tarnished the GOP’s brand of fiscal conservatism.

    (3) Republicans will present voters with a much clearer alternative to the Democrats than they did over the past six years. After years of bitter infighting and compromise, which blurred ideological distinctions and positioned Democrats as the party of responsible, effective leadership in government, the GOP could emerge reinvigorated.

    Those predictions may be no more than wishful thinking. As a former Republican who abandoned the party, which I felt had abandoned me, I may be yearning for the good old days. Meanwhile, I still worry that Republicans, like the Democrats, are captive to special business interests. (See my comments in “Who Rules Virginia?”) Also, I am terrified that a reinvigorated GOP may get more militant on culture-war issues that I regard as a distraction to the more pressing challenges of meeting the challenges of globalization and the emerging Knowledge Economy. Still, a guy can always hope, can’t he?

    Update: More pressure on Stosch. SWAC Girl notes that Sen. Mark Obenshain, R-Harrisonburg, has joined the ranks of those calling for a change in Senate leadership. In a Nov. 13 letter, he wrote:

    Since I joined the Senate, our leadership has consistently divided Republican ranks. Examples abound, including doing battle with House Republicans, dissolving the joint Republican Legislative Caucus, the functional dissolution of the Senate Republican Caucus and the establishment of the Republican Senate Leadership Trust.

    It is imperative that we immediately refocus our attention on the ideas that brought the Republican Party to power in the 1990s. We must look for common ground, not just with a majority of our colleagues in the Senate, but also with our colleagues in the House. Towards that end, we must immediately move to reestablish the Joint Republican Legislative Caucus.

  • Red Light Cameras for Henrico?

    Posted on

    by

    James A. Bacon

    Apparently, it’s under consideration. But this bit is troubling:

    Paying for the system could become a Catch-22 situation, Assistant Director of Public Works Tim Foster told the board, because while tickets issued as a result of the cameras might initially pay the monthly fees and produce extra revenue for the county, it’s likely that fewer violations would occur as motorists became familiar with the system.

    “We want to see a decrease in violations,” he said, but that would result in a greater cost burden to the county.

    So what are the cameras for, revenue or safety? It’s the same sort of argument that, for a time, swirled around the state’s abuser fees.

    And let’s not forget another possible consequence of installing such cameras:

    …some studies have suggested that use of cameras can cause an increase in accidents, when cars stop suddenly to avoid entering intersections and are rear-ended, Foster said.

    But at least they aren’t running red lights. And who knows? Those rear-end collisions could result in a few more reckless driving citations… which could help pay for the cameras… which might cause more rear-end collisions… which could pay for even more cameras, which might cause even more wrecks and more citations.

    Maybe it’s about revenue after all.

  • Damn the Torpedoes, Full Steam Ahead!

    Posted on

    by

    James A. Bacon

    Reports the Examiner:

    Work will begin on the Dulles Metrorail extension in Tysons Corner even before the fate of a crucial $900 million in federal funds has been determined, officials said Wednesday.

    The move, to begin utility relocation along Route 7, commits Virginia more deeply than ever to a transit line whose funding remains uncertain.

    … Tara Hamilton, a spokeswoman for the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, which is managing the rail project, said that ground-breaking won’t be stalled even though the federal government is still deciding whether to fund the project.

    Isn’t that risky? After all, the Federal Transit Administration has expressed significant reservations about the project. Federal funding, which would pay roughly 25 percent of the project cost, is hardly guaranteed.

    It seems the state is between a rock and a hard place.

    MWAA green-lighted the utility design work because of terms of a contract with Bechtel and Washington Group that required Virginia to pay a fee of several million dollars if the project did not move forward by Aug. 1, officials said.

    “There were activities that were undertaken at the request of the airports authority by [Bechtel and Washington Group], basically to keep the contractors busy so the cost penalties were not incurred,” said Virginia Transportation Secretary Pierce Homer.

  • Virginia’s Professional Guilds: The CPAs

    Posted on

    by

    James A. Bacon

    In my last column, “Hidden Advantage,” I argued that flexible labor markets were one of Virginia’s hidden competitive strengths. But I noted one area of concern: Virginia’s propensity for regulating professional and occupational groups tend to tighten labor supply in their professions and drive up prices for their services.

    The current issue of Virginia Business magazine offers a case study of this phenomenon. Over the next 15 years, about 75 percent of the nation’s Certified Public Accountants will approach retirement, reports Editor Robert Powell. At the same time the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which tightens financial reporting standards for publicly traded companies, has increased the demand for CPAs.

    To ensure an adequate supply of CPAs, CPA organizations are increasing scholarships and promoting the profession to students. In Virginia, the number of CPAs licensed has increased 22 percent to 21,310 over the past five years. However, writes Powell:

    A temporary kink in the CPA pipeline occurred last year because of new education requirements. Adopting a standard used by many other states, Virginia last year increased the number of earned credit hours required for taking the CPA exam from 120 to 150. As a result, many accounting graduates stayed in school to earn their master’s degree and get the additional credits. The Board of Accountancy licensed only 192 CPAs in 2006, down from 656 the year before. The number of new CPAs is expected to return to a more normal level this year.

    All of these actions need to be seen against the backdrop of unprecedented demand and a shortage of CPAs. As the Virginia Society of CPA notes on its home page, “The majority of CPA firms in the United States are having a tough time finding qualified employees at all levels, according to the 2007 Top Management of an Accounting Practice (MAP) Issues Survey.”

    Drawing upon the tenets of public choice theory, I would hypothesize that the leaders of the CPA profession would use the legislative process to stack the deck in their economic favor. They would have at least two sets of self-serving considerations. First, they are incentivized to restrict the number of people practicing their profession, thereby creating pressure to raise fees. But that is offset to some degree by a countervailing incentive: The industry leaders are partners in their firms and they share in their firms’ profits. If they restricted access to the profession too much, they would have fewer CPAs to employ and would forego the mark-up charged for their services. In theory, there is a profit-maximizing sweet spot of an ideal number of CPAs, and CPAs, through their collective actions, I suggest, will seek to achieve it.

    I don’t know for a fact that CPAs think in such calculating terms. All I’m suggesting is that they have every incentive to think that way, and their actions seem to be consistent with the profession’s economic interests.

    The ability to influence the supply of employees entering your occupation is pretty advantageous, if you can pull it off. I’m sure that labor unions representing blue-collar occupations would love to have the same power as the CPAs. In Virginia, however, the regulatory authority to rig labor markets in your favor is largely a white-collar prerogative.

    Update: After reading the comments made in response to this post, I’ve concluded that I don’t have any solid evidence to support my hypothesis stated above. For the time being, Virginia CPAs stand absolved of my suspicions — unless new evidence presents itself.

  • More Money Spent, and Precious Little to Show

    Posted on

    by

    James A. Bacon

    After a series of bizarre confrontations with the Richmond school board, Richmond Mayor L. Douglas Wilder has lost the P.R. battle to bring accountability to the city school system. For those not familiar with the ongoing saga, Wilder evicted the school administration from City Hall late this summer, only to have a circuit court judge order the school officials back in. The incident cost tens of thousands of dollars, soured the public on Wilder and garnered widespread sympathy for the school board.

    While Wilder’s heavy-handed tactics may have backfired, he was on to something. Someone has to hold the school board accountable. Richmond city schools spent $13,168 per student in the most recently completed school year — up 6.3 percent from the previous year, report Olympia Meola and Michael Martz with the Times-Dispatch. Spending is climbing even as enrollment is declining.

    A city auditor has identified potential savings of up to $20 million a year, but the board has taken no action. It would be one thing if record spending delivered demonstrably superior results, but improvements in student performance, if any, have been marginal. Is there any way to hold the Richmond school administration accountable? Is there any way to stop this runaway train?

  • Drip… Drip… Drip… The Message Is Slowly Sinking In

    Posted on

    by

    James A. Bacon

    “The emerging oil crisis will permanently change society, increasing costs in every sector, forcing people to relocate closer to work and to reconsider mass transit options. The demand for the lowest cost and most reliable option, namely walking and cycling, will increase and the demand for solo driving will decrease.”

    So said Daniel Kellogg, a citizen testifying before the Commonwealth Transportation Board yesterday in a public hearing, as it kicked off a year-long process of massaging the state’s transportation plan. With an influx from new revenue sources, this year’s 2008-2013 plan includes $8.7 billion for highways and $2.3 billion to rail and public transportation. (Read the report in the Manassas Journal Messenger.)

    Virginia’s transportation system was designed around oil costing $30 per barrel or less. When the price of gasoline and asphalt triples, the supply and demand equation changes. The transportation system has to change with it.

    Douglas Koelemay, the Bacon’s Rebellion representative to the CTB (technically, he’s a Northern Virginia representative, but we claim the B.R. columnist as our own), said the CTB is changing the way it considers projects, with an eye to the future instead using “measurements from the past.” Said he: “The imperatives of energy prices and climate change are real.”

    So, we know we have to change. That’s progress. But how do we change? There’s the rub.

    There is widespread sentiment that we must invest more in mass transit. As an abstract statement, that is undoubtedly right. But we can’t just start dumping money into mass transit projects the same way we used to dump money into roads. Every project must be analyzed for its Return on Investment. Unfortunately, I have yet to see any sign that Virginia has devised a method for calculating ROI on transportation investments in any meaningful way, much less in a way that fairly ranks them in order of priority with such alternative investments as carpooling initiatives, bike paths, traffic light synchronization or accident response management.

    Secondly, dumping money into mass transit without changing land use patterns is an exercise in futility. Mass transit is one of those things that everyone thinks is a great idea — for the other guy. But trains and buses do not run in a vacuum. If we want people to actually ride them, they must serve neighborhoods and business districts of a minimum density and level of pedestrian connectivity. Sadly, I have yet to see any sign that funding for mass transit projects will be made contingent upon communities enacting the land use reforms needed to make them financial viable.

    Our thinking is inching in the right direction, but we have a loooong way to go.

  • More Fodder for the Pre-K Debate

    Posted on

    by

    James A. Bacon

    JLARC has taken a crack at studying Gov. Timothy M. Kaine’s proposal to expand pre-K in Virginia. A draft report released yesterday draws some conclusions that bear upon the debate:

    • Research indicates that a quality preschool experience for “at-risk” four-year-olds helps prepare them for school and can have long-lasting benefits.
    • Research suggests quality pre-K can be beneficial for children not at risk, but gains experienced by these children may be more limited. Virginia’s focus on at-risk students appears appropriate.
    • Virginia Preschool Initiative students gain in literacy skills during the pre-K year and outperform other kindergarteners. Longer term student-level data are needed to assess VPI’s impact on test scores in later grades.
    • Best estimates of annual per-pupil costs for a quality pre-K program in Virginia range from $6,790 to $7,920. Costs will need to be adjusted as compensation levels, support costs, or pupil-to-teacher ratios change.
    • The Governor’s proposal for expanding the scope of preschool for at-risk children is unlikely to serve as many children by 2012 as has been stated, particularly if the VPI per-pupil amount is not increased.

    Here’s my spin on the bottom line: First, we can document short-term benefits for at-risk children, but the long-term benefits are debatable. Short-term benefits to middle-class children are limited, as the long-term benefits presumably are as well.

    Second, as soon as the pre-K program is expanded, it will face cost pressures. Apparently, the $5,700 per child the state allocates currently to the program is deemed less than the $7,000+ it takes to run a quality program. Raising the standards will be the next battle cry.

    Thirdly and most importantly, some 5,270 slots are going unfilled currently, indicating that pre-K is not where local school systems prefer to allocate their resources. Many school boards believe there are other areas where the money may be better spent.

    Let’s go ahead and expand the Virginia Preschool Initiative to include at-risk kids — and then rigorously measure the long-term impact on individual children to see if the investment does what it’s touted to do. If it does, the program is a keeper. If it doesn’t, there is no justification for expanding it beyond the at-risk population.

  • Zapata’s Legacy

    Posted on

    by

    James A. Bacon

    What on earth does Emiliano Zapata, a leader of the 1917 Mexican Revolution, have to do with illegal immigration in the United States today?

    Alvaro Vargas Llosa has a fascinating take on the social forces driving poor Mexicans to the United States in search of work. He tells the tale through the eyes of Emiliano Zapata, a poor landless laborer who is the grandson of the famous revolutionary. The original Zapata fought for redistribution of land to Mexico’s peasants, but the reform was corrupted by the Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI. Writes Llosa:

    What has been the consequence of a century of collectivization of the land? In the 1990s, when trade policies became more liberal, Mexico’s rural population found itself caught up in an extremely inefficient system that was undercapitalized, making it very difficult for Mexican peasants to compete with the outside world. When the government finally allowed the villagers to sell the ejidos, something they had been prevented from doing since 1917, many of them put their land on the market and left for Mexico’s cities. When the urban areas did not offer improved conditions, they migrated to the United States. “If my grandfather came back,” ponders Emiliano, “he would die of sadness.”

    And such are the ways that the histories of foreign lands intertwine with ours. There’s no escaping it, it’s one world, baby. (Photo credit: Wikipedia.)

Now Available

Book cover of 'Dust Mites: A Second American Revolution' by James A. Bacon, featuring astronauts planting a flag with a blue and white emblem on a lunar landscape, with Earth visible in the background.
For sale on Amazon.com

The year: 2075. The American colonies on the Moon are getting restless under Washington’s tyrannical rule….

This second edition of “Dust Mites” has a snazzy new cover, includes helpful lunar maps, and is 5,000 words tighter than the original. The sequel, “Trogs,” is scheduled for publication this summer.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

About

Bacon’s Rebellion is Virginia’s leading politically non-aligned portal for news, opinions and analysis about state, regional and local public policy. Read more about us here.

Fund the Rebellion

Shake up the status quo! Your contributions will be used to pay for faster download speeds and grow readership. Make a one-time donation by credit card or contribute a small sum monthly.

Can’t wait until tomorrow

For your Bacon’s Rebellion fix?

Enter your email address to receive immediate notifications of new posts by email.

SUBSCRIBE

Search Bacon’s Rebellion

Categories

Archives

The Jefferson Council

Protecting Thomas Jefferson’s Legacy at the University of Virginia

Forgot Your Password?

Shoot me an email and I’ll generate a new password for you.

Latest