Bacon's Rebellion

Virginia state government organizes its economic development efforts around traditional programs — tourism, trade, small-business assistance and recruitment of corporate investment. These are all worthy parts of any comprehensive economic development strategy, but Stewart Schwartz, executive director of the Virginia Coalition for Smarter Growth, is thinking of economic development in broader terms.

In an open letter to Gov. Timothy M. Kaine and his counterparts in Washington, D.C., and Maryland, Schwartz articulated a “smart growth” vision of sustainable economic development in a world characterized by increasing energy prices, global warming and government facing massive structural deficits in Medicare and Social Security.

Writes Schwartz: “In this environment, we simply cannot afford to continue costly patterns of sprawl development, nor can we afford the increasing decentralization of government agencies to exurban locations. It is our cities and other existing communities, combined with transit-oriented development and other policies, which offer the opportunity to deal with these challenges.”

Sustainable economic development policies would include:

Energy Efficient Transportation: “Those regions of the world that are most energy efficient in their buildings and transportation infrastructure will be the most economically competitive. Cities, with their compact grid of streets, and dynamic, close interaction between thousands of business entities, offer huge energy efficiencies. Overspending on new highways simply enables development patterns that over the longer term are neither affordable nor sustainable. Given what we know, these historic practices no longer make sense and ultimately will prove harmful to the efficiency of our metropolitan areas. Instead, expanded transit (bus, bus rapid transit, streetcar, light rail, Metro), freight rail and passenger rail networks tied to transit-oriented development will reduce public and private costs, including transportation, and will reduce future energy consumption.”

Tackling Global Warming: Virginia, Maryland and Washington, D.C., will be among the areas most affected by global warming. “Tens of thousands of acres of coastal land and wetlands will be potentially lost and we will face more severe storms and urban flooding.” The worst effects of global warming can be avoided, Schwartz argues, “if we act aggressively within the next 10 years to implement policies to reduce CO2 emissions.” In the Mid-Atlantic, that means investing in transit, locally interconnected streets that maximize pedestrian and bicycle trips, and “leaving behind forever the practice of throwing money at ever larger highways in a vain attempt to cure congestion.”

Conserving Fiscal Resources: The nation is plagued with chronic budget deficits — and that’s at the peak of the business cycle and before massive expenditures on Medicare and Social Security kick in. In the future, government will face ever greater fiscal constraints than today. “The cost simply to maintain and rehabilitate the infrastructure we have already built is a massive liability which grows in scale every year. … We have to be much more efficient and more judicious with our transportation and other infrastructure investments. … Compact, mixed-use, transit-oriented and pedestrian-oriented development combined with the right pricing signals will be essential to reduce the demand on our roadways and to use our land and infrastructure more efficiently.”

I totally agree with Stewart about the need to emphasize energy efficiency as a way to maintain economic competitiveness and sustain quality of life in an era of rising energy prices. I also concur that we not saddle ourselves with horrendously expensive-to-maintain physical infrastructure as government enters an era of increased fiscal constraints.

I’ve evinced skepticism about global warming hysteria on this blog. Temperatures are rising, but I’m not convinced that CO2 emissions are the main culprit. Further, any actions we take locally will have an infinitesimal impact on global trends. Still, it can’t hurt to reduce CO2 emissions as part of move towards energy conservation and self-sufficiency, goals that are justifiable on other grounds.

More importantly, I think Schwartz does a valuable service by expanding the way we think about economic development. It’s not just something we relegate to the Secretariat of Commerce and Trade. A meaningful definition would encompass our approach to education and the building of human capital. And it would encompass the way we design and build our human habitat.

Reader Larry Gross has brought to my attention two very cool — and under-reported — pieces of legislation.

Road reclassification. In HJR 623, Del. Michelle McQuigg, R-Occoquan, would establish a subcommittee to study the current, outmoded (circa 1930s) classification of roads and streets in Virginia with a functional system as outlined by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission in 2001. The current classification, notes the bill, “oftentimes bears little relationship to the significance of a road, its location, its traffic volume, or its function.” JLARC proposed categorizing roads by statewide significance, regional significance and local significance.

This is no academic exercise. Real state dollars are dumped into different administrative buckets, with the result that many less-deserving roads get priority over more deserving roads. Additionally, determining which roads are of “local” significance is a critical step in devolving authority for local roads to local governments.

Expanded Tolling Authority. In SB 782, Sen. Ken Cuccinelli II, R-Fairfax, would grant the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority, currently a shell organization, with the power to impose and collect tolls for use of new and reconstructed facilities “so as to increase their traffic capacity” and to issue bonds supported by those toll collections. The bill also stipulates that every toll facility in Northern Virginia must be capable of fully automated electronic operation.

SB 782 is part of a broader package of legislation designed to address transportation and land use in tandem. Said a Jan. 8 press release from Cuccinelli’s office: “If his transportation legislation passes, Cuccinelli said that localities would finally have the right to reject denser development if it would negatively impact local transportation networks, the transportation trust fund would be constitutionally protected and a HOT lanes network would reduce congestion on our worst roads.”

Cuccinelli isn’t exactly Mr. Popular with the Axis of Taxes running the state Senate, so I wouldn’t expect his proposals to get very far. But you never know. In any case, it’s good to know that at least one member of the upper chamber shows signs of thinking outside the tax-and-spend box.

Last month, Virginian-Pilot reporter Tom Holden created quite a stir when he quoted Del. John Welch III, R-Virginia Beach, as saying he now supports a general tax increase to fund transportation improvements. Wrote Holden:

Del. John Welch III, one of the General Assembly’s most ardent anti-tax champions, said Thursday he supports a 10-cents-a-gallon gas tax increase to help pay for Virginia transportation projects.

Welch, who like all state lawmakers is up for election in November 2007, said he changed his mind after voters repeatedly told him on Election Day that they were fed up with the stalemate in Richmond.

“I worked the polls for 13 hours… and people told me they want something done,” he said. “They don’t like taxes but they want action. I will entertain fees or gas tax increases for the good of Virginia.”

Welch’s about-face was widely touted by the Axis of Taxes as evidence that the once-solid ranks of the low-tax wing of the House of Delegates was cracking. But now comes Leesburg Today with an article exploring the prospects for a compromise on the transportation-funding issue. One of the conservatives who supposedly has “turned the corner” on taxes, writes Dusty Smith, rejects the notion:

“It has seriously been mischaracterized,” said Robert Rummells, chief of staff for Del. John J. Welch III (R-21), referring to news reports that Welch would sponsor a bill to raise the gas tax by 10 cents per gallon and dedicate it to transportation needs. “It couldn’t be further from the truth.”

Rummells said Welch was asked his opinion about a proposal to raise the gas tax by 30 cents, which he flat out rejected. He responded by saying he could entertain the idea of raising the tax by 10 cents, but only if the General Assembly and voters approve a constitutional amendment that would prevent the Transportation Trust Fund from being used for any non-transportation item. A constitutional amendment requires approval by two successive legislatures and a statewide referendum, meaning the earliest it could be in place would be November 2008, if it took effect immediately after the referendum.

“The most Welch would even consider is a dime,” Rummells said, adding that without the constitutional amendment, there’s not a chance of Welch voting for that tax hike. “If there’s no lockbox, there’s no dime.”

Several legislators touted Welch’s words in his hometown newspapers as evidence conservative Republicans were swayed when voters in the recent elections chose to send Democrats to several statewide positions who identify transportation as their biggest concern. However, Rummells’ comments suggest otherwise. Welch does plan to sponsor a constitutional amendment to lock up the Transportation Trust Fund, Rummells said.

Whom do we believe? The popular inclination is to trust Holden, a veteran journalist, over some mealy-mouthed spokesman for a politician who wouldn’t even speak for himself. On the other, in my observation, the overall journalistic coverage of the transportation debate (I’m not referring to Holden specifically) has been so shoddy as to border on journalistic malpractice. It is obvious to me, if to no one else, that many journalists covering the transportation debate are captive to blatant prejudices and preconceptions.

Rummell has flat-out contested the accuracy of the Virginian-Pilot story, suggesting that Welch’s comments were taken grotesquely out of context. The core tenets of journalism require that the Pilot follow up, report honestly on the extent to which it quoted Welch fairly or unfairly, and clarify/update his position on taxes. It will be interesting to see if the Pilot does so. Failure to do so will smack of cover-up and create a presumption of guilt.

Crow-Eating Update: I owe Tom Holden and the Virginian-Pilot an apology for insinuating that they even might have done anything wrong on this story. After writing this blog entry, I suggested that J.R. Hoeft over at Bearing Drift follow up on this story, which was in his back yard. He found it of interest, raising essentially the same questions that I did. (See his post.) However, Hampton Roads blogger Vivian Paige noted in the comments of J.R.’s blog that she’d noted the Welch story in her own blog back in December. She’d noted the delegate’s constitutional-amendment qualifier back then, so what was the fuss about?

Worried that I had missed something, I went back to Holden’s original story — and there it was: “Welch backs the increase on the condition that lawmakers also pass a constitutional amendment limiting access to the transportation trust fund.” I had overlooked it. Totally my fault. Let me reiterate: Holden presented Welch’s comments fairly and in context. The Pilot owes no one an apology and has no obligation to follow up.

Unless he was quoted out of context by Leesburg Today, however, Rummell has some explaining to do. Just how, exactly, did the news media mischaracterize Welch’s comments? Was he back-pedaling because Welch had caught some heat for his comments?

Finally, I have some self-examination to do. If I had read Holden’s article more carefully, I would not have needed to ask whether the Pilot or Rummell was the credible party. The answer would have been apparent. All I can say in my defense is that I pursued the truth of the matter and reported it as soon as I discovered it.

Two Fairfax County men have filed a lawsuit in Richmond Circuit Court Thursday to block the transfer of authority for the Dulles Toll Road to the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority. The transfer of state assets and contracting out of “the power to tax” to the non-state entity cannot take place without approval of the General Assembly, contend Patrick R. Gray and James W. Nagle, who both identify themselves as “frequent users” of the toll road.

Read the lawsuit here.

Transfer of the toll road to the MWAA, which governs Washington Dulles International Airport, is critical to Kaine administration plans for constructing the “Rail to Dulles” extension of a heavy rail line from the Washington Metro through Tysons Corner and Dulles Airport. The MWAA would oversee the project and would use revenues generated by the toll road as the major source of funding.

Under the agreement the Kaine administation negotiated with the MWAA, the airport authority would have exclusive say-so over future rate increases for the toll road. Further, states the lawsuit:

MWAA places a higher priority on constructing the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project than on maintaining, improving and operating the Dulles Toll Road. … Because the final design and cost of construction of the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project have not been determined, the Plaintiffs are subject to further increases in user charges for using the Dulles Toll Road to fund the increased state share of funding for the Dulles Corridor Metrorail project.

The MWAA agreement with the Kaine administration is predicated on the assumption that “the use of value engineering, competitive construction bidding and management” will migitate the risk of being forced to increase tolls, the lawsuit states. But, it goes on, a “recent history of management failures,” in particular, inadequate efforts to obtain competitive bidding on 15 of 35 contracts reviewed by the General Accounting Office, call that assumption into question.

The state Constitution, continue the plaintiffs, requires “the affirmative vote of each house of the General Assembly” to transfer any assets of the Commonwealth to any persons or entities outside the commonwealth. The agreement negotiated between MWAA and the Kaine administration deprives the plaintiffs of the right to “petition their legislators to prevent, or minimize the effect of, a transfer.”

Richmond attorney Patrick McSweeney represented the plaintiffs in the suit. Now we know what he’s been doing since he stopped writing the columns we published in Bacon’s Rebellion!

(Hat tip to Phil Rodokanakis for forwarding a copy of the lawsuit to me.)

One of the more remarkable aspects of Del. Clifford L. “Clay” Athey’s proposed land use reform legislation is that it would enshrine the term “New Urbanism” in the state code. Other than to speak generally about “mixed use” and “walkability,” however, he does not try to define what it means. It’s the job of local governments, apparently, to supply the details.

Athey’s bill, which would require fast-growing counties to create “urban management areas” to accommodate growth, is generating a lot of heat, as Bob Burke reports today in “Time to Grow Up“, and it may never pass into law in its current form. But it shows how far legislators — some legislators, at least — have come in thinking about transportation and land use issues.

Athey boiled down to a sound bite that neatly encapsulates the thoughts I’d been trying to communicate in pages and pages of verbiage. Virginia will never solve its transportation problems, he told Burke, until urbanizing counties begin acting and looking more like cities. “What this bill seeks to do is say to counties, if you want to be urban, act like a city or town,” Athey says. “You can’t have the best of both worlds.”

That’s what the “new urbanism” dictum is all about: Nudging counties in the direction of more compact, mixed-use development and pedestrian-friendly streetscapes, thereby economizing on infrastructure. Counties like being more spread out. They just don’t want to pay for their choice. In the upcoming debate, counties will accuse the House of trying to “mandate” new transportation responsibilities upon them without paying for them. The flip side of that argument, of course, is that localities want to maintain the right to make any land use decision they want — and have the state pick up the tab for the transportation impact. With transportation funding reaching a crisis, Virginia just can’t afford that anymore.

Those who would like to see a dramatic color graphic that illustrates the importance of the Fundamental Change in governance structure that is advocated in our Backgrounder “A New Metric of Citizen Well-Being” at db4.dev.baconsrebellion.com, check out Page B 2 in the Sunday 7 January 2007 WaPo (the second page of Outlook).

In recent years, WaPo has done as good a job on political payola and on the incredible federal farm subsidy quagmire as they have done a bad job on the need for Fundamental Change in human settlement patterns.

EMR

In his state of the Commonwealth speech last night, Gov. Timothy M. Kaine made the case for two education initiatives: Giving teachers an extra three percent pay raise, and funding pilot programs to expand the Virginia Preschool Initiative.

I’ve got nothing against paying teachers well. What I object to is rewarding all teachers, the good and the bad, equally. The Governor didn’t say how many millions of dollars it would take to increase teacher salaries by three percent, but it’s a significant amount of money. Why not use that money to reward the really good teachers, the ones we want to keep in the system, instead of rewarding the deadwood?

As for the preschool pilot programs, I would say that testing new ideas is good, experimentation is good. Let’s see if the preschool programs accomplish what they’re touted to accomplish. But if the pilots are to be genuine demonstrations of feasibility, not simply a way to get the camel’s nose under the tent, then I would suggest following the advice of Bacon’s Rebellion columnist Chris Braunlich:

The General Assembly has been asked to fund both the pilot program and creation of a quality ratings system. Legislators would be wrong to reject it out of hand. But they would be more wrong to approve it without insisting on a pilot that will actually study the effectiveness of universal preschool or a rating system that will give some sense of what this will all cost somewhere down the road.

Of all the major legislative initiatives that Gov. Timothy M. Kaine touted in his State of the Commonwealth speech last night, the best was his health care package. For the most part, his proposals would do no harm. Indeed, they could actually do some good.

First and foremost, Kaine understands that people need to assume responsibility for their own health. Kaine’s remarks deserve to be quoted at length (even moreso, as the MSM totally ignored them in their coverage of the speech):

We do an outstanding job of treating people when they are sick. But, we don’t do very well at keeping our people healthy. While there are a growing number of exceptions, our health care system does not consistently encourage healthy living in a meaningful way.

I applaud the many Virginians — including those in this chamber—who have taken personal responsibility for improving their health. I want to set that same kind of example for Virginians, and you’ll see me out there — getting my weight and blood pressure checked, getting my flu shot, walking, hiking, and riding my bike. I hope to see you there with me.

As one of Virginia’s largest employers, the Commonwealth can also set an example for others by implementing policies that support employee health. We are encouraging our employees to make better health choices, by expanding the Healthy Virginians initiative. Healthy Virginians offers state employees a variety of tools to exercise more, eat better and stop smoking.

I have also proposed changes to the state health insurance policy to promote good health, not just cover treatments after the fact. And our Medicaid program recently announced changes to do the same with the state’s nearly 700,000 Medicaid recipients. …

I have tasked my Secretary of Health and Human Resources and my Secretary of Education to work together to improve health education in our schools and improve the food that is available to our students every day.

Consistent with his idea that Virginians need to take more responsibility for their own health, Kaine wants to help them become better consumers of health care services. Said Kaine:

Late last year, I was the first governor to join with U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Mike Leavitt to partner in making our health care system more transparent and more focused on quality and safety. If we work with our health care providers to make these changes, we will enhance the quality and consistency of care we receive for our medical dollar, encourage a more cost-effective use of the system, and increase patient safety.

I applaud the Governor for not adopting the intellectually slovenly approach of tackling Virginia’s health care crisis by throwing money at it. He is absolutely right. Virginians need to take more responsibility for their own health, both by adopting healthier lifestyles and by becoming more demanding consumers of health care. The path to a better, more affordable health care system is not to encumber hospitals, physicians and other providers with more regulations. It’s to empower Virginians to act in the marketplace to demand more value, more productivity and better outcomes.

Following up on his announcement of earlier this week, Gov. Timothy M. Kaine used his State of the Commonwealth speech to plug two narrowly targeted tax cuts.

One initiative would raise the filing threshold for state income tax from $7,000 to $12,000 for an individual and from $14,000 to $24,000 for married couples. That would eliminate income tax liability for an estimated 147,000 Virginians.

I have mixed emotions. On the one hand, I’d like a little income tax relief myself. The 2004 “tax reform” stuck it to wage earners in my income bracket. Plus, Gov. Kaine wants to raise another $850 million in revenues, much of it new taxes on the middle class. (Let’s not even talk about the federal income tax, with its highly progressive “clawbacks.”) On the other hand, I’ll say this: Easing the tax burden is a better way to help the poor and working class than creating new entitlement programs.

Kaine’s other idea is a very bad one: He proposes a constitutional amendment that would allow local governments to exempt up to 20 percent of the value of an owner-occupied home or farm, providing targeted tax relief to homeowners. The idea, I guess, is to shift the tax burden to commercial businesses. This comes from the same guy who, earlier in his speech, bragged about Virginia’s recognition as “the most business-friendly state in America”.

Cognitive dissonance, anyone?

Wherever such tax relief was passed, it would only increase the “beggar thy neighbor” competition between local governments for commercial development, and it would only aggravate the perverse perception that residential development doesn’t “pay its way.” If you want to intensify the paucity of affordable and accessible housing in Virginia, this is one sure-fire way to do it.

Gov. Timothy M. Kaine used the occasion of his annual State of the Commonwealth address last night to outline the framework of a potential deal on transportation funding. “There are significant areas of agreement between the House and Senate on this matter,” he said in a conciliatory tone that contrasted with previous threats to make transportation a major election issue. “There is just too much agreement here to walk away from the issue for a second year in a row.”

What are those areas of agreement? Quoting from his speech:

• Statewide revenue needs amount to approximately $1 billion dollars more per year.
• Taxes on auto insurance premiums should be earmarked forever for transportation solutions.
• Abusive drivers should pay stiffer fines, which would be used for transportation needs.
• Some surplus general funds can appropriately be spent on transportation.
• Regions should be granted some degree of autonomy in raising funds for local projects.

As I read the political tea leaves, there is a very good chance that a master compromise will be achieved along these lines. The mood is pervasive that “something must be done.” Inevitably, “something” will be. Of course, any such transportation-funding package would represent a victory for Business As Usual, severing the nexus between those who use the roads and those who pay for them. For me, the sole consolation is that a general, statewide tax increase does not seem to be on the table.

Give the Governor credit for recognizing that more money alone won’t cure Virginia’s transportation woes. “In 2006, we took the first real steps to link transportation and land use planning through legislation concerning traffic impact statements, transfers of development rights, and cluster housing,” he said. “This year, let’s take the next steps towards smart growth management.” (“Smart growth management”? That’s a phrase you won’t read in the MSM accounts of the Governor’s speech. As usual, reporters focused exclusively on the tax question.)

Kaine reiterated ideas that he’d floated before, and he appeared to be receptive to the House of Delegates plan to curtail the intake of subdivision streets into the state system. Key points from the speech:

• Give local government authority to reject rezoning proposals when new developments would overwhelm the existing transportation infrastructure.
• Limit commercial curb cuts onto transportation corridors in order to preserve the traffic-carrying capacity of those corridors.
• Create incentives for new subdivision streets to be designed so as to reduce congestion and long-term maintenance costs. “The state should not automatically pick up the maintenance costs for new roads unless those roads are designed to move traffic efficiently.”

Some elements of Kaine’s land use reforms will prove controversial. Some may criticize the entire package as grossly inadequate. I agree — these measures barely scratch the surface of the Fundamental Change that’s needed. But they represent a start that, hopefully, can be built upon.

If Kaine succeeds in negotiating a grand compromise along these lines, will traffic congestion in Virginia be tamed? Not by a long shot. These reforms will tinker on the margins: continuing to waste billions of dollars on the wrong priorities and bringing only incremental improvement to human settlement patterns. But we can be thankful of one thing: It could have been worse. At least lawmakers seem willing no longer to give carte blanche to Business As Usual. Slowly but surely, the issues are being re-defined and the momentum of debate is shifting.

The example of MainStream Media obliviousness highlighted in our current column (“Can’t Take This – Not Another Day!”) is from the 28 December WaPo. Perhaps it should have been the January issue of Virginia Business.

The cover story is on the transportation “stalemate.” As has been pointed out concerning other Richmond New Urban Region Media, any understanding of the land use / transportation relationship seems to be beyond the institutional capacity of the current staff. The story was a regurgitation of Business As Usual.

The current issue of Virginia Business also has a “Regional Report” on Fairfax County. As we Have noted from time to time, the current borders of Fairfax County include all or part of 10 Beta Communities.

Fairfax County is not a “Region” much less a New Urban Region. It is not even a “subregion” except in the narrow sense that any territory can be called a “subregion” and so there is a Fairfax County Subregion.

A robust, consistent Vocabulary and a comprehensive Conceptual Framework is the first step to understanding human settlement patterns. This understanding is a first step in solving the mobility and access crisis as well as the affordable and accessible housing crisis.

At one point, the editorial content of Virginia Business challenged business leaders to think about the collective, long-term interests of their organizations and of the citizens of the Commonwealth instead or just repeating the chamber of commerce / Business-As-Usual line.

EMR

Gov. Timothy M. Kaine is expected to use his “state of the commonwealth speech” tonight to press for a financial solution to Virginia’s transportation woes. As Michael Hardy and Tyler Whitley explain the stakes in an article today:

The governor will pledge bipartisan cooperation, but he will challenge the lawmakers not to leave a second year in a row without addressing transportation funding,” said one administration source.

However muted the rhetoric, Democrat Kaine’s speech will sound the likely battle cry for this November’s elections for all 140 legislative seats.

By turning the transportation issue into an election rallying cry, Kaine has created an interesting — and under-reported — dynamic within the Republican Party. The first inkling I had popped up in correspondence with a General Assembly insider, who was communicating off the record, to the effect that the Senate “has to take any real deal” offered by the House of Delegates, “and they know it.”

How was that, I asked. Several soft-on-taxes Republican Senators will lose their primaries to aggressively low-tax challengers, my source responded. By contrast, for all the predictions that Democrats stand to make significant gains in the general elections, conservative Republicans in the House aren’t worried. None of them are facing primary challenges.

I don’t follow electoral politics. For details, consult Not Larry Sabato, the lead blogging source on Virginia election analysis. For purposes of this analysis, I am working off a summary provided by Virginia Free (Foundation for Research and Economic Education). Sens. Walter Stosch, R-Henrico, and Russell H. Potts, R-Winchester, face challenges from credible candidates. Sen. Emmett W. Hanger, R-Mount Solon, will be opposed by a potentially attractive but largely unknown conservative independent. By contrast, conservatives in the House are all running unopposed in their primaries. Their test will come in the general elections with the Democrats.

The races of interest:

• Walter Stosch – Joe Blackburn. Stosch enjoys enormous advantages of name recognition, incumbency and a formidable warchest, but Blackburn has a strong base of support within the district. As Virginia Free notes: “Blackburn, a Richmond attorney, had a very successful and well-attended campaign kickoff late in 2006. Meanwhile, the Henrico County GOP elected Blackburn’s choice for local chairman, Sheriff Mike Wade, essentially delivering control of the local party apparatus to Blackburn. Stosch backed the opposition, losing in his home base of Henrico County, which comprises nearly the entire senate district. Blackburn has enlisted key advisors to former Governor Jim Gilmore to assist his effort, and he claims the endorsement of VCAP, the Virginia Conservative Action PAC.”
• Russell Potts — Jill Holtzman Vogel — Mark Tate. The only thing that Russ Potts has going for him is that so many Republicans dislike him that two of them are running for his seat, thus splitting potential opposition. Tate came within 106 votes of unseating Potts in a 2003 primary — back when Potts still claimed to oppose taxes. After running as a pro-tax independent in the 2005 gubernatorial race, he has shredded any credibility with the party base. Potts has not declared whether he will run again. If he declines, he will leave the field to Tate and Vogel, both conservatives.
• Emmett Hanger – Arin Sime. Hanger enjoys clear advantages of name recognition and incumbency. His opponent, Arin Sime, describes himself as a small government conservative: “pro-life, pro-gun, pro-school choice, pro-farmer, pro-property rights, pro-small business, anti-eminent domain abuse and anti-tax hikes.” A 1997 UVa grad, he owns a software development consulting firm. Sounds like a long shot to me. In a general election, Hanger would win the Democrats’ votes, enough to tilt the election in his favor in even most conservative of districts.

It’s still relatively early in the game, and other primary opposition may surface. I would be amazed if someone did not run against Sen. John H. Chichester, R-Northumberland, who promised four years ago to oppose taxes only to turn around soon after the election and propose a tax increase so massive that it dwarfed even the hikes favored by then-Gov. Mark R. Warner. Chichester has immeasurably more gravitas than Potts and is probably unbeatable — he won the primary handily in 2003 — but his duplicity angered many rank-and-file Republicans. He’s sure to inspire at least a kamikazi run against him.

Bottom line: Kaine had better watch out. Conservative Republicans aren’t buying the mantra that general taxes must be raised to solve Virginia’s transportation problems. The biggest casualties of making transportation the big election issue of 2007 may be Kaine’s Republican fellow travelers in the state Senate. As that awareness solidifies into conventional wisdom, who knows what the Senators might do to buff their conservative, anti-tax credentials in this session?

Be afraid, be very afraid! A flood of cheap novelty cigarette lighters could turn your toddler into an unwitting arsonist!

According to fire prevention specialists with the Harrisonburg fire department, one child in Chesterfield County — or it could have been Henrico — was playing with a cigarette lighter in the shape of a toy purse, set a fire and nearly burned the house down. A child in Harrisonburg was caught clicking another toy lighter in his pants pocket. Fortunately, an alert teacher caught him before the child set his pants ablaze.

The Harrisonburg fire fighters were tending a booth in the General Assembly building this afternoon in support of legislation submitted by Del. Matthew J. Lohr, R-Harrisonburg, which would ban the sale of the lighters to anyone under the age of 18. The booth displayed some 40 or more novelty lighters. There were dolphin lighters and pig lighters, cow lighters and turtle lighters. There were lighters that masqueraded as wrist watches and tiny cell phones. There were lighters in the guise of guns and cars, beer cans and poker chips, footballs, hand grenades and jack o’ lanterns. One lighter looked like a tiny fire extinguisher.

“They look like toys,” said M.V. Messerly, a fire prevention specialist. But appearances are deceiving. Picking up a lighter in the shape of a pink pig, Messerly gave it a flick with her thumb so that flame shot out of its nostrils. “It’s been hard enough keeping children away from Bic lighters,” she said.

The cheap, novelty lighters — many of them made in China — represent a grave threat, said Wanda Willis, a lieutenant in charge of fire prevention.

Would you say they constitute “a national menace?” I asked.

Yes, she would, she said. Children can’t tell the difference between the novelty lighters and toys. Kids can take them to school, and teachers can’t tell the difference either, unless they inspect them closely.

So, stay alert, parents! That dime-store trinket in your child’s hands could pack a deadly surprise.

Through two years of blogging, I’ve been content to cover the action in the General Assembly from afar, supplementing the daily newspaper coverage with e-mail correspondence, Web research and occasional interviews. One topic that I did research in depth was the package of land-use reforms submitted by the House of Delegates leadership. Some readers were skeptical of the legislation’s merits. One anonymous blogger goaded me via his comments to attend the subcommittee meeting of Counties, Cities and Towns when the legislation would be introduced, to witness for myself what kind of greeting the bills would receive. “See you in House Room C,” he signed off.

OK, I said, I’ll go. And go I did. And when I got to the General Assembly Building just before 3 p.m., a sign on House Room C said that the hearing had been canceled. Grrr. Thanks a lot, Anonymous, that was a great tip! I’m so glad I reserved my one trek to the 2007 session for this awe-inspiring occasion!

Well, the schedule posted in the General Assembly building mentioned that the House Republican Caucus also would convene at 3 p.m. If the big dogs in the House weren’t presenting the landmark legislation to the sub-committee, I figured they might be talking about transportation, land use or something interesting in the caucus. The receptionist said the caucus should be open to the public unless it went into executive session. So, I zipped on over to the Patrick Henry Building, grabbed a seat and watched quietly as a large number of middle-aged men in dark suits and gray hair filed into the room. Eventually, I caught the eye of House Speaker William J. Howell, who, after a brief but friendly chat, informed me that the caucus was closed to the public. Double grrrr.

Bottom line for the afternoon: Your correspondent uncovered no earth-shaking revelations regarding the more momentous debates of this year’s session. But I did get button-holed by two officers with the Harrisonburg fire department eager to tell their story. An alarming increase in novelty cigarette lighters is putting innocent Virginia children at risk for setting themselves, their homes and their schools on fire. I will blog that story very shortly — and you’ll have read it here first, a world exclusive for Bacon’s Rebellion.

Some people think I’m anti-business or anti-development because I don’t buy into the political agenda of Virginia’s real estate industry. Nothing could be further from the truth. I’m convinced that creative, entrepreneurial developers are Virginia’s best hope for creating more liveable communities. Government can make rules, but they can’t innovate. If anyone is going to figure out how to reconcile the goals of sustainable development with the goal of providing affordable, accessible housing, it has to be developers — because developers, not government, are the ones who actually actually build our communities.

That brings us to one of the more visionary developers in Virginia: John Clark, the driving force behind Haymount, a New Urbanist community along the Rappahannock River just east of Fredericksburg. Clark has dedicated half of his adult life to keeping alive his vision for Haymount. I wrote a cover story about him in 1991 for Virginia Business magazine, when Haymount was little more than a plot of farmland and a dream. After struggling for years with regulatory approvals and market conditions, Clark has finally begun building the project. He expects people to begin taking residence in 2008.

What I find especially encouraging is the fact that local environmentalists, who once opposed the community as a great project in the wrong place, have finally embraced it. Kiran Krishnamurthy at the Times-Dispatch wrote yesterday described how John Tibbett, leader of Friends of the Rappahannock, has learned to live with the 4,000-home community in rural Caroline County. “There was an evolution in our perspective toward Haymount, from being the right development in the wrong place to being a model,” he told Krishnamurthy. “Their goals fit our goals.”

While battling to keep the Haymount project alive, Clark was obsessed with incorporating the latest and greatest environmental thinking into his development. He scoured the marketplace and the literature for every green idea he can find. When Haymount finally gets built, it will become a national showcase for green development. Krishnamurthy lists some of the environmental features that Clark is planning:

Haymount will employ state-of-the-art wastewater treatment and stormwater drainage systems; feature an organic farm, garden and market; cluster the 4,000 homes together to reduce the development’s footprint; preserve two-thirds of the
1,600 acres; possibly include man-made wetlands; and equip each home with two bicycles.

Clark also said he plans to set homes back from the waterfront, preserving scenic views and using the development’s … river frontage for a park. Tippett applauds those steps.

“They could have made huge amounts of money doing waterfront lots,” Tippett said, adding he foresees Haymount and Friends of the Rappahannock one day hosting international conferences on eco-friendly development. “We can talk about low-impact development and then walk outside and see it.”

From the conversations I’ve had with Clark over the years, that description is only scratchinig the surface of what he has in mind.

Neal Peirce, a nationally syndicated columnist, wrote last month how path-breaking “green” developments are popping up around the country. Prairie Crossing, a 400-home settlement, is located at the junction of two rail commuter lines 45 miles north of Chicago. Prairie Crossing is recycling old corn and soybean fields into the kind of wildflower-dotted prairie that once reigned in the plains. Habersham, a development in the low country of South Carolina, blends “porch-rich Southern architecture” with “marsh-lined water edges and great live oaks, bedecked with Spanish moss.”

Here’s the beauty of capitalism: If “green” development pays, we’ll get a lot more of it. Government can’t do it. Even environmentalist not-for-profits can’t do it. It takes visionaries like John Clark to figure out how to make it pay off. If you count the time value of holding onto the Haymount property, the early and expensive design work and literally years of Clark’s time, the project may never represent a competitive deployment of capital. You can always tell the pioneers — they’re the ones with the arrows sticking out of their backs. But if Clark can prove successful from here on out, others will learn from his experience and spread his best practices like prairie grass.