Bacon's Rebellion

Gov. Timothy M. Kaine has lined up significant support for a Virginia telework initiative, collecting pledges from 32 Northern Virginia technology companies to “expand or implement telework within our organizations” and to encourage their colleagues to do so as well.

According to Secretary of Technology Aneesh Chopra, the Kaine administration also has set ambitious goals for the state — 20 percent of the eligible workforce will telecommute by 2010. Said Chopra: “The Commonwealth must play a role in leading by doing.”

Telework is only one piece of the larger transportation solution but it’s probably the easiest to put into place. It’s encouraging to see the state committing to getting its employees off the roads. Even more encouraging is to see members of the Northern Virginia Technology Council agreeing to participate actively in the initiative. (Read the NVTC press release.) Beats lobbying for higher taxes.

The Third Crossing over Hampton Roads is slipping further out of reach, reports Christina Nuckols at the Virginian-Pilot. Citing uncertainty about state priorities, the two consortia that submitted plans to build the $3 billion mega-project have asked the state to put the project on hold for two years.

Some legislators have said they regarded the upgrading of U.S. 460 between Suffolk and Petersburg as the highest priority for the Tidewater region. But the state lacks the funds to subsidize that project, much less the far more ambitious Third Crossing.

Tidewater Skanska and Fluor Virginia Inc. had filed unsolicited bids to build the Third Crossing in 2004. Skanska had estimated that tolls could cover the lion’s share of the cost but some $600 million to $1.2 million in state and federal dollars would be needed. Given the state’s uncertain commitment to the project, neither firm wants to spend the money to develop more detailed plans.

House Transportation Chair Leo Wardrup, R-Virginia Beach, raised the key philosophical question: “If we can’t get there with tolls, there’s something wrong with how we’re running our highway program.”

I agree. If tolls won’t cover the construction costs, I would submit, either the project is too ambitious in size and scope, or the demand does not exist to justify building it. There are two exceptions to that line of logic: Subsidies could be warranted (1) if the state regards the Third Crossing as critical to economic development, as in continued development of the ports, and/or 2) if the state regards the Third Crossing as critical for public safety, as in hurricane evacuation. In either case, I would argue, the public subsidy should come from the General Fund, where it would compete with other economic-development and public-safety priorities.

In a tour of Northern Virginia, Gov. Timothy M. Kaine stated that he would push for land use reforms and extra transportation funding in the 2007 session of the General Assembly. In previous statements, he had said that he would steer clear of transportation issues until after the fall 2007 elections when voters would have a chance to throw out opponents to his proposed tax increases.

Although the governor is sticking to his guns regarding the need for more transportation revenues, he apparently sees limited areas of agreement with a House of Delegates where low-tax sentiments run strong. According to a report filed by Washington Post reporter Amy Gardner, Kaine said he would:

• Focus on how to spend the $339 million in surplus General Fund revenues that House Republicans agree can be steered to transportation without raising taxes.
• Resurrect a campaign proposal to give local governments more authority to reject rezoning projects that would swamp local transportation infrastructure.
• Revisit legislation authorizing the Virginia Department of Transportation to conduct traffic-impact analyses of major rezoning projects. With the General Assembly crafting permanent legislation, the measure may encounter more opposition than the pilot project did last year.

Gardner also noted that the legislature is likely to take up proposals that would make developers more responsible for maintaining the subdivision roads they build, and also to require greater connectivity between subdivisions, which would provide more options for traffic flow. The Kaine administration is examining both issues, but Gardner provided no details on the governor’s current thinking.

Kudos to the Virginian-Pilot editorial writers! They really nailed it with an editorial prompted by, of all things, two proposed development projects in Chesterfield County. As the Pilot has come to realize, when the Virginia Department of Transportation pays for maintaining local roads, land use decisions made halfway across the state affect all of us.

Now, with road-maintenance costs rising and state transportation revenues running short, local development decisions such as those in Chesterfield County suddenly pose a question of statewide import:

If localities had to shoulder more of the road-maintenance tab, would they make smarter land-use decisions before approving development? Would they focus on density, alternative transportation and related matters to a greater degree than they do now?

Intuitively, the answer is “yes.”

Aligning transportation and land use decisions is only one of many reforms needed to tackle Virginia’s transportation woes, but it’s a good place to start. Getting the Virginian-Pilot behind the effort represents a huge step forward in the battle for public understanding.

“As a business leader, I am concerned,” declares Katherine Busser, a senior vice president for Capital One and chair of the Strong Start Council. “I need a workforce of critical thinkers, team players, and effective communicators. These skills find their roots in the earliest years. High-quality early-childhood education is a solution.”

We can all agree that Virginia needs more critical thinkers in order to compete in a global, knowledge-based trading system. But a little more critical thinking might have helped Busser in her column in Sunday’s Richmond Times-Dispatch touting a universal pre-K program.

Busser’s column is long on platitudes and short on data. One of the few numbers she cites is this: Last year, Virginia taxpayers spent $90 million on children who had to repeat a grade between kindergarten and the third grade. The number she neglected to mention was that universal pre-K would cost $300 million a year. Even if universal pre-K reduced drop-outs to zero — a proposition for which there is zero evidence — that still would yield a lousy return on taxpayer investment.

The person displaying an ability to think critically in this debate is not a businessman at all, but a lawyer and politician: Del. Kirk Cox, R-Chesterfield. In a companion column, he asked the tough questions that Busser needs to address:

(1) What would Virginia get for $300 million? Does the price tag include the cost of adding 4,100 classrooms plus intangibles such as training, health care, snacks and support services?

(2) Does universal pre-K help all children? Some evidence suggests that at-risk students might benefit, but there is nothing to indicate that students of middle- and high-income families would gain anything. “Is it right to ask Virginia taxpayers to pay for the child care and preschool choices of millionaires when studies show it may not help these children?”

(3) Does the current program work? “What statistical data — actual results — does the state have that demonstrate improved test scores and proficiencies for those children who enrolled in the Virginia Preschool Initiative program versus those who did not?”

Gov. Timothy M. Kaine and other supporters of universal pre-K have have to do better than dish out pious generalities about the importance of early childhood learning. Of course early environmental influences are critical. Of course we want to encourage early learning. But that’s a far cry from justifying the expansion of existing programs targeting at-risk children to a universal program for all.

The hot new concept in residential real estate now is to build developments around equestrian centers. The Washington Post notes that there are at least three such communities in the Washington metro area. Additionally, I have heard of equestrian/residential projects downstate: one in New Kent County, one near Lynchburg.

Unlike golf communities, in which golf carts are evolving into a new form of transportation (see previous post), no one is talking yet of the horse as a serious transportation option!

Dan Morse at the Washington Post has written a light feature story about the spread of golf carts as a mode of transportation, typically in retirement communities but also in small towns and suburban subdivisions. The story doesn’t reach any profound conclusions, but there is some interesting data embedded within it.

As many as 40,000 of the 200,000 golf carts built each year are used for purposes other than golf. In other words, they’re used for local transportation as an alternative to the automobile. Some people are using them to cruise around subdivision streets. With a top speed of 18 m.p.h., they generally are not used to travel any great distance.

In Colonial Beach, a Virginia town on the Potomac River, carts have been street-legal since 2002. There are now an estimated 400 golf cart owners in town.

In the winter, riders can enclose the sides of carts with thick curtains akin to soft convertible tops and warm the inside of carts with a propane heater that fits into the drink holder. On Saturday, up to 25 Colonial Beach residents are expected to climb into their carts for an annual holiday parade, following Santa in their carts. This follows a golf cart scavenger hunt earlier in the year.

Very cute. But there are serious questions: (1) To what extent can golf carts substitute for automobiles on a large scale, (2) to what extent can they ameliorate the ills of an autocentric society such as pollution and traffic congestion, and (3) what can local authorities do to encourage their use in a socially utilitarian manner?

If golf carts simply substituted for cars on short trips, using the same roads and parking spaces, I don’t see how they could make much difference… Indeed, limited to 18 m.p.h., they might make matters worse by slowing traffic. However, if carts could utilize trails and bike paths used mainly for recreation rather than providing access, they might alleviate some congestion. Also, if bike/jogging/cart paths are added to provide connectivity in places where you can’t build a road — between cul de sac subdivisions, for instance, or through parks and/or school grounds — they could provide inexpensive options not currently available.

It would be helpful to know more about how people and communities are using the carts.

I’m suffering from post-Thanksgiving burn-out. The Bacon clan gathered in Richmond from all corners of Virginia — three generations, plus in-laws — for a non-top orgy of Southern hospitality engineered by my wife and my sister, which means huge breakfasts, huge lunches, huge dinners and endless hors d’oeuvres filling in the gaps in between. Most of my bodily functions, including brain activity, have shut down while the digestive process takes over.

Accordingly, dear policy junkies, I am allowing readers to do my Internet clipping for me. The previous post came courtesy of John Kalitka. These two come from Ray Hyde who, from what I can tell, does not sleep but roves the Internet shark-like at all hours of the day and night in a quest for knowledge and enlightment.

Rural Roads Seeing Impact of Traffic Congestion

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — What happens when freeway drivers start using back roads as shortcuts? That’s exactly what is happening to byways across the six-county Sacramento region. Rural roads are seeing the impact of congestion.

“Traffic is like water — path of least resistance. And rural roads are another way to keep moving, and those roads are simply not designed for commute traffic,” said Celia McAdam of the Placer Transportation Agency. More

The Average Person (with $1.95 Million) Can Own and Run His or Her own Biodiesel Plant

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — Sick and tired of soaring gas prices? Now you can build your own alternative fuel plant and set your own limits. It’s not as farfetched as it seems.

Orlando-based Xenerga is offering entrepreneurs a chance to get their own biodiesel production franchise, which can produce fuel for use in any diesel engine. More.

Several days ago, I noted a traffic experiment in Drachten, a Dutch city of 50,000, where authorities had removed most of the traffic lights, installed a number of roundabouts and counted on citizens to treat each other with courtesy. The experiment seems to be working there. The question I asked is whether a system based on courtesy could possibly be transferred to the United States? (See “The Role of Courtesy in Coping with Traffic Congestion.”)

Now comes an article from Spiegel Online, “European Cities Do Away with Traffic Signs,” indicating that the idea may be migrating to other European countries. In seven cities and regions around the continent, the European Union is testing some radical ideas: eliminating virtually all traffic signs entirely.

European traffic planners are dreaming of streets free of rules and directives. They want drivers and pedestrians to interact in a free and humane way, as brethren — by means of friendly gestures, nods of the head and eye contact, without the harassment of prohibitions, restrictions and warning signs.

It’s nice to know that the E.U., which has passed so many regulations in its short existence that its rule book now runs 85,000 pages, wants to deregulate at least one sphere of human existence. Whether the idea can work or not, I don’t know. It may prove feasible in homogenous societies where people share the same habits, values and ways of thinking. I am highly skeptical, however, that anarchy in the streets could be transplanted to an entitlement society like the United States. We are, after all, the country that invented road rage. Friendly gestures? I’ve got yer friendly gesture right here!

Still, I’m a great believer in experimentation. I look forward to seeing what we can learn from the European experience.

(Hat tip to John Kalitka for pointing me to the story.)

Dominion has cleared an important environmental hurdle in its request for regulatory approval to build a new nuclear power plant, the Associated Press reports. Federal regulators will make a decision whether to grant a permit in late 2007. Dominion hasn’t decided whether it wants to build the plant, but it wants to keep its options open.

Meanwhile, Dominion needs 300 megawatts more power to serve fast-growing Northern Virginia, reports Greg Edwards with the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

The company has made plans for a power plant to serve that area during peak demand. … First, though, Dominion Virginia Power wants to see if there is a better and cheaper way to meet its needs.

The company has put out a request for bids to see if someone else can offer a better plan for providing the electricity. Or, as an alternative, it will accept proposals for managing electricity demand in Northern Virginia so that a new plant would become
unnecessary.

I appreciate the fact that Dominion is soliciting proposals rather than presuming that it can do the job better than anyone else. It would be nice, though, it the company would consider other options such as, oh, I don’t know… conservation! A more aggressive time-of-day pricing plan might eliminate the need to build a new power plant entirely.

It’s no accident that Virginia ranked No. 1 in Forbes Magazine’s 2006 ranking of the business climates of the 50 states. We are blessed by geography — a central location on the Mid-Atlantic seaboard, and proximity to the federal feeding trough in Washington, D.C. — but the Commonwealth also has consistently pursued business-friendly policies over the decades. In this document, “Rating the States – a Closer Look,” the Senate Finance Committee takes a detailed look at why Virginia compares so favorably.

Among the factors subject to influence by public policy are these:

• Tax burden. Absolute state/local tax burden is one of the lowest in the country; Virginia ranked 41st in 2006. Even more impressively, when ranked as a percentage of personal income, Virginia’s tax burden was the 49th lowest in the country. Virginia state/local taxes claimed 16.1 percent of personal income, versus a national average of 20.3 percent.
• Labor costs. Virginia has a right-to-work law and low workers compensation costs.
• Energy costs. Despite the fact that Virginia is not an energy-rich state, outside of the far Southwest coalfields, the average cost per unit of electricity for industrial customers was 4.04 cents in Virgina vs. 5.02 cents nationally.
• Human capital. Virginia ranks 7th in the nation for percentage of population with a college degree. Additionally, the labor force is growing consistently more rapidly than the national averages. Despite the fact that 60 percent of all newcomers to Virginia come from outside the United States (can you believe that?), more than 70 percent have some college education or degrees.
• Regulatory environment. Virginia’s environmental and workplace regulations rarely exceed federal regulations in severity. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce ranks Virginia among the top four states in the country as far as legal fairness.
• Conservative government. Virginia is one of nine states in the country with a AAA bond rating. The Government Performance Project gave Virginia the second highest grades in the country, ranking behind only Utah, for how well the states manage their money, people, technology and infrastructure.
• Quality of life. Virginia has less poverty and a significantly lower crime rate than the rest of the country. The number of Virginians with medical insurance is a little higher than the national averages.

The report wasn’t all rah-rah. It pointed out several weak spots in Virginia’s business climate — none of which will come as a surprise: increasing traffic congestion, unaffordable housing and regional decifiencies in educational attainment.

Overall, “Rating the States” is very thorough and well worth perusing.

Wonk alert! The Senate Finance Committee has posted online detailed its analysis of the state budget, higher education, western state hospital, consolidating the schools for the blind and deaf, and public safety. You can find the PDF files here.

I will use this material as fodder for columns, as I have time to read, learn and inwardly digest.

I’ve praised the movie “New World” in this blog for its attention to historical authenticity, and readers of this blog have debated the merits of revisionist history. Now comes an article from the William & Mary website about the behind-the-scenes interaction between Virginian Indians and “New World” director Terence Malick over the portrayal of Indian culture in the movie.

Quotable quote:

When leaders of Virginia’s Indian communities were first asked to consult on the film, many of them were hesitant because they realized that any story that focused on Capt. John Smith and his relationship with Pocahontas—a story most First Americans do not accept—was apt to present a distorted image of the Virginia Algonquian heritage, Green said. He, however, was anxious to participate.

“My idea was that you don’t see too many movies about Virginia Indians,” he explained, “so maybe we can take this situation and educate the public. Maybe we can show them that we are still here.”

Overall, though, the movie-making experience was a positive one.

(Photo credit of chief Robert Green of the Patawomeck tribe: William & Mary.)

Bill Gates may have dropped out of college, but he doesn’t want poor kids to drop out of high school. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is investing $9.9 million to underwrite the expansion of the Georgia-based Communities in Schools program to Virginia and three other states. CIS, which targets students who have dropped out or are threatening to drop out of high school, will set up shop in the Richmond region.

While less than half of low-income and minority students in the U.S.complete high school, 85 percent of CIS students earn their diplomas and two-thirds go on to some form of post-secondary education.

According to a CIS press release, the program supports at-risk students with community resources and services, balancing health, safety, and social needs with academic demands. Instructors work with students to create individualized learning plans, and equip them with the “CIS Five Basics:” (1) a one-on-one relationship with a caring adult, (2) a safe place to be, (3) a healthy start in life, (4) a marketable skill to use upon graduation, and (5) an opportunity to give something back to the community.

I don’t know if this program will work or not, but we need more experiments like this. The trouble with a top-down school system like Virginia’s is that it discourages localized experimentation and innovation. Let’s hope Bill Gates can succeed where so many others have failed.

When Ed Risse and I write about dysfunctional human settlement patterns, the context is usually transportation gridlock and affordable/accessible housing. That’s because the dysfunction in transportation and housing are so painfully evident to all. But dysfunctional human settlement patterns manifest themselves in other ways, and one of those is the cost of electric power.

We do not find ourselves at this moment in an electric power “crisis” — at least it’s not a crisis as defined by the political class. That’s due in large part to the fact that Dominion, Virginia’s dominant power company, has frozen its electric rates (with relatively minor fuel cost adjustments) through 2010. Not only are rates lower than the national average, they are stable.

Under these circumstances, electricity, like water, is one of those things that people don’t give a rip about until they don’t have it. Thus, for most Virginians, the shape of our electric power system is a non-issue — until the power goes out. In which case, it rockets to the top of the list, most likely provoking some ill-considered, short-term remedy to allow the politicians look like they’re “doing something.”

The good news is that a state commission is currently in the process of assembling a 10-year energy policy for Virginia, which means that, crisis or no, our electric-power system is under scrutiny. There are two aspects of the problem, one of which is getting the attention it deserves, and the other of which is not.

A growing chorus of voices is questioning what I call “Big Grid,” an electric power system that relies upon a relatively small number of giant power plants, located in out-of-the-way places where they don’t bother the neighbors, and upon giant, high-powered transmission lines to move the electricity to the population centers. That system exists because economies of scale had traditionally favored large power plants, despite the fact that transmission lines leak about six percent of all the electricity generated. However, any cost-benefit analysis of Big Grid needs to take into account the social costs of pollution as well as hidden vulnerabilities and risks — as demonstrated vividly by the blackouts up north that affected 50 million people back in 2003.

The alternative to Big Grid is “distributed generation” in which small-scale power production takes place in proximity to the electric consumers, decreasing the load on the power grid. We’re talking solar and cogeneration in tandem with a reduction of electricity consumption through investments in energy efficiency. I explore those issues in my recent column, “Big Grid.”

One commonly touted strategy for reducing energy consumption is variable pricing: Rate structures that reward business and residential consumers for shifting consumption from peak seasons and times of the day to off-peak periods. That spares the power companies from running their expensive, peak-load generators. I’m all in favor of peak-load pricing. But it’s incomplete. The concept of variable pricing should encompass location-variable pricing as well.

Here’s a little-noted fact: Scattered, low-density development requires major investment in power lines and sub-stations and is more expensive to serve with electric power than is more compact development. Unfortunately, electric rates do not distinguish between energy-efficient and energy-wasting settlement patterns: Everyone pays the same rate. In effect, people living in energy-efficient settlement patterns are subsidize those who live inefficiently.

Any reform of state energy policy needs to adopt location-variable pricing as a supplement to peak-load pricing. Failure to do so will translate into unnecessary capital expenditures on transmission lines and sub-stations, unnecessary electricity leakage and unnecessary costs for electric consumers.

Electric power rates are not a crisis in Virginia… yet. But they’ve become a major political football in Maryland where rate caps have been lifted. We will face the same issues as Maryland soon enough.