Bacon's Rebellion

Want to know more about the future of public-private transportation partnerships in Virginia? Then you need to attend the Public-Private Partnership Forum, Dec. 16-17 at the Virginia Crossings Resort in Glen Allen, Va.

With the Commonwealth relying increasingly upon toll roads and private sector cash to build its transportation system, this timely conference will explore issues related to transparency, risk and accountability in public-private partnerships — as applied to both community development and transportation.

Confirmed speakers include:

– House Speaker William J. Howell
– Pierce Homer, Virginia Secretary of Transportation
– Jim Regimbal, Fiscal Analytics, Ltd
– Edd Hauser, UNC Charlotte Center for Transportation Studies
– Alan Pisarski, Independent Consultant
– Ken Klinge, Former Chairman, Commonwealth Transportation Board

Plus many more….

Click here to see an updated version of the program.Click here to visit the conference home page and access registration information.

In its final days, the Warner administration appears to have developed its own, unique approach to the transportation crisis: Solicit public-private partnerships on an unprecedented scale to upgrade major traffic corridors, using tolls and private capital to pay for improvements that the state cannot. We are living through what may be the greatest boom in public-private transportation partnership solicitations and proposals in the history of Virginia.

In theory, PPTAs inspire the private sector to inject fresh thinking and outside capital into Virginia’s transportation system. But critics worry that the PPTAs elevate lower-priority projects to the top of the list for state funding at the expense of the general welfare. Bob Burke highlights the issues in his latest Road to Ruin reporting, “Show Me the Money.”

We have tracked the fortunes of the Virginia Information Technology Agency on this blog with some regularity. Clearly, the Warner administration has ambitious plans to transform the delivery of IT services in state government: The 10-year, $2 billion contract assigned to Northrop Grumman may be the biggest chunk of state IT business entrusted with the private sector anywhere in the country.

At the same time, this blog has received input from state employees wondering, Where’s the Beef? If VITA’s such a hot idea, where are all the efficiencies and savings that were promised? Back in 2003, then-Secretary of Technology George Newstrom forecast that the state would have reaped $100 million in cumulative savings by 2005. Well, 2005 has come and darn near gone. Show me the money!

Eugene Huang, Newstrom’s successor, answers those questions in my latest column, “Mission Creep.” Bottom line: Savings so far amount to about $50 million total, about half of what was expected. Huang blames the General Assembly: Legislators wouldn’t pony up the modest up-front capital to invest in money-saving improvements the administration was counting on. Meanwhile, in its contract with Northrop Grumman, the state is getting an IT system with greater security and redundancy than exists now. Huang maintains that the state will save $240 million compared to the cost of undertaking the upgrade itself.

Is Huang dishing out the straight poop, or he is blowing smoke? I’d welcome comments from informed observers.

The Nov. 28, 2005 edition of Bacon’s Rebellion has been published. We have set a new record for content — 17 columns, plus our regular “Nice & Curious Questions” feature, a new Road to Ruin feature, and sponsored content. People had a lot to say!

You can read the latest edition here.

It’s rare to see the Washington Post criticize Gov. Mark Warner, but an editorial today takes him to task for delaying a decision on DNA testing of evidence in the Roger Keith Coleman case. One little-noticed reason for Warner’s overwhelming popularity is his avoidance of discussing or acting on controversial, hot-button issues.

No “honeymoon” for Lt. Gov-elect Bill Bolling in the editorial pages of the Daily Press. Should we tell them the Lt. Gov. position is basically ceremonial and that there’s no danger he will implement his “dangerous free-lunch” ideas?

The Richmond Times-Dispatch editorial page advises that Governor-elect Tim Kaine has said that a “non-partisan redistricting commission, made up of individuals who are neither officeholders nor party officials, is the best way to draw legislative districts.” It will be interesting to see if Kaine makes an effort to end gerrymandering in Virginia.

The Roanoke Times editorializes on a pet Bacon’s Rebellion topic: “Kaine’s victory should put sprawl control on the legislative agenda. But finding the right balance between unrestrained growth and regulations that will hold the line on taxes and preserve quality of life is no simple task. Thoughtful debate in Virginia is past due.”

There is grumbling about the noble Brown v. Board of Education scholarship program, according to Jamie Ruff of the Richmond Times-Dispatch. No reparations-like program can ever be perfectly designed. I would have favored a provision allowing eligible individuals to assign their scholarship to a relative or a high school scholarship program, but even that would create potential problems.

The headline of a recent article in USA Today tells it all: “Outlook good for tax cuts by states: Revenue growth creates surpluses.”

A chart accompanying the article shows the projected increases in state and local revenue in 2005: 7.25 percent nationally (based on the first nine months of the year). The story then proceeds to describe tax cut proposals in Utah, South Carolina, West Virginia, North Dakota, Michigan and New Hampshire.

Absent from the list: Virginia.

Tax revenues for the first three months of Virginia’s fiscal year are running 14 percent ahead of the same period last year. (See my blog post of Nov. 7.) There’s a good chance the month-over-month revenue gains will moderate, although that’s what the Warner administration said would happen last year, and the revenue just kept flowing. But let’s assume that the revenue gusher does moderate by 20 percent to 30 percent. That still puts Virginia’s revenue performance way ahead of that of other states.

But no one here is talking tax cuts. The only people talking about taxes — most vocally, the editorial writers of the Washington Post, Virginian-Pilot, Roanoke Times and Daily Press — still want to increase them.

How much is enough? The list of “unmet needs” is endless. But taxpayer paychecks are all too finite.

This is what happens in Virginia when to are judged to have intended to deceive voters and this is what happens at the federal level for a violation that appears to be just a paperwork snafu. Something else for Virginia political operatives to be thankful for? Perhaps, but I suspect the bills to close the disparity are already being drafted, given the events of the past campaign. And I don’t think the Virginia fines will be going down.

Mr. Kaine’s New Campaign

Thursday’s WaPo editorial: “Having dodged the question of new taxes for transportation as a candidate, Mr. Kaine takes office lacking a revenue-raising mandate. Accordingly, he faces an uphill battle, as well as a relatively poor political climate. His initiative comes just two years after Gov. Mark R. Warner (D) fought a bitter fight for a $1.5 billion tax overhaul and increase for public education. Pulling off a second major tax increase in three years will be a colossal challenge.”

Lack of Revenue? Major Tax Increase? Colossal Challenge?

Hmm…

~ the blue dog

The State Board of Elections, in perhaps their last update until Monday, now shows Bob McDonnell leading Creigh Deeds by 323 votes. That’s a gain of one for McDonnell. The canvassing conducted since Monday afternoon found three votes for McDonnell versus only two for Deeds.

November 22, 2005

STATEMENT OF FORMER DEMOCRAT ATTORNEY GENERAL AND FORMER STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS MEMBER

-Regarding the Attorney General Election-

RICHMOND – Former Democrat Attorney General Stephen Rosenthal and former State Board of Elections member and Republican Delegate John H. (“Jack”) Rust issued the following statement today regarding the Attorney General election:

“We are troubled by the lack of transparency in a vote certification process that consistently has shifted vote totals in the attorney general election.”

“Election day is a public event open to observers. Local electoral boards were required by law to conduct canvasses at public meetings attended by citizens, the press, and observers from both political parties. After the local canvasses concluded, however, the State Board of Elections’ certification process has gone behind closed doors with little or no explanation to the public. In what should be an open and readily apparent vote certification process, the State Board appears to have ignored its role of managing the certification process and has allowed local electoral boards free reign to do so without public involvement.”

“After the initial election night count, the margin of victory was roughly 3,000 votes. In the ensuing time, that margin has decreased by about 90% to less than 350 votes. The public and both political parties have been provided little explanation by neither the State Board nor the local election boards for such a significant shift in vote tallies.”

“We agree wholeheartedly with respected political scientist Larry Sabato as quoted in the Richmond Times-Dispatch: “‘It’s amazing, that’s all you can say,’ he said. ‘The net changes are all going in one direction, toward the Democrat, which is unusual but possible.’”

“The statistical unlikelihood of such an odd occurrence raises concerns. More worrisome is the undisclosed process, not provided for in the Code of Virginia, by which some of these changes have been discovered. For example, the State Board of Elections notified both campaigns that 56 additional paper ballots had yet to be counted in Chesapeake. This number subsequently has changed multiple times. Apparently, additional ballots were counted last Friday. Then, after the counting was supposedly complete, the tally changed again on Monday with no explanation other than that an ‘error’ had been made. Last Thursday, the State Board of Elections reduced the vote total for Bob McDonnell by 10 votes in Fauquier County notwithstanding the fact that the Fauquier County electoral board had certified the higher number and without providing any explanation to the public.”

“It appears that the electoral boards in Chesapeake, Fauquier and elsewhere have unilaterally decided to re-open sealed envelopes or locked machines or to change vote totals without public participation and without being directed to do so by the three-member State Board of Elections or a court. Such renegade vote ‘counting’ falls outside the powers these boards hold under the law of Virginia and raises serious questions about the integrity of the process by which the vote total has changed since Election Day.”

“We call upon the State Board of Elections to manage and control a certification process that is fair and transparent to the public, press and both political parties.”

Paid for and Authorized by the Republican Party of Virginia

——————————————————–

I hope this is a passing concern. Local election boards need to follow the rules and just follow the rules and carefully follow the rules.

Coverage of the genesis and ongoing process of Virginia’s massive IT outsourcing projects has been late and not particularly illuminating. It wasn’t mentioned during the gubernatorial campaign and no one seems to be out in front on it, making the case. I’ve been interested from the beginning on just who is or was the guiding force–who will take the applause or the blame a few years down the road?

Columnist William Welsh of the boosterish Washington Technology magazine had a piece yesterday that provided some insight.

Was the outsourcing Governor Mark Warner’s baby? Welsh says he spoke with Warner:

I don’t know if Welsh got a more expansive answer from the Governor, but the response is vintage Warner, a sign of his genius. Instead of answering the question asked, he set himself up to take the legacy credit if the initiative succeeds or to deflect blame if it fails.

Welsh credits former Secretary of Technology George Newstrom and Chief Information Officer Lemuel Stewart for the outsourcing project, but without so much as a quote or third party confirmation.

What really might be the driving force behind the outsourcing is revealed in Welsh’s closing comment:

Contractors have waited a long time for a state IT outsourcing opportunity of this scope. They should make every effort to ensure it succeeds by meeting milestones and performance standards, ensuring the state gets the savings and new facilities promised, and that state workers get job benefits and fresh opportunities that are as good, if not better, than what they had working for the state.

It’s the responsible thing to do.

In other words, Virginia let us get our nose under the tent–here’s our big chance. Get this right and there will be more opportunities in other states.

There’s nothing wrong with that strategy, but we should be vigilant that perception and reality are aligned. Beware of the big vendors managing perceptions for the Virginia project to gain contracts elsewhere.

From the Monday Times-Dispatch:

“The (Republican House) caucus convened amid Democrats’ contentions that the minority party has picked up enough wins – six members elected in the past three years – to add another Democrat to each of the House’s standing committees. Late last week, Del. Brian J. Moran of Alexandria, the Democratic caucus chairman, warned Republicans not to change procedural rules in January to deny the minority additional seats.”

Okay — let’s talk about real power: Speaker Bill Howell’s power to fill committee seats with fifteen freshmen (sixteen if Ryan McDougal moves to the Senate) showing up in January.

Do the Democrats have a point? I know they don’t have a moral leg to stand on after their behavior when they were in charge, but there is that nagging line about two wrongs not making a right, so do they have a point?

There are 22 seats on most House committees (25 on Appropriations.) Doing the math with 58 R’s, 39 D’s and 3 I’s, that splits each committee up 12.76 R’s, 8.58 D’s and 0.66 I. Even if Brad Marrs prevails in a recount of that district and the Republican count goes to 59, the standard Republican committee share goes to 12.98. Putney is a Republican in all but name, making it 60-39-1 (if Marrs prevails). But that still leaves the basic D share of a 22-member committee at 8.58.

The current split on most committees gives the Democrats 8 seats out of 22 (and 8 out of 25 on Appropriations, where a 39 percent share would be 9.75 seats.) On the important Commerce and Labor Committee, Democrats had only seven seats of 22 on the 2005 roster. It is kind of hard to give the Democrats 0.58 of a seat, of course, but it is possible to give them nine on some committees and eight on others. It is also possible to leave things just as they are.

I mention this only because while we are up on the high plains of policy on Bacon’s Rebellion Blog, the people who make their living working the halls of the GA are pondering all this and in some cases trying to influence things. Six openings on Courts. Six on Education. Four on Transportation and four coveted seats on Appropriations. This is where the real work gets decided — committee assignments.

Creigh Deeds had a pretty good weekend. He picked up 23 votes and now trails Bob McDonnell by 322 votes.

The canvassing continues. Every nook and cranny is being checked because you never know where a stray vote might be hiding.

According to Kiran Krishnamurthy at the Richmond Times-Dispatch, Medicaid and transportation are the top legislative priorities in the House of Delegates.

House Speaker William J. Howell, R-Stafford, says that Medicaid, which accounts for 12 percent of the General Fund budget, needs a top-to-bottom reform just like welfare did. Krishnamurthy quotes Howell as follows:

Lawmakers “kind of blew up the [welfare] model and started over, and I really think we have to take a look at Medicaid in that same kind of sense,” he said, mentioning health savings accounts and HMOs for Medicaid participants as possible avenues.

On the transportation side, Howell says he will have “a very full package,” with an emphasis on generating revenue through tolls.

I hinted in an earlier Road to Ruin posting, and I’m elaborating on the idea here, that the election of Tim Kaine is scrambling the political calculus of the transportation debate. Sen. Finance Chair John Chichester, the seeming lord and ruler of the state Senate, may lose the power to control that body’s deliberations to the extent that he did under the Warner administration. That, in turn, may make it much tougher to push through a transportation-related tax hike in the 2006 General Assembly.

I have next-to-no knowledge about the inner workings of that body. I’m taking my cue from Bob Burke’s description of last week’s hearing by the Statewide Transportation Analysis and Recommendation Task Force. As Burke wrote:

Sen. Edd Houck, D-Spotsylvania, objected in the opening minutes of the START meeting that too little time was set aside to talk about transit and land-use issues. Those topics “always seem to be a footnote. It’s always, ‘Let’s spend some time talking about money, and if there’s a spot at the end… maybe we can talk about land use.”

Hmmm. Let’s see…. A Democrat has elevated land use to a central issue in Senate deliberations on transportation. Tim Kaine made land use a centerpiece of his transportation policy during the campaign. Could there be a connection? Of course there is!

During the Warner administration, Chichester could always count on support from the Senate Democrats in squelching the Senate’s few low-tax conservatives because Chichester and the Democrats were aligned with Gov. Mark Warner, and against the conservatives, on the need for tax increases. But Tim Kaine has declared that he won’t support a tax hike for transportation until passage of a Constitutional amendment protecting it from fiscal raids by the legislature. He also wants to address the dysfunctional pattern of land use, an underlying cause of traffic congestion.

Whatever the Senate Democrats’ views on taxes, they will feel a strong partisan pull to back a Democratic governor. And if Tim Kaine is against new taxes, at least for now, they may be too. Although Senate Dems may have little philosophically in common with the low-tax Republicans, they may decide to make common cause tactically to turn back a Chichester bid to raise some $1 billion to $2 billion a year in new revenue.

The state Senate has 24 Republicans and 16 Democrats. If the Dems line up solidly behind Kaine, all it takes is five conservative Republicans to block any tax-hike legislation coming out of the Senate. Chichester may be able to ram his preferred legislation through the chamber, but there’s a good chance that he’ll have to fight like hell to do it. Such a prospect may force him to be more bending in budget negotiations with the House than he has been in past years.