The transportation-land use connection is finally getting debated.
Although Gov. Timothy M. Kaine had made transportation/land use an issue in his gubernatorial campaign, it never got more than token coverage by the scribblers in the Mainstream Media who decide how debates are framed and presented to the public. When the House GOP leadership tried raising the issue again in the September special session, their package of land use reforms — arguably the most far-reaching changes to the state governance structure since the 1930s — got about as much ink as a proclamation honoring the ladies’ auxiliary of the Chatham volunteer rescue squad.
This time around, the House initiative is generating headlines. Although much of the attention is predictably negative, at least voters are aware that an alternative does exist to the state-run, tax-and-build policies of the past 70 years.
The most balanced coverage comes courtesy of Corey Byers and Meghann Cotter at the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star. That article, which gives equal time to the authors of the House legislation and to local government critics, raises the key issue: Can local governments do a better job of planning for and maintaining local roads than the state can? The Free Lance-Star quotes House Speaker William J. Howell:
We think local governments can probably do as good a job, if not better, maintaining secondary roads. … Answering the problem of transportation is broader than raising taxes and giving the money to VDOT. The prime culprit is increasing sprawl.
Local government officials in the Fredericksburg area responded fairly predictably: The problem isn’t local land use policies — or if it is, it was zoning decisions made years ago. The solution isn’t structural reform, it’s more money from the state.
Agree with whom you want to — at least we’re getting a debate.
As predictable as the reaction of local officials was the negative reaction of pundits at the Roanoke Times and the Washington Post.
The Times editorialist does credit House leaders with raising a legitimate issue even if, in the final analysis, he thinks they are wrong-headed about taxes: “Their proposals to tie local land-use decisions to transportation costs put smart-growth ideas on the state agenda for the first time in a serious way, challenging powerful development lobbies. The shift in priorities is years overdue.”
The Times‘ concern is that the House initiative shifts “blame” for the transportation crisis from where it really belongs — the House refusal to raise more stable, long-term revenues for transportation, or to augment the powers of local governments to block development along the lines that Gov. Kaine has proposed. You can agree or disagree with the Times analysis, but at least the editorial writers are tentatively exploring new ground and not re-hashing the same editorials of the past three years.
Then there’s the Washington Post, which, in a self-parody of knee-jerk, tax-and-spend liberalism, makes the editorial writers at the small-metro Roanoke Times look profound and nuanced by comparison. In a spittle-flecked screed that barely deserves the honorific of “editorial,” the Post devotes some 650 words blasting the House legislation without ever describing what it would do.
“Don’t be fooled,” cautions the WaPo editorial headline, “Virginia Republicans are the ones starving the state’s transportation network.”
Don’t be fooled by what? The Post never says. The closest the editorial comes to summarizing House transportation policy is to note that it would spend half the state’s budget surplus, $500 million, on one-time transportation projects. The Post mentioned not one word –not one word — of House plans to devolve more responsibility for road planning and maintenance to local governments. The editorial is not merely one-sided, it is so one-sided as to be deceptive. Perhaps worse, it is ignorant. The wine-and-brie yokels at the Post are either so close minded or so uninformed that they aren’t aware that alternative viewpoints even exist.
Fortunately, Northern Virginia residents don’t have to rely upon whacko WaPo editorial writers for their information. One way or another, new perspectives on the transportation debate are leaking into the public domain.
