Tag Archives: Stephen D. Haner

Transparency? No, Alignment Drives PAC Decisions

Money In Politics

Abigail Spanberger won’t take money from corporate political action committees but will from ideological political action committees because the issue PACs have their position statements on their web pages.

Spanberger said that Friday to a business organization that donates no political money, Virginia FREE, but there were plenty of big donors or their representatives in the room.  Jeff Schapiro of the Richmond Times-Dispatch was there but didn’t really cover her remarks, other than to note she didn’t mention President Donald Trump (so he kindly did that for her.)

Continuing an argument I have made before, Spanberger’s careful tiptoe through this minefield is additional evidence of the powerful corrupting nature of our campaign finance system.  She tried to put a nice spin on her position that business money is too tainted to accept, blaming that in large part on voter perception.  When “face to face with voters” she hears that in Virginia corporate money has too much influence.

Here is what she says on her campaign web page:  “As we’ve increasingly dealt with the effects of special interests in campaign finance, it’s important that all elected officials take a stand against letting a small group of funders influence our elections. And because my commitment to campaign finance reform starts now, with my campaign, I will not accept any corporate PAC donations.”

Abigail Spanberger

Federal election rules have caps on donations that reformers at the Virginia state level can only dream about.  Corporations cannot write checks directly but must set up political action committees collecting funds from employees using the same strict limits.  She is probably correct however that the average voter has no clue about that.

In response to a line of questions from Virginia FREE director Chris Saxman she said hers was really a “a pro-business stance” because it allows her to meet with business leaders and lobbyists with no talk of money.  It’s “taken off the table.”

But then Saxman asked her about all the groups she does take money from.  Business PACs are only a subset of the giving world.  Special interests abound on all sides.  That’s when she said a big difference is those groups have their agendas on full and open display, but with a company “I can’t go to their website and see what those priorities are.”

Continue reading

This Certainly Demonstrates Something (Don’t Ask)

Under normal circumstances, building two wind turbines 27 miles off the coast of Virginia at a cost of $300 million would  be neither reasonable nor prudent.  They may produce the most expensive 12 megawatts of electricity in Virginia history. The only rational reason to go forward is to test technology which is becoming more common around the world but is still untested in hurricane territory.

On that basis the proposed Dominion Energy Virginia project now pending approval at the State Corporation Commission received a lukewarm blessing from the SCC’s staff, mainly because Dominion continues to talk about quickly following up with a far more extensive turbine project in the same location.  Before building the big project, perhaps 2,000 MW, some testing is a good idea.

But the staff commentary also noted it would make sense to give the test project (known as Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind or CVOW) time to prove itself before building a multi-billion-dollar expansion.

“Should the Company decide to move forward with a larger scale offshore wind project before the CVOW Project is in service and the demonstration is complete, or before the CVOW Project has demonstrated that it can survive a hurricane type storm, the Commission may want to consider requiring the risk of such a decision be borne or shared by shareholders,” wrote Gregory L. Abbott of the Division of Public Utility Regulation in pre-filed testimony.  He also suggested the SCC put a hard cap on the cost.

He added: “…it appears unlikely that the CVOW Project will demonstrate that large-scale offshore wind will be economic compared to either the least-cost traditional generation option or to the least-cost carbon-free renewable generation option.”

The staff filed several sets of testimony, parts which are kept confidential at the request of Dominion.  There will be two hearings, the first and perhaps most important next week dealing with questions about the SCC’s authority when the General Assembly has deemed that a project is “in the public interest” based on lobbyist assurances.

The General Assembly used that phrase in connection with CVOW.  Does that reduce or even eliminate the Commission’s authority to reject things based on outrageous cost or imprudence?  Of all the many things to win that valued legislative endorsement, this is by far the worst use of your money.

It is your money.  In effect, Dominion will pay for the project with those excess profits it is not using to pay customer refunds.  There will not be a separate (and easy to track) rate adjustment clause.  When the accounting for this project finally comes up for SCC review in 2021, assuming the General Assembly doesn’t change the rules for the umpteenth time, whatever Dominion has spent on this will reduce the amount of potential profit for refund.

SCC staff witness Carol Myers dives into that, in a document replete with redaction.  The company hotly disputes her estimate of the real cost of the project at almost $700 million over 25 years, but it will have the incentive to prove a high cost in the next review because that prevents refunds or (the thought causes them to shiver) rate reductions.

Continue reading

Decisions on a New House Plan May Start Today

The most recent proposed House of Delegates plan drafted to comply with a federal court order, linked to more information on VPAP. Source: VPAP

The House of Delegates Privileges and Elections Committee meets this afternoon to consider several competing proposals for a new House of Delegates district map, all having proponents who claim they will satisfy demands from a federal court.

Setting aside the politics and hypocrisy on both sides, when I see the Virginia Public Access Project’s displays and analyses on these various proposals I just marvel at the way technology has changed this process and appreciate the way VPAP has presented it to us all.

The game was far simpler before this detailed GIS mapping technology, overlain with all the demographic and political data.  I will never forget staying up almost all night in 1991 to prepare a Senate plan with nothing but paper precinct lists and an Excel spreadsheet.

As previously noted, and this opinion won’t be shared by all, this has gotten out of hand.  The 2011 redistricting map was certainly a gerrymander, as they all are now, but it contained neither the intent nor the effect of racial discrimination.  It met the legal standard as understood at the time, passed with commendable bipartisan (and biracial) support and was cleared by the Justice Department.  Nobody stood on the floor of the General Assembly and screamed “Jim Crow!”

The people now claiming harm are seeking partisan advantage, nothing else.

If the federal courts now read the Voting Rights Act a bit differently the proper remedy is to set the rules clearly in time for the 2021 mapping process and election.   To tweak a couple of dozen districts (perhaps hundreds of precincts) for just one election cycle, and then change them again two years later, is a remedy that creates more harm than benefit.

I say this now with the added experience of working in a poll and dealing with voter confusion over where they should be.  Jumbling precinct lines causes harm.  Period.

But among the benefits to one side might be a quick change in control of the House of Delegates, so we go through this exercise.  With the publication now of two Republican-sponsored plans along with a highly-partisan Democratic plan the Democrats and Governor Northam can either accepts something that meets the new rules or reject them all and send the matter to a court-appointed special master.

Their problem is that the special master’s first step, I suspect, will be to review the plans considered by the special session, and if one of them does the trick, recommend it to the judges.  Almost 30 years ago, working for the then-minority caucus, we were drawing plans we knew would be voted down but we hoped would be attractive to a court seeking alternatives.

With this new plan sponsored by Delegate Chris Jones that outcome might be more likely.  I’m sure it has been refined with careful consideration of the court’s order, and it apparently has some Democratic endorsements.   The end of this game may be in sight.  The General Assembly should solve this, not the court.

A Thumb On The Scale for ACP?

Weather normalized summer peaks for Dominion compared to earlier and current projections by the company. Source: Southern Environmental Law Center

A witness to whom Dominion Energy Virginia had vehemently objected, Gregory Lander of a company called Skipping Stone, had his time on the stand anyway at the State Corporation Commission Tuesday. His testimony might still be stricken, but the two commissioners and everybody else in the room heard it and then a lengthy cross-examination underlined it.

If he is correct the entire integrated resource plan filed by the giant utility, a process ordered by the General Assembly to plan the utility’s future, had a fundamental flaw. One single input in a model had a ripple effect in its choices for future generation, some of which it hopes to support with the controversial Atlantic Coast Pipeline.

The three-day hearing on the integrated resource plan, which will stand for two years, opened with SCC Chairman Mark Christie deferring a ruling on the motion to exclude some of Lander’s testimony. He said the decision on the ruling would be announced with the full decision.

Christie also repeated what has become a standard SCC disclaimer on IRP cases. It is just a planning document, any future plants will need a full commission review, “and just because you admit evidence does not mean it’s a finding of fact.”  He also added that before the ratepayers are billed for gas from the ACP the cost will need to be judged reasonable and prudent in its own case.

A little background: Dominion uses a modeling system called Plexos that uses information such as the expected new demand, generating units which might need to retire, various types of generation and their costs and environmental expectations to design its future system. As engineers say, and it was said again this week at the SCC, all models are wrong but some of them are useful.

The five future generation configurations included in the integrated resource plan used the model with different inputs, many of the variations dealing with future carbon regulation. According to Lander, and this was apparently confirmed in interrogatories, the cost of transporting natural gas through the ACP to Dominion generators was simply left out. SCC staff witnesses pointed to the same omission.

The commodity cost for gas was plugged in, but the cost of getting that gas to the plant was not. This omission made the choice of natural gas more cost-competitive and perhaps skewed the model in favor of gas. It put a huge thumb on the scale.

It is the transportation charge for the gas which will include the cost recovery, plus profit, for the construction of the project. Lander claims that will add up to $3 billion to ratepayer costs over 20 years. Opponents claim gas from the ACP will be more expensive than from existing pipelines. Lander was an expert witness hired by Appalachian Voices, an anti-pipeline group.

The IRP cannot be found reasonable and prudent, Lander told the judges, if an important cost like fuel logistics is set at zero. “The model is making choices that are not reflective of total costs.” He said that instead of building new gas combustion turbine units, included in the plan to complement all the intermittent solar also planned, the company should just keep some of the other fossil fuel units it plans to retire early and run them less often.

Continue reading

Dominion Objects to Testimony on Pipeline Cost

One of the first decisions the State Corporation Commission may need to make in Monday’s hearing on the Dominion Energy Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) is whether to allow and consider testimony about the cost of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline.

Dominion filed a September 7 motion asking that testimony from a witness brought by Appalachian Voices “be stricken as irrelevant and improper,” which the environmental group answered with its own brief filed Friday.  Dominion argues the cost of the pipeline is not part of the IRP and is not properly before the commission in this case.  It will seek to recover the pipeline capital costs when gas from the pipeline is subject to a future fuel cost review.

Gregory Lander of energy consulting firm Skipping Stone states in his disputed testimony that the costs are already built in.  “The Company’s 2018 IRP embeds the costs of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline into each of the generation scenarios it presents…. (but) has not properly costed-out the all-in cost of increasing, beyond its current pipeline capacity portfolio, the costs associated with the level of pipeline capacity it intends to obtain on the Atlantic Coast Pipeline.”

He claims that acceptance of the IRP by the Commission in effect accepts that up to $3 billion of the cost of building and operating it will be passed on to ratepayers over 20 years.  Those are in addition to the cost of the gas.  Opponents of the pipeline argue it is not necessary to bring natural gas via the ACP to Dominion’s generators, and if it does so it will be supplanting lower-cost alternatives.

“In reality, the Company’s goal is not to avoid scrutiny of the ACP costs in this proceeding, the Company’s goal is to avoid scrutiny of the ACP costs in every proceeding,” states the brief in support of retaining Lander’s testimony.  It noted a similar effort to keep the data out was made successfully in 2017’s IRP case and during the certificate of need case for the new natural gas generation plant in Greensville County.

This is just one of the disputes expected when the SCC takes live testimony for two days on the plan, which outlines several scenarios for meeting future demand in Dominion’s territory while meeting current and future environmental rules. The amount of demand growth over the period is itself the main point of contention, with opponents claiming the utility has inflated its needs to justify excessive new plant construction.

In rebuttal testimony Dominion pushed back on claims by the SCC staff and others that it won’t need additional generation. It says the others ignored recent winter peak demands and claimed that an economic slow period responsible for flat demand is coming to an end.  “The lack of economic growth in Virginia has been a key driver to the forecast being higher than what has actually occurred” wrote Dominion’s director of energy market analysis Robert Thomas.

One of the reasons cited for expected growth is the explosion of data centers in Virginia, but representatives of that industry filed their own written comments disputing they will cause higher demand.  The letter was signed by eBay and Adobe among others.

Continue reading

Hurricane Response Challenged By State Senators

Spending line items for $60 million state response to Hurricane Florence. Source: Secretary of Finance

On Monday, Secretary of Finance Aubrey Layne talked about the cost of Virginia’s response to Hurricane Florence with little controversy, and that was before the storm spawned a series of tornadoes striking Mecklenburg County and Metro Richmond.

Thursday, after Florence visited Virginia directly, he made the same presentation to another committee and suddenly ran into major push back. “Shocking” was the word used by Senator Ryan McDougle, R-Hanover, who then admitted he was engaging in “Thursday morning quarterbacking.”

Under authority granted in state law and the budget, Governor Ralph Northam declared an emergency in Virginia on September 11 and authorized the expenditure of up to $60 million from state funds. He ordered an emergency evacuation in certain lowlands. Because his order followed a similar federal declaration, Virginia stands to recover up to 75 percent of the expense from federal funds, but only on a reimbursement basis up to two years from now.

Layne, who is known for loving to provide the details, added a chart listing the various plan elements and their authorized cost, reproduced above. Given the worst predictions didn’t come to pass for Virginia, only some of the funds were spent and the final accounting is not yet made.

It was some of those line items that generated the commentary in the Senate Finance Committee, especially three emergency shelters for 5,800 people at a possible cost of $32 million. Simple math pegs that at $788 per person per day, for shelter in state-owned buildings, not hotels. Questions also arose about $20 million authorized for two Virginia-based specialized rescue teams, based on a planned 10-day deployment, and other line items that appeared to include very generous amounts for food and lodging.

“Where in the world are they sleeping and what are they eating?” asked Sen. Richard Stuart, R-Westmoreland. “Somebody is gouging us.”

Layne promised to follow up with itemized costs and promised that auditors would be going over the expenses later. He repeated that what was authorized was not the same as what got spent, and the lump sum amounts for some of those teams probably included pay, transportation and other expenses beyond food and lodging. Some of them were dispatched to North Carolina instead when it became clear Virginia was out of the bulls-eye.

Would it really bother you if this rescue team had been sent from Virginia?

Which prompted yet another question from McDougle about whether North Carolina ever does the same and provides help when Virginia needs it. Layne was firm in responding to that, saying during his time as Secretary of Transportation he knew of times when North Carolina helped Virginia and he thought the Department of Emergency Management could provide other instances.  Senator Bill Carrico, R-Galax, a former police officer, chimed in with some examples from his part of the state.  Nobody else questioned the Governor’s decision to offer help to our neighboring state.

“If we had had the devastation we all expected, we wouldn’t be questioning this,” said Senator Rosalyn Dance, D-Petersburg. And one of her fellow Democrats, Janet Howell of Fairfax, went to climate change and how “these storms are coming at us at a frightening rate” and the federal government needs to “work on the models.”

Virginia’s response to this threat was far more robust than previous examples, as further data from Layne showed. He listed 26 “events” going back to 2010, including other hurricanes, with a total emergency response authorization of only $71 million. The big differences came from the early decision to mandate evacuations (with more that could have followed) and to open those three major shelters. Some of the expenses were made as emergency purchases outside the state’s normal procurement.

There might be an element of damned if you do or if you don’t in this.  It was a badly-needed reality check and drill, with some lessons to be applied next time, because there will be a next time and we can all see what the Carolinas are now having to endure.  Governor, Mr. Secretary, send them anything they ask for and we’ll worry about payment later.

Follow up:  Details added in the Richmond Times-Dispatch story sparked by the same meeting.  The reporter got to see the invoice for the shelter contract.

VA CPAs Say Conform, Hold Tax Funds for Later

The Virginia Society of Certified Public Accountants (VSCPA) Monday called on the 2019 Virginia General Assembly to conform Virginia tax with recent federal changes, to track and sequester the hundreds of millions of dollars in higher taxes thus generated and to hold those funds for a future tax reform effort.

Nobody knows these issues better than the people who prepare tax returns, and the CPAs cite continued uncertainty over the full impact of the federal changes, especially with several issues still awaiting guidance from the U.S. Internal Revenue Service.  The society’s position is detailed in a white paper.  It offers no firm advice on what policy changes should eventually be adopted.

“VSCPA leadership and the VSCPA Tax Advisory Committee considered and discussed numerous policy options in an effort to make a recommendation, considering extensive input from VSCPA members and tax professionals, and determined that there was no member consensus on any single policy prescription,” Vice President Emily Walker wrote in an accompanying news release.

The VSCPA has enhanced its clout on this issue by hiring former Senate Finance Committee Chairman Walter Stosch as an outside lobbyist.  Stosch’s message to conform in full and then hold the money for later decisions is likely to carry greatest weight with his former colleagues in the Senate.

On the same day the CPA’s position was announced the first piece of proposed conformity legislation was filed, a House bill seeking to allow one major deviation from conformity.  It would allow Virginians to take the standard deduction on their federal returns but still itemize deductions on their state returns.  The deductions they can take will be under the new federal rules, however.

In previous Republican-generated statements pledging to allow Virginians to keep state itemized deductions while taking the federal standard deduction, the question of which deductions – new or old — has not been addressed.  The new federal law places limits on state and local tax deductions, eliminates the moving expense deduction, and make many other changes.

Delegate Richard Bell (R-Staunton) is not on either the House Finance or Appropriations Committees and it is likely other bills will emerge, probably many of them, before the session starts in January.  To apply retroactively to tax year 2018 any bill will have to pass with 80 percent super-majorities in both chambers, requiring a bipartisan consensus.  A bill changing policy for tax year 2019 needs just the usual majorities plus the Governor’s signature.

Secretary of Finance Aubrey Layne was back discussing the issue before the House Appropriations Committee Monday, at the end of his regular presentation on the state’s finances.  A CPA himself, he probably helped influence that society position paper.  The Northam Administration is resisting efforts to make immediate tax policy changes in response to conformity but has not ruled out a tax reform effort next year.

That approach has its own challenges.  By the administration’s own estimates, conformity with no policy changes produces almost $600 million in additional revenue for tax year 2018 from individuals and businesses.  To hold the funds in reserve for a future tax policy debate would require great discipline on the part of the elected leaders.  And if done in special session next year that debate would take place during the run-up to what is likely to be a bitter primary and election season for both House and Senate.

Layne has access to the revenue model produced for the state by Chainbridge Solutions LLC and added a data tidbit yesterday:  While some people will see a tax increase if Virginia adopts full conformity, others will see a tax increase if the state does not.  The individual tax hike from non-conformity is more than $181 million.  That’s far less than the other way around but demonstrates the complexity of all this.

Speaking of complexity, an effort to explain this in easier-to-understand language led to the production of another white paper, this one mainly written by me and distributed Monday.  You can find it on the Thomas Jefferson Institute website here.

Chain Reaction: Tuition Rises Due To Higher Tuition

Annual average increases since 2010 in General Fund (GF) support and in-state tuition and fees at each school, compared to the Higher Education Price Index (HEPI) and Consumer Price Index (CPI). At nine schools the state funds have lagged even the smaller inflation measure.  Source: House Appropriations Committee

Increased pay for faculty and administrators is one of the major cost drivers behind the continuing climb in tuition and fee charges, a member of the House Appropriations Committee staff told that committee Monday.   As those charges climb, the universities are also increasing the percentage of tuition revenue used to provide financial aid for students being priced out, transferring costs from one group of students to the other.

Anthony Maggio’s presentation went into details missing from the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia’s own review of the cost increases.  His critical overview highlighted:

  • The six institutions that exceeded the tuition increases in their six-year plans. (Eight institutions including the Virginia Community College System stayed under the amounts in their plans.)
  • The amount the schools are still charging in their mandatory fees to support their athletic programs, now more than $1,500 at eight of fifteen schools and over $3,000 at one.  Legislation in 2015 slowed but has not stopped the growth.
  • A potential way he believes the universities may be shifting more research program costs onto the students’ tuition or fee payments, further explaining rising tuition.

Athletic charges included in mandatory comprehensive fees. Source: House Appropriations Committee

Maggio reported that Radford University increased tuition 7 percent instead of a planned 3 percent hike and blamed, among other things, enrollment loss and a commitment of funds to economic development activities.  The other schools that exceed their targets often mentioned salaries or fringe benefit costs.

Continue reading

Who Were the Puerto Rico 3,000; How Did They Die?

The death rate per 10,000 rises after Hurricane Maria a year ago, but more in line with historical trends before a “displacement adjustment.” Source: George Washington University

So, who were those 3,000 Puerto Ricans who died because of Hurricane Maria last year?  What killed them?  The storm down south and the controversy swirling over our illustrious President’s defensive tweet sent me searching for data.

It turns out there is no list of names.   There is no accounting of what causes of death were attributable to the aftermath of the devastating storm.  In fact, having now scanned the George Washington University report at the heart of this all, I have an itching feeling they missed a big statistical point.

The bottom line is that the researchers developed a model and made a projected estimate of the number of deaths to be expected on the island during the six months following the storm, based on previous year’s death numbers.   They then factored in the fact that a full 8 percent of the population, 280,000 people roughly, left the island following the storm.

With that population change factored in, the “expected” number of deaths was about 3,000 fewer than the 16,000 deaths which were recorded September through February.  Those 3,000 “excess” deaths above the projection are the one’s being attributed to the effects of the storm.  I’m rounding because their report admits the projection is not exact.  The chart I included above notes the higher death rate per 10,000 people.

There are not 3,000 death certificates noting hurricane-related causes (loss of electricity, stress, poor transportation response) and the authors chide the local medical community for not being sufficiently exact in filling out their death certificates.  So they are left with models and projections and estimates, which have translated into MSM-accepted Truth.

Here’s my question, the itch not addressed in the report, that I saw:   Who left?  Who departed following the storm?  Would the elderly, infirm and impoverished have been the ones to decamp to the mainland?  Or would they have been the one’s left behind?  Doesn’t the shift in the baseline also at least in part explain this?  The death rate really only jumped dramatically when you reduce the baseline population.

Had those people who left stayed, the number of deaths might have been the same (and then more in line with past history.)  Are they assuming mortality should have gone down after the migration but didn’t, and that’s a sign the storm continued to kill 500 more per month?

We estimate that in mid-September 2017 there were 3,327,917 inhabitants and in mid-February 2018 there were 3,048,173 inhabitants of Puerto Rico, representing a population reduction by approximately 8%. We factored this into the migration “displacement scenario” and compared it with a “census scenario,” which assumed no displacement from migration in the hurricane’s aftermath. We found that, historically, mortality slowly decreased until August 2017, and that rates increased for the period of September 2017 through February 2018, with the most dramatic increase shown in the displacement scenario accounting for post-hurricane migration (emphasis added).”

No question, the number of deaths from this kind of disaster is not – and never has been – limited to the people killed at the height of the storm.  But are the numbers being fudged here just a bit?  You must consider who could and would leave and who could not, and the population left behind.  But that takes away this wonderful cudgel for beating Trump (and it’s his own damn fault for taking the bait).

Gee, if you take a population and subtract 8 percent – most of them younger, healthy and affluent – is there anyplace in the world where you would NOT see an uptick in the death rate among those left behind?  Just asking.

A Model Transfer Program That Should Be Copied

Under prodding from the General Assembly that goes back years, Virginia’s four-year institutions are finally developing an easier path from community college to a bachelor’s degree.  Unfortunately for students, it is spreading slowly.  Unfortunately for anybody obstructing the process, there is one place where the full potential is being realized and proving the concept.

The dual enrollment and transfer relationship between Northern Virginia Community College and George Mason University is so seamless the community college students have GMU identification cards and access to GMU recreational facilities.  The Nova Advance program works for 20 degrees with a goal of expanding to 50 possible degrees.  Community college students have access to advising and other forms of support from the start.

Paying community college prices for two years saves $15,000 or more towards a bachelor’s degree.  Also, before this process community college transfers often found they needed more credits than traditional students, adding additional and wasted cost.  With the early guidance toward the right courses and firm agreements to accept the credits the standard 120 credit hours should now do it.

GMU Vice President for Academic Innovation Michelle Marks said getting this ready for launch this term “is the most complicated process I’ve ever worked on.”  Hundreds of faculty members at both schools had a hand in course and program design.  They planned to start with five degrees, but the enthusiasm pushed them way beyond that.  “People wanted to do this,” she said.

There will be some lost revenue for both schools but the presidents of both see this as “right for the families and right for the students.” Marks said.   The first 129 Advance students are in class now, with 189 more lined up to start in the spring.  The long-term growth plan runs to four digits.

This past summer, Virginia Commonwealth University and the two Richmond community colleges announced they are working on a similar program, but on a  smaller scale and limited to arts and humanities degrees.  Previously about 75 students per year have switched from John Tyler or J. Sargeant Reynolds to VCU.

The new program will take three years to implement, with the first year (underway now) spent on evaluation and planning, and is supported by $2.4 million over the period from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation.  It will be another year from now before students enter the pipeline.

Jeff Kraus of the Virginia Community College System mentioned three other working relationships, involving Virginia Tech, James Madison and the University of Virginia and their neighboring community colleges.

Sharon Morrissey

These examples do make a key point: What is working is a relationship between the four-year school and its neighboring community college or colleges, rather than a statewide, system-wide focus.  “Community college students are not going to travel to the other end of the state to finish a degree,” said Sharon Morrissey, VCCS Vice Chancellor for Academic Services.  The dream remains far more widespread portability of transfer credits from community colleges.

The General Assembly started pressing this forward years ago with the classic carrot, financial aid in the form of a program of scholarships for VCCS transfers to four-year programs.  Those transfer grants have grown to almost $4 million per year, and the 2,500 students using them this term can receive up to $3,000 per year if seeking a science, technology, engineering or math degree at one of the major institutions.

Continue reading