Imagine this: $7 billion in bonds and $18 billion in revenue is given to an unelected group to improve traffic and the only result is, 20 years later, there are 99 more miles of congested lanes than when you started. That's what Hampton Roads residents will face if the Sales Tax Referendum is approved on Nov. 5. This cannot be allowed to happen. Constituents must vote no to force government officials to find a reasonable and ethical way to improve traffic problems.
The Sales Tax Referendum calls for a 1 cent-on-the-dollar tax increase to fund $7.7 billion in regional transportation projects. The increase will last 35 years -- but there is a clause in the referendum that can extend the increase indefinitely for maintenance. The Hampton Roads Planning District Commission will be charged with distributing money to transportation projects and relieving the growing traffic problem in Virginia's second largest metropolis. Referendum advocates in The Yes! Campaign claim that it will help national defense, improve evacuation and emergency vehicle response time, provide more family time and aid the environment.
Sounds ideal. Too bad none of it's true. It helps with defense? Our nation has been conducting a war on terrorism for over a year now. Hampton Roads' traffic hasn't been cited as a concern by either military or government officials. According to the kNOw Campaign, the Hampton Roads opposition to the referendum, the only two officials raising questions about whether the traffic in one of the largest military areas in the nation is causing problems are retired admirals who never asked for federal funding while on active duty, even though the federal government is required by law to pay 80 percent of the cost of interstate roads and bridges. If the traffic is such a burden on America's safety, it seems odd that the admirals waited until they retired to promote the need for less traffic in Hampton Roads. Interestingly enough, the referendum exempts the governmentfrom paying anything. Hampton Roads' residents will pick up the slack.
At least it will help the environment and evacuation routes. No, wrong again. Mass transit, long advocated by environmental officials, is a great way to improve both the congestion and the environment -- the more people that ride, the less cars on the road, the less smog in the air. But the referendum, clearly defined on the HRPDC Web site (www.hrpdc.org), lacks both details and realistic, sufficient funding for a mass transit plan. Only $200 million would be allocated for light rail, the most plausible mass transit system. This money would provide for only 5 miles of rail, less than what it would take to get from one side of Poquoson, the smallest of Hampton Roads' cities, to the other. Also, the roads will open up previously untouched land to developers, causing more urban sprawl and destruction of nature. That doesn't sound too environmentally friendly. Evacuation routes now face the problems of bottlenecking, causing massive backup on the roads. The referendum's plans will simply move back the bottleneck by lengthening the distance from the oceanfront so that the number of lanes is lessened. The traffic will still bottleneck because cars will be forced to merge into fewer lanes, and the traffic will still be in the flood zone. The problem will just be moved, not solved.
Still, the referendum will allow for faster travel, meaning more family and faster emergency response time. Oh, sorry, that's not true either. The construction won't start for seven to 11 years and will then take 20 years to complete. According to a kNOw presentation that was not disputed by a HRPDC representative at a Poquoson City Council meeting, traffic will increase by 38 percent during construction. Hampton Roads residents will spend 20 years stuck in between orange cones, paying more money every day just to end up with 13.1 percent of 5,111 miles congested. Twenty years and billions of dollars will be wasted for a half percent improvement of traffic. It's doubtful that a half percent will give families more quality time together andemergency workers faster response times. Traffic won't even improve by 10 seconds on secondary roads -- which constitute a great majority of the roads in the area.
These are huge problems, but by farthey aren't the largest. First, the tax is regressive, which means the lower your income, the higher your tax rate. It punishes the poor, seniors and minorities. That's a good idea -- let's make people who can barely afford food and medicine pay for more roads to open more land to developers. To top it off, we won't make the federal government pay a cent. Also, there is no guarantee the money allocated to transportation will even be used for that. According to Virginia State Delegate Tome Gear, this year alone $317 million was taken out of the Virginia Transportation Fund for other spending. Constituents could spend billions only to watch as congestion is never fixed.
Overall, the largest flaw is the management system the referendum establishes. The kNOw Campaign explains that every month the money will go straight from sales to the HRDPC, made up of unelected officials who decide which banks get the money, which engineers do the studies and so on. The HRDPC has never handled construction jobs. Their last genius plan was the 2003 Aviation World's Fair -- a $20 million project that never happened. And they want us to trust them with $18 billion? The referendum exempts the HRPDC from the Virginia Fair Practices Law. It is simply corruption in the making.
Speaking of corruption, take a look at who has donated money to the Yes! Campaign's war chest of over $1.7 million: the Virginia Road and Transportation Committee, Hampton Roads Association for Commercial Real Estate, and other development corporations to name a few. They will all benefit greatly if the roads are expanded to open up new land. No wonder they are pushing for a yes vote.
By voting no, we show the General Assembly we will not settle for poorly thought out, badly organized, potentially unlawful plans. Vote no for the Sales Tax Referendum; show that we want traffic fixed, but with fair taxes and a good plan.
(Maggie Bowden's column appears
Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at mbowden@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | YesterdayThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | 6 days agoEvery student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
