TJPDC Technocrat or Trumpeter Swan?

By. Neil Williamson, President

Sean Tubbs of Charlottesville Tomorrow reports in this morning’s Daily Progress that Stephen Williams’ contract as Executive Director of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC) will not be renewed.  While the Free Enterprise Forum has often questioned much of the TJPDC’s work under Mr. Williams, we wish him only the best in his future endeavors.

Where does the TJPDC go from here?

In selecting its next executive, should the TJPDC Board seek out planning professionals who have rich resumes filled with writing, securing and administering grants?

Should the Board focus on the significant transportation component of the job and look to transportation and transit professionals with a litany of studies and reports under their belt?

Or should this regional planning organization consider seeking out a “Trumpeter Swan” who may or may not have the planning credentials but has a resume filled with assignments that required leadership, consensus building and risk management?

Please let me explain.

The “Trumpeter Swan” moniker is attributed to advertising giant David Ogilvy who in seeking new Creative Directors wrote a space advertisement seeking “Trumpeter Swans who combine personal genius with inspiring leadership – we have an opening for one of these rare birds”.

Such talented individuals tend to be long on world experience and short on academic credentials.  In addition, the most successful trumpeter swans are self aware of their own shortcomings, as such they tend to surround themselves with high level talent without fear of being out shined.  

But the question remains would such a rare bird have an chance of survival in the TJPDC environment?

The safer choice is a technocrat; someone who has worked their way up through the planning ranks perhaps with a smaller region.  Such an individual would know ‘how to play the game’.  This is the lens which was used to select the past two TJPDC leaders.

Which direction will the TJPDC Board go?

Stay tuned.

Respectfully submitted,

Neil Williamson

Neil Williamson is the President of the Free Enterprise Forum, a local government public policy organization located in Charlottesville.  www.freeenterpriseforum.org

Not Inside Baseball – C’ville PUD Opportunity

By. Neil Williamson, President

“When you are provided your opportunity at the plate, make the most of it” – Anonymous Coach 

Later this month (June 25) the Charlottesville Planning Commission will have a work session to discuss potential reforms to the Planned Unit Development regulations (PUD). The Free Enterprise Forum applauds the review of the PUD regulations and hopes to work with the commission to create new flexibility and reward ingenuity while ensuring future PUDs are an asset to the community.

While this may look like inside baseball to many, the reality is this issue is a critical question regarding future economic vitality, employment opportunity and redevelopment potential.

Please let me explain.

It has been said that development is much like water and electricity; it takes the path of least resistance. Therefore those parcels in the city that are/were naturally prime for development due to topography, location or zoning are mostly built out.  The remaining parcels, including redevelopment opportunities, will likely require significant engineering, creative approaches and flexibility of PUD regulations.

What is a Planned Unit Development? According to the Cooperative Extension Service:

Compared to other types of zoning approvals, the PUD process is a flexible application of zoning. Through the PUD approval process, there is often great flexibility in siting and design regulations for buildings and land uses with the PUD project site. Density requirements, setbacks, and building height restrictions may be relaxed, and the mixing of land uses may be allowed in order to improve the design of the project as a whole and its integration with the surrounding community. In return for greater flexibility in the design of planned unit developments, local government zoning ordinance provisions often require the developer of the project to provide public benefits, such as the preservation of open space for public use.

But all PUDs are not created equal.  According to Stuart Korfhage of The St. Augustine Record:

The St. Augustine City Commission chose maximum flexibility over stringent property use standards in its recent revision of the planned unit development (PUD) ordinance.

At Monday’s Commission meeting, commissioners voted 4-1 in favor of a new ordinance that does not severely limit applications for PUDs in the city’s historic district. The commission considered three options in recent months and chose the plan with the fewest restrictions.

The Free Enterprise Forum hopes the Charlottesville Planning Commission June 25th work session produces this kind of deep examination of their ordinance applications.  Frankly, we are concerned with the low level of questions the staff report seems to be asking.

Is this really about reform or merely housekeeping?  None of the staff proposed changes encourage ingenuity or allow flexibility with the subdivision ordinance or design guidelines.

Considering PUDs were designed to provide the opportunity for flexible application of siting and design requirements (see above) we ware dismayed that no parcel under two acres could qualify as a PUD.  While we anticipate most parcels would exceed two acres, it is not difficult to imagine an infill project that might need regulatory relief in order to achieve the community vision.  We suggest that this limitation be lifted.

We are aware of concerns raised regarding the level of transparency regarding PUD applications and the public’s right to review plans.  The Free Enterprise Forum believes such sunlight is good and any formally filed documents should be readily available for public review.  However, we also recognize pre-application discussions with City staff are often required to determine the potentiality of such an application, such meetings should not require public notice.

The Free Enterprise Forum hopes Charlottesville City Planning Commission will make the most of their time at the plate and expand the lens of this PUD review and refocus staff energy on improving PUDs as a tool to get better development.  A refined PUD process will increase the use of the PUD and foster innovative development and redevelopment of the City core.

We stand ready to assist in this important Charlottesville economic vitality effort.  As John Fogerty said, “Put me in Coach; I am ready to play”

Respectfully Submitted,

Neil Williamson, President

Neil Williamson is the President of the Free Enterprise Forum, a local government public policy organization located in Charlottesville.  www.freeenterpriseforum.org

Photo Credits: Free Enterprise Forum

Will Increasing Regulation Increase Prosperity?

FORUM WATCH EDITORIAL

By. Neil Williamson, President

On the national level, President Ronald Reagan famously said, “Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it”. 

One has to ask, Do the majority of our elected representative support or oppose this concept?

Just as the leaders of our community are being asked to think big regarding their comprehensive plan goals and objectives, they continue to consider government actions that would demonstrably add bureaucracy, and cost with limited public benefit.

Interestingly, the proponents for this type regulations work hard to use a lexicon that discourages opposition. Charlottesville, the “Human Rights Commission” sounds like something everyone should agree on. It was perhaps because they did not want to be seen as opposing “Human Rights” that a majority of City Council favored adding enforcement language to this politically appointed group. Aaron Richardson of The Daily Progress reports:

“The council on Monday night reached consensus to hold a public hearing on the ordinance that would establish a commission that could investigate, mediate and make judgments on claims of discrimination in small businesses and delegate claims from larger businesses to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. .

… Councilor Kathy Galvin told the council on Monday that she was skeptical of the effect a commission with full enforcement powers could have on local businesses. She added that discrimination is not the only thing keeping low-income residents and minorities out of work.”

The Free Enterprise Forum applauds Ms. Galvin’s persistence on this critical issue. Back in December of 2011, the Free Enterprise Forum asked if you could be in favor of Human Rights and Opposed to the Human Rights Commission.

We said, “the Free Enterprise Forum fears that moving forward with the politically appointed Human Rights Commission, based on its current construct and goals, will do more harm than good for City economic opportunities across all demographic cohorts”.

Couple this with Charlottesville’s tax rates, the newly enacted Stormwater fees, one has to wonder how much more regulatory burden can businesses withstand before looking at space outside the City. 

Things are not significantly better in Albemarle County, where their Planning Commission is considering a number of new overlay zones that will increase complexity, reduce property rights and increase the scope and size of local government.

“Adopt a historic overlay district ordinance to recognize and protect historic, architectural, and cultural resources, including individual sites and districts at the local level.

Expand the authority of the Architectural Review Board (ARB) to include the review required under the recommended historic district overlay ordinance. Revise the make up of the ARB to include members with expertise in historic preservation and revise the name of the group accordingly”.

This is in addition to the Monticello “land grab” vista preservation overlay (note the verbiage change), the new proposed “Biodiversity” inventory and action plan. Clearly there is an undercurrent in government that more control is better government. The Free Enterprise Forum respectfully disagrees.

All of these regulatory hurdles have an impact on economic development and stability.  This morning’s (4/22) Washington Post featured a Sarah Halzack article explaining DC bucking the trend of “Job Sprawl”.  Citing Brookings Institute’s Elizabeth Kneebone’s study showing DC was the only one of 100 studied that had added jobs to its urban core.  According to the article:

“Decentralization of jobs can have either a positive or negative effect on a metropolitan area.  The implications of this shift can depend largely on a region’s land-use policies as well as the quality and reach of its transit system. [Emphasis added-nw]

“Particularly for low income residents, if jobs move further out, if there isn’t reliable transit and they don’t have a car, that could limit their opportunities,” Kneebone said.

This information coupled with the Charlottesville dearth of jobs in the so called “Orange Dot” Report proves economic realities must help shape local policies if we wish to attract and retain JOBS to live in our region.  The concept of economic vitality has been woefully understated during the community discussions regarding poverty, employment issues and property rights.

While we appreciate Monticello’s contribution to the community, we believe they are a private property owner. The Thomas Jefferson Foundation takes great pains to mention that it receives no government support but now is asking Albemarle County to serve as a middle man between the mountaintop and their neighbors. Perhaps the Foundation might choose to use a part of their most recent $10 million dollar gift to directly reach out to their neighbors rather than mandating local government do so.  

While we understand and appreciate the goals of biodiversity, we do not believe this chapter should be the longest in Albemarle’s Comprehensive Plan and we question the need for a Biodiversity Action Plan that virtually deputizes the Natural Resource Committee.

While we remain very concerned with human rights, we are equally concerned that unnecessary red tape will push more businesses out of not only Charlottesville but the entire region. 

While we believe the importance of historic places, we find that property owners, not government, should determine what to do with their property.

If we as a community choose to ignore the significant negative implications of over regulation on business development and retention, the resultant community may not be one you wish to see preserved.  Just as one can ask if the community vision is “Aspen or Austin”, if  these proposals come to fruition a better question may be should Charlottesville be known for Making Products or Making Beds.

Today, we find ourselves at  a tipping point, as the number of government overlays, rights commissions and review boards increase, the economic vitality of the region decreases by an inverse proportion.

Which way will the scale fall?

Stay tuned.

Respectfully Submitted,

Neil Williamson, President

Neil Williamson is the President of the Free Enterprise Forum, a local government public policy organization located in Charlottesville.  www.freeenterpriseforum.org

Who’s Responsible for TJPDC Failure To Deliver Million Dollar Planning Promise?

By. Neil Williamson, President

As Albemarle County and The City of Charlottesville continue to move forward on their comprehensive plans, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC) effort entitled “Many Plans One Community” is failing to meet deadlines and has lost their project manager.  The HUD funded “Livability Communities” Planning Project continues to disappoint citizens and decision makers alike.

The “Performance Measurement System Report” document was designed to be the first deliverable for the Sustainable Communities Planning Grant (p.4).  The work on this deliverable  was mainly completed from January 2011 to April 2011.  Yet today the draft provided to the public for consideration as a part of Charlottesville’s Comprehensive Plan includes typographical errors and is missing critical information.  Throughout the document are the terms “placeholder” (p.25,26, 26, 28) or “need updated Information from City and County” (p.37)  All of the executive summaries in the March 15, 2013 draft (almost two years since the work was completed) contain Latin placeholders.

A review of the work plan included on the “Many Plans One Community” website indicates that all text was to be completed by January 31, 2013 to coincide with the respective Planning Commission Comprehensive Plan reviews.

The TJPDC process was designed from the outset to improve, not delay, the comprehensive plan process.  In their 2011 media release kicking off the process the TJPDC described the process:

Many Plans, One Community is the portal for information exchange and public input that will inform the updates of the Charlottesville and Albemarle County comprehensive plans, the Charlottesville Albemarle Metropolitan Planning Organization Long Range Transportation Plan update and the development of a regional Livable Communities Plan. Many Plans, One Community will be a One-Stop Shop for all information about each of these four different plans, as well as a forum for the public to provide feedback throughout the process. It is envisioned that this process will extend limited staff resources and encourage collaboration, facilitate public information sharing and increase transparency across municipal boundaries.

Back in September, 2012 Charlottesville Tomorrow’s Sean Tubbs reported that three “One Community” TJPDC Planners had been let go earlier than planned due to budget overruns:

Two temporary employees of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission hired to help update the Albemarle and Charlottesville comprehensive plans will leave their jobs seven months earlier than expected as money from a $1 million federal grant begins to run out. . .

…“We are anticipating that we will be able to close out the project, complete all of the products

that have been promised both to HUD, the city and the

TJPDC Exec Stephen Williams

county and the MPO within the budget and within the time frames that are proposed,” Williams said.

Then on January 31, 2013 Project Manager Summer Frederick left the TJPDC to return to work for Albemarle County.  The TJPDC media release indicates:

As of February 1, 2013, Mr. Williams, will be the primary point of contact for all project management issues related to the Many Plans, One Community Livability Project.  Mr. Williams may be reached via phone at 434-979-7310 x110, or via email at swilliams@tjpdc.org

After three years and nearly a million dollars, what do the citizens have to show for it?  A litany of meetings, a website, partially completed reports and now TJPDC Exec Williams is taking management responsibility?

One has to wonder has the TJPDC met the terms, objectives and deadlines of the HUD Federal Grant?

And if not, who should be held responsible?

Respectfully submitted,

Neil Williamson

Neil Williamson is the President of the Free Enterprise Forum, a local government public policy organization located in Charlottesville.  www.freeenterpriseforum.org

Why Didn’t Somebody Call The Police

By. Neil Williamson, President

Albemarle County just released its latest draft of their comprehensive plan.  A large portion of the plan regards land use.  Interior to the land use portion is the concept of the “neighborhood model”.  The Neighborhood Model is a form of New Urbanism that promotes pedestrian orientation, building mass, interconnected streets, multi modal transportation options and even public art.

But what about crime?  There is an increasing volume of research indicating some elements of new urbanism promote criminal activity. 

So we were most interested when Albemarle County announced in July 2011 that a new Crime Prevention Officer position (click here for the media release).  Ten year Albemarle Police veteran Steve Watson, a CEPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) Certified Police Officer was selected for this position.  According to the County media release:

Officer Watson’s duties and responsibilities will include managing community related events, and coordinating the Crime Free Multi-Housing Program and the Neighborhood Watch Program.  Officer Watson will be the liaison between the community and the police department as it relates to crime prevention.

In a telephone interview with the Free Enterprise Forum, Officer Watson indicated he has had no interaction with the Planning Department regarding Crime Prevention and the Neighborhood Model but he would welcome such a conversation.  Frankly, Officer Watson seemed almost evangelical about his passion for CPTED.

Considering this newly acquired talent, why didn’t somebody call the Police? 

During the discussion of relegated parking (once merely a part of the Neighborhood Model, now written into County Code), the Free Enterprise Forum asked what the Albemarle County Police Department thought of this planning concept.  Based on our limited understanding of CPTED, hidden parking lots created a fertile environment for criminal activity.  Our calls for police involvement fell on deaf ears.

Basic CPTED theory focuses on examining the built environment and how CPTED principles apply to problem solving, community planning, and safety and security assessments. 

The National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC) offers certification in CPTED and indicates the basic coursework provides:

The Basic CPTED course covers the theory behind CPTED and give an overview of the history of crime and the physical environment; the basics of CPTED principles and how they work; applying successful applications and techniques of CPTED to specific crimes; how to consider CPTED principles in plans to secure key public places and facilities; and how to conduct a community safety assessment using CPTED principles.

• CPTED applications to specific crimes and “hot spots” locations
• Specific practical techniques including street and security lighting, landscaping, barriers, traffic calming, and target hardening
• Role of maintenance, ordinances, and other local laws in strategies to prevent crime and improve quality of life
• How to conduct a community safety assessment using tools based on CPTED principles
• How to consider CPTED principles in plans to secure key public places and facilities
• How to link neighborhood volunteers to local crime prevention, community building, and homeland security initiatives.

Naively perhaps, the Free Enterprise Forum believed that the Albemarle County Planning Department would know that the Albemarle County Police Department had this new position dedicated to Crime Prevention and would utilize this resource to evaluate the Comprehensive Plan review.  [Remember this Comprehensive Plan revision included a Million Dollar Grant to help Albemarle coordinate planning work with Charlottesville and the University].

There is mention of CPTED in the Current Comprehensive Plan under Parks and Open Space:

The design and location of open space determines how fully it will be used. For example, a public space framed by building fronts, surrounded by neighborhood thoroughfares, and accessible to nearby residents is inviting and safe. Such principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) can improve siting decisions, as can such criteria as locating parks near paths or major destinations like schools and other public facilities

But nowhere in this state mandated document is there significant consideration of crime prevention through better community design.

For a government dedicated to the health, safety and welfare of its citizens,  that is a crime.

Respectfully Submitted,

Neil Williamson

Neil Williamson is the President of the Free Enterprise Forum, a local government public policy organization located in Charlottesville. The full Contradictory Consequences report can be found at www.freeenterpriseforum.org

‘Rezoning Ransom’: Repeal cash proffers

This editorial first appeared in The Daily Progress on Sunday March 3, 2013.  The full “Contradictory Consequences” white paper can be found at www.freeenterpriseforum.org under the reports tab.  The Free Enterprise Forum is a privately funded public policy organization focused on local government in the Central Virginia region.

 

By. Neil Williamson, President, Free Enterprise Forum

There are times you have to say no to one thing because you said yes to something else. Such is the case with cash proffers.

If a community believes in citizen vetted comprehensive planning, preserving rural areas by densification of development areas and economic vitality, then such a community must say no to the fatally flawed cash proffer system.

In the recently released “Contradictory Consequences” white paper, the Free Enterprise Forum research and case studies explain the impacts of cash proffers. Sold to the public as a way to make growth pay for itself, the unintended negative economic and planning impacts have caused localities across the Commonwealth to repeal this “rezoning ransom” and replace these funds with more dependable and equitable infrastructure funding options. Today, rather than simply recalibrating their cash proffer calculation, as Albemarle County is doing, full repeal is a much more economically and ecologically sensible and sustainable alternative.

Cash proffers are per unit fees “voluntarily” extracted from applicants seeking to rezone their property. In theory, such “voluntary” proffers would be directly tied to the costs associated with the increased density of a rezoning. In reality, cash proffers lower land values, encourage development contrary to comprehensive plans, and create false hope for outside infrastructure funding.

Lower land values, lower property tax revenue – In concept, cash proffers are voluntary payments made by landowners to mitigate the impacts of changing the prescriptive zoning on their property. The concept works best when the rezoned value exceeds the increased cost of the proffer. Such a symbiotic relationship is difficult to achieve with automatic inflation increasing cash proffers and fickle housing markets not keeping pace.

Albemarle	Single Family Detached $19,753Townhouse $13,432Multi Family $13,996
Charlottesville	No cash proffers
Greene	$5,778 per unit
Fluvanna	$6,577 per unit
Louisa	$4,362 per unit
Nelson	No cash proffers

Basic economic theory indicates any increased cost must be paid by an entity that is a part of the transaction. Many believe the increased cost of a cash proffer will be borne by the end user, the new homebuyer. This can only occur in a housing market that has constant upward motion.

If, due to market conditions, the end user is not available to accept the cost of the cash proffer it is the land owner, whose land will be discounted by the increased entitlement costs that cash proffers create. In turn, such reduced land values reduce the locality’s real estate tax assessed value and revenue (absent an increase in the tax rate).

‘By Right’ Development Encouraged Charlottesville and Albemarle are currently updating their State mandated comprehensive plans. These community vetted plans suggest the manner in which the locality wishes to grow in the next twenty years.

In many, if not most, cases the zoning in a locality’s development area does not match the comprehensive plan designation. While the property owner does not have to agree to the comprehensive plan changes, they cannot act on those new designations until they have rezoned the property. Alternatively, if the land owner chooses to move forward with the existing, some might call “stale”, zoning, which likely does not agree with the locality’s comprehensive plan, they can do so immediately without paying any cash proffers.

In 2011, a developer acquired the rights to a project that included property in The City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County. Charlottesville does not have a cash proffer, while Albemarle’s exceeds $19,000 per single family home. After calculating the increased value of the land with the rezoning in each locality, the developer chose to rezone the property that was in the City (without cash proffers) and chose NOT to rezone the property in the county. This calculated decision was based on calculation of the cost (in money and time) of rezoning the County land exceeded the increase value.

Therefore, the land owner is incentivized to not to follow the community vetted comprehensive plan vision but instead to construct lower density, less thoughtfully designed developments. These projects are built to meet local building and zoning code but absent the enhancements and flexibility a rezoning might allow.

False Financial Hope – Forecasting cash proffer revenue is much like predicting snow in Central Virginia, localities do not know when it is coming, how much they are actually going to get or when it will stop. Cash proffers rarely, if ever, total the amounts localities are banking on.

In November 2012, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors was presented a staff report outlining cash proffers that were in excess of $49.3 million dollars quite literally off the chart.

As one looks at this chart (right) and sees almost $50 Million dollars proffered, one might anticipate the cash proffer program is answering the very need it was designed but the Free Enterprise Forum estimates at least 28% of those proffers will never be collected as they are associated with the now defunct Biscuit Run Development.

It is interesting that while the State of Virginia acquired the property for a state park on December 31, 2009, Albemarle County continued to calculate those proffers as receivable in November 2012.

Rural Areas Jeopardized – According to the Piedmont Environmental Council, Albemarle County has in excess of 10,000 units already rezoned for residential development. Why have these not moved forward?

Have the embedded costs of development in Albemarle County, including cash proffers, created a cost burden the market is unable to bear?

If growth trends continue, won’t these embedded costs push residential development out of Albemarle County’s designated growth areas and into the rural areas?

The reality is that cash proffers contribute to the paradigm that rural residential development remains the least expensive, most profitable development option in Albemarle County.

If the cash proffers are pushing development into the rural areas and surrounding localities, what are the community costs of increased traffic, more costly government services delivery, as well as loss of ecologically contributing farmland, and productivity?

Cash proffers have produced a plethora of Contradictory Consequences without achieving significant benefit. Now is the time to repeal this rezoning ransom and replace it with a more sensible and equitable alternative.

Neil Williamson is the President of the Free Enterprise Forum, a local government public policy organization located in Charlottesville. The full Contradictory Consequences report can be found at www.freeenterpriseforum.org

“Common Wealth Report” Released

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Study Finds Disparity in State Tax Revenue and Disbursements

Charlottesville, VA – Virginia state tax revenue generated by economic activity and the disbursement of such revenue vary dramatically according to a study released today. The Common Wealth Report, underwritten by The Charlottesville Regional Chamber of Commerce and compiled by the Free Enterprise Forum, studied state tax revenue generated in each locality for FY2011 and direct State funding for the same period.

At the start of the study, it was theorized that a significant portion of State Tax revenue would return to the locality where it was generated. There seems to be an inverse correlation between economic prosperity and direct state funding. While not universal, those localities with the greatest contribution of State taxes tended to be “donor” localities with less tax revenue returning to the locality when compared with taxes sent to Richmond.

Of the localities studied, the Common Wealth Report identified the City of Petersburg as the largest recipient of State funds as compared to taxes generated. Charlottesville was second with the Commonwealth returning $1.66 in State spending to the locality for every dollar sent to the state.

Fairfax County accounts for 23.5% of all income tax collected in Virginia. Fairfax County is the largest donor locality included in this study. For every tax dollar sent to the Commonwealth, Fairfax receives $0.36 back. Albemarle County is the fourth largest donor locality studied.

The Common Wealth Report does NOT include transportation tax revenue nor transportation spending in its calculations. In addition, due to reporting variations income tax data from FY2009 was used to complete the tax generation data.

Free Enterprise Forum President Neil Williamson said “Our goal in developing the Common Wealth Report is to provide citizens an objective locality-specific metric to be used to compare state tax generation and state spending between municipalities. Perhaps informed with an objective metric such as the Common Wealth Report, additional study can be done to determine what it is citizens are getting for their money and whether they are getting their money’s worth.”

According to Timothy Hulbert, President of the Charlottesville Regional Chamber of Commerce, the Chamber chose to underwrite this report to “provide guidance for local officials and citizens alike about the importance of economic vitality statewide.

“This report reminds all of us that we are citizens of the Commonwealth of Virginia. We in Charlottesville are directly impacted by economic forces in the rest of the state,” Hulbert said.

The Free Enterprise Forum is a privately funded, public policy organization.

Population Growth Report or Manifesto?

By. Neil Williamson, President

This morning’s Daily Progress included an article outlining a report written by Craig Evans considering the fiscal costs and benefits of growth.  This report is underwritten by a local population control advocacy group, Advocates for a Sustainable Albemarle Population (ASAP).  The Free Enterprise Forum was contacted by the paper and asked to provide comment.  Brian Wheeler quotes us accurately in the well written article.  Below is the entirety of our statement on the issue of this troubled “report”.

The Free Enterprise Forum believes the Evans report while seemingly accurate in its limited financial analysis fails to recognize the indirect, but calculable, economic benefits of population expansion. The Free Enterprise Forum is concerned the “Counting the Costs and Benefits of Growth Analysis” report by Craig Evans is flawed in design and unfairly prejudiced in its analysis and conclusions.

Much of the Evans report reads significantly more like a political manifesto rather than an academic thesis. Using such terms as “Race to the Bottom” and describing developers as “Speculative Enterprises” do not add to the academic credibility of the report and fails to recognize developers as the very businesses who take the financial risk to bring the community’s comprehensive plan to life.

Taken at face value, the Evans report indicates that the County and City lose roughly $.25 for every dollar collected in residential tax revenue. In FY2011, the City posted a $3.8 Million dollar surplus. How is that possible?

According to NBC29, “The [FY2011] surplus came from a couple of different places. First, the city saved money during the last fiscal year when expenses came in $2.9 million under budget. On top of that, the city collected $900,000 more revenue than expected in 2012 – largely from a spike in sales, meals and lodging taxes”. Only by recognizing the indirect benefit of and important symbiotic relationship between population and revenue producing commercial activities can you reconcile this anomaly.

The Evans report fails to calculate the considerable value of population to economic vitality. It is established that “Retail follows Rooftops” and revenue follows retail. One need only look to Greene County’s recent increase in retail square footage that followed the residential expansion. In addition the retail sales tax local option has increased exponentially in Greene County since the establishment of the retail centers.

In its most telling omission, the Evans Report fails to recognize that every locality in the state must produce a balanced budget. Property Taxes are set by elected officials after consideration of ALL revenue sources. While the property taxes generated by individual homeowners may not cover Evans cost calculations, these same citizens generate the economic activity [sales tax, commercial tax, machine/tool taxes] that allows the locality to keep property taxes lower because of commercial activity.

One thrust of the Evans report is that growth comes with costs. Taken in isolation this is a true statement but when one considers the economic opportunities and advancements such growth also provides.

The Evans report cites Loudoun County as an example of rampant growth and it is true their government spending has accelerated significantly to meet the needs of their community. At one point Loudoun was building a high school a year to keep up with growth in student population. Late last year, Loudoun County was named by the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey as the county with the highest median income per household in the nation. With a median income of more than $119,000, Loudoun households generate almost twice the income than Albemarle households. Yes, there is a cost to growth but the benefits far outweigh the costs.

Paraphrasing Aaron Levenstein, “Statistics are like bikinis. While what they reveal is suggestive, what they conceal is vital”.

Respectfully Submitted

Neil Williamson, President

————————————————————

Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a privately funded public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson County.  For more information visit the website www.freeenterpriseforum.org

Historical Repetition US29 Bypass

“All this has happened before, and it will all happen again.” –

Peter Pan Walt Disney Pictures 1953

Last week, utilizing a Freedom of Information Act request, Charlottesville Tomorrow obtained an Army Corps of Engineers letter to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) critical of the US 29 Western Bypass moving forward without additional study up to perhaps, a new full Environmental Impact Statement.

Rather than citing specific data lapses and specific federal wetlands concerns, the Army Corps of Engineers letter relies on data provided by the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC)  and the Charlottesville/Albemarle Transportation Coalition (CATCO). That these two organizations were called out, in SELC’s case cited four times by name, suggests the Army Corps of Engineers was heavily lobbied.

The letter, which missed the processes required deadline due to “workload …and the complexity of the matters at hand”, suggests that the Environmental Assessment (EA) process be rewound to start and reconsider all the alternative routes and solutions.

The past is clearly prologue here because on this specific road this matter was heard and addressed in Piedmont Environmental and Sierra Club v. United States Department of Transportation lawsuit. The suit was returned supporting FHWA decision on all but one count and this was supported in the appellate decision.  The final count, which could have been legally defended was mitigated and removed in 2003.

Interestingly on page 20 of Federal Judge Norman Moon’s 40 page decision the court found the contention regarding a lack of consideration of alternatives was “completely without merit”.

Fast forward just under a decade and you see the Army Corps of Engineers, under significant lobbing from the left, utilizing many of the same facts as were decided in the PEC case. Recognizing the Army Corps self identified “workload” issues, it is easy to see how legal language from well placed letters with cut and paste legal language may have found their way into the Corps letter.

While we were disappointed in the Army Corps letter, both in content and timing, the Free Enterprise Forum believes FHWA still retains the ability to approve the roadway with a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). Most if not all of the concerns raised in the Army Corps letter were dealt with as a part of the 2001 Moon decision. Any new regulatory requirements could be mitigated as the project applies for and receives permits from the Corps.

Of course once FHWA issues their ruling, this Federal action will likely generate a lawsuit from an alphabet soup of opponents to the roadway.

Perhaps Yogi Berra said it best, “It’s déjà vu all over again”

Respectfully Submitted,

Neil Williamson, President

Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a privately funded public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and  Nelson County.

A Tax By Any Other Name

FORUM WATCH EDITORIAL

By. Neil Williamson, President

“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;” – William Shakespeare

Words matter that’s why it is refreshing that as State Senator John Watkins has been discussing his transportation funding solution he has used the term “Gas Tax” rather than the more trendy “user fee”.

By contrast Charlottesville, if you haven’t heard yet, the bottom line on your property tax bill is increasing but don’t call it a tax. 

No, your property tax bill will be the mechanism the city uses to collect the soon to be passed stormwater user fee.   

Who will pay the fee?  Property owners based on their percentage of impervious surface.  The city has already used aerial images to calculate your property’s impervious surface. Impervious surface includes rooftops, driveways, paved patios etc.

But wait, doesn’t rain fall on everybody?

The goals of the Water Resources Protection Program include “bringing the community together to help protect and improve the city’s valuable natural and man-made resources by protecting public health and safety…”  Aren’t these community goals that should be supported by the entire community?

While some of the costs of the new program can be blamed on the city’s existing, aging  stormwater infrastructure.  The majority of the cost is associated with new TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load) storm water requirements that are a part of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Chesapeake Bay initiative.   

Back in the old days, when a locality (or State) identified a need in the community and a government solution to that need, the community would fund that solution through its normal revenue stream.

Instead, the city is utilizing enabling legislation to establish a stormwater utility (expect Albemarle County and others to follow) to create a dedicated million dollar a year revenue source for stormwater management.

The city sees significant benefits to the user fee approach –

Providing funding through user fees has many advantages. Charging a fee is fair and equitable since it is based on a property’s contribution to the problem (runoff from impervious surfaces), not simply on assessed value, and includes all properties (including tax-exempt ones). A stormwater utility also ensures that collected user fees are wholly dedicated to funding the WRPP components. Finally, a fee also provides a consistent and stable funding source to ensure that the WRPP is both environmentally and economically sustainable.

It is important to note that the city has been proactive in reaching out to large commercial centers as well as churches (often with large parking lots) to inform them of the fee structure as well as discuss potential mitigation the owners can do on site to reduce their stormwater impacts and their “user fee”.

The Free Enterprise Forum is torn on the user fee concept.  While we tend to like paying for specific services rendered, we see the benefit being provided to larger than just those carrying the cost burden.

One business owner indicated his company owned  several apartment buildings mainly filled with University of Virginia students.  Using the user fee methodology, as schools make up about 60% of the  budget and that his properties do not significantly add to Charlottesville’s K-12 education population, shouldn’t he get a credit on his property taxes?  Of course not, education is a community goal that benefits all – well educated graduates may become future employees (or tenants) for his company. 

Taken to its logical conclusion, couldn’t the same argument be made for the gas tax and the stormwater utility fee.  In the former, an effective and efficient transportation system encourages economic development and improves the quality of life of all citizens regardless of their need for gasoline.  In the latter, environmental improvements included in the WRPP clearly benefit all of the community not just those who own impervious surfaces.

Words matter.  To paraphrase William Shakespeare “A tax by any other name will hurt as much”

Respectfully Submitted

Neil Williamson, President

Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a privately funded public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and  Nelson County.