TransUrban Donations Targeted
Posted by Chap at 7/7/2008 10:40 AM and is filed under uncategorized 
Last week, the state press broke a story about "illegal donations" given by Transurban, the operator of the HOT lanes project.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/02/AR2008070203200.html?hpid=moreheadlines
Transurban is the subsidiary of a foreign-owned company, which means that it cannot make political donations. Thus the money has to be returned.
I received $500 from Transurban last December. We will be mailing it back this week.
I'm not minimizing 500 bones. In my youth, that was two weeks of hourly wages. But in a campaign which cost $1.5 million, I can honestly say I didn't notice the donation until it was pointed out to me last week.
Ironically, the Transurbans of the world showed little interest in me til after Election Day. After the election, Transurban made the donation which my Treasurer applied to our campaign debt.
There was no quid pro quo requested or implied -- the issue of HOT lanes was decided many years ago as a public policy. (The actual details will need some adjusting as events are proving out -- I'm going to use a later post to draw attention to the bordering community issue).
Anyway, that is the story and I'm sticking to it.
I think you should be worried about more that the $500 check from Transurban. This whole project is in trouble and will be a huge political liability for anybody who supports it. It will make the Abuser Fees look like a walk in the park.
First, it is very questionable why a region with 25% of the state's population, paying 40+% of the state's taxes and receiving 14% of the state's spending needs to be the HOT lane pioneer. It sounds to me like our elected officials are letting us get sold out - again.
Second, the project is already badly mismanaged. The initial cost projections have skyrocketed, VDOT pulled a "bait and switch" with proceeds from the project going to VRE instead of bus mass transit that would benefit NoVA and the Transurban crowd has been clear cutting acres of land for use in "construction staging". Every tree within 50 feet of the HOT lanes will be cut down.
There is no known price for using the HOT lanes. All the VDOT FAQ document says is that the price is variable and will change with congestion levels. I have seen estimates of $1 / mile during congested periods.
Third, this project exposes serious problems within VDOT. VDOT's own widening plan was haphazard and would have required the removal of many houses. By using the breakdown lane for part of the expansion, Flour / Transurban quickly managed to reduce the number of homes affected. This raises the question of why VDOT couldn't figure this out for themselves. It's starting to look like the "public / private partnership" (code words for selling public assets) is more about closing a competence gap than a financing gap.
Fourth, why would anybody start the congestion tolling experiment with I495 / I95? Any well run organization would pick a less critical place to try out a new idea.
Fifth, the "unintended consequences" from this bad idea are liable to be legion. Unlike a state road project a "public / private partnership" (code words for sell out by elected officials) can start construction with the design being completed. Therefore, there can be little effective public discussion because the answers are not known. That is why state road projects mandate a design before building. There is a high likelihood that people will drive through neighborhoods rather than paying the tolls.
Sixth, a similar plan was defeated for expanding Rt 81. "Local opposition" killed that idea while a similar, equally bad idea was being proposed and adopted in Northern Virginia.
Chap - In my humble opinion, you should run away from this haphazard plan. Send back every check, ashtray, golf ball and anything else you have received from Flour / Transurban. Start asking questions. Start demanding that the officials at VDOT do their job. Stop letting us be the patsy for every hare brained financial scam cooked up in Richmond to the detriment of Northern Virginia.
Don:
Thanks for your email and hard-hitting comments. Based on the details you provided, you are either a VDOT official or a rep for Fluor competitor. You know way too much to be a state lawmaker!
Seriously, I didn't start this thread to clobber Transurban so let me make some points in response:
1. The HOT lanes proposal was made pursuant to the PPTA which has been law since 1997. Fluor made a bid and the state accepted it. It's a private contract, not a publicly-funded project. So it's not like the Assembly made any special decision to give Flour or Transurban this right. They used existing law.
2. Unless there is a major infusion of cash of $1B or more, the current version of the Beltway will be the same version that we've had for the last 20-25 years. The HOT lanes proposal is bringing private $$ to the table where public funding is not present. Without this proposal, there would be no Beltway improvements.
3. Do you have the disposable cash to use the dedicated lanes? I don't. But don't ignore the fact that local bus -- METRO and Connector -- and HOV vehicles can use the lanes free of charge. THat is a huge bonus to transit in Fairfax County.
4. As far as Rte 81, I am very familiar with that project which has been around since I've been in the Assembly. The deal-breaker there was that the tolling included ALL cars, not just those using the new lanes. That is not the case here. No one has to use the HOT lanes (clearly marking the lanes to avoid entrapping innocent drivers is something I'm watching). You can continue to use regular lanes, which may be alleviated.
5. THe cutting of trees is a major issue. I am working with VDOT right now to try and protect communities that adjoin the Beltway. Again, this is VDOT property. But I'm trying to ensure that the buffer is maximized.
6. You say that NoVA has been getting the shaft. Historically true. But the two largest projects in the state over the past few years (Woodrow Wilson and Mixing Bowl) were both completed here on time. Right now, NoVA gets 25% of new highway construction funding and 75% of transit funding from RIchmond. So we're doing OK there.
Bottom line? THe jury is out on this project. It may crash and burn. It may succeed. At this point, we don't know.
Thanks again for your excellent comments. That is why I love this blog. You get some great comments and folks know what they're talking about.
Chap:
Thank you for the response. I don't work for VDOT or a transportation company of any type. I am just a guy who has lived in Fairfax County almost all his life (since the 1950s when I was born). All my life I have been told that Northern Virginia pays far more in taxes than it receives in state spending. While I think it's fine for those with more money to pay more taxes I have never seen an accounting of how much more. Over time, people get very suspicious when the total amount raised vs. total spent in NoVA goes unreported. In blunt terms, there is a suspicion that the elected officials from NoVA may be working more for their state political parties than the constituents in their districts. Please do not take this personally. It has been a suspicion of us "NoVA lifers" since you were in elementary school. However, now that you are in a position of power I'd hope that you might push for sufficient transparency to let NoVA's voters and taxpayers understand the "regional income statement".
There are bright spots for NoVA such as the Wilson Bridge project and the Mixing Bowl rehabilitation. However, there is bad news too. The 2004 tax hike (pushed by Gov. Warner) was intended to increase funds for education. Unfortunately, for reasons that have never been explained, the tax hike did not include a "maintenance of effort" clause (as Gov. Gilmore's tax increase did). Therefore, certain local governments in Virginia lowered their local contribution to education and drew more money from the state. This allowed them to reduce their property taxes by using additional money taken from places like NoVA. So, the Warner "education tax hike" meant that a number of affluent counties (like Henrico) lowered their local contribution to their own children's education while residents in NoVA paid more in taxes. Here is an excellent analysis of that whole mess:
http://www.forwardfairfax.com/papers/withdrawals.html
One key point is, "The result was profound. For example, Fairfax County taxpayers were expected to pay $61 million more in sales taxes dedicated to education over the first two years. The usual school distribution formula would have given them back $53 million in new funds for education; under the revised formula, they were expected to receive only $37 million.
The reality was even worse: Fairfax County records indicate that the County's taxpayers paid nearly $70 million in new sales taxes in Fiscal Years 2005 and 2006, and received back only $32 million in new education funds."
So, where is NoVA under a full and honest accounting of the sources and uses of state funds? Nobody seems to know. Or, if someone knows, they are not saying. Meanwhile, the mantra is constantly repeated that there is too little money available for things like expanding the beltway. But it seems to people like me that there is plenty of money. It's just not being used in NoVA.