Kaine makes it hard to say no on roads

Fair enough; clearly, we are all entitled to our own opinion. Perhaps those of us in the business community think the anti tax zealots have gained the upper hand with Delegates, while at the same time they think the business community is the only group with sway over Delegates. Clearly, neither is right nor wrong all the time. What has changed in the last few years is a broad consensus in the community that our traffic congestion is bad, it has gotten much worse since the referendum in 2002, and it is the responsibility of our state legislators to own the problem and to fix it. While last year's "solution" did not hold, it was clear that even in the House, there was a majority of both parties that acknowledged the seriousness of the problem. The Governor has consulted with all parties and put forth a plan that works. No one agrees with all of his plan, and there will be changes. I hope in the end, the solution is sustainable and solves the problem for at least a decade.

Well Mike, as I said before, I do not belong, have ANY association with, and do not claim to be a representative of any of the so-called anti tax groups that you describe or perhaps assume I associate with. I do not. I am 48 years old, not retired military, and work full time. I hold in complete contempt of unelected members of institutions that assume they always know best for me and that I should just cave in and deal with their final decisions. I won't. I have a representative in The HOD and one in the state Senate. These are the people that represent me in the legislature and ultimately decide what taxes will or will not be raised. Not the MPO, The HRPDC, or any other HR entity. I have concluded that those in the business community and the well connected will have their opinions and thoughts considered by these HR entities. They don't give a rats behind what I think. So consequently I have no use for any of them. I have issues with some of the projects selected by the MPO and don't feel they merit the funding or construction as they, in my view will not achieve the congestion results they advertise.

Keith, my apology. When I said move on in my last post, I meant in your thinking, not where you lived. That said, if you choose to challenge some of your own assumptions, perhaps you will separate yourself from the stuck in the past thinking of the leaders of the anti tax associations whose basic point is; leave things the way they are. For me, that is an intolerable situation from a personal and business standpoint. The old, grey, retired and angry leaders of those associations are basically retired bureaucrats for whom investment is an unknown. But the fact is, we live in a competitive world, and if we don't invest in our future transportation network, business will take not and move elsewhere. That may be fine if you are retired, but that would be disastrous for the future prosperity of this region.

Well Mike, you continue to accept that the taxpayers are made of money and should roll over and give up their wallets for the flawed biased data analysis for some of these gravy train roads that your HR buddies have been fighting for for the last 18 or so years. Let's just throw money at it and the problem will go away. Flawed is still flawed no matter who "signed off" on it. The Governor and company "signed off" on the HRTA and they got spanked for it. If the House was sold on all of these projects, they would have been funded already wouldn't they? The HRBT was poo-pooed by Mayor Fraim and he has been called on the carpet for it. You're government's best friend Mike. You never saw a tax you didn't like and continue to use the analogy that we should surrender more of our income just because states like N.J., N.Y., R.I., and the like do. IF you like taxes so much, what are you doing here? As long as the possibility exists that I will be forced to pay for projects that I don't agree with, I am staying put and will continue to make my voice heard here and in the legislature and will let the chips fall. I am not going anywhere.

Well Keith, you continue to accept the anti tax payers discussion points hook, line, and sinker. Fact is, the six regional projects and the renewed funding for local roads will result in congestion relief, but the leaders of the anti tax zealots must have a boogey man, so they have created one, and you have bought off on it without independent thought or analysis. Fortunately, the elected leadership of this region, the Governor, the House, the Senate, the Commonwealth Transportation Board, and the Federal Highway Administration has signed off on the projects, but you prefer the siren song of Murphy, Greenmun, and Moss. The rest of the leadership of the region and the Commonwelath have moved on, but they are stuck in the year 2002 still tilting at windmills. You seem to have the capability of independent thought, so I suggest you move on as well.

There are holes in the safety net and the potential for them to get larger. Our per capita cost of state, local taxes and fees WAS at one time a relative bargain. And it still is if you're a CEO of a development company. Not for the rest of us though.
The transportation infrastructure is being addressed. The point of contention lies between what the public sees as relief of traffic congestion and what your HRPDC and MPO buddies see. The public is not going to be hung out to try with new taxes, fees and tolls for new road construction that relieves the ports and commerce of gridlock while they are still sitting in the same congestion as before. Regardless of what the experts and the data analysis has produced. I believe that there wouldn't be as much resistance for tolls and additional taxes if the funds collected for transportation has been spent for transportation needs instead of being raided by the GA (republicans and democrats) for balancing budgets. I believe the public has lost trust in all of them.

Actually Keith, no, I don't leave out local taxes and fees. Fact is, our per capita cost of state and local taxes and fees is still a relative bargain. For those you described in your post, there is a safety net. We have real estate tax relief for the disabled and for those who meet the income and net worth eligibility requirements. We have other programs as well. Point is, failing to invest for the last decade in transportation in the long run will effect the financial position of most of us greatly if the deterioration is not addressed.

Well, Mr. Barrett, should senior citizens quit paying their premiums and do without their long term health care, and do without medicine they might need. Should they just go away and die so the Port of Virginia and commerce can prosper? Should they be short changed? They have a valid point. Most of these folks are lucky they can still get gasoline and have a car to get themselves to the doctor. The point is that they, like a lot of us have faced hefty tax increases and higher costs of just living and getting by. Should we let the business community have undue influence on public policy? In most cases they do. You keep saying Virginia is a low tax state, while you leave out the local taxes and fees that localities continue to increase and yet salaries for the working and retired senior citizens hasn't closed the gap. Now we are again faced with government with it's hand in our pockets again.
Transportation funds need to be secured from a legislative raid and used for transportation. Nothing else. Also, I think it's time that localities stop building $3M bridges, museums, and Waterside Market places and pony up that money for local road projects. Time to change spending prioritie

Of course you cut back, but you don't cut back on long term investments. But frankly Keith, you exemplify in your posts the very issue I am trying to address. If we let the retired bureaucrats have an undue influence on public policy, we will get policy that meets their needs yet short changes our future propserity. If I cut back on repairs and maintenance in my business, and cancel future projects until "times get better" then I may have more cash flow in the short term, but in the long term, I threaten the structural integrity of my buildings, and if that happens company wide, I threaten the viability of my business. That is exactly what is happening to the Leadership of the House of Delegates by their penny wise and pound foolish public policies. With Leadership like theirs, one wishes for the rank and file to rise up, throw off the ropes on bondage, and do what is right for Virginia.

Well, gee Mr. Barrett, in tough times we the citizens are expected to at least cut back on the things we need whether we like it or not. If the legislature was to use the tax money it had collected for transportation in the first place instead of balancing state budgets, then there wouldn't be such a high demand for additional funding. The citizens have paid taxes to the transportation fund and it was spent on other things. Now you want taxpayers to dump money in a bottomless pit to makeup for any shortfall for money that was supposed to be spent on road maintenance in the first place. There may be some real estate tax relief for seniors, but there is no relief in sight for gasoline prices bordering $4.00 a gallon. What a great time for a tax increase while the economy is going down the toilet.

So your point is that times are tough so we should cut out maintenance and construction of our public highway and transit systems? Cut out maintenance and construction so that costs escalate $30,000,000/month? Cut the investment out so we can continue to pay a "tax" of $900/year which is the estimated cost of the loss of productivity because of a decade of following your advice? Point is, you can't have it both ways. There is a documented cost in loss of productivity and in lack of safety on the roads. Other states with much higher tax rates than Virginia continue to invest in transportation infrastructure because it is the key to continued prosperity. Those retired or disable citizens can apply for real estate tax relief. Programs are available to provide relief. Programs aren't available to compensate for short sightedness and failure to plan and look ahead for the future.

Well, those folks in that sea of gray hair were probably concerned about little things like gasoline approaching $4.00 a gallon, real estate taxes up about 30%, food and medicine costs up, health care, and the possibilities of foreclosure and bankruptcy. Yeah, I'll bet they were out there begging the Governor to please take more of their money. Virginia is a low tax state. I'm sure they felt that if New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts can pay high taxes, then why can't we? You state "My criticism is directed to the rest of us who let their attendance at public hearings, and their perseverance on these forums, unduly influence elected officials who cater to their views." Well gee wizz! That works both ways sir. So as long as these elected officials cater to the views of the chambers of commerce or the business communities, then everything is alright huh?. Good grief!
Yes, the retired bureaucratic gray haired senior citizen on fixed incomes have the same concerns that rest of us do. Mr. Barrett, if the incomes of these gray haired bureaucratic retired people were six figures, they probably would have stayed home.

Actually, you miss the point. If the retired population wishes to express itself strongly and from the perspective of its perceived self interest, that is, of course, their perogative. My criticism is directed to the rest of us who let their attendance at public hearings, and their perseverance on these forums, unduly influence elected officials who cater to their views. My point is this; think of a corporation that starts to think more about capital appreciation and less about competing, and I suggest you are witnessing the beginning of the end for that firm. That is what will happen to the economy of Hampton Roads if we stop investing and start giving in to short term thinking about how low taxes should be. Regretfully, many retired bureaucrats on fixed incomes show up at public hearings; the Governor's meeting last week in Hampton was a classic example. A sea of grey hair while those who should care were at home.

Now Mr Barrett resorts to insulting an even larger segment of society while trying to place himself in the enlightened "we know what is good for you better than you do" crowd. So so typical of a developer that is trying to convince everyone that his development is exactly what we need to survive. Usually, that is called a con but I guess my "retired" behind doesn't know any better. Oh stupid me.

Well, Mr. Barrett, any rational citizen that uses our transportation network can see that some of the MPO transportation projects (particularly the proposed Third Crossing) will not relieve their traffic gridlock that they assume these taxes will pay for; The sample by CNU only polled 500 people which doesn't reflect how everyone in Tidewater feels about taxes and transportation; you are assuming that all who post here are retired and well off which is not necessarily so- I am not; There is no guarantee that taxes collected for any transportation improvements will be spent for such improvements vice government raiding the fund to balance budgets; there is no trust or respect on these posts for unelected and appointed authorities and HR pencil pushers who dictate what's in the best interest for commerce and force the rest of us into bankruptcy to pay for it. Government and commerce are the only ones who seem to prosper in these deals while the rest of us end up in the poorhouse.

How any rational citizen who uses our transportation network can deny that it is seriously broken is beyond me. And of course, the recent survey by CNU proved that a representative sample of voters know the system is flawed, know it has gotten worse since the referendum, and agree they will need to pay more in taxes, fees, and tolls, to help the system perform. So why do anti tax posters prevail on this site? Frankly, they are older, retired, government workers on fixed pensions, who could care less about the future prosperity of this region. If we accept that retired citizens should rule on public policy on transportation, we have already begun the steady and inexorable slide into balkanization and decline.

We squak about Kaine's plan, but we spend billions of dollars bombing the heck out of a country and then we will trun around and spend billions more to re-build it, and we don't hear complaints about that waste of tax dollars. Trying to fix our transportation problems and everyone wants it, but no one want to pay for it. Doesn't make any sense!

Wm Tabor hits it on the head. Referendum 2002...2 to 1 NO regional sales tax.
The MPO/HRPDC/HRTA (late lamented) scam of passing off the tab for improving the Port of Virginia (that is, THE PORT OF VIRGINIA...there is no port of Hampton Roads)...is yet one more time,a non-starter.

Have to agree with some of the political skeptics...Kaine wants the transportation issue to crash, hoping for Dem gains in the next election...
Don't think he can bamboozle the voters to this extent. at least I hope people aren't that dumb.

Road congestion ,road congestion, we have to do something about it. Before you try to fix a problem it is often good practice to find out the cause of the problem,correct? If your kitchen sink is leaking all over the floor, you stop the leak, then mop it up.The problem with our roads is greed, greed by Developers and the local Govts that continually approve developement after developement. You cant put out a fire by dousing it with gasoline.(As in we need more developement for the tax base, you know ,to pay for more roads ,schools, cops ect...) I dont want to hear about some "well intentioned polotician" trying to get into my wallet with new taxes until somebody properly extinguishes this fire! At the current pace all of the new proposed projects will be outdated way before they are completed, whats new!

So long as the taxes he proposes are for the MPO plan that predominately benefits port interests and does next to nothing to relieve congestion within the Tidewater Cities I will have no problem saying no.

What's more, when the voters were asked about essentially the same plan with slightly different funding in 2002, they said no by a 2 to 1 margin in spite of a multi-million dollar marketing plan trying to sell it.

One has to wonder at what point those who claim to believe in representative government will start listening to the clear voice of the people instead of the special interests pushing this plan.

Well said.

No...now that was easy.