Why VRE, As Offered, is a Bad Deal for Spotsylvania by Supervisor Candidate Chris Yakabouski

Fitz Johnson’s op-ed “How can Republicans be trying to derail VRE?” (op-ed, Oct 22) offers a self-absorbed perspective on VRE that is typical of those who will enjoy a special benefit if Spotsylvania taxpayers bail out VRE. As a candidate for public office, my perspective on this issue is grounded entirely on what is in the public interest.

On August 18, 2009, the Spotsylvania County Board of supervisors voted to join VRE but left it up to the new Board to ratify or reject this deal after the election. I will vote to reject this deal because VRE is dealing from the bottom of the deck and the role of sucker was assigned to Spotsylvania taxpayers. This “deal” is forever. There is no escape and no way to modify its terms regardless of how harmful it is to the County and its residents.

The “deal” touted by Supervisors Pitts and Skinner, unless stopped, would be the most lopsided anti-taxpayer agreement ever entered into by Spotsylvania. Some of the people sounding off are claiming the language of the deal says what it doesn’t say and many of the loudest proponents will personally profit at the long-term expense of the taxpayers of Spotsylvania. I am all for free enterprise and maximizing profits but I absolutely will not stand for people unfairly doing so at the risk and expense of working Spotsylvania families.

After I hear about all the wonderful virtues of VRE, I find myself thinking why not? Sounds ok! What’s wrong with commuter rail? Who wouldn’t want free money for local roads? Who wouldn’t want to bring high paying jobs home to Spotsylvania? Those are the promises and they sound great. But before signing on the dotted line, lets look at what we are getting into and see whether those promises are real or just more pie-in-the-sky offered up by people who stand to make a lot of money at taxpayer expense or who think leadership is figuring out a new way to separate taxpayers from yet another dollar. So let’s have a look, shall we?

The first promise is that joining VRE will miraculously spur economic growth in Spotsylvania. According to the VRE visionaries, high-tech businesses will sprout like mushrooms if only Spotsylvania will impose a new gas tax and pay millions to subsidize VRE. Of course, this pie-in-the-sky promise is easily refuted by simply looking at VRE’s impact on economic development in nearby communities over the past 20 years. Obviously, the dilapidated Fredericksburg VRE station has attracted nothing but problems. VRE’s presence couldn’t even save a struggling restaurant located on top of the VRE station! Look North to Lorton in Fairfax. Several years back Lorton prison closed and the land cleared for development. There was already a VRE station nearby and so one would expect tons of these wonderful businesses to locate in this virgin area. Business parks must dot the landscape where the prison once stood, right? No. Only houses. Lots and lots of houses and lots and lots of people and as much traffic congestion as anyone could want. Lorton is much closer to D.C. than we are, but the high paying jobs didn’t materialize.

Ok, let’s look at Leeland Station in Stafford. This station is located in southern Stafford and had little development around it -- no houses, strip malls, and barely any traffic. This location is very similar to what we have around the proposed VRE station site in Spotsylvania. If you believe Supervisors Pitts and Skinner, Stafford surely must have attracted a huge first class business park with high paying jobs and associated benefits. Drive through sometime. No businesses, just more houses. Promises are one thing, reality another.

Another promise is free money for roads. But if you look at where this free money comes from, it disappears. First, the VRE agreement requires a new gas tax to be forced upon our taxpayers -- teachers, deputies, retired folks, stay at home moms, single moms and dads, those who have lost their jobs, as well as everyone else who drives a car. But at least our roads will be improved, right? Not so much. Every dollar raised by the gas tax is earmarked for VRE, period. There is no language in the proposed agreement protecting the taxpayers of Spotsylvania County. There is no minimum amount Spotsylvania is slated to receive. Instead, the County doesn’t get a dime until the full VRE fee is paid for. Spotsylvania gets the crumbs if anything is left, a huge bill if the tax falls short. And, the dirty little secret Pitts and Skinner try to hide is that if the gas tax falls short, Spotsylvania County would be legally required to raise taxes or cut services to pay the bill.

VRE sounds great. So do flying cars. But neither is a good thing upon which to bet the farm. I am all for improving traffic, and when I served on the Board of Supervisors the county received millions of dollars of traffic funds because of the many good projects which were approved. But in each of those cases, the development benefitted both the developer and the county – all were specifically designed to increase business development and solve traffic problems at the same time. For example the continuous turn lane off Route I-95 at the Spotsylvania exit was paid for, and built from a proffer by the Silver Companies. These are real improvements.

The lofty promises made by the VRE cheering squad hide a bad deal for the citizens of Spotsylvania. And the truth is, I am not opposed to joining VRE if it is a good deal for the taxpayers of Spotsylvania. In the middle of a recession, a mandatory gas tax coupled with a no-escape deal sounds like a terrible idea. As an elected official it is my responsibility to make sure our county is better off when I leave office than when was elected to office. I do not think this current agreement is in the best interest of all our citizens.

—Chris Yakabouski

The writer is the Republican Candidate for the Spotsylvania Board of Supervisors in the Battlefield District

Is VRE viable partnering in Spotsylvania’s transportation Plan?

by Gary Bullis, Spotsylvania GOP Member

I attended the VRE Summit, hoping to learn the facts about VRE. Should Spotsy partner with the northern counties and join VRE? The panel members were all articulate and advocates for VRE. It was clear that the panel members representing the northern counties wanted Spotsy to join to spread the cost.

Many questions remain.
(1) What is the benefit to the 120,000 Spotsylvania citizens who do not ride the VRE? Potential to attract jobs to the area. The Fredericksburg rep was asked that question and he said that Fredericksburg was already built out and there was no measurable benefit for luring high paying jobs to the area. He noted that approximately 900 Spotsylvania residents ride daily, which one could argue takes 900 cars off the 95 corridors but still impacts local rush hour traffic.

(2) How is it paid for? According to the "Master Agreement," the cost of commuter rail service shall be borne by the PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS. A minimum of 50% recovery of operating cost will come from fare revenue. The difference will be funded from a gas tax of 2%, which is soon to be 2.1%. This means that non riders will be required to subsidize those who ride up to 50% of the cost. If this tax increase still proves to be insufficient the balance will be funded from the county general fund. Most employment in the area is with the federal government or contractors, who are already subsidizing their employees to ride VRE with federal tax dollars. In addition, the VRE COMMISSIONS seek funds from the taxpayers of the Commonwealth and federal government in the form of grants. That's a lot of subsidizing. The cost for parking lots, stations, and other capital cost items remain the responsibility of the PARTICIPATING JURISDICTION (i.e. Spotsylvania County taxpayers)

(3) What are the transportation options? According to a regional transportation needs study by the Fredericksburg Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (FAMPO), numerous options to VRE are available and are already in place.
a. Carpools registered - 130. This does not include unregistered carpools.
b. Vanpools Registered – 366. This does not include unregistered vanpools.
c. Private Commuter Bus Runs - 27.

The estimated total number of vehicles removed daily via a, b, & c already equals 5,462. This is at no cost for the taxpayers with the added benefit of thousands of dollars from fuel taxes paid.
Too often, mass transportation does not go where you need to go. If you don’t work within walking distance to the station, the public will choose another alternative. According to a regional study done by the FAMPO, "Transit is most effective in densely developed areas with concentrated development. In the George Washington Region, development is of a very low-density nature."

"Various research efforts have shown that productive, traditional; fixed-route transit requires at least 3 households per acre or at least 4 jobs per acre. In terms of how "transit supportive" areas are, those with 3 to 10 households per acre or 4 to 20 jobs per acre generally have a medium level of transit supportiveness, and those with higher levels generally have a higher level of transit supportiveness. In the George Washington Region, relatively few areas currently have these densities. As the Region's grow, some existing areas are projected to develop more densely, but most new development patterns are expected to be similar as at present and to sprawl into new areas."

According to The Heritage Foundation and The Political Economy Research Center, rail transit in Portland and St. Louis, which have been widely promoted as light-rail success stories, accounts for less than 2.5 and 1 percent respectively, of new travel. This light rail development has been heavily subsidized. Portland’s planners had predicted that development would increase along the transit corridor while growth slows outside the corridor. Does this sound familiar? The facts show that this did not happen. Rail transit is not a substitute for carpool, vanpool, or bus commuting because it is structurally incapable of taking enough people where they want to go. Rail transit is more costly, requiring subsidies from the more than 120,000 non-riders thru an additional 2.1% gas tax as well as other tax subsidies. I urge the Board of Supervisor to consider these facts and join together as our community leaders in opposition to joining VRE during these difficult economic times.