| Send to Printer | << Back to Article |
| Local |
|
Northern Virginia may be able to avoid road maintenance responsibility
)
(AP)
Gov. Tim Kaine gestures as he talks to the media after a speech before the Greater Richmond Chamber of Commerce in Richmond, Monday. Kaine discussed transportation issues with the business leaders. Local government leaders may be getting their way on part of the mammoth transportation-spending bill under review by Gov. Tim Kaine. Judging by comments from Kaine and legislators, a consensus is forming to remove language from the bill that would force localities to take over responsibility from the state for maintaining the roads in their jurisdiction. The maintenance requirement would have kicked in if Northern Virginia counties and cities voted to enact a series of tax and fee increases that, if fully implemented, would raise $400 million annually for transportation in the region. Though the bill also mandates the state to provide localities money for the maintenance work, local officials worry the state will eventually reduce or eliminate the funding, leaving them with expensive bills to pay and the prospect of further tax increases. “That is a poison pill we are not willing to swallow,” Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Chairman Gerald Connolly said. Appearing with local leaders last week, Kaine promised to amend the bill to reflect their concerns. He has until March 26 to suggest changes, which then receive a vote in the General Assembly. “That is an unfunded mandate,” the governor said of the maintenance provision. “It is not fair to local governments.” Kaine, a former Richmond mayor, also pledged to try to resolve the locals’ other chief concern, which is that they have to vote to enact the tax and fee hikes instead of state lawmakers. Solving that problem, however, is tricky because if the Legislature imposes the fees, the revenue could be diverted from the region in future years. Del. David Albo, R-Springfield, who drafted the section of the bill dealing with localities, said he thought the maintenance provision would be better because it would give counties and towns more control over the work done in their jurisdictions. But if the proposal upsets officials, he said, he would support a gubernatorial amendment deleting the provision. “If they don’t like it, I don’t like it,” he said. jrogalsky@dcexaminer.com |
