Fairfax County Democratic Board Fires Back at Surovell, Puller

Fairfax (0.00 / 0)

"Unbelievable" is being used to describe the Surovell/Puller op-ed, yet the secondary fund appropriation has languished to less than what it costs to buy a Gibson Les Paul electric guitar?  If some of the supervisors want to devote real estate tax revenues to further development in other areas other than the US-1 corridor, Puller & Surovell are absolutely right in claiming that that type of push has caused inequity.

So what's the problem?  Vis-a-vis, Tyson's is getting more of a lion's share of funding, right?  The revitalization steps she mentioned are important but not as transformational as getting a Metro extension.  South of Old Town, US-1, with all of its residential developments, could really use the greater flexibility offered by several more Metro station extensions.   Mobility in an area brings  about change, not whether or not the grass is cut on the median -- which was a little bit of a patronizing statement.

If Bulova believes that Delegate Surovell isn't holding up his end of the bargain and is AWOL in the transportation funding arena, she "just hasn't been paying attention."  Where are the Comprehensive plan numbers?  How much more is Tyson's getting?  Am I missing a point or two or three?

---

by: robsmithiii @ Sun Jul 11, 2010 at 12:22:58 PM UTC

Public or Private Servants (0.00 / 0)

I think the following is the key point of the Puller and Surovell argument that is completely ignored by Bulova, McKay, and Hyland: "if Tysons Corner's landowners want to create their own tax district to fund their own improvements, that should be facilitated."

On the Fairfax County School Board's vote to close Clifton Elementary, commenter HisRoc, with whom I usually disagree, made the same point at novacommonsense.com.  When a relatively small group will disproportionately benefit, perhaps they should pay for their own improvements, especially if public money is hard to find and doubly especially when the beneficiaries are relatively wealthier than the average individual taxpayer.

Bulova, McKay, and Hyland are playing with fire by pretending that the pitting of the less well off part of Fairfax County against the more well off part of Fairfax County is something that either Puller and Surovell invented or shouldn't talk about.  Elected officials may need the campaign contributions of big business, and they may need to think about securing their part of big business profits when they leave office, but when the interests of big business and a critical number of voters diverge, too obviously choosing big business over individuals will cause those officials to confront being out of office sooner than they may hope.

---

by: jsrutstein @ Sun Jul 11, 2010 at 14:50:50 PM UTC

To set the record straight! (0.00 / 0)

"I think the following is the key point of the Puller and Surovell argument that is completely ignored by Bulova, McKay, and Hyland: "if Tysons Corner's landowners want to create their own tax district to fund their own improvements, that should be facilitated."

The fact is that the Tyson's Corner landowners have already created their own tax district to fund the Metro silver line extension. I don't know all the issues involved in this dispute, but it would appear that both Toddy and Scott (as well as Jack) may not be fully up to speed either.  

---

by: TomPaine @ Mon Jul 12, 2010 at 14:58:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Could it possible be this...... (0.00 / 0)

Fairfax County outlines tax options for Tysons Corner road projects

mix of financing options, including tax increases, are needed to pay for road upgrades as Tysons Corner transforms into a city, according to a Fairfax County report.

Although the future of Tysons is transit-oriented via Metro's Silver Line, county transportation officials say road improvements are essential to increasing mobility within the congested business district.

The report, released Thursday, says Tysons needs an estimated $646 million in transportation improvements to accommodate growth over the next 20 years. To pay for those upgrades, county officials have outlined a financing plan that calls for the public to fund 67.5 percent of the cost, and the private sector 32.5 percent.

The public share is higher because it's based on the proportion of through-traffic in Tysons, which is 35 percent of the total, and half of the locally generated traffic, which is 32.5 percent.

Financing options include new levies, such as a countywide 4 percent meals tax or a special tax on non-residential landowners in Tysons. Officials are also considering tax-increment financing, in which a portion of future tax revenue from redeveloped properties would be set aside for road upgrades.

Other options are a general obligation bond and redirecting current tax revenue to Tysons, such as a portion of the property or commercial and industrial taxes.

.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

---

by: totallynext @ Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 18:58:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Glad that VA Dems are so good at shooting at one another (0.00 / 0)

That way, when the Repubs rush our barricades we can be caught unawares while bleeding from our own self-inflicted wounds.

This strategy worked brilliantly in last year's gubernatorial election and it's great to see that we're still pursuing the same wise strategy!  

Impeachinelli! Now on Twitter.

---

by: kindler @ Mon Jul 12, 2010 at 01:14:17 AM UTC