When billions of dollars are on the line, people get creative and persuasive.
"The world is not flat, babies are not delivered by storks, and more roads don't decrease traffic congestion," said E.M. Risse Monday, Sept. 30, at a Transportation Tax Referendum Forum in Arlington.
Risse, an expert on human settlement patterns, was one of four panelists debating the sales tax referendum slated for the Nov. 5 ballot. He joined fellow sales tax opponent Stewart Schwartz in debating referendum champions Stephen Fuller, a GMU professor specializing in the Northern Virginia economy, and and Al Eisenberg, a Vice-President at the Greater Washington Board of Trade and a former County Board member.
The four men debated the proposed sales tax for two hours, taking questions from the audience and even directing queries at each other. If passed, the referendum would levy an additional half-cent sales tax on Northern Virginia, including Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun and Prince William counties, raising $5 billion for transportation projects, $250 million of which is slated for Arlington roads.
The debate, organized by the Arlington Coalition for Sensible Transportation, the League of Women Voters of Arlington, George Mason University's School of Public Policy and the American Association of University Women, drew about 150 Arlingtonians.
<b>FIREWORKS BEGAN</b> when Schwartz felt Eisenberg had labeled him as an extremist. He fired back with an allegation that Eisenberg was there at the behest of clients who were interested in pushing through construction of an outer beltway – a design Schwartz said would line developers’ pockets and hurt Arlington.
Eisenberg and Fuller said that the referendum is the only existing provision to raise transportation funds, and there was no backup measure in place. "A 'no' vote is a vote for decline," said Fuller. The alternative was to let transportation in the region stay static, and that would prove disastrous, he said.
Eisenberg cited unsafe bridges in Arlington County and the need for rail access to Dulles Airport; ways Arlington would benefit from the referendum, he said. He called rail access to Dulles the "single most important" development for Arlington and called this referendum "the only thing that offers any hope" to relieve traffic congestion and improve dangerous bridges and costly bottlenecks.
Schwartz said that if the referendum passes, he has "no doubt" that Arlington county would make good use of the revenue generated, but outlying counties and the Virginia legislature could not be trusted to do likewise. "Fairfax hasn't done its share, and Fairfax won't do its share," he said.
Outlying counties continue to extend roads rather than planning for mass transit and "balanced communities," he said, and extending roads brings more traffic congestion to Arlington from Fairfax, Prince William, and Loudoun.
Fuller countered that Arlington has 12 jobs for every 10 residents, and that the Arlington economy depends on people from other counties being able to commute.
No proposal is perfect, Fuller and Eisenberg said, and with a short state budget, the referendum is the only way to raise transportation funds. But that’s not confronting the problem, Schwartz and Risse said, just adding on "more of the same."
Debates on the referendum are scheduled throughout October at various locations in the area, leading up to the November 5 vote.