By Jerry Markon
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Virginia’s highest court on Tuesday took up the constitutionality of the state’s landmark transportation plan, which has aroused fervent opposition from anti-tax activists but is supported by officials who say the measure is needed to relieve clogged roads throughout Northern Virginia.
The Virginia Supreme Court heard arguments in a lawsuit proponents filed to ensure that the law — which allows the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority to finance more than $300 million a year in regional highway and transit projects — doesn’t violate the state constitution. An Arlington County Circuit Court judge upheld the legislation in August.
Lawyers for the Loudoun County government and a group of prominent conservatives and anti-tax activists argued that the authority can’t impose taxes and issue bonds, in part because it isn’t elected by voters. The state Attorney General’s Office countered that the General Assembly has a long history of giving local or regional authorities the power to borrow money.
The seven justices peppered both sides with questions. Lawyers said the court, which took the case on an expedited basis, is expected to rule soon.
Outside the courtroom, the often arcane legal debate gave way to passionate arguments about whether the law has led to excessive new taxes imposed by an unelected body or was a necessary response to Northern Virginia’s growing transportation crisis. Although most of the authority’s members are elected officials, the board itself was not elected by voters.
“This is the destruction of representative government as we know it,’’ said Del. Robert G. Marshall (R-Prince William), who voted against the legislation and is among those challenging it in court.
Marshall announced this week that he will challenge former governor James S. Gilmore III for the GOP nomination for the U.S. Senate seat held by John W. Warner (R), who is retiring.
Related Stories
Story Archives
Related Link
Advertisement
Chris Zimmerman, chairman of the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority, said the state’s first transportation funding bill in 21 years must be upheld to allow needed road projects to go forward.
“We’ve waited more than 20 years for any significant new funding for transportation, and we find ourselves mired in the first- or second- or third-worst traffic congestion in the nation, depending on who you believe,’’ said Zimmerman (D), an Arlington County Board member.
The transportation authority has begun collecting up to $325 million a year in new taxes and fees, which took effect Jan. 1 and would help finance projects such as a new interchange on the Fairfax County Parkway and the widening of the Prince William Parkway. The fees, assessed across Northern Virginia, include an annual $10 registration fee for all vehicles and a 2 percent hotel room tax among others.
If the law is overturned, fee collections will stop and the matter will go back to the legislature, which passed the transportation bill after more than two years of delicate negotiations. The people challenging the act in court include eight Northern Virginia residents, some of them anti-tax activists, and the Loudoun Board of Supervisors. One of their attorneys is former state Republican Party chairman Patrick M. McSweeney.
Another attorney for the group, Wesley Russell, told the Supreme Court justices that “no entity other than an elected governmental body may levy taxes” or issue bonds.
Several justices pointed out that other agencies, such as industrial development authorities, are legally able to borrow money. “Are you saying that if we agree with your argument, then an industrial development authority would be constitutionally prohibited from issuing bonds?’’ Chief Justice Leroy R. Hassell Sr. asked.
“It is a possible consequence, but I don’t think it’s a necessary consequence,’’ Russell responded.
“I don’t understand your answer,’’ Hassell said.
William Broaddus, an attorney for the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority, told the justices that if Virginia residents object to the transportation plan, “their recourse is to tell the General Assembly, ‘We don’t like what you’re doing.’ ’’
Copyright 2009 The Washington Post Company