ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, February 15, 1996 TAG: 9602150042
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-10 EDITION: METRO
ELECTED officials of Roanoke city and Roanoke County recently agreed to form a special transportation district and impose a 2 percent gasoline tax, in part to replace disappearing federal funding for the valley's only public-transit system - Valley Metro buses.
The agreement is remarkable for two reasons: It marks a significant new commitment to regional cooperation in providing a service that clearly needs to be regional. And it involves a tax increase, which these days requires at least a modicum of political courage.
Alas, no good deed goes unpunished. The agreement hinged on taxing authority being granted by the General Assembly, and when the city and county asked valley legislators for help, they got zip. None of the local representatives in the House of Delegates would agree to sponsor the bill. Roanoke Sen. John Edwards made an obligatory gesture of introducing it ``by request'' - legislative shorthand for dead on arrival in Richmond.
In fairness to the lawmakers, it shouldn't be forgotten that Gov. George Allen has vowed to veto any tax increase. Even so, the city and county proposed a local gas tax, not a state tax increase. And the city and county agreed to reduce local real-estate taxes to offset the gas-tax impact for at least a year.
To be fair, too, it should be noted that Valley Metro isn't Virginia's only public-transit system in crisis because federal subsidies are to be eliminated by 1999. Nor is mass transit Virginia's only public-transportation need. State lawmakers may realize that a statewide gas-tax increase may soon be necessary. They may believe it will be easier to sell to the public if they don't squander political currency voting for regional gas taxes now.
Even so, in this instance, Roanoke City Council and the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors were willing to take the political heat - and for good reason. Countless local residents and businesses will be hurt if Valley Metro is forced to curtail bus service, already too limited for an area this size. A lot of people who ride the bus may not be able to work without it.
Meanwhile, the city - already subsidizing the bus company with about $670,000 a year - will have to ante up more just to keep service at current levels. That's money it won't be able to devote to other needs.
Consider, too, that the proposed city-county transportation district could be the building block for a better and larger district, eventually extending to the New River Valley. This could foster not just greater recognition of interdependence, but more cooperation for transportation improvements benefiting the entire region - perhaps along lines recommended by the citizen-based New Century Council. Such improvements could include everything from highway and rails to greenways and bike paths. But without taxing authority, the idea has no wheels.
The Urban Partnership, a coalition of municipalities and business interests, is asking the General Assembly to make millions in state funds available to encourage multijurisdictional responses to economic-growth issues. The city and county tried to begin, without asking or waiting for state funds, and they got the cold shoulder. They may not have done their homework sufficiently, but what is state lawmakers' excuse?
These representatives - including House Majority Leader Dick Cranwell of Vinton - regularly lecture local governments to work together to solve local problems. Haven't they some explaining to do?
LENGTH: Medium: 63 lines KEYWORDS: GENERAL ASSEMBLY 1996by CNB