Taxing Issues
0
Votes

Taxing Issues

Supervisors agree unanimously to opposed proposed NVTA taxes.

In a show of solidarity, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to oppose the seven taxes the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority (NVTA) could implement on the region’s residents as early as July 12. The supervisors also voted to challenge the constitutionality of NVTA’s implementation of the taxes.

The NVTA is expected to file a bond validation lawsuit, which would certify the panel’s ability to impose several taxes and issues bonds to be repaid with the tax revenue.

The seven taxes could generate as much as $400 million in new revenue. Sixty percent of the regional tax would go toward transportation projects, with first priority given to projects identified last week, including six projects in Loudoun.

In April the Virginia General Assembly passed House Bill 3202, which gives the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority the ability to impose regional fees and taxes in their area of authority. The bill is an attempt to increase revenue for the region’s needed road and transportation improvements.

DURING THE BOARD’S July 3 business meeting, County Attorney John Roberts advised the board not to file its own suit and instead become a defendant in the NVTA’s lawsuit when it files.

"The reason I wanted to have this discussion is we started down a path of questioning the legality of the constitutionality of the authority having taxes," Supervisor Mick Staton (R-Sugarland Run), who is chair of the board’s transportation and land-use committee, said. "The easiest course of action to take is to participate in the bond validation suit."

If the NVTA does file a bond validation lawsuit, any affected party, including any residents, corporation or property owner, would have the opportunity to become a defendant.

Roberts told the board, however, it would have only 10 days in which to file to become a defendant.

"It requires quick action if you want to become a defendant," he said.

Staton said it was important for the board to take a stand on behalf of the residents it represents.

"The slippery slope that I was worried about already appears to have started," he said. "As a representative of my constituents, I feel it is my duty to stand up and say something about this. Are we just going to allow this and hope that some private citizen has the time and money to stand up and oppose this on their own?"

WHILE THE BOARD voted unanimously, not all of the supervisors were behind the challenge 100 percent.

Supervisor Jim Burton (I-Blue Ridge) said he was concerned about where the lawsuit would be heading.

"I have already participated in one bond validation suit and it was a disaster," he said. "I am more than willing to let the NVTA go down that route and let them discover if what they are doing is legal or not."

Supervisor Stephen Snow (R-Dulles) said the General Assembly needed to come back together and fix its proposal.

"I think we’ve got a bad law and before people are fined over it, they need to go back and do their homework and fix it," he said.

MANY OF THE supervisors expressed concern with the actions of the NVTA, including separating itself from the Northern Virginia Regional Commission and taking actions it had not been authorized to take.

"Last time I looked no one on the NVTA was appointed to wear crowns," Supervisor Bruce E. Tulloch (R-Potomac) said. "I believe that we are going down the wrong path. We need to hold people accountable for the things that they say so the people of Loudoun County can be served efficiently."

Supervisor Lori Waters (R-Broad Run) said she was concerned that an authority that is not elected by the people of Loudoun County could impose taxes on the county’s residents and that the General Assembly was not meeting its responsibilities.

"I think this is a case where Richmond created a tool in advocating their responsibility for what they were supposed to do in the first place," she said. "They wanted the ability to say, no, it’s not us doing it."

Chairman Scott K. York (I-At large), who is the county’s representative on the authority, said he believed it was important to have a dissenting voice if the authority does choose to file.

"I am not happy with the legislation that we were brought," he said. "If [the General Assembly] thought that taxes should be raised, they should have raised the taxes and not given the responsibility to an organization that is not elected by the citizens."