| Virginia isn’t
like Tennessee
All
I read with interest your sidebar piece on smart growth
in Tennessee that was in the October 2002 issue of Virginia
Business. Overall, I found it to be excellent, with
one exception.
While
there are many parallels between Tennessee and Virginia,
there is one glaring difference that would make the
adoption of a smart growth plan similar to Tennessee’s
very difficult. Virginia, unlike Tennessee and the other
48 states, has cities that are completely independent
of their adjacent county. In other words, counties perform
no services nor collect any taxes within Virginia’s
39 independent cities unless by agreement.
One
important aspect of the Tennessee smart growth plan
that you do not mention are the provisions that enable
Volunteer State cities to annex adjacent county property,
which forestalls development pressures in the county
and provides the cities with additional tax base and
vacant land for new development. While annexation is
a process that raises citizen concerns elsewhere in
the nation, annexation in Virginia also removes permanently
population and tax base from the affected county. Principally,
for that reason, the General Assembly placed a “temporary”
moratorium on city annexations in 1987 and has extended
that bar seven times since then.
In
1980, Virginia established a process whereby its 190
towns can conclude agreements with their parent counties,
authorizing the towns to annex by ordinance within a
predetermined growth area in return for the towns giving
up their right to become independent cities. There are
currently 13 such agreements in effect in the Commonwealth.
The Virginia simplified annexation method is very similar
to the one enacted in Tennessee as part of its smart
growth laws.
Again,
from a long-time professional planner, thank you for
your writing on the important subject of growth and
your noting the importance of regional planning.
Ted
McCormack, AICP
Deputy
Director
Virginia Commission on Local Government
Richmond, Va.
Yes, please tax,
tax, tax that cigarette!
Your
commentary “Tax, tax, tax that cigarette”
(October 2002) was right on target with its endorsement
of a 60-cent cigarette tax increase in the 2003 General
Assembly session.
Such
a move would be a “win-win-win” for Virginians,
from financial, health and political points of view.
From an economic standpoint, a per-pack cigarette tax
increase of 60 cents would generate more than $376 million
annually for Virginia’s coffers, which would certainly
help with the state’s $2 billion deficit. It would
also result in 26,000 lives saved from tobacco-caused
premature death, 53,000 fewer future youth smokers and
43,600 adult smokers who would quit.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
each pack of cigarettes costs Virginia taxpayers $5.57
in health care costs and lost productivity. It hardly
makes sense that despite the burden of these costs,
the state collects only a few pennies per pack in excise
tax revenue.
A
poll conducted this summer by several public health
advocacy groups, including the American Cancer Society,
showed 67 percent of Virginia voters support a 60-cent
per-pack cigarette tax increase. The poll also showed
that voters would express their support for a cigarette
tax increase at the polls, looking favorably on a candidate
for statewide office who supports the tax versus a candidate
who opposes it regardless of the candidate’s party
affiliation.
The
time has come for Virginia legislators to address the
Commonwealth’s health and fiscal challenges, and
the answer is raising the cigarette tax by 60 cents.
Susan
Morgan
American Cancer Society Volunteer/
Celebration on the Hill Ambassador
Susan’s Paint and Paper
Radford,Va.
Editor’s note: The commentary did not specifically
endorse a 60-cent per pack tax but used that figure
as an example.
Return
to Virginia Business - November 2002
|
