The toll road troll gets his nose under the I-66 tent.

Yesterday, the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) unanimously approved the tolling of I-66 inside the Beltway for one-passenger cars that are headed eastbound during morning rush.  About three hours of tolls for 40,000 autos out of the more than 400,000 that make that trip each workday.   

The tip of the toll road troll nose just barely got stuck under the I-66 tent as the result of some last minute maneuvering to allow toll-free driving in the opposite direction during afternoon rush.  The decision will actually add vehicles to the dreadfully congested I-66 route, especially in the absence of any plans to expand the highway. 

We have no objection to tolling a highway—any highway—for the purpose of providing revenues to maintain and improve the highway, but this plan, like most other tolling plans, is aimed at taxing drivers to provide revenues for other purposes.  In this case, any surplus funds—and the tolls will be high enough to make sure they generate surplus funds—will be used to provide public transit options generally in the inside the Beltway I-66 corridor.   The Washington Post says, “The state expects to generate $18 million in toll revenue in 2018, the first year in which tolls will be fully implemented. The money can be used to support mass transit options on the I-66 corridor, as well as the possible widening of eastbound I-66.”

Well, there are no plans to widen eastbound (or westbound) I-66 and it is unlikely that there will be any for years, if not decades.  Physically, it will be extremely difficult to add a third lane from Falls Church to the Roosevelt Bridge as anyone who has driven that route well knows.  And with that extreme difficulty goes tremendous expense.  Moreover, Arlington County almost violently opposes any widening of the highway into its various neighborhoods and has since the interstate was built decades ago.

We think it more likely that, within a few years, the new toll will be expanded to all users of I-66 inside the Beltway—possibly with the toll break for carpools--and possibly from just peak periods to 24-hours per day with rates varying with peak flow periods.  Once the toll gate spigot begins generating revenues, there is no stopping the expansion of its coverage and increases in the tolls.

Moreover, we expect that the use of the tolls will expand to public transit measures well beyond the Beltway.   In fact, we anticipate that tolling I-66 will expand well beyond the Beltway.  It is easy to foresee that, as Northern Virginia continues to grow, tolling will extend as far out as Gainesville, ostensibly to help sustain the interstate and constrain traffic flows.  Those tolls will, like Dulles Toll Road tolls, be used to extend Metrorail’s Orange Line as far as the tolls—to the Gainesville exit area.

Our state and local leaders see a massive potential revenue flow from these tolls to help offset the huge cost of transportation infrastructure construction and operation.  They may even see future opportunities to extend the use of those tolls to non-transportation uses.  All they have to do is to take one tiny step at a time in moving forward so as not to so upset their constituents that they all get thrown out of office.  The first step is to get the toll troll’s nose under the tent.  That box has now been checked. 

Tolling I-66 Inside the Beltway: Adding Tolls AND Traffic to Pay for “Multi-Modal” Transportation.

While a bit outside of our Reston bailiwick, the extended dialogue on tolling I-66 inside the Beltway—mostly out of Richmond and NoVa discussions—and how that might be done appears to be running off the rails—if an interstate highway can be on rails.  Nonetheless, the latest proposal for I-66 inside the Beltway may set an ugly precedent for other highways closer to Reston, particularly the Dulles Toll Road (DTR) that would be inequitable, inappropriate, and ineffective in relieving congestion.    

 

As a starting point, let us say that we have no objection to the reasonable tolling of highways or other roads.  The key goal of a toll road should be to generate toll revenues that maintain and improve the tolled road in a way that is equitable while striving to reduce congestion.  That leads us to two key tolling principles:

•  The tolls:  Everyone pays tolls and they pay the same toll per mile at the same time except discounts for congestion-alleviating HOV car and van pools and public transit. 
• No separate HOT lanes for the one percent, which does virtually nothing to alleviate the congestion for the other 99%, while “free loaders” remain stuck in traffic.  HOT lanes merely give drivers a way around traffic by accepting a self-imposed tax that has virtually nothing to do with improving traffic flow or generating needed revenue--unless the tolls are prohibitive for most.
• To reduce congestion most effectively, we prefer an HOV-3 requirement over the longer term (vice HOV-2) with steep toll reductions, maybe a third of the SOV toll, maybe none at all.    
• Moreover, tolls should be distanced-based as well as time-of-day/ “peak period”/dynamic tolling, reflecting users actual use—unlike either the Dulles Greenway or the DTR.   (In particular, by being roughly at the mid-point of the DTR, Reston DTR users pay about twice the price per mile that others pay for using the full length of the toll road.

•  The revenues:  All the revenue from the tolls goes to maintaining and improving the tolled road, not other transportation programs or projects, much less non-transportation uses.  We have stated this frequently in the past regarding the ill-conceived $6 billion funding of Silver Line construction through DTR tolls. 

Now on the table for I-66, according the Washington Post, is a proposal that violates several of these principles:  If you drive alone east to work inside the Beltway during the “peak period,” you will pay a toll; if you drive west even alone, you won’t pay a toll.   HOVs (2-person now, 3-person ca. 2020) and transit would not be tolled.  The tolls would reverse direction during the peak period when you’re driving west to home at the end of the day.   As a result, people who live in DC who drive by themselves to work in Tysons would pay nothing to use I-66 while SOVs reversing that commute could be paying $17 per day.   

Officials, including the Governor, offer a little bit of sugar (for a short-term high) to help the toll medicine go down: 

• HOVs will continue to use I-66 with no toll for now; that’s a sucker’s play.
• SOVs  will be able to use I-66 inside the Beltway during rush period, not just HOV vehicles as is now the case, if you’re willing to pay the toll.  Years--maybe decades--from now, they will be cut out again when traffic growth demands it. 
• The toll only applies to “rush hour,” but that can be changed later to full-day tolling and almost certainly will.  The tolling camel’s nose—and the needed tolling equipment--would be under the tent. 

All this points to the prospect of ever expanding and increasing tolls:  all day vs. rush periods, all vehicles vs SOVs, both directions vs. one, and, of course, increasing toll rates.  Just ask DTR users.  Once the principle of tolling is accepted and the equipment is installed, the rest is as certain to follow as night follows day.  

The key problem is, as the article notes, “The toll revenue left over after the expenses of operating the HOT lanes system inside the Beltway will go to supporting alternative transportation — carpooling and commuter buses, for example.”   Why not lower the toll to meet just the cost of maintaining and improving I-66, at least inside the Beltway, if there is a surplus?  

I-66 tolling should not become a “cash cow” for agenda-driven bureaucrats, the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission in this case, to spend on even less cost-effective transportation modes, nominally to ease I-66 congestion.  While it’s true that drivers don’t pay the full cost of the roads they use (without tolls), we’ve never seen public transit of any type, much less bike riding or walking, cover its cost, much less help pay for roadway improvements.  Why should this be true? And the extent these “multi-modal” alternatives reduce commuting traffic is both minimal and transient, especially for the long-distance commuting that characterizes the I-66 corridor.  

A quick look at the Supplemental Report (2013), Figure 2.7, prepared by VDOT's consultant on the I-66 inititiave shows how cost-ineffective using tolls or taxpayer dollars for "multi-modal" transportation is.  In its "Refined Package (Peak-Only Tolls" option, throughput on I-66 inside the Beltway increases by about 40,000 people per day or a 9% increase in throughput from MWCOG's CLRP+.  Only 4,000 of those additional people will be moved public transit, about 10%, yet both the total cost and the cost per passenger to add those 4,000 people is 74% higher than the cost of adding POVs  as the table below shows.  Moreover, spending an extra $33 million per year on transit results in only a 0.9% shift in transportation mode productions from private vehicles to transit over 25 years.  In an era when our governments are badgered by their inefficient use of taxpayer (or, in this case, toll payer) monies, this is a perfect example of why that criticism continues.  If the intention of the I-66 plan is to increase I-66's throughput, the most cost-effective way to do so is to improve (widen) the highway; subsidizing added transit routes is a relative waste of money.  

 

The basic 2012 consultant’s report for VDOT guiding the I-66 initiative (during the McDonnell administration with amendments under the McAulliffe administration as recently as two weeks ago) also identifies some 60 bicycle and pedestrian improvements that the “surplus” I-66 tolls could fund.  Here is what GreaterGreaterWashington says enthusiastically about the improvements:

The report includes 60 bike/ped projects which include trail improvements to the Mt.Vernon, Custis, Four Mile Run, W&OD, Route 110, Washington Blvd and Arlington Blvd Trails; connector trails; bike facilities added to the Route 27 bridge over Route 110 and the Meade Bridge; bikeshare expansion and parking additions along the Rosslyn-Ballston Corridor and in Falls Church; Rosslyn Circle improvements, including a tunnel; bike lanes; and bike parking at Metro Stations. The list is too long to go into, so if curious, you should check it out starting on page 3-76 of the report.

The only roadway improvements explicitly identified in the proposal are to widen the western end of I-66 to three lanes, including extending the eastbound I-66/DTR merge to three lanes for a mile rather than the current quick transition from four to two lanes of eastbound traffic at the East Falls Church Metrorail station.  The east end I-66 chokepoints remain unchanged.

 

The program’s only strategic goal appears to be to generate revenue for development of alternative transportation modes after covering I-66 maintenance expenses.  As explained above, the proposal does not intend to relieve congestion on I-66.  In fact, it adds single-occupancy vehicles (SOVs) that are now banned from I-66 inside the Beltway during rush periods.  HOVs will not be discouraged from using the corridor because they will not be tolled.   

Longer term, the 2012 consultant’s report forecasts ”the increase in (transit) mode share is less than one percent for work trips.”  That’s less than one percent shift to transit for some $23 million in annual toll revenues totaling more some one-half billion dollars in tolls by 2040 at the initial suggested toll rates.  I-66 is to become a “cash cow” for the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission which will decide how those dollars are spent.  There are vague suggestions of future expansion of this portion of I-66, but they are always caveated by the huge restrictions on space to expand the highway by adding additional lanes.  More likely over time is the tolling of all vehicles in both directions all day will add to the revenues and keep congestion at a sufferable level, nothing more.

And tolling I-66 inside the Beltway will likely beget tolling and/or driving restrictions elsewhere.  Already Arlington County is examining how to prevent traffic diversion to its streets from I-66 because of the tolls.  Because the proposed tolls only apply to SOVs, not HOVs, in the near term, there actually shouldn’t be much of an impact because SOVs are already banned from I-66 during rush period.  That said, Arlington officials and residents see the long-term writing on the wall:  Tolls for everyone on I-66 that will divert traffic to Arlington’s already congested east-west rush hour streets.  And VDOT has not yet provided a traffic-impact analysis of its proposed tolling of I-66 even for the short-term.

Put simply, this I-66 inside the Beltway initiative is a new tax on highway transportation to pay for public transit, biking, and pedestrian transportation.   It is not intended to relieve or even stabilize congestion on I-66 despite public officials’ claims, which will grow as more people live outside and work inside the Beltway.  And it will almost certainly lead to higher tolls on the full range of vehicles using it over the full day every day over time.   

Buyer beware!

US Supreme Court Declines To Hear Challenge of Toll Road Fees Backing Metrorail Construction to Dulles Airport, Hunton & Williams, October 12, 2015

Hunton and Williams, the law firm representing MWAA, issued the following press release concerning the decision of the Supreme Court not to hear the case brought by Dulles Toll Road users:

On October 5, the US Supreme Court declined to review a ruling upholding the validity of tolls charged by the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA) to motorists who use the Dulles Toll Road. Toll Road revenues provide a significant portion of the $5.7 billion cost of constructing the Silver Line extension of Metrorail to Washington Dulles International Airport — one of the largest public infrastructure projects in the United States.

By denying certiorari, the Supreme Court left undisturbed a January 2014 decision of the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the dismissal of a class action lawsuit brought by Dulles Toll Road users. Rejecting the class plaintiffs’ argument that the tolls amounted to an unconstitutional tax, the Fourth Circuit held that the tolls were valid user fees for passage on the Toll Road. That lawsuit was the last of several actions filed since 2007 attacking the Toll Road user fees.

The Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari puts an end to more than eight of years of litigation over the Toll Road fees, leaving a clear path for MWAA to complete the full 23-mile Silver Line Metrorail expansion to Dulles Airport. . . .

Virginia politicians react to E-ZPass Express Lane fines, KMSP-TV, Fox 5 News, Minneapolis, MN, February 2, 2015

By Emily Miller, FOX 5 Chief Investigative Reporter

RICHMOND, Va. - We have exposed tens of thousands of dollars in fines drivers have been hit with for accidentally missing tolls on their E-ZPass Express Lanes in Virginia. The company that operates those lanes, Transurban, responded to our story by capping the fines and fees at $2,500, but many commuters say that is still too much.

Almost everyone I have interviewed in this series of reports has asked me why the state lawmakers haven't stepped in to help them.

“You wonder if these lawmakers realize that they signed up for this type of extortion when they signed up with this partnership with this company,” said Lisa Stanglin. . .

So, why the silence in Richmond?

Could it be that Transurban has spent almost $2.5 billion to build the E-ZPass lanes on the Beltway and I-95?

Or is it because Transurban gives political money? Unlike federal campaign laws, Virginia allows corporations to give directly to candidates. Also, Virginia has no limits on donations from corporations.

The non-partisan Virginia Public Access Project tracks money in politics.

According to their reports, Transurban has given almost half of a million dollars -- $445,710 to state politicians in the last ten years. Sixty percent of the donations went to Republicans while 40 percent went to Democrats. The Republicans are in control of the state legislature. . . .

Click here to read the rest of this story and see the video--and others like it by the same investigative reporter.

Just one question:  Where are the scores of Washington-area reporters, especially the dozens in Northern Virginia?  This is a major issue begging for public--and legislative--attention that will make Transurban's outrageous extortion disappear.  Ideally, it will lead to state control over all tolling of publicly used roads, including the Greenway.

Editorial: Time For A New Deal, Leesburg Today, January 15, 2015

It is the dawn of a new year, and, for Loudouners, that means it’s time to renew their futile protests against plans to ratchet up toll rates on the Dulles Greenway.

It’s an annual exercise in frustration that is no closer to resolution today than a decade ago.

The dance is a familiar one. Members of the county’s General Assembly delegation join area residents in expressing outrage that the State Corporation Commission would even consider yet another toll increase. Then SCC leaders respond that their hands are tied because the General Assembly has ordered the annual toll hike be approved.

Over the years, the General Assembly has done a good job of noting the many community problems caused by high toll rates, but it has failed to address any of them. However, residents should clearly understand that no other body can solve them.

The financial impacts of high tolls and the lack of distance pricing on area families is fairly obvious. The community impact of commuters avoiding the freeway and clogging neighborhood streets each morning and afternoon has been frequently discussed. Even safety concerns about having construction traffic and large trucks bypassing the highway have been repeatedly cited.

Perhaps they are merely local concerns that don’t resonate with General Assembly members.

How about an issue that should? Economic impact.

Click here for this editorial's look at the economic impact.

There is nothing in this editorial that hasn't also been said about the planned huge increases in the Dulles Toll Road tolls (now set for 2018 since the state coughed up $300 million to keep them down for a few years) to help cover the debt service payments for the Silver Line.

In the end, it will be the economic impact that drives the General Assembly to make a change, but--if history is any lesson--probably not until it is too late.  And we're getting there rather quickly as the cutbacks in federal spending have meant low to no growth in the area already and, therefore, no/low growth in county and state tax revenues.  Yet local and state governments want to spend more without raising or adding new taxes.  It won't work. 

Hold on to your seats, we're in for a bumpy economic ride.   

D.C.’s Silver-Line Slog, CITY Journal, Autumn 2014

The following are excerpts from the lengthy subject article by Ethan Epstein:

A costly and long-delayed subway project raises questions about America’s ability to build needed infrastructure.

BRIAN GORDON GREEN/NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC CREATIVE.  Metro Washington’s burgeoning population has overwhelmed the public transportation system, making traffic unbearable.

 

A trip through Washington, D.C.’s Dulles International Airport offers a glimpse of what people in the past thought transportation would look like in the future. Opened in 1962, the airport boasts a quintessentially “mod” look, thanks to a stunning, Eero Saarinen–designed main terminal meant to evoke flight. But Dulles evokes the early 1960s in another way: its lack of a rail connection to the city it serves recalls a time when the automobile was king. Indeed, Dulles, the city’s primary international airport, is situated nearly 30 miles of congested highway away from the District of Columbia’s downtown core and linked to the city by only infrequent public buses. Chronic heavy traffic makes the ride painfully slow.

But change is coming. This past summer saw the opening of the first segment of a new Washington subway (dubbed Metro) rail line that eventually will connect Dulles to D.C.’s central business district. The new line’s first phase cost $2.9 billion to construct, and the most optimistic estimates put the final price tag for the project—decades in the making—as high as $5.6 billion. That’s nearly $1,000 for every man, woman, and child in the Washington metro area. The sluggishness of the process and its eye-popping cost raise troubling questions about America’s ability to construct vital infrastructure. . .

As a point of comparison for just how expensive the Silver Line will prove to be, consider the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, for which the Russian government was roundly mocked for its vast spending—some $51 billion on construction, nearly $10 billion more than China spent on its 2008 summer games. In particular, critics pointed to a 30.4-mile railroad/highway connecting the ski slopes to the town of Sochi, which alone cost $8.7 billion—about $286 million per mile. As one commentator noted, it would have been cheaper to pave the pathway with a centimeter-thick layer of beluga caviar.

But Washingtonians shouldn’t be quick to chortle. If the Silver Line meets its currently projected cost, it would cost $243 million per mile. And the Russian project included both road and rail, while ascending mountains. . .

Is there a saner approach to transportation infrastructure?  . . . .

 Click here for the full article.

Environmental Design Change Won't Bust Silver Line Budget, Says MWAA, September 18, 2014

Martin DiCaro reports:

The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority’s new Silver Line project chief sought to assure the public on Wednesday that an environmental design change to the second phase of the Metrorail extension to Dulles Airport will not further burden taxpayers and toll payers.

Charles Stark, newly hired to oversee the Dulles Corridor Metrorail project at MWAA, said a $548 million contingency fund will more than cover expenses related to complying with new Virginia stormwater runoff regulations designed to protect the Chesapeake Bay watershed, first reported by WAMU 88.5 on Monday.

Any construction budget increase likely would fall on drivers on the Dulles Toll Road, whose tolls are covering half the Silver Line’s estimated $5.6 billion price tag. Phase I, from D.C. to Reston, opened in July seven months late and $150 million over budget. Phase II is scheduled to reach Dulles Airport in 2018. . .

“If the contingency fund is exceeded, who is going to pay? It is going to be the taxpayer and above all the poor people driving down the Dulles Toll Road who are already being asked to pay a huge amount of money for the Silver Line,” said John Hanley, vice president of the Reston Citizens Association, a group that represents 50,000 Reston taxpayers and has been a vocal critic of the Silver Line’s financing scheme.

While the environmental design change may not exhaust the contingency by itself, other problems that may crop up between now and 2018 likely will, Hanley said.

Click here for DiCaro's full report. 

So neither MWAA nor Clarke Engineers, which is managing the project, know how much added money or time MWAA's unilateral decision will take to voluntarily meet new stormwater management requirements.  That appears to be a failure of due diligence on MWAA's part, not to mention a lack of consideration that they are paying next to nothing while toll road users and Fairfax and Loudoun taxpayers pay more than 94% of all the added costs.  And even if they don't use all the contingency fund, wouldn't it be nice to save toll road users and taxpayers a few pennies??? 

But the decision is just MWAA behaving like it always does--unilaterally and capriciously.

MWAA Adopts Stormwater Regulations, Potentially Delaying Silver Line Phase 2, WAMU 88.5, September 16, 2014

Martin DiCaro, a leading reporter on Silver Line and Dulles Toll Road developments, reports that MWAA has decided to meet new state stormwater management requirements.  The change could affect both the budget and schedule for construction of Phase 2 of the Silver Line although MWAA has a considerable contingency fund to cover change orders and, since construction is in its early phases, the change may not affect the budget.  Still, the new requirements add to the cost of construction.

If the cost of the change exceeds the funding already set aside for contingencies, Dulles Toll Road users will be forced to absorb half the increased costs while the other half is absorbed by Fairfax, Loudoun, and MWAA under current funding arrangements.  Ironically, MWAA made the decision unilaterally, yet it has the smallest financial stake in any added costs (5.6%) so it's basically sticking toll road users and county taxpayers with nearly all the added costs. And, as you can read below, there was no requirement for MWAA to make this decision; it was voluntary.  Just spending other peoples' money!

Here are some excerpts from DiCaro's article:

The agency overseeing the construction of the second phase of the Silver Line Metrorail to Dulles Airport has decided to make a major change to the rail extension’s design to comply with new state environmental regulations, potentially adding cost and time to the project’s completion.

The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA), which ran the construction of the first phase of the Silver Line from D.C. to Reston, said new stormwater runoff regulations designed to protect the Chesapeake Bay watershed spurred the decision.

It is unclear how the work will affect the final cost and timetable of the $3 billion project that is supposed to reach the airport and extend into Loudoun County in 2018. . .

The Silver Line is being financed with a combination of federal and local tax dollars and toll revenues from the Dulles Toll Road, the latter covering about half of the entire project’s estimated $5.6 billion cost.

The design change to control and treat the flow of stormwater runoff in Fairfax and Loudoun Counties could increase the burden on the public to pay for the second phase of the rail line.

MWAA, not its contractor, is ordering the change, so the agency will have to dip into its sizeable contingency fund to begin to pay for it. The contractor team led by Clark Construction is not on the hook for the increased costs. A spokeswoman for Clark Construction declined to comment on this story, referring all questions to the airports authority.

MWAA was not required to meet the new regulations adopted by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality that took effect July 1. The Silver Line design was grandfathered into the old regulations, but because everything that will be built around the future rail tracks and stations in Fairfax and Loudoun will have to comply, MWAA decided to meet the new standards, too. . . .

Click here for the full article and broadcast.

Dulles Toll Road users shoulder an increasing share of Silver Line’s costs, Washington Post, July 12, 2014

By Lori Aratani and Mary Pat Flaherty July 12 at 7:26 PM

Dulles Toll Road users are shouldering nearly half of the costs of Metro’s soon-to-open Silver Line, a far bigger share than originally predicted.

Those drivers also face the biggest exposure for any additional cost overruns or delays on the rail line set to open July 26 — seven months late and $150 million over budget.

Commuters are vulnerable because tolls are the one share of the Silver Line project’s funding formula that is not capped at a fixed dollar amount or percentage of the final tab.

Since construction began five years ago, there have been five toll increases that spiked a common round trip from $2.50 to $7 or, viewed as a monthly tab for typical weekday commuters, from $50 to $140.

The impact of the line’s rising costs has been painfully apparent to drivers who use the road regularly. Yet the significance of rising tolls as a main funding source drew less public attention than heated intrastate political battles and engineering skirmishes over tunnels. . . .

Click here to read the rest of this article. 

While the increases in tolls on the Dulles Toll Road and their role in financing the Silver Line are not news to toll road commuters or Reston 2020 blog readers, their importance can not be ignored and we appreciate the Post picking up on this unfair and inequitable assignment of Metrorail costs to those who will or can not use the Silver Line for their purposes.

Although former Fairfax Board of Supervisors Chairman Kate Hanley is quoted as being "amazed" by the role highway tolls play in financing the rail line, the Fairfax Board under her successor, Gerry Connolly,, was specifically responsible for promoting and approving the 2007 "Funding Partners Agreement" that set this arrangement in place without so much as a public hearing. 

Without TIFIA funding--which is clearly a possibility as the Highway Trust Fund dries up in the next month without Congressional action--CDMSmith forecast that tolls would rise to $18 full toll each way by 2050 (about $7-$8 in today's dollars).  With TIFIA funding, tolls will still rise to about $12 each way, meaning an annual toll bill of about $4,800 for Dulles Toll Road users. 

And just for clarity, we would note that MWAA is paying only 4.1% of the rail construction costs (about $240 million)--less than half what it will cost to build the station at Dulles Airport and the rail line across Airport property ($587 million according to MWAA's April 2011 cost analysis).  And, oh yeah, MWAA will be leasing its land along the Silver Line to developers at a huge profit in the years ahead.  Fair, reasonable???

Of course, now Congressman Connolly is singing a different tune as he practically broke his arm patting himself on the back for his role in garnering a TIFIA funding commitment for the Silver Line.  While we appreciate his efforts along with those of Rep. Frank Wolf and Virginia Senators Warner and Kaine to gain this reduced-cost funding commitment, we know--and so do they--that this financial arrangement is unfair, inequitable, and quite possibly imprudent in the long term--even if TIFIA comes through. 

Before we sign off here, we will reiterate again that Reston 2020--and most Restonians--welcome the arrival of the Silver Line in Reston and its future extension into Loudoun County.  We believe it will be an important ingredient in the continuing economic health of our community.

We do, however, continue to object in the strongest possible terms to the abominable financial arrangements that force people who are not be able to use the Silver Line for any reasonable purpose to pay the largest share of its construction cost.  It is a disgrace and a mockery of sound public policy.