Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.)
Thursday, July 28, 2005
1:15 PM
In Thursday's article, Washington Post staff writer Lyndsey Layton reports:
"Rep. Thomas M. Davis III plans to file a bill today asking Congress to make a major new commitment to Metro and provide $1.5 billion to keep trains, tracks, stations and buses in good repair and relieve the crowding that threatens to overwhelm the system.
"But the money, which no other transit system in the country would receive and which Metro says it deserves because of its unique role in carrying federal workers and visitors in the nation's capital, comes with several strings attached."
"The bill says Metro can have the funds only if it hires an inspector general, who would track the way the agency is managed and spends its money, investigate employee reports of wrongdoing and publicly report the findings."
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III was online Thursday, July 28, at 1:15 p.m. ET to discuss his proposal to provide $1.5 billion to Metro.
Read the full story: Bill Offering Metro $1.5 Billion Insists On More Oversight, Dedicated Funding (Post, July 28)
More From The Post: A Package Deal For Transit
The transcript follows.
____________________
washingtonpost.com: Rep. Davis will be with us shortly.
_______________________
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: I am pleased to be here with you today, and look forward to your questions.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.: The proposed $1.5 B in funding is a great idea (and much needed) as are the requirements for two federal representatives on the board and a new inspector general. However, the Vienna land-use limitation smacks solidly of NIMBY-ism. Shouldn't the land use issue be left up to the local government? Would you support the bill without the Vienna restriction? (simple questions that need to be addressed, not talked around)
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: Land use is left up to the local government. We hope the provision will prove unnecessary, but the Board has to address our concerns about parking and the balance between commercial and residential densities.
The site can be developed without the Metro parcel. We only address Metro's property.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.: Mr. Davis, As a whole, your bill is one of the most sensible measures I've seen in years. But why are you pushing for a less dense development at MetroWest? Isn't the point of Metro, or any public transit system, to encourage dense development?
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: Vienna is the terminus for the Orange Line. The elimination of 650 parking places when there is already a parking shortage is nonsensical. I have to protect Metro's interests. I believe the Board needs to do the appropriate traffic studies before it decides to increase the densities. And I have concerns about the ability of Metro's cars to handle increased ridership coming from Vienna, and what that means to riders further down the Orange Line.
_______________________
McLean, Va.: Representative Davis,
I think the proposals outlined in the article are entirely reasonable, given Metro's history and circumstances.
When a Virginia referendum to add a penny to the sales tax to support transit was voted down a few years ago, I remember a colleague saying he voted against it because "once you add the tax it never goes away." Will the promise of federal funds be enough to convince the average voter to accept a local tax increase?
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: We don't mandate a local tax increase. All we require is a dedicated source of revenue that is reliable. That could include taxes that are already collected that would be dedicated to Metro instead of going into the general fund.
I did favor the sales tax increase because transportation never seems to win out in the struggle for general fund money.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.: Rep. Davis,
This is a terrific proposal that recognizes the importance of Metro to the federal government. Does your bill require that a portion of the funding be used for security enhancements?
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: We believe security enhancements should be funded through the Homeland Security appropriations. This bill goes for maintenance and other capital needs. We have fought for additional dollars elsewhere in the federal budget for Metro security.
_______________________
Vienna, Va.: Tom - Thank you for adding the "no sale/no lease" language to your bill (for Fairlee Metro West). Thank you for standing up to Gerry Connolly. You have the support of at least one Democrat, and I suspect a whole lot more.
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: Thank you.
_______________________
Ashburn Campus, MCI: Hello Congressman, I am happy to see that someone realizes Metro needs another set of eyes and ears on the board in order to keep things running. My question to you is if the money is given to Metro, will any of it be going towards the Dulles Extension, especially after the report yesterday that they are over budget on the Tysons portion, even before one hole is dug?
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: No, this money is for the maintenance of the current system. We have money for the extension to Reston in the transportation bill that will come before the House this evening, provided it meets Federal Transit Administration standards.
However, FTA is currently reviewing the numbers on the cost of the extension to see if it is viable. It is possible that the local and state governments badly underestimated the capital costs and that could jeopardize the project.
I hope not.
_______________________
Centreville, Va.: Mr Davis,
As you may have noticed, this area is experiencing a severe housing shortage. If we don't build more housing units closer in, those people will end up out in Gainesville, still adding more cars to 66 and 29. The problem with Vienna's traffic isn't Vienna residents. It's the long distance commuters. Given the incredible success of the high density developments in Arlington (Rosslyn, Clarendon, Ballston), what is your justification for opposing a similar development in Vienna? And given your proximity to the site in question, don't you think you're a little too close to the issue to be impartial?
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: First of all, I live six miles from the site. Secondly, Vienna is not Arlington, and doesn't want to be Arlington. It has Tysons on one side, and if this development goes through, the Town of Vienna -- just voted the fourth best place to live in the country -- will change forever.
Moreover, if you are trying to take the Metro from Centreville, this eliminates 650 parking places currently available at the Vienna station. I think it needs another look and some compromise has to be reached. We don't argue with higher density. But the densities envisioned here appear to me to be too excessive.
_______________________
Fairfax, Va.: Congressman Davis, thank you for encouraging our local officials to commit to dedicated Metro funding and to be more responsible in Metro land deals. The Vienna Metro Station may lose 750 parking spaces due to proposed development. Will the 1.5 billion be earmarked for projects such as parking garages?
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: At this time, Metro's plans do not allow for construction of parking garages. However, we do save 650 parking places from being eliminated at the Vienna station.
_______________________
Reston, Va.: Mr Davis,
Thank you for taking the time to answer questions with us.
In general, I think this Bill makes sense and can be very helpful. How soon do you think it could be passed and Metro would be able to access these desperately needed funds?
Thanks
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: If the Compact is amended in a timely manner -- the Compact is the agreement among the federal government, Virginia, Maryland and D.C. -- this should take effect by 2007.
It can't come soon enough.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: There are six principal directors and six alternate directors on Metro's Board of Directors. How will the addition of two seats for federal overseers possibly make any bit of difference in the performance of metro? Wouldn't that just slow down the need for changes by increasing bureaucratic politics?
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: First, having a federal voting member serves as a tiebreaker -- seven votes, rather than six. Second, it gives the federal government a voice at the table, something we currently lack.
But we do not upset the balance of having Metro be a primarily locally operated system.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: Recent Washington Post articles have outlined Metro's numerous lapses in fiscal mismanagement, customer service, and shuttle/bus maintenance. Why should a fiscally irresponsible company be given a billion-dollar buyout?
washingtonpost.com: Washington Post Series: Off the Rails (Post, June 5-8)
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: Without more money, the system collapses. And without better management, the system also collapses.
Our bill does both. It gives Metro more money, but we add an independent inspector general, federal representation on the board, and more reporting requirements to go with the money.
_______________________
Burke, Va.: Rep. Davis,
Have you given any consideration to mandating that the two new proposed "federal" members of the Metro board be regular (preferably daily) Metro users? (Or mandating the appointment of a passenger representative?) Only 1 or 2 of the current members ever ride the system.
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: That issue was brought up today by Mr. Van Hollen at a hearing of the Government Reform Committee that I chaired. It is a distinct possibility, but we still need to hear from the Administration on this.
_______________________
Metro West: Eliminate 650 parking spaces? Are they kidding? What about all of the people who will drive to work at Metro West from Loudoun and Prince William, adding who knows how many cars?
It seems that the people in favor of it are only too happy to have someone powerful in their corner -- Gerry Connelly -- and we who are opposed to it aren't allowed to have anybody powerful in our corner who can actually do something about it. Keep up the fight against that no-good non-smart-growth development!
-- A constituent from near Vienna Metro
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: Thank you. I think you are one of the silent, unrepresented majority on this issue.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: Excellent idea. What are the odds of this bill being passed and how long would it take for it take affect? Doesn't metro basically have to accept this proposal? It would be irresponsible for them not to accept it based on the current situation.
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: I think the odds are pretty good. We don't intend to mark this bill up until the fall. We would like to move it out of the House by the end of the year, to get it over to the Senate.
But we need to continue to work with the Administration to shape it.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: Thanks for your willingness to address some of the problems with Metro. I'd like to know how your bill will ensure that Metro uses the extra money it's receiving for the most high-priority projects (buying more train cars, extending lines, etc.) instead of wasting it on unneeded things like pedestrian tunnels.
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: The money goes to Metro's Capital Improvement Plan -- this includes 340 new rail cars to run 8-car trains during peak hours; 275 new buses and 3 bus garages; and needed maintenance at Metro stations.
Pedestrian tunnels are an important way to relieve the burden at transfer stations, and this bill also includes funding for tunnels connecting Farragut North and West, and Gallery Place and Metro Center.
_______________________
Richmond, Va.: As a Republican, do you believe the Federal Government should have less of a say in the daily operations of State Governments? Also as an extension of that shouldn't the Federal Government remove itself from interfering with the decisions of a local government in regards to land use when the state has given the locality the power over local land use decisions? Does this bill set a precedence for a new role by the Federal Government to rule on local land use decisions?
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: The local government can do whatever it wants. It just can't use Metro land to do it. Metro should not be selling property to lose parking spaces. That's hardly interference.
_______________________
Reston, Va.: Mr. Davis, many thanks for spearheading efforts to provide the necessary investments to maintain and improve Metro service for the entire D.C. metropolitan area. If your bill passes, how long do you think it will be before we begin to see improvements in Metro services (more trains, more frequent trains, etc.)?
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: Thank you. The answer to your question depends on how long it takes the states to ratify the changes to the Metro Compact.
In this case, the federal government brings some additional oversight and $1.5 billion dollars. We ask the localities to dedicate a source of revenue. That could take a month, or it could take years. But it's the only leverage we have.
_______________________
Vienna, Va.: Chairman Davis -
Why do you oppose the proposed condo development at the Vienna Metro station? Is it true you oppose this development because you believe that Democrats tend to live in such developments?
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: No, that's ridiculous. I have no way of knowing who is going to move into the development. But I do wonder where all the cars are going to go, with no improvements on I-66.
This is a similar concern to that of Congressman Al Wynn, a Democrat in Prince George's County.
_______________________
Vienna, Va.: Mr. Davis, as a resident of Vienna, thank you for doing what you can to make sure Fairfax County listens to us. The proposed development around the metro system is way too big, will cause huge traffic delays, and they're basing their decision on an extension out to Dulles that might not even happen!
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: Thank you.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.: I can understand the concern about parking in Vienna, but why not allow the dense development that will take advantage of the transportation network and increase "feeder" bus service to the metro? I think a lot more people would be willing to give up their cars if we made it easier to get to the station by other means.
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: The county is in the middle of a transportation study to determine that. Currently, we know that 2,200 new units in Vienna will generate thousands of trips per day in vehicles. And no one has worked to mitigate that impact on I-66 and the surrounding area.
We don't try to stop the development. We simply try to mitigate its effects on commuters and surrounding citizens, who elect me.
_______________________
Vienna, Va.: If your concerns about MetroWest are related to parking shortages and traffic, why not add requirements for studies on these to the bill? Instead (according to The Post article) you simply banned the sale/lease of the Vienna land.
Other local members of Congress reportedly added such practical stipulations, yet you (reportedly) simply banned the Metro from selling/leasing land for Metro West.
How do you explain this? Was it bad reporting or bad governing?
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: I'm willing to remove all restrictions if the concerns are addressed, as opposed to writing a criteria that can be indefinite and be the basis for litigation.
Same concerns, just a different approach. I'm hopeful this will work out for everyone involved.
_______________________
Falls Church, Va.: Why has it taken so long for dedicated funding for Metro to be considered?
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: It's been 25 years. Previous chairmen of this Committee have not seen it as a priority.
_______________________
Alexandria, Va.: You State "The local government can do whatever it wants. It just can't use Metro land to do it. Metro should not be selling property to lose parking spaces. That's hardly interference." Please elaborate on why the local government can not use the land and why it is not interference?
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: The re-zoning includes 67 non-Metro acres, which we don't touch in any way, shape or form. We simply don't allow Metro's three acres to be part of the plan until its interests are protected as well as those of the Metro riders.
_______________________
Fairfax, Va.: Mr Davis, you say you wonder where all the cars for the MetroWest development will go. My question is where they will all go if MetroWest is NOT built? It's not like stopping MetroWest will stop people from moving to Northern Virginia. They have to go somewhere. Where do you propose they go if not next to Metro stations?
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: I doubt that the people who move to MetroWest, into high rises, will instead move to Centreville or Gainesville. Their orientation is more to downtown. I guess you could ask, how far out do you want the city to come. Centreville? Washington D.C. had 800,000 people in 1950 and currently has 550,00 people. There is adequate room for density in the core without creeping out further.
Having said that, these are ultimately county decisions, and not federal. But the interests of Metro riders at the Vienna terminus deserve consideration, which in my opinion has been lacking.
Also, the Town of Vienna Council unanimously opposes this development and we are trying to bring them into the process. You'd hope that local officials would have done this, and I'm sorry that I have to be the one to do it. But these voters elect me, too. And we have a Metro system, which at the Congressional level, I oversee.
Again, our goal can't be to stop the development, but to temper it.
_______________________
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III: Thank you very much for all of your questions.
_______________________
Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.