One of the first posts I wrote on this blog was about the Dillon Rule. And if you search this blog, you’ll find that I often rail against it. I promised last week to open a thread where we could discuss it. From an editorial in today’s Virginian-Pilot:
The state’s rigid adherence to the Dillon Rule – which requires local governments to get permission from the legislature to do virtually anything, including such mundane matters as increasing dog and cat fees or pedestrian ordinances – prevents mayors and supervisors from finding ways to provide public services and end expensive duplication.
So I’m not alone in my dislike of Virginia’s interpretation of the Dillon Rule. While I recognize that there are benefits – primarily to businesses – I believe the costs outweigh them.
Your thoughts?
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Dillon was an Iowa State Supreme Court Justice at the turn of the century (1900) who wrote a series of Essays on local government, corruption within and how to manage it and deal with it.
The premise of the “Dillon Rule” was the all local politicians are crooked. Thus the rigid adherence to asking the state for permission to raise taxes. In my opinion, this is a myopic view, as there is no question that state and federal elected officials are as big a crooks as the local folks. The Dillon rule has prevented localities from raising taxes for any given whim. Just imagine the slew of new taxes Virginia Beach residents would pay, if there were no restrictions! If you think taxes are bad now, just take the Dillon Rule away.
There are pro’s and con’s to the “Dillon Rule” but given its history, the taxpayers have benefited more than the local governments have suffered.
I’m curious what your objections are to it.
The only gain the taxpayers have made, based on your comments, is the lack of new taxes.
There is also a cost to that lack of new taxes. Look at the transportation/road issues in Hampton Roads, the school issues, among others. Some are issues that should be addressed by the local leadership, that have to be addressed by the folks in Richmond.
I believe I have heard Vivian, and a lot of others, say voters have more sway with the electeds closer to them. If true, as I believe it is, we should want to have the legitimately local control kept local, for the particular reason you state,”there is no question that state and federal elected officials are as big a crooks as the local folks”.
Dillion doesn’t allow that.
Right, T.W. At the end of the week, while I feel wasted hours of my life bleed away in endless beltway traffic, I always tell myself how lucky I am as a taxpayer that Fairfax, Arlington and Alexandria have absolutely no options or opportunities to fix the region’s roads because of the cantankerous legislators from the southern and western reaches of the state who won’t allow those municipalities to fund it themselves.
It’s the same sense of joy I’m sure most taxpaying citizens from the township of Clifton in Fairfax County experience when their tax dollars go to pay for schools out in Martinsville while the elementary school in their own back yard gets shuttered because of a lack of funding.
Yep, nothing wrong with the Dillon Rule and the infusion of state politics into local policy.
TW – I’m guessing that you made no effort to read any of the links I posted. Kinda makes it hard to answer your question. Besides, if the Dillon Rule was, as you imply, only about taxes, there probably wouldn’t be nearly as much objection as there is.
Isn’t it some form of the Dillon Rule that the federal government wants?
They take our money and then, to get any of it back to fund highway projects, we have to agree to the federal blackmail and set specific speed limits and drinking ages. Or, they take our money and, to get any of it back in education funding, we have to agree to their requirements.
The rule/structure itself is inherently neutral, I think. That is, you can end up in a Dillon Rule state with extraordinary, or very little, local autonomy. It’s all about how the structure is used.
To judge the application in any meaningful way, we need to look at the context and results. Sort of like “States Rights”. Nothing wrong with that, in theory. In practice, it’s the banner generally waved by those pushing worst and most oppressive policies in America. Similarly, the Dillon Rule in Virginia is mostly about rural areas imposing their policy preferences on NoVA and Hampton Roads while happily taking a net cash flow from these areas.
Silence, I guess you are referencing the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority that was ruled as being unconstitutional by Virginia’s Supreme Court. So, you’re blaming the south and west of the Commonwealth for that legal rendering?
It also prevented HRTA, for which I am grateful. Ironically, Hampton Roads faces similiar issues that NORVA does. Not to the same extent as you guys, but we also send a large amount of revenue to Richmond and don’t get anything near back. Partly as you say, due to legislators from other regions. In fact, Silence, we get coerced into self-funding through regional taxation. At that point you give the rest of Virginia further ammunition. At the point where you do get regional taxing authority, they can say,”They already have a sufficient funding stream. They can raise their regional taxes and keep their damn grubby hands off of the Education…..oops, I mean General Fund.” So, thank goodness we don’t have the HRTA and the rest of the state will be further pushed for a level field.
And as for that “General”Fund, proponents of regional taxation normally defend the GF with aggression. Do we have a transportation “emergency” or not? If we do, I would think the GENERAL fund would be a good temporary source of funding. If not, don’t claim we have an emergency need for transportation money, because in that instance, I see your motivation and am not interested in hearing your arguement. Either we need something or we don’t. Either it is an “emergency” or it is just pathetic obfuscating rhetoric pleading for more taxes.
It is the state at large that wants Hampton Roads to contribute more and recieve less. It is Virginia at large that would prefer that we raise our own taxes regionally and allow even more of a cushion in the “General Fund”. It is the state at large that would have Hampton Roads, not the state itself, PAY FOR the expansion of the STATE OWNED port and Port Authority’s infrastructure improvements that will handle many additional trucks to and from an expanded port that benfits the entire state.
For Doug Knack, I again would refer to my comments already made, but also add that local shool populations have decreased. Virginia Beach has even begun closing elementary schools (Plaza Elem.) due to what? An “over capacity”. Schools in Norfolk may have issues in addition to what VB has, but it has nothing to do with the Dillon Rule. Open to hearing your case on that though.
I do agree with Vivian on the issue that more is at play than taxation. Thus far, however, I still haven’t heard anything that persuades me on that end. Cities often ask for and are granted needed and reasonable changes. Often it is rubber stamping. In fact, as Vivian pointed out already, it takes active citizen involvement if you want to thwart some fishy scheme your council dreamed up. Truly, if you want better government, you had better show up!
Going to a point along the lines of what TW spoke of, Norfolk has greater room to manuver than Virginia Beach. To be honest, I am quite happy that Virginia Beach City Council was defeated by the voters in its quest to get a Development and Housing Authority with which to seize property more easily. I am not exactly impressed with Norfolk’s Authority and wouldn’t want it for VB. Virginia Beach already has had a shameful relationship with property owners of Burton Station. My how easy it is to put an airport next to neighborhoods belonging to former slaves that were given that land when they were freed. How do decendants years later protect their land from noisy airplanes when they’re persecuted based on race? They Don’t! Likewise, it is hard to defend one’s property when even more years later, Virginia Beach Council sees potential industrial development in their neighborhood and tries to rush the landowners elsewhere without fair compensation. In fact the zoning regulations preventing them from improving their property actually helps keep the value down for when the city does attempt condemnation. The improvement of churches was even prevented. Talk about violation of property rights! All shown in fantastic reporting by the Virginian Pilot.
So thank goodness to the Commonwealth’s response to Kelo vs. New London (How about that Pfizer plant? Poetic justice!!). Thank goodness for VB voters giving a resounding “NO!” to a Redevelopment Authority. Thank goodness for the Dillon Rule that prevents VB Council and manager from arbitrarily bullying people off of land more than they already do.
Dillon came up with his line of thinking in a corrupt era where city power brokers were going to every means to reach the end of having the railroad come their direction. It is power that corrupts people and the Dillon Rule is a check to that power and abilty to rule corruptly. Reasonable changes are granted as a matter of course. Requests that run counter to property rights or otherwise violate the citizenry stand another review because of the Dillon Rule.
I just don’t feel sympathy for government officials that feel frustration at not being able to raise our taxes in ways that are less noticeable to the voters. I don’t pity the city official wanting to boot good families off of land they took pride in.
I am no opponent of progress or legal development. I just insist that the US Constitution be obeyed and real attention focused on the words “JUST COMPENSATION” in our 5th amendment.
“nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
”
Just compensation does not mean property value assessed way after everyone knows the land will be condemned. It does not mean watered down values that would give Coca-Cola incentive to look to the city of Norfolk to condemn an up to code auto parts lot for Coke’s additional parking spaces. When Coke goes through the city and doesn’t send an offer to the land owner, something is stinking in Norfolk!!
So yes, the court did stop that, but it goes to show willingness to do harm to property rights. The Dillon Rule along with the court system provides checks to such criminality.
It some circumstances the Dillon Rule may be preventative and thus make for swifter justice. After all, rights delayed are rights denied, so better to error on the side of individual liberty. By the way, when the developing authority kicks out neighborhoods of poor people in the name of development and rarely gives the owners of well kept property fair compensation, just where do these people go? If as in many cases, the money given to them for their land isn’t enough to buy a comparable home, do you even give a rat’s behind about it? Somehow, I think the various “authorities” become accustomed to living with that.
Thus far, I see the Dillon Rule as protective rather than an undue burden on local government. However, we do have the US Constitution and the courts and even though not having the Dillon Rule would make it easier for citywide trampling of rights, I hold out that there may be more circumstances that unduly impede local governments that I am not aware of. Since my main focus is on individual liberty, I mostly come across evidence of government abuse and may not catch all the potential for improvement by the government that does NOT run contrary to an individual’s Natural Rights. I’m somewhat confident in my beliefs on this topic, but I am open to persuasion. I may have missed something crucial that would alter my view of the Dillon Rule.
Britt,
You’ve spent too much time hanging with Reid Greenmun.
First, your response was Reid-length. 🙂
Second, monies coming from the General Fund for transportation don’t qualify for Federal matching funds. Federal law requires dedicated revenue streams and accounts.
What you could do (which Reid never gets) is to fence some of the money now going to the General Fund into the Transportation Trust Fund. That would increase transportation funding while meeting the Federal requirements.
Henry, I am long winded and often feel compelled to cite a myriad of examples to back or illustrate my opinion. Part of the reason I am prone to that is that, I know, Just because you say something doesn’t make it so.
You kinda get what I’m saying and “fencing” as you put it, is fine with me. Either you REALLY think we need more money and we have an emergency or you don’t. If you REALLY think we have an emergency, then shifting proceeds like from ABC stores to the Transportation fund (even temporarily assuming our emergency is temporary and fixable)would make sense. The money doesn’t have to come from that source, but it needs to come from somewhere.
Anytime you say ANYTHING about pulling money for transportation, the big government tax lovers scream about raiding the General Fund as if Transportation isn’t a big enough priority to get some more state money. Then they insist on raising taxes. Either we have an emergency and it is hurting our economy or we don’t. To our transportation operatives I ask, “Which is it?” If we have one, divert some money and prioritize for that emergency we have now.
So, I agree in long winded fashion, that there are ways to get money into the fund and eventually get matching funds should the Federal Government have any money left.
I think those who criticize the Dillon Rule are kidding themselves about local government. I hate to say it, but the past 20 years have seen a distinct decline in local government in the Commonwealth. People are just too busy to serve any longer, so more and more localities are getting poorer and poorer representation.
Take a look at towns. Wow, there are certain towns that really require begging just to get enough candidates to fill the ballot. I can think of one (Hurt, Va) that literally did not have enough candidates a few years ago and the last member of council was elected by write-in. Think about that…the town couldn’t even get enough candidates to fill the ballot. Or school boards. Only an idiot can look at the “revolution” in the early 90s and call it a success. Oh, the end of the Byrd Machine they proclaimed! Isn’t it grand that we can now elect school boards. The truth is that the vast majority of these elections are never contested….get west of 288 and look at statistics. You’ll be surprised at just how abysmal that failure has been in “opening up the process.” HA! And don’t get me started on boards and commissions. Ask a City or County Clerk how hard it is to ever get these things full in certain places. People just don’t have a night a month to give any longer. I currently represent three local gov’t bodies, and two of them contain members that are known to sleep during meetings. That’s right, they sleep. They’re not bad people and their heart is in the right place of service to the community, but I would certainly have qualms about extending their powers when they sleep at board meetings and sometimes don’t even bother to read board packets.
So many in the General Assembly see these horrible local gov’t situations and just don’t want to “open it up” for fear of what may result.
I don’t mean to sound so negative, but sometimes facts have to be put on the table. If more younger, qualified, competent people volunteered to serve on boards and commissions and actually ran for office, the GA might feel a little more comfortable in loosening power. But most of these Delegates and Senators see the paucity of individuals willing to serve at a local level and just don’t feel like it’s a wise move.
Which comes first – the loosening of the Dillon Rule or the competent people?
The competent people get into positions and bang their heads up against the wall because the rule prevents them from enacting what they want to do. Or they never get appointed to boards and commissions because they advocate a change in the way “things have always been done.”
So all of Virginia is to be hamstrung by the few localities where incompetents serve?
I don’t think for one minute that the GA would loosen the power. In fact, I’ve spoken to far too many who started out supporting a loosening of the Dillon Rule only to get to Richmond and become drunk with power.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That’s what the strict interpretation of the Dillon Rule gives us.
All due respect, I did read the links, and fail to see that a good case can be made for abolishing the “Dillon Rule” in Virginia. No question it goes beyond taxes, but that is the immediate first thought when considering the Dillon Rule by most, who are familiar with it.
Had to laugh when I saw “transportation” brought up. That is now, always has been a STATE ISSUE. The fact that legislators haven’t had the guts to fix VDOT, then raise taxes, is not a local issue, nor has anything to do with the Dillon Rule.
So far we’re 11 posts into the thread and no one has a made a solid, sensible, intelligent case for abolishing the Dillon Rule, nor has anyone made a case that the premise of the Dillon rule is flawed in any manner. At least one that makes sense.
Anyone thinking that an additional layer of bureaucracy (HRTA for example) would “FIX” anything must be waiting for the tooth fairy to catch up on those lost teeth! The Dillon Rule has prevented more government, unelected more government from taxing us to death.
The fact is, the Dillon Rule has worked in Virginia. You can probably point to isolated issues, where you say it doesn’t work, and may be right, but overall, its worked, and thats why there isn’t a rush to change it.
Besides, the same do-nothing republicans and democrats who won’t fix transportation, aren’t going to get off their dead-hind-ends to wrestle with the Dillon Rule. Too busy making backroom deals and raising money for the next election to be bothered.
Home Rule? What a wonderful example, right across the 14th Street Bridge for Home Rule!
Really? Because me and my neighbors are mostly quite ready to fund and fix our transportation problems. But the anti-tax zealots from elsewhere have done an excellent job of using the Dillon Rule structure to prevent us from doing it. So, because some guy who doesn’t see any problems with his Bath County commute and hates all taxes, me and Silence and a million of our neighbors get to waste our lives traveling by a less efficient transportation system than we might otherwise have.
And yeah, you’ve got a good example in DC. They, too, suffer from the whims of legislators who aren’t accountable to them.
You could always move to Bath!
MB, if you want better transportation and feel more money is needed I have some suggestions.
1)Have NorVA & Hampton Roads grow a spine and insist that both of our areas get reasonable transportation funding from the state. Both areas contribute the lion’s share of revenue and deserve consideration.
2)Efficient transportation lowers the cost of goods delivery from the ports and commerce in general. Have Norva & HR lobby with the reasoning that as our ability to grow increases, our ability to contribute to the general fund increases. Recognize that or face both our areas when you try to pass your next bill.
3) If you’re just insisting on spending your own money, I’m sure there’s a public/private partnership or a McDonnell privatization program for you to just jump on. You can also toll NEW roadways(user pays).
4)Find ways to divert funding to the transportation fund even if temporarily so.
So, in other words, do pretty much what we’ve been doing. Thank you, Britt, for your helpful advice.
MB, that is not the case. Hampton Roads has done a poor job in insisting on our fair share. We certainly haven’t banded together with Norva to combat our mutal postions of putting in a lot and recieving too little in return for real problems.
Granted the arguement that our prosperity as a region will better contribute to the state has been made, but can you say it enough? Not until we get a better deal.
Another thing you evidently claim we do, but we don’t, is divert funds to Transportation even if temporarily so to address current emergencies. There is just a shouting match in the GA about the untouchable General Fund and all its sacred funding streams.
Thanks are not necessary for my “helpful advice”. It is my pleasure to try to help.
You want to see why local government shouldn’t be trusted? Take a look at the City of Richmond. They just voted to create a senior level job to ensure contracts are funneled to minority firms.
They didn’t appoint someone to ensure the taxpayers would get quality work from contractors, just someone to ensure a larger quota of jobs are handed over to someone based, not on quality, but on their gene pool of origin.
Oh, and by the way, of all of the Richmond Council, only Bruce Tyler questioned why the City was creating this unnecessary, senior position at a time when other agencies are cutting positions due to shrinking revenues.
Sure the Dillon rule slows things down, but it also makes it hard for the “Boss Hog” political dealers to completely ruin the integrity of local governments.
MB:
Your emotional outburst, is a prime example of the irrational argument, being used by anti-Dillon Rule folks. You still haven’t made a logical or intelligent argument for abolishing the Dillon Rule. Just hand-wringing, teeth-gnashing, grasp at straws type of emotional responses that solve nothing. They key is as Britt points out, legislators from Hampton Roads (or NORVA) finding the guts to press for funding to fix the problems. Dillon Rule has nothing to do with it. If this thread is any indication, the Dillon Rule is going to stand strong for many, many years to come. Aside from an out-of-touch Pilot Editorial (does anyone actually care what they write anymore?) and a few scattered cries in the wilderness, there is no effort, movement or push to do anything about the Dillon Rule. Love you Vivian, have the utmost respect for you and this blog, but the Dillon Rule isn’t going anywhere, at least for the immediate future.
And please, “TOLLS” are not “pay as you go”! Its another one of those “if you repeat it often enough people will believe it”. Tolls are the single most expensive means of paying for anything. By conservative estimates, it costs 5-times as much as simply funding it from the General Fund. You Pro-Toll folks forget that you have to pay for:
1-the toll equipment (very expensive)
2-the toll facilities
3-the toll takers (retirement-health insurance-vacation-sick leave-etc, etc)
4-toll administration (including big lavish buildings)
and the list goes on and on, the more money collected, the bigger the bureaucracy gets. More importantly, any state that has used the “easy electronic” method (EZ-PASS) has had major financial scandals where millions were embezzeled or lost to shifty accounting.
Just look at the huge overhead we had on 264! Fully 93% of the money collected went to Toll taking overhead. Funding something from tolls guarantee’s that it will never be paid for and traffic will be stopped, backed up and a major headache at any toll booth facility.
TW & Britt – both of you seem to miss the point. HR and NoVA shouldn’t have to go, hat in hand, to Richmond to try to get the money for transportation. If the people in HR & NoVA want tolls, they should be able to enact them. Just because YOU don’t like them, doesn’t mean that the rest of the people in the area don’t.
But transportation, although obvious, is just one of the many issues that the Dillon Rule constrains. Step back from a particular issue and try to see a much broader picture.
Localities couldn’t implement a smoking ban – had to wait for the state to do so.
The state has imposed a guns allowed in restaurants rule. Localities cannot opt out.
The list goes on and on.
And if the Dillon Rule is so good for business, why is it that the Charlotte area, to which Hampton Roads used to be compared, has far surpassed us in everything? Could it be that the cooperation necessary between cities and counties cannot be done in Virginia?
Where in the heck are the national banks headquartered in Virginia? Not a single one.
The case FOR the Dillon Rule is status quo. The case AGAINST the Dillon Rule is moving VA forward.
And that’s pretty much it. Virginia’s conservatives have a long and hallowed tradition of having to be dragged, kicking and screaming, out of the past. I’d just as well leave them behind, if they didn’t insist on holding on to the rest of us who’d like to move forward.
Projection. Look it up.
I think the case against the Dillon rule, being made here, only confirms that the case is weak. Gun control is not and should not be a “local” issue. Nor should any of the other issues that have been brought up. Why have a hodge-podge of rules and regulations across the Commonwealth when the General Assembly can do it, and it applies evenly across Virginia? And please, this is not a “conservative vs liberal” issue at all. To make it such is but another desperate attempt to divide, throw names and avoid the issues. If this is the best you can do, please sit on the side lines and let the adults discuss the issue and leave the name calling to the children.
I see nothing wrong with HR, NORVA or any other part of the state going “with hands out” and plans in hand to beg for money for transportation. Its the way its done all across America. Works great in the Carolina’s, Kentucky, Maryland and other close by states. The problem of late in Virginia has been the myopic mindset of the Republican controlled House to not raise taxes. Oh, they’ll pile on the “fee’s” and “tolls” but not if they’re properly labeled a “tax”, then its verboten’! You can lay the blame for our transportation mess squarely at the feet of the Republican led House of Delegates. But voters keep re-electing them, so in all honesty, its the voters fault as well. The Dillon Rule has no effect or affect on this “transportation” issue whatsoever.
We elect members of the General Assembly to do this job. Now you want fickle city council people and Mayors to disrupt it?
Honestly, you can claim this is an “issue” but only to you and MB. The rest of Virginia is doing fine and not worried, bothered or upset about the Dillon Rule. Its worked fine for over a hundred years! Long live the Dillon Rule!
You should get out a little more, T.W. You might even learn something.