Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 5 · column 1 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
Senate seat
Continued from page A-1
which most legislators assume will be the dominant issue in the next Assembly session, Sen. Miller said he wants to see revenue projections before proposing any solutions.
“All of the cookie jars are pretty well raided, ” he said.
Ms. Haynes said, “My analysis is that actually the General Assembly did a pretty dam good job of balancing the budget,” adding: “I am completely opposed to raising taxes.”
Both candidates lamented the General Assembly’s redistricting plans. Ms. Haynes said it was “just a shame” that some jurisdictions (such as the heavily Republican Harrisonburg area) were cut into as many as four different House districts and that the 26th District in the Senate stretches from the Rappahannock River fall line outside Fredericksburg to the West Virginia line.
Sen. Miller said the Senate plan was not as bad as the House’s, which he called “absolutely atrocious” and demonstrative of “sheer political arrogance.”
“It’s simply to dilute the Republican areas in hopes they can salvage some of their Democratic seats,” said Sen. Miller.
On legislative land-use issues such as impact fees, transferable development rights and proffers, both candidates say localities need more power to pay the costs of development.
“I think we all recognize local governments have to have some way to finance infrastructure,” said Sen. Miller. A compromise that would satisfy both local governments and developers is in the works, he said, and might make it to the floor of the General Assembly in January.
He supports proffers and impact fees, but added that if proffers are
95.9%