Jennifer Braaten announced Tuesday that she will retire from Ferrum College this summer.
Braaten, Ferrum’s first woman president, has led the college for 14 years. She became the college’s 10th president in 2002 after serving as president of Midland Lutheran College in Nebraska.
Braaten said she decided to retire because of health issues in her family.
“The college has grown in stature and reputation from her strong leadership during her tenure as president, and our prayers of love and support are with her as she now enters a new phase of her life”, Sam Lionberger, chair of Ferrum’s board of trustees, said in a statement.
During her term, school enrollment grew from around 950 to more than 1,300 students, two capital campaigns raised about $45 million, and $30 million in new construction and renovation projects were completed.
Braaten chaired the Council of Independent Colleges in Virginia, the Appalachian College Association and the National Association of Schools and Colleges of the United Methodist Church. She was also on the Board of Trustees of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACS/COC), which serves as the accreditation body for colleges and universities in 11 states.
She currently chairs the audit committee of the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities (NAICU) and also chairs the New President’s Advisory Committee for the Council of Independent Colleges.
Virginia is recovering $63 million in a settlement with 11 banks to settle allegations they misled the commonwealth and the Virginia Retirement System about the quality of mortgage-backed securities sold to VRS, according to Attorney General Mark Herring.
Herring said this represented the largest recovery from a suit not related to health care under the Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act.
“This case breaks new ground for Virginia, recovering millions for Virginia taxpayers from banks that we alleged had misrepresented the products they sold to the Commonwealth,” Herring said in a statement.
Under the agreement, the banks have admitted no liability, and Virginia has dismissed claims against the defendants in exchange for the following settlements:
Countrywide Securities Corp. and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. (combined): $19.5 million
RBS Securities Inc.: $10 million
Barclays Capital Inc.: $9 million
Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: $6.9 million
Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.: $5.6 million
Citigroup Global Markets Inc.: $4.8 million
Goldman, Sachs & Co.: $2.9 million
HSBC Securities (USA) Inc.: $2.5 million
Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC: $1.2 million
UBS Securities LLC: $850,000
The case was initially filed in Richmond City Circuit Court by Integra REC LLC on behalf of Virginia. Herring intervened and brought the case on behalf of Virginia and the VRS.The commonwealth sought to recover $383 million in alleged damages, including $250.66 million of realized losses.
The Virginia Department of Transportation released on Tuesday its new scorecard for more than 300 transportation projects vying for $1.7 billion in funding.
The transportation agency also released its initial funding recommendations based on the new scorecard. The Commonwealth Transportation Board will make its own revisions and hold public hearings on the proposals before finalizing its decisions in June.
The new scoring is part of House Bill 2, which changed how the state prioritizes its transportation funding. Virginia Business reported on the new transportation legislation in its January cover story.
“Political wish lists of the past are replaced with a data-driven process that is objective and transparent, making the best use of renewed state funding received in 2013 and the recently approved federal transportation funding,” Gov. Terry McAuliffe said in a statement. “Each project is scored based on its merits and value, making Virginia the first state in the nation to use such an outcome-based prioritization process.”
In the first round of funding, 130 localities and regional groups submitted more than 300 projects valued at more than $7 billion for $1.7 billion available in the six-year construction plan.
Under the new law, projects are scored on six criteria: congestion reduction, economic development, safety, environmental quality, land use and accessibility.
Some of the larger projects included in the funding scenario released Tuesday include $144.9 million for Interstate 64 widening on the Hampton Roads Peninsula and $300 million toward expanding Interstate 66 outside the Beltway in Northern Virginia.
A full list of VDOT’s initial funding recommendations can be found here: http://www.ctb.virginia.gov/resources/2016/jan/pres/HouseBill2.pdf.
The scorecard can be seen here: http://www.virginiahb2.org/projects/default.asp.
HITT Contracting Inc. announced Thursday it had acquired Trademark Construction, a 55-employee general contractor based in Houston.
HITT, a Falls Church-based general contractor, said the acquisition will strengthen its presence in Texas and expand the firm’s ability to service clients.
The 55-employee office will operate as Trademark HITT. HITT said it plans to expand its number of employees there.
Chris Hines will continue to serve as the regional leader for the combined company.
CV International Inc. of Norfolk has acquired M&S Shipping Ltd.
Under the acquisition, CV International will add M&S Shipping’s three local employees to its Norfolk office. M&S Shipping is a freight forwarder based in Virginia Beach.
M&S Shipping was founded in 1987 as the U.S.-based subsidiary of M&S Shipping Group Ltd. of London.
“It was a good synergy for us with some of our collateral service lines to grow the business that they had,” said Mike Coleman, president of CV International.
For more than a decade, the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority studied, evaluated and ranked the region’s most critical transportation projects but had no money to address them.
The authority was created in 2002 to determine how to spend money generated from a proposed 1 percent increase in the local sales tax rates. To the surprise of many, the sales tax increase was voted down in a referendum.
Nonetheless, the authority continued its work, deciding what needed to be done to unclog its vast transportation network.
So when the Virginia legislature in 2013 finally passed a landmark transportation funding bill, the authority was ready to roll.
The law included regional revenue streams for Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads. In the first three fiscal years since the law went into effect, the authority in Northern Virginia has allocated $535 million on 68 road and transit projects. Another $169 million has been programmed by Northern Virginia localities for their own projects.
Annually, the authority should have about $200 million to spend on regional projects, with another $100 million split among localities.
“[There’s been] a radical sea change in terms of how we think of transportation funding for Virginia,” says Marty Nohe, chairman of the authority and a member of the Prince William County Board of Supervisors. “Traditionally, the argument has been that Northern Virginia has been getting a pitifully small share of transportation money compared to the rest of the state. It’s because we’re taxing ourselves to do it … and that money is being spent quickly and wisely in our region.”
Virginia’s transportation funding has undergone a major transformation since 2013. The breakthrough legislation passed that year added the first infusion of new funds to Virginia’s transportation system since 1986 while creating the locally raised revenues for Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads.
But lower-than-expected oil prices and Congress’ failure to pass an Interstate sales tax have blown holes in the plan’s anticipated revenues. Years of neglect also have taken their toll and only about $1.2 billion is available for new capacity projects over six years. Revenues should improve, however, from a federal highway bill and proposed transportation construction funds under Gov. Terry McAuliffe’s budget.
To ensure money is spent wisely, the General Assembly enacted new legislation, designed to govern how the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) prioritizes projects. This year will provide the first test of how these new criteria are being used to score and budget projects in Virginia’s six-year transportation plan. “This will bring much more transparency and accountability to the process,” says Virginia Transportation Secretary Aubrey Layne.
New money, new rules
The transportation law passed in 2013, known as HB2313, ended a long legislative stalemate over transportation funding. The bill, passed under the guidance of former Gov. Bob McDonnell, was expected to bring in almost $4 billion in new revenues over six years, fiscal years 2014 to 2019.
Instead of a per-gallon gasoline tax — which hadn’t been raised since 1986 — the bulk of Virginia’s transportation revenues now are tied to the wholesale gas tax. “The whole idea of indexing it to a percentage of the wholesale tax was the price of gas would rise, and that would index it to inflation,” Layne says. “Of course, it went exactly the other way.”
Oil prices fell. Fortunately, the legislation included a floor of $3.11 per gallon, so that taxes could only dip to a certain level. “If that floor wasn’t in, our revenues would be even down farther,” says Layne.
Still, the drop in oil prices and the elimination of an alternative fuel vehicle fee in 2014 have contributed to the reduction of revenues by $397 million over six years, according to December 2015 estimates from VDOT. Also, the Virginia legislation included revenue from the Marketplace Fairness Act, a federal online sales tax proposal that Congress never passed. In Virginia, that money would have gone mostly to transit funding. Without the revenue, a provision in HB2313 automatically increased the state gas tax by 1.6 percent, but that still did not fully make up for expected revenue from the Internet sales tax.
A federal highway bill, passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama, will provide Virginia with approximately $96 million each year in additional federal transportation funds for the next five years. VDOT is awaiting details on the law’s implementation.
Inheriting the first significant influx of transportation revenues in decades, the McAuliffe administration and the General Assembly enacted legislation to ensure that available money is spent on projects that will have the most impact on the state’s transportation network.
Last year, the General Assembly passed a bill known as HB1887 to guide the CTB in dividing revenue for transportation construction. The law requires that 45 percent go toward the “state of good repair,” including heavy-duty repair such as fixing existing bridges and rebuilding existing roads. “So, this will align in the short term the needs with the revenue sources in the commonwealth,” says Layne. “We can’t continue to ignore existing infrastructure and keep adding; that makes no sense. We’ve got to make sure we’re bringing the current infrastructure up to speed.”
The remaining 55 percent of the construction money is divided (about $1.2 billion over the next six years), with half going to build statewide priority projects and the rest divided among the commonwealth’s nine transportation districts.
Decisions on how this money is spent are subject to another state law, HB2, which was designed to help the CTB score and prioritize projects.
The legislation uses six criteria — congestion, economic development, land use, safety, environmental quality and accessibility — to score projects that are submitted by regional transportation groups.
Competition is stiff. In this first round of HB2-driven projects, local authorities have submitted 288 projects costing more than $7 billion for about $1.2 billion available during the next six years.
The scoring on each project will be unveiled at the end of the month, although the CTB won’t officially decide which projects to include in its six-year plan until the spring. “The law says we must use [the scorecard], but it does not mandate that you pick the highest-scored projects. It does say if you don’t, you have to explain why you don’t use them,” says Layne.
This year will provide the first real test of how the new rules help the transportation board select which projects to fund. The Northern Virginia Transportation Alliance, an advocacy group for effective road and transit investments, has concerns about the complex regulations.
First, the alliance believes that traffic congestion relief should get a higher priority for scoring purposes. Currently, regulations say congestion relief should make up 45 percent of a project’s score in Northern Virginia. “What that says to the alliance is that everything else added together actually equals more than congestion relief, so is congestion relief really the greatest factor?” says Nancy Smith, policy director at the alliance, which advocates for a weighted score of 50 to 60 for congestion relief.
Smith says that the regulations also create a bottom-up approach that could limit the CTB’s abilities to put forward the most meaningful statewide projects. Under the regulations, the transportation board has limited itself to submitting only two projects for consideration for funding under HB2.
“Sometimes it’s hard for a local jurisdiction to think regionally because that’s not necessarily their job,” says Smith. “Key transportation investments really do need a statewide perspective.”
Regional authorities
The regional revenues set up by the 2013 transportation funding law are not governed by HB2 legislation. (Although it is significant to note that those regions still receive transportation spending from CTB’s statewide program.)
With less money to spend on statewide projects, the creation of regionally raised and dedicated transportation funds may have been the most effective legacy of the 2013 transportation spending bill.“When you have regions like Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads that have growing populations, growing economies and have a lot of needs already, that’s why it was even more important that HB2313 created these separate pots of money for these two regions,” says Smith.
In Northern Virginia, the authority has had a steady revenue stream. Its money comes from increases in local taxes that are not tied to gas prices, including a 0.7 percent local sales tax, a real estate grantor’s tax and a 2 percent hotel tax. Revenues generally have been in line with the expected $300 million each year.
The authority must give 30 percent of its revenues to Northern Virginia localities for their own transportation projects. The remaining 70 percent of the money is used by the authority for regionally significant projects. “We do take into account project readiness,” says Monica Backmon, executive director of the authority. “These are taxpayer dollars, and we want to make sure we’re advancing projects.”
So far, the $535 million has been allocated to a wide range of projects in various stages of planning and development. Some of the larger projects include Route 28 widening, Route 123 widening in Fairfax and construction of multimodal facilities during the extension of Metrorail’s Silver Line to Washington Dulles International Airport.
Now that the authority finally has money to spend, it has embarked on a two-year project to update its long-range plan. Upon completion in 2017, the plan will budget revenue for six years (2018 to 2023), working much like CTB’s six-year construction plan.
For its own dedicated revenues, the Hampton Roads Transportation Accountability Commission already has allocated $365 million, $15 million more than what has been collected so far, according to Kevin Page, the commission’s executive director.
That includes $257.6 million toward widening two of three segments of Interstate 64 from Newport News to near Williamsburg. The remaining money has been spent on preliminary engineering and environmental impact statements to help advance its nine mega-projects deemed vital to improving congestion in the region.
Hampton Roads’ regional revenues, which include a 0.7 percent increase in the sales tax rate and a 2.1 percent increase on gasoline with no floor in place, have been hurt by lower-than-expected oil prices. Revenues, anticipated under HB2313 to be more than $200 million per year for fiscal year 2016, are expected to be $43 million less than originally expected.
To build all of these mega-projects, the commission says it needs $229 million a year from other sources. It is exploring a variety of ways to do this, including significant investment from VDOT and introducing a floor on the regional gas tax. “It’s ambitious, but we have to unlock this region not only for our economic vitality but to enhance the quality of life for our citizens,” says Page. “It’s one that we feel we can achieve if we work together with our regional governments, Richmond and our constituency.”
A closer look at public-private deals
While Virginia has been changing the framework guiding transportation funding, the commonwealth also has faced criticism for some of its public-private partnerships (P3s).
Virginia’s Public-Private Transportation Act has been hailed as one of the country’s most forward-thinking laws allowing the public sector to use private dollars to help build expensive road projects.
But controversy has plagued many of Virginia’s P3 deals, including the $300 million spent to build an alternative to Route 460 before the proper permits were secured. (The project started as a P3, but eventually became a design-build project.)
Another controversial deal is the Elizabeth River Tunnels project, another P3 deal arranged under the McDonnell administration. Complaints about the project included the implementation of tolls before construction was completed and a contract provision that would require the state to compensate the private partner if the region built a competing crossing. “[This]deal is one of the worst deals I’ve ever seen negotiated,” says Gov. Terry McAuliffe. “We had to pay down the tolls by half. They were bad deals, plain and simple. Those deals would never happen in this administration.”
In response, last year the legislature passed measures to provide better oversight of P3 projects. The legislation established the Transportation Public-Private Partnership Advisory Committee, designed to determine whether funding each project as a P3 is in the public interest. The law also requires a responsible state agency executive, in most cases the transportation secretary, to certify with the governor and the General Assembly that the deal is in the public’s best interest. “I do believe that [the legislation] will go a long way to prevent what has happened in the past,” says Del. Chris Jones, R-Suffolk, who sponsored the legislation. “It’s a much more transparent process.”
Despite controversy over past deals, the McAuliffe administration is not abandoning the P3 process. VDOT announced in December that it would pursue widening Interstate 66 outside the Beltway as a P3 deal — the first that must adhere to new guidelines. The proposal would rebuild the interstate with three normal lanes and two “dynamic-tolling” lanes, where prices would fluctuate with traffic conditions.
Under the plan, public funding would not exceed $600 million, and the private partner would bear the financial risk if traffic volumes were lower than expected on the tolling lanes. The state is scheduled to select partners this year and retains the right to build the $2.1 billion project itself if agreements cannot be reached.
Going forward, Layne will be responsible for assuring the governor and the General Assembly that any proposed deal — and changes made to it — is in the best public interest. “That was a big issue with the Downtown/Midtown tunnel project [in Hampton Roads],” says Jones. “Some of the key details were not known until after the agreement was signed.”
This year’s legislation
This year will demonstrate how VDOT’s new framework will work as projects are scored and secured, so fewer bills on the transportation front are likely to be filed.
Jones plans to submit a bill, in consultation with the McAuliffe administration, that would help guide the state’s future decisions on using tolls. “We need to have some good policies on tolling,” says Layne. “One being that we can’t put a fixed toll on a project that doesn’t have an alternative, and two, no more tolling facilities until they have added a new capacity.”
Another piece of legislation, filed by Del. Jim LeMunyon, R-Chantilly, would prohibit tolling on I-66 inside the Beltway. The McAuliffe administration plans to add dynamic tolling during rush hour, an idea strongly opposed by many Northern Virginia motorists. The CTB has approved the I-66 plan.
McAuliffe’s proposed budget this year includes $338 million in additional construction money, but there seems to be little appetite in the General Assembly for any new designated revenues. That situation makes the new rules governing how money is spent all the more important.
But in Northern Virginia, where transportation has been a longtime headache, the new money has helped the region to begin addressing its transportation issues. Nohe, the chairman of the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority, says that the group determined in 2007 it would need $700 million a year to solve all of the region’s transportation problems.
“So in that regard, no, this is not the money that solves every transportation problem. The 2013 regional funds, however, do give us what we need to start solving the biggest problems,” he says.
“I often say: We will never solve every traffic problem in Northern Virginia, and those that we can solve will not happen overnight, but for the first time in over a generation, we at least have money to solve some of the problems, and that in and of itself is a revolutionary change.”
It’s likely to be the governor’s biggest year. Because of the commonwealth’s single-term limit for governors and its biennial budget schedule, Virginia governors get one shot to put together a budget they’ll actually oversee. A recovering economy and a two-year delay from federal sequestration cuts are providing a better budget picture for Virginia than it has seen in years.
Despite the reprieve from Congress, Gov. Terry McAuliffe says Virginia must continue to diversify its economy. In addition to major investments in K-12 education, he is planning on a number of economic development actions. Those plans include cutting Virginia’s corporate tax rate from 6 percent to 5.75 percent, extending the commonwealth’s research and development tax credit and adding a new one that targets larger companies spending more than $5 million annually on research.
McAuliffe also is planning a bond package to fund higher education research and facilities and wants to expand the state’s cybersecurity workforce. His goals include achieving a national cybersecurity certification at all of Virginia’s 23 community colleges. “The good news is that I have 18,000 jobs open right now at $88,000 starting salary for these jobs,” McAuliffe says.
One issue that could dominate this year’s General Assembly session is Medicaid expansion — a perennial battle between the Democratic governor and the Republican-dominated legislature. McAuliffe’s budget (which was finalized after this interview), included Medicaid expansion under the federal Affordable Care Act at an expected savings of $157 million. He also proposed a hospital assessment fee to help pay for Virginia’s portion of the program. Republicans have vowed to strip Medicaid from the budget.
In December, McAuliffe received a boost from the Virginia Hospital and Healthcare Association, which announced it would support paying a tax that would help Virginia fund its portion of Medicaid expansion. “We’ve already forfeited about $6 billion dollars,” says McAuliffe. “That money would have run through our economy. That money goes to save our hospitals.”
Virginia Business interviewed the governor in mid-December at his offices in Richmond and discussed a range of issues including the budget, transportation, Medicaid expansion and economic development.
Virginia Business: Let’s talk about your proposal to lower the corporate tax rate. Do you think, with North Carolina potentially going to 4 percent, is a quarter percentage point enough?
McAuliffe: I think psychologically there is a big difference. They were at 5, and I do think they have some triggers on theirs for theirs to continue to go lower. So let’s just say they’re at 5 percent today, but maybe they’ll hit the benchmarks…A lot of negotiating is psychological. We can be competitive at 5.75, but we’re a little bit out of the game at 6 …
I know some may find it hard to believe, but, when you’re actually sitting with business executives, literally one of the first questions is “What’s your tax rate, again?” And a door could come down immediately on you before you even get into the negotiations…In Virginia we always pride ourselves on being one of the top states in the nation to do business. We’ve been hurt a little bit in our rankings. Number one, and I think rightfully so, they have said we are too reliant on the federal government … The other thing that hits us is that we’ll find out after the fact that we were looking to be part of a project, but we got knocked out before we even knew about it, and could even make a pitch, because our cost-of-living numbers are so high.
What is very unfair about that is that Northern Virginia is lumped together with the rest of the state. And I’ll talk to a CEO and often say “Are you kidding me? If I had known this, I could take you to Southside and Southwest Virginia. I can get you some of the low cost of living that would have made sense for this type of manufacturing.” But a lot of times, you never even get the chance. So I think taking the corporate rate down sends a great signal across the country and the globe: Virginia is serious about recruiting businesses.
VB: You’ve said that 2016 is going to be a banner year for economic development. I know [those deals] are going through some of the permitting processes, but can you give us an idea on industries that we might see investment from?
McAuliffe: I’ve got one huge project we’re working on. I’ve got a handshake with the owner of the company from overseas. We’ve got to get through a lot of permits: water permits, air permits and things like that. It would be similar to the Tranlin project [in Chesterfield County that is expected to add 2,000 jobs.] Until you get all those permits, you never know, but I’m optimistic. We’ve got new manufacturing projects lined up. Some of our existing businesses we’re working with on major expansions.
I’m really trying to key in the cyber, the data, the personalized medicine space — predominately in Northern Virginia. I do want us to become the [cybersecurity] capital. This is one area the federal government is going to spend billions of dollars, and the private sector is going to spend billions of dollars … The state that is out at the forefront of this [trend] is going to be the state that is going to bring those businesses. We have about 450 cyber companies today, and the FBI cyber command is up at Quantico. We have all the military defense assets, so I think we are uniquely positioned to become the cyber capital, and that’s going to be gigantic growth for us.
I recently met with solar manufacturing companies. You know I’m big on the renewables. It’s important for Virginia’s future. I just [announced a permit for an 80-megawatt solar facility in] Accomack, which will be the largest in the mid-Atlantic; and the second-largest solar field on the East Coast.
Why is it important? Well, obviously it’s important for the environment, but we ought to be manufacturing the solar panels here in Virginia not in Georgia where they were manufactured for the facility. And when I was up to visit Amazon and Google and Microsoft, all three made it very clear you need to provide us with renewable energy for our facilities or we will not come to your state.
VB: As far as personalized medicine goes, we just named Knox Singleton of Inova our Business Person of the Year, much because of his vision for the Center for Personalized Health.
McAuliffe: This is something very important to me, but we can become the state for personalized human genomic sequencing, all the new proteomics. We can become that state where people go to, and when a child is born, you can determine, at birth, what diseases …. that child may be susceptible in the future to and start doing treatments early. I mean this is revolutionizing health-care delivery.
That’s why I’ve been so focused on research. I recently went down to Georgia. They have the Georgia Research Alliance. It’s unbelievable what they have done down there…they have literally rebuilt the Georgia economy…I want to do the same thing here in Virginia.
For years and years we were the top recipient of Department of Defense dollars. [The money] just came in, and we didn’t really have to work for it. I don’t mean it negatively. I’m just saying [that was] because of all of our assets. Well, that’s shrinking. Fifty percent of the GDP of Hampton Roads is defense, and 33 percent of Northern Virginia is defense. The pot is getting smaller. So we now have to hustle to bring in business. It just doesn’t come anymore…
We really have to bring in new 21st diversified businesses here to Virginia. We now have to work for it. It’s not just going to happen. It’s great to have proximity to Washington, D.C., and we love all the investments we can get out of there, but we now need to travel the globe. Ninety-five percent of the customers of the globe live outside of the United States of America. That’s why I travel as extensively as I do. You gotta go where the customers are.
VB: Are there any other big issues that we can expect, that would be specifically of interest to the business community for this session?
McAuliffe: I’m doing a massive bond offering for our colleges and universities for research. It will be a huge higher-ed bond package to allow them to build new research facilities on their campuses.
VB: And then, I did want to talk about Medicaid expansion, and the opportunity you see there.
McAuliffe: Yeah, $2.4 billion dollars a year, we are forfeiting right now. We’ve already forfeited about $6 billion dollars. That money would have run through our economy. That money goes to save our hospitals. We have 37 rural hospitals. Today 17 operate in the red. I don’t know how much longer they can go with the continued cuts … I can save our budget upwards of about [$157 million with Medicaid expansion]. That is money I can use to spend on education, economic development. The point is: This is our money. We’ve paid it in.
I have said from the beginning, I believe we can craft a very unique Medicaid expansion in Virginia where the commonwealth has no financial obligations. It will not cost the commonwealth a penny. [The hospitals association has] indicated it’s worth it for them to put up the money [through a “bed tax”] for the cost of us to run this program and do what we need to do. Because for every dollar they put up, they probably get five or six back. So it makes economic sense for the hospitals to do this. That means we can craft a program, no obligation, provide health care to 400,000 Virginians. That $2.4 billion will run through our economy … It’s our money; we ought to bring it back.
VB: Let’s talk about transportation. The P3 process has received a lot of attention in the last year. How does Virginia ensure that it gets good deals when it does these projects?
McAuliffe: Well, we’ve done some good P3 deals here in Virginia. We’ve done some horrible P3 deals in Virginia. As you know, I had to stop some projects that were negotiated before I sat here. The Route 460 deal was incredible; $300 million dollars wasted on a road with not a shovel in the ground or a permit being applied for. We stopped it. It’s one of the first things I did in office.
The Midtown Tunnel deal [in Hampton Roads], one of the worst deals I’ve ever seen negotiated. We had to pay down the tolls by half. I had to eliminate the tolls on the Martin Luther King Freeway.
They were bad deals, plain and simple. Those deals would never happen in this administration. Listen, we enjoy negotiating, and I don’t blame the businesses … If they brought in better lawyers, and they outnegotiated us, shame on us. It’s not the businesses’ fault. Let me be clear. I don’t blame them. Their job is to negotiate the best possible deal they can for their shareholders, and boy did they get a great deal, but my job is to get the best deal for the taxpayers.
Falls Chruch IT company CSC has named President and CEO Mike Lawrie chairman of the company and added two directors.
Board Chairman Rodney F. Chase, who has been a director since 2001, and Erik Brynjolfsson, who became director of CSC in 2010, have retired from the board.
The company named Mukesh Aghi, president of the U.S.-India Business Council, and Herman E. Bulls, an executive at commercial real estate firm JLL, to the board.
Aghi served as chairman and CEO of Steria India and was president of IBM India and worked with J.D. Edwards in locations around the world.
Bulls is international director of JLL Global Markets. He co-founded and served as president and CEO of Bulls Capital Partners, a commercial mortgage banking firm. He served in the U.S. Army on active duty for almost 12 years, retiring as a colonel in the Army Reserves.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept All”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit "Cookie Settings" to provide a controlled consent.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.