PRESENT:    All the Justices 
ROBERT G. MARSHALL, ET AL.
OPINION BY
 
v.    Record No.  071959
NORTHERN VIRGINIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, ET AL.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LOUDOUN COUNTY
v.     Record No.  071979
NORTHERN VIRGINIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, ET ALcalities of the Commonwealth, when that political 
subdivision is not a county, city, town, or regional 
government, and is not an elected body. 
 
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 
On July  13,  2007, the Northern Virginia Transportation 
Authority  (“NVTA”) instituted a bond validation proceeding in 
the Circuit Court of Arlington County under Article  6 of the 
Public Finance Act of  1991, Code  §§  15.2-2650 through  -2658. 
NVTA requested, among other things, that the circuit court 
determine the validity of certain bonds that NVTA proposed to 
issue  (“the bonds”), and the constitutionality of certain 
taxes and fees that NVTA was authorized to impose, under 
Chapter  896 of the  2007 Acts of Assembly  (“Chapter  896”), to 
finance the bonds. 
The Commonwealth, on behalf of the Governor, the Attorney 
General, and the Speaker of the House of Delegates 
(collectively,  “the Commonwealth”), intervened in the bond 
validation proceeding as plaintiffs in support of NVTA.    The 
Board of Supervisors of Loudoun County, Virginia  (“Loudoun 
County”) filed responsive pleadings as a defendant opposing 
validation of the bonds.    A group of citizens living in the 
area encompassed by NVTA, Robert G. Marshall, John Berthoud, 
Richard H. Black, Catherine Ann Marshall, Edmund Charles 
Miller, Marcia S. Miller, Kristina Rasmussen, Phillip A. 
Rodokanakis, and Frank W. Smerbeck  (“the Marshall 
Defendants”), also filed a joint answer opposing the 
validation.    Additionally, the Marshall Defendants filed a 
 2 
 
counterclaim and moved for summary judgment alleging, in part, that the bonds and Chapter  896, or portions thereof, violate the Constitution. 
After conducting a hearing, the circuit court granted 
NVTA its requested relief, dismissed the remaining counts of 
the Marshall Defendants’ counterclaim, and dismissed the 
Marshall Defendants’ motion for summary judgment.    The circuit 
court held, in relevant part, that the enactment of Chapter 
896 
was within the legislative power of the Virginia 
General Assembly set forth in Article IV of the 
Constitution of Virginia, and does not violate any 
Section of that Article, and the NVTA Act, as 
amended by Chapter  896, and Virginia Code  §§  46.2-
755.1,  46.2-755.2,  46.2-1167.1,  58.1-605,  58.1-606, 
58.1-802.1,  58.1-2402.1,  58.1-3825.1, as enacted, do not violate any provisions of the Constitution of 
Virginia; and 
. 
that the regional fees and taxes and all other means provided for payment of the Bonds are valid and 
legal and meet the requirements of the Constitution of Virginia and all applicable statutes  .  .  . . 
The court, in granting the relief prayed for in the complaint, 
ruled that the bonds are valid and legal.    Loudoun County and 
the Marshall Defendants appeal from the circuit court’s 
judgment. 
II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 
3 
 
In  2002, the General Assembly created NVTA as a political 
subdivision of the Commonwealth.    See Code  §  15.2-4830.    NVTA 
encompasses the Counties of Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, and 
Prince William, and the Cities of Alexandria, Fairfax, Falls 
Church, Manassas, and Manassas Park  (“the Northern Virginia 
localities”) which are designated by name in the statute. 
Code  §  15.2-4831.    The governing board of NVTA consists of  14 
voting members and two non-voting members.    See Code  §  15.2-
4832. 
The voting members of NVTA’s governing board are the 
chief elected officers of the governing body for each named 
county and city, two members of the House of Delegates 
appointed by the Speaker of the House, one member of the 
Senate appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules, and two 
citizens appointed by the Governor, all of whom reside in the 
nine localities embraced by NVTA.    See Code  §  15.2-4832.    Any 
chief elected officer of a governing body of a member city or 
county may name a designee, but each such designee must be  “a 
current elected officer” of the applicable governing body. 
Id.    Decisions of NVTA must be approved by a  “super-majority” 
of the voting members.    See Code  §  15.2-4834. 
NVTA’s powers are limited by its enabling legislation to 
activities pertaining to regional transportation.    See Code 
§§  15.2-4830,  -4838, and  -4840.    NVTA is empowered, among 
4 
 
other things, to prepare a regional transportation plan for 
the Northern Virginia localities and to construct or acquire 
transportation facilities that are either specified in the 
plan or constitute a regional priority.    Id.    NVTA may issue 
bonds to finance such projects.    See Code  §§  15.2-4839,  -4519. 
 In  2007, both houses of the General Assembly passed and 
the Governor signed the legislation that became Chapter  896. 
The title to Chapter  896 states, in part, that the act will 
amend and reenact numerous provisions of the Code, with all 
such enactments  “relating to transportation.”1    Under various 
provisions contained in Chapter  896, NVTA has the authority, 
in its sole discretion, to impose seven regional taxes and 
fees  (“the regional taxes and fees”). 
The regional taxes and fees NVTA is authorized to impose 
within the Northern Virginia localities are: an additional 
annual vehicle license fee  (Code  §  46.2-755.1); an additional 
initial vehicle registration fee  (Code  §  46.2-755.2); an 
additional vehicle inspection fee  (Code  §  46.2-1167.1); a 
local sales and use tax on vehicle repairs  (Code  §§  58.1-
605 (K)(1),  -606(H)(1)); a regional congestion relief fee  (Code 
§  58.1-802.1); a local rental car transportation fee  (Code 
1 A copy of Chapter  896 of the  2007 Acts of Assembly is 
available for viewing, downloading and printing from the 
General Assembly’s website as of the date of this opinion at 
5 
 
§  58.1-2402.1); and an additional transient occupancy tax 
(Code  §  58.1-3825.1).    For each such tax and fee, the General Assembly specified the subject of taxation and fixed the 
amount or rate. 
The General Assembly designated the revenue raised from 
imposition of the regional taxes and fees for the sole purpose of financing bonds and providing revenue for transportation 
projects and purposes in the nine localities embraced by NVTA. Code  §§  15.2-4831,  -4838.1.    Chapter  896 also contains a 
provision directing that should a court of competent 
jurisdiction hold that any portion of the Chapter is 
unconstitutional, the remaining portions of the Chapter shall remain in effect. 2007 Acts ch.  896, cl.  23. 
After conducting a public hearing, NVTA’s governing body voted to impose the regional taxes and fees authorized by 
Chapter  896, effective January  1,  2008.    The governing body 
also adopted a resolution authorizing the issuance of bonds of NVTA in a principal amount not to exceed  $130 million, to be 
paid from the pledgeable NVTA revenues, which include revenues from the regional taxes and fees. 
III. ANALYSIS 
the following Internet URL: http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-
bin/legp504.exe?071+ful+CHAP0896. 
6 
 
We have long recognized the principle that the power of a 
government to tax its people and their property is essential 
to government’s very existence.    Southern Ry. Co. v. 
Commonwealth,  211 Va.  210,  220,  176 S.E.2d  578,  584  (1970); 
Chesapeake & Potomac Tel. Co. v. City of Newport News,  196 Va. 
627,  638,  85 S.E.2d  345,  351  (1955); City of Fredericksburg v. 
Sanitary Grocery Co.,  168 Va.  57,  64,  190 S.E.  318,  321 
(1937); Vaughan v. City of Richmond,  165 Va.  145,  148,  181 
S.E.  372,  374  (1935); City of Norfolk v. Chamberlain,  89 Va. 
(14 Hans.)  196,  226,  16 S.E.  730,  740  (1892).    This power to 
tax, which is inherent in every sovereign state government, is 
a legislative power that the Constitution vests in the General 
Assembly.    Town of Danville v. Shelton,  76 Va.  (1 Hans.)  325, 
327-28  (1882); see Chamberlain,  89 Va.  (14 Hans.) at  227,  16 
S.E. at  739. 
Established principles govern our determination whether 
the General Assembly has adhered to the Constitution in 
exercising its legislative power.    The exercise of that power 
clearly encompasses the levying of taxes.    Every law enacted 
by the General Assembly carries a strong presumption of 
validity, and courts are concerned only with the issue whether 
a legislative enactment has been rendered according to, and 
within, constitutional requirements.    City of Newport News v. 
Elizabeth City County,  189 Va.  825,  839,  55 S.E.2d  56,  64 
 7 
 
(1949).    The separate question regarding the wisdom and the 
propriety of a statute are matters within the province of the legislature.    Id. at  831,  55 S.E.2d at  60. 
We will not invalidate a statute unless that statute 
clearly violates a provision of the United States or Virginia 
Constitutions.    In re Phillips,  265 Va.  81,  85-86,  574 S.E.2d 
270,  272  (2003); City Council of Emporia v. Newsome,  226 Va. 
518,  523,  311 S.E.2d  761,  764  (1984).    Here, we are only 
concerned with the applicable provisions of the Constitution 
of Virginia.    We give the Constitution a liberal construction 
in order to sustain the enactment in question, if practicable. 
Heublein, Inc. v. Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, 
237 Va.  192,  195,  376 S.E.2d  77,  78  (1989).    We also interpret 
statutes in a manner that avoids a constitutional question 
whenever possible.    Yamaha Motor Corp. v. Quillian,  264 Va. 
656,  665,  571 S.E.2d  122,  126-27  (2002); Virginia Soc’y for 
Human Life, Inc. v. Caldwell,  256 Va.  151,  156-57,  500 S.E.2d 
814,  816-17  (1998).    The party challenging an enactment has 
the burden of proving that the statute is unconstitutional, 
and every reasonable doubt regarding the constitutionality of 
a legislative enactment must be resolved in favor of its 
validity.    Hess v. Snyder Hunt Corp.,  240 Va.  49,  53,  392 
S.E.2d  817,  820  (1990).    See Blue Cross of Virginia v. 
Commonwealth,  221 Va.  349,  358-59,  269 S.E.2d  827,  832-33 
 8 
 
(1980); see also Phillips,  265 Va. at  85-86,  574 S.E.2d at 
272. 
An act is unconstitutional if it is expressly prohibited 
or is prohibited by necessary implication based upon the 
provisions of the Constitution of Virginia or the United 
States Constitution.    Dean v. Paolicelli,  194 Va.  219,  227,  72 
S.E.2d  506,  511  (1952); Kirkpatrick v. Board of Supervisors, 
146 Va.  113,  126,  136 S.E.  186,  190  (1926); Albemarle Oil & 
Gas Co. v. Morris,  138 Va.  1,  7,  121 S.E.  60,  61  (1924); 
Button v. State Corp. Comm’n,  105 Va.  634,  636,  54 S.E.  769, 
769  (1906); Smith v. Commonwealth,  75 Va.  (1 Matt.)  904,  907 
(1880); see also School Bd. v. Shockley,  160 Va.  405,  413,  168 
S.E.  419,  422  (1933).    However, when a court, in determining 
the constitutionality of a statute, departs from the express 
limitations of the Constitution and relies instead on implied 
constitutional restrictions, the legislative usurpation must 
be very clear and palpable to justify the court’s holding that 
an enactment is unconstitutional.    Whitlock v. Hawkins,  105 
Va.  242,  249,  53 S.E.  401,  403  (1906). 
The principle of severability is also applicable to the 
various provisions of an enactment.    The General Assembly 
expressly has provided that any unconstitutional provisions of 
an enactment will be severed from its remaining valid 
provisions, unless the enactment specifically states that its 
 9 
 
provisions may not be severed or that the provisions must 
operate in accord with one another.    Code  §  1-243; see also 2007 Acts ch.  896, cl.  23. 
Applying these principles, we first examine the Marshall 
Defendants’ claim that Chapter  896 violates Article IV, 
Section  12 of the Constitution.    This Section provides that: 
No law shall embrace more than one object, which 
shall be expressed in its title.    Nor shall any law be revived or amended with reference to its title, but the act revived or the section amended shall be reenacted and published at length. 
The Marshall Defendants argue that Chapter  896 violates 
this Constitutional provision in two respects:  (1) the title 
of Chapter  896 is not sufficiently inclusive because although 
that Chapter affects  12 titles of the Code and contains  23 
enactment clauses, some of those enactment clauses and Code 
titles are not referenced in the title to Chapter  896; and  (2) 
Chapter  896 violates the  “single object rule” because it 
contains matters unrelated to transportation. 
 As examples in support of their second argument, the 
Marshall Defendants note that Chapter  896 provides for such 
diverse subjects as funding salaries for certain professors at 
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University  (“Virginia 
Tech”), funding the Virginia Truck and Ornamentals Research 
Station, mandating impact fees on new development, and 
dedicating revenues from a statewide tax increase to the 
 10 
 
Virginia Agricultural Foundation Fund.    Thus, according to the Marshall Defendants, Chapter  896 combines so many diverse 
matters in a single act that legislators and the public were 
likely to have been misled by its title, and that the various elements of Chapter  896 lack a natural and necessary 
connection to each other. 
NVTA points out that the subjects embraced in Chapter  896 
are congruous and have a natural connection with, or are 
germane to, transportation, and that the Marshall Defendants’ 
listing of various items in Chapter  896 that they claim are 
unrelated to transportation are out of context; NVTA posits 
how each is germane to or has a connection with 
transportation.    For example, NVTA points out that the changes 
to the statutes related to the Virginia Truck and Ornamentals 
Research Station, salaries for Virginia Tech professors and 
the Virginia Agricultural Foundation Fund were required 
because they are partially funded by the fuels tax and it was 
necessary to conform the existing statutes to reflect the 
increase in that tax authorized by Chapter  896. 
 This Court’s jurisprudence with respect to Article IV, 
Section  12 is well established. “The fact that many things of 
a diverse nature are authorized or required to be done in the 
body of the act, though not expressed in its title is not 
objectionable, if what is authorized by the act is germane to 
 11 
 
the object expressed in the title, or has a legitimate and 
natural association therewith, or is congruous therewith, the 
title is sufficient.”    Town of Narrows v. Board of 
Supervisors,  128 Va.  572,  582-83,  105 S.E.  82,  85  (1920). 
Thus, Article IV, Section  12 requires that subjects 
encompassed in a statute, but not specified in the statute’s 
title, be congruous, and have a natural connection with, or be 
germane to, the subject stated in the title.    Commonwealth v. 
Brown,  91 Va.  762,  772,  21 S.E.  357,  360  (1895)  (construing 
former Va. Const. art. V,  §  15  (1869)).    This mandate, 
however, does not require that an act’s title include an index 
to each provision of the act.    Southern Ry. Co. v. Russell, 
133 Va.  292,  298,  112 S.E.  700,  702  (1922)  (construing former 
Va. Const. art. IV,  §  52  (1902)). 
Acts of the General Assembly enjoy a presumption of 
constitutionality both as to title and to text.    State Bd. of 
Health v. Chippenham Hosp., Inc.,  219 Va.  65,  71,  245 S.E.2d 
430,  434  (1978). “[I]f there is doubt as to the sufficiency 
of the title, the doubt must be resolved in favor of its 
sufficiency, as courts will not declare an act of the 
legislature unconstitutional unless it is plainly so.” 
Commonwealth v. Dodson,  176 Va.  281,  305-06,  11 S.E.2d  120, 
131  (1940)  (citations omitted); accord State Bd. of Health, 
219 Va. at  71,  245 S.E.2d at  434.    Due to the nature of 
12 
 
Article IV, Section  12, the analysis of a particular act must necessarily  “stand on its own,” and we must look to both the body and to the title of the act under scrutiny to determine whether the act violates the Constitution.    State Bd. of 
Health,  219 Va. at  72,  245 S.E.2d at  434. 
The title to Chapter  896 states, in part, that the act 
will amend and reenact numerous provisions of the Code, with 
all such enactments  “relating to transportation.”    These and 
other references in the title adequately describe the subject 
matter of the body of the act, and the act’s provisions are 
germane to the object expressed in the title.    See Town of 
Narrows,  128 Va. at  582-83,  105 S.E. at  85; Brown,  91 Va. at 772,  21 S.E. at  360. 
Our examination of the subjects included in Chapter  896 
reveals that those subjects are congruous and have a natural 
connection with the subject of transportation expressed in the 
title.    The particular statutes and changes to statutes 
identified by the Marshall Defendants do not lead us to a 
different conclusion.    Some of those changes were required 
because the matters addressed in the existing statutes were 
partially funded by taxes related to transportation, and it 
was necessary to conform those statutes to reflect the 
increase in taxes authorized by Chapter  896.    Other statutes 
and changes improve or fund transportation or were necessary 
 13 
to implement or modify the effects of the provisions of 
Chapter  896 on existing transportation statutes.    Therefore, we hold that the circuit court correctly determined that 
Chapter  896 does not violate Article IV, Section  12 of the 
Constitution. 
We next consider the argument of the Marshall Defendants 
and Loudoun County that Chapter  896 violates other provisions 
of the Constitution.    In essence, the Marshall Defendants and 
Loudoun County contend that by authorizing NVTA to impose the 
regional taxes and fees, Chapter  896 effects a 
constitutionally prohibited delegation of the General 
Assembly’s taxing authority to a political subdivision whose 
governing board is not elected by the citizens to serve in 
that capacity. 
NVTA and the Commonwealth respond that NVTA’s power to 
impose the regional taxes and fees, as authorized by Chapter 
896, does not constitute a  “true” delegation of legislative 
authority because the General Assembly specified the subject 
of the regional taxes and fees, dictated the amount or rate of 
the taxes and fees, and mandated that the revenue derived be 
spent in a certain manner.    NVTA and the Commonwealth contend 
that the General Assembly retains authority and control over 
the regional taxes and fees, and remains free to amend, 
repeal, or restrict NVTA’s power to impose them.    Thus, NVTA 
 14 
 
and the Commonwealth maintain that the Constitution does not prohibit the General Assembly from authorizing NVTA to impose the regional taxes and fees within the restrictions prescribed in Chapter  896.    We disagree with the arguments advanced by 
NVTA and the Commonwealth. 
Initially, we observe that neither NVTA nor the 
Commonwealth disputes that the main purpose of the regional 
taxes and fees, authorized in Chapter  896, is to raise 
revenue.    We consistently have held that when the primary 
purpose of an enactment is to raise revenue, the enactment 
will be considered a tax, regardless of the name attached to 
the act.    See Tidewater Ass’n of Homebuilders, Inc. v. City of 
Virginia Beach,  241 Va.  114,  120-21,  400 S.E.2d  523,  527 
(1991); County of Loudoun v. Parker,  205 Va.  357,  360-61,  136 
S.E.2d  805,  808  (1964); Board of Supervisors v. American 
Trailer Co.,  193 Va.  72,  76,  68 S.E.2d  115,  118-19  (1951). In 
accordance with this authority, we conclude that each of the 
regional taxes and fees provided in Chapter  896 constitutes a 
tax, because they all are designed to produce revenue to be 
used for the purpose of financing bonds and supplying revenue 
for transportation purposes in the Northern Virginia 
localities.    Code  §§  15.2-4838.1(C)(3),  -4840(12).    Thus, we 
must consider whether by those provisions of Chapter  896, the 
15 
 
General Assembly has delegated a portion of its taxing authority to NVTA. 
The General Assembly has delegated its authority when it 
enacts a law authorizing another entity to determine whether 
the law will be imposed.    See Chapel v. Commonwealth,  197 Va. 
406,  413-14,  89 S.E.2d  337,  342  (1955); Mumpower v. Housing 
Auth. of Bristol,  176 Va.  426,  454-55,  11 S.E.2d  732,  743 
(1940).    Here, although the General Assembly specified in 
Chapter  896 the form, substance, and use of the regional taxes 
and fees, the General Assembly retained no authority to decide 
whether the regional taxes and fees would be imposed, leaving 
that decision solely to NVTA.    See Code  §  15.2-4840(12). 
Although the General Assembly can later pass a law to amend or 
repeal NVTA’s authority to impose taxes, this does not negate 
the fact that the sole discretion to impose the regional taxes 
and fees presently rests with NVTA.    Therefore, we hold that 
because the regional taxes and fees specified in Chapter  896 
may be imposed in the sole discretion of NVTA, the General 
Assembly has delegated its taxing authority to NVTA with 
regard to the imposition of those taxes and fees. 
 We must now determine whether the General Assembly’s 
delegation of this taxing authority to NVTA violates the 
Constitution.    The Constitution of Virginia  “is not a grant of 
legislative powers to the General Assembly, but is a 
 16 
 
restraining instrument only, and, except as to matters ceded 
to the federal government, the legislative powers of the 
General Assembly are without limit.”    Harrison v. Day,  201 Va. 
386,  396,  111 S.E.2d  504,  511  (1959); accord City of Roanoke 
v. Elliott,  123 Va.  393,  406,  96 S.E.  819,  824  (1918).    As we 
have stated, the General Assembly may enact any law or take 
any action  “not prohibited by express terms, or by necessary 
implications by the State Constitution or the Constitution of 
the United States.”    Kirkpatrick,  146 Va. at  126,  136 S.E. at 
190. 
In determining the constitutionality of the General 
Assembly’s delegation of taxing authority to NVTA, we consider 
the explicit language of the Constitution.    See Town of South 
Hill v. Allen,  177 Va.  154,  164-65,  12 S.E.2d  770,  774  (1941). 
That explicit language demonstrates the special status that 
the legislative taxing power occupies in the Constitution, and 
reflects the greater restrictions that the Constitution places 
on the General Assembly’s exercise of the taxing power. The 
following provisions of the Constitution guide our analysis in 
this case. 
Article I, Section  6 of the Constitution states, in relevant part 
that all men  .  .  . cannot be taxed  .  .  . without 
their own consent, or that of their representatives duly elected  .  .  . . 
17 
 
Article IV, Section  1 of the Constitution provides that: 
The legislative power of the Commonwealth    shall be vested in a General Assembly, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Delegates. 
Article IV, Section  11 of the Constitution states, in relevant part, that: 
No bill which  .  .  . imposes, continues, or 
revives a tax, shall be passed except by the 
affirmative vote of a majority of all the members 
elected to each house, the name of each member 
voting and how he  [or she] voted to be recorded in 
the journal. 
Article IV, Section  14(5) of the Constitution states, in relevant part, that: 
The General Assembly shall not enact any local, special, or private law in the following cases: 
. 
(5)    For the assessment and collection of taxes, except as to animals which the General 
Assembly may deem dangerous to the farming 
interests. 
Article VII, Section  2 of the Constitution provides, in relevant part, that: 
The General Assembly may also provide by special act for the organization, government, and powers of any county, city, town, or regional government, including such powers of legislation, taxation, and assessment as the General Assembly may determine  .  .  . . 
Article VII, Section  7 of the Constitution provides, in relevant part, that: 
18 
 
No ordinance  .  .  . imposing taxes  .  .  . shall be passed except by a recorded affirmative vote of a majority of all members elected to the governing body. 
We view these provisions of the Constitution with special regard for the detailed and explicit oversight that the 
framers provided regarding the General Assembly’s exercise and delegation of its legislative power of taxation. Article I, 
Section  6 is contained in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights, 
and it prohibits taxation of citizens without their consent or that of their elected representatives.    We observe that 
Article IV, Section  1 places the legislative power of the 
Commonwealth in the General Assembly. 
However, the people of Virginia approved a Constitution 
that places restrictions on the General Assembly’s exercise of the taxing power.    In fact, greater restrictions are placed on the taxing power than are placed on the exercise of most other types of legislative power.    For example, under Article IV, Section  11, the General Assembly is prohibited from enacting legislation imposing a tax without an affirmative vote of a majority of all members elected to each house.2 
2 In contrast, most laws that do not involve the taxing, appropriation, or other related powers of the General Assembly may be enacted merely by a majority of those members voting in each house, provided that the majority is comprised of at 
least two-fifths of the members elected to that house.    See 
Va. Const. art. IV,  §  11(d). 
19 
 
The General Assembly is directly prohibited from enacting 
“any local, special, or private law  .  .  .  [f]or the assessment 
and collection of taxes.”    Va. Const. art. IV,  §  14(5).    There 
is, however, an exception to this specific prohibition.    The 
General Assembly may by special act delegate the power of 
taxation to any county, city, town, or regional government. 
See Va. Const. art. VII,  §  2.    NVTA is not a county, city, 
town, or regional government, and thus it is not a political 
subdivision to which the General Assembly may constitutionally 
delegate its legislative taxing authority pursuant to Article 
VII, Section  2.3    Instead, NVTA is a political subdivision 
narrowly charged by the General Assembly with the 
responsibility of addressing certain regional transportation 
issues in the Northern Virginia localities it encompasses. 
See Code  §§  15.2-4830,  -4838, and  -4840.    Furthermore, 
exercise of the delegation of taxing authority by a county, 
city, or town is restricted in that an ordinance or resolution 
imposing taxes may not be passed except by recorded 
3 The Marshall Defendants and Loudoun County did not argue before the circuit court that Chapter  896 is a local or 
special law that violates the provisions of Article IV, 
Section  14(5), prohibiting the General Assembly from enacting any local, special, or private law for the assessment and 
collection of taxes.    Thus, the question whether Chapter  896 
is such a local or special law, and the resulting impact of 
Article IV, Section  14(5) and Article VII, Section  2, is not 
before us in these appeals.    See Rule  5:25. 
20 
 
affirmative vote of a majority of all members elected to the 
governing body.    See Va. Const. art. VII,  §  7. 
 Upon review of the constitutional provisions set forth 
above, we conclude that the Constitution, in keeping with 
rights enumerated in Article I, Section  6 of the 
Constitution’s Bill of Rights, clearly contemplates that taxes 
must be imposed only by a majority of the elected 
representatives of a legislative body, with the votes cast by 
the elected representatives being duly recorded.    The 
constraints that the citizens of Virginia have placed upon the 
General Assembly regarding the imposition of taxes would be 
rendered meaningless if the General Assembly were permitted to 
avoid compliance with these constraints by delegating to NVTA 
the decisional authority whether to impose taxes.    Thus, 
although the Constitution does not explicitly prohibit the 
delegation of such decisional authority concerning the 
imposition of taxes, that delegation is prohibited by 
necessary implication, and the General Assembly may not 
delegate its taxing power to a non-elected body such as NVTA. 
See Shockley,  160 Va. at  415,  168 S.E. at  423. 
 The General Assembly also may not accomplish through 
Chapter  896, indirectly, that which it is not empowered to do 
directly, namely, impose taxes on the citizenry in the absence 
of an affirmative, recorded vote of a majority of all members 
 21 
 
elected to each body of the General Assembly.    Thus, by 
enacting Chapter  896, the General Assembly has failed to 
adhere to the mandates of accountability and transparency that the Constitution requires when the General Assembly exercises 
the legislative taxing authority permitted by the 
Constitution. 
If payment of the regional taxes and fees is to be 
required by a general law, it is the prerogative and the 
function of the General Assembly, as provided by Article IV, 
Section  1 of the Constitution, to make that decision, in a 
manner which complies with the requirements of Article IV, 
Section  11 of the Constitution.    Accordingly, we hold that the 
provisions of Chapter  896 permitting NVTA to impose the 
regional taxes and fees are invalid because they violate the 
Constitution.    See, e.g., Commonwealth v. City of Newport 
News,  158 Va.  521,  545-46,  164 S.E.  689,  696  (1932). 
Therefore, such taxes and fees that NVTA has already imposed 
are null and void. 
We further hold that the circuit court erred in 
validating the proposed bonds, which rely on the funding 
mechanism of the regional taxes and fees.    Because Chapter  896 specifically provides for the severance of any provisions in the act that are determined to be unconstitutional, the 
22 
 
invalid portions of Chapter  896 are hereby severed from the remainder of the act.4    See Code  §  1-243. 
For these reasons, we will affirm in part, and reverse in part, the circuit court’s judgment, and enter final judgment in accordance with our stated holdings. 
Affirmed in part, 
reversed in part, 
and final judgment. 
4 Based on these holdings, we need not address the remaining assignments of error. 
23
The phrase,'Unsound Transit', was coined by the Wall Street Journal to describe Seattle where,"Light Rail Madness eats billions that could otherwise be devoted to truly efficient transportation technologies." The Puget Sound's traffic congestion is a growing cancer on the region's prosperity. This website, captures news and expert opinion about ways to address the crisis. This is not a blog, but a knowledge base, which collects the best articles and presents them in a searchable format. My goal is to arm residents with knowledge so they can champion fact-based, rather than emotional, solutions.
Transportation
Friday, March 21, 2008
Virginia Transit Authority Supreme Court Decision
The articles are posted solely for educational purposes to raise awareness of transportation issues. I claim no authorship, nor do I profit from this website. Where known, all original authors and/or source publisher have been noted in the post. As this is a knowledge base, rather than a blog, I have reproduced the articles in full to allow for complete reader understanding and allow for comprehensive text searching...see custom google search engine at the top of the page. If you have concerns about the inclusion of a specific  article, please email bbdc1@live.com. for a speedy resolution.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
