|
|
Governor to speak at Legislative Day
Gov. Tim Kaine will speak at VML/VACo Legislative Day on Thursday, Feb. 7.
The Legislative Day program will begin at noon in the Metro Richmond Convention Center, located at 403 N. 3rd St. in downtown.
Kaine's address is scheduled for 12:15 p.m. The registration desk will open at 11 a.m.
If you haven't registered, download the registration form or e-mail or call Sherall Dementi (sdementi@vml.org; 804-649-8471) for more information.
Registration is $40 per person, which includes a box lunch.
Sign-up today for this important event!
Details of far-reaching impact fee bill emerge
Legislation pushed by Homebuilders Association of Virginia
The most significant land use legislation of the 2008 session -- pushed by the Homebuilders Association of Virginia -- would end cash proffers and replace them with impact fees for schools, roads and public safety buildings. The patron is Sen. John Watkins, who explained the major elements of SB 768 at a press conference on Jan. 18. Watkins maintained that the legislation would relieve existing homeowners from having to bear the cost of building new infrastructure. In addition, he said, the bill would ensure that developers pay their fair share of those costs.
Under the proposed legislation, cash proffers could no longer be negotiated with a developer for a rezoning. Existing proffers that have been pledged, but not paid, however, would continue in effect. For all future development, the locality could impose an impact fee for the schools, roads and public safety buildings for residential properties. The fee would not include school costs for commercial developments. In all cases, the fee would be imposed on a development whether or not a rezoning is involved -- a major difference between impact fees and cash proffers, which are limited to land in a rezoning.
The legislation only allows counties with a stated growth rate -- and the towns in the county -- to impose impact fees. The prerequisites are the same as in last year's transportation bill for urban development areas: 20,000 population or more with a 5 percent 10-year growth rate, and any locality with a 15 percent 10-year growth rate. It includes all cities, regardless of the growth rate.
If the locality enacts an impact fee, it must also enact a grantor's tax at a rate of 20 cents per $100 value of the sale. The grantor's tax would be used for infrastructure in the impact fee service areas created by the locality, along with the impact fees.
The bill also contains absolute caps on the amount of the impact fee. The caps vary for three general areas of the Commonwealth: Northern Virginia, Tidewater and the rest of the state. For the majority of the state, for residential lots, the maximum fee is $5,000 per single family, detached dwelling; $3,335 per single family attached; and $2,500 per multi-family unit. For Northern Virginia and Tidewater, the cap is $8,000, $5,336 and $4,000 for the three categories. For commercial and industrial properties, the caps are $3/square foot for office; $4/square foot for retail; $2/square foot for industrial; and $1,000 per room and $3/square foot for non-room area of hotels and motels. The non-residential rates are the same statewide.
The bill allows the negotiation of on-site non-cash proffers in the rezoning negotiation process. It ends the authority, however, to negotiate off-site non-cash proffers for residential developments, but does allow that for commercial developments.
The bill has a transition period to allow local governments to shift from a cash proffer system to the impact fee system. Impact fees may be imposed on all lots and properties, including those which have zoning for the ultimate use in place.
The bill sets Jan. 1, 2009 as the transition date from cash proffers to impact fees and the new grantor's tax. Staff contact: Mark Flynn (mflynn@vml.org).
Assortment of legislation targets Comprehensive Services Act
The Comprehensive Services Act for At-Risk Youth and Families (CSA) is the target of several pieces of legislation as well as budget initiatives this year.
A number of bills come from a joint legislative study committee that spent two years looking at components of CSA. It also reviewed the results of a year-long study of CSA conducted in 2006 by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC). Some legislation was inspired by the Chief Justice's commission studying mental health law and the courts. Other bills come at the request of parties involved with CSA.
Four bills address case management requirements under CSA. HB 487 (Hanger) would require community planning teams (called FAPTs) to develop residential service plans for any youth placed in a residential facility. The plans would include plans for returning the child home or to community at the earliest appropriate time, and the services needed to serve the child in the community. A number of localities currently do this. Two companion bills, SB 658 (Howell) and HB 503 (Hamilton) would require the same plans to be developed, and in addition, require community management teams to review and monitor every residential service plan. Finally, SB 488 (Hanger) would require that the state develop uniform guidelines for intensive case management services. None of the bills identify how or who would pay for any increased or more complex level of case management responsibilities.
Other bills related to CSA include the following:
SB 479 (Hanger) -- would require the state CSA office to provide an annual workshop on best practices and evidence-based practices for CSA staff and others. The state budget has included funding for the past several years ($50,000 a year) for training to be conducted for staff who work on CSA at the local level.
SB 480 (Hanger) -- would require the State Executive Council (SEC) to oversee development and implementation of a uniform standard for utilization review to be used at the local level. Currently, localities are required to have a utilization management process that covers all CSA services and that is approved by the SEC. This bill appears to require that everyone use the exact same UR process, not one that suits the needs of the locality.
SB 481 (Hanger) -- would require uniform data collection about residential service providers, services and costs for children in CSA; requires uniform outcome measures to evaluate residential services paid for through CSA. There currently are requirements in the Code of Virginia for uniform data collection standards and outcome measures that cover length of stay and expenditures that localities must submit; it is unclear who would submit the additional data.
SB 482 (Hanger) -- would require to State Executive Council (SEC) to oversee collection of data on the cost of services purchased through the program, for certain services purchased with Medicaid dollars, and for payments made through the Title IV-E foster care program. Currently, localities must report program costs.
SB 483 (Hanger) -- would require the State Executive Council to set standards for evaluating local decisions regarding levels of care and participant outcomes. There currently are requirements for development of outcome measures in the program (which this would delete). It does not appear to say who would evaluate local decisions.
SB 484 (Hanger) -- rewords current Code requirements regarding data collection standards and review of data regarding services provided, numbers served, and the cost of services.
SB 485 (Hanger) -- requires that data collected identify the facility where a child receives services; the circumstances under which a child ends a service; and circumstances under which a child leaves the CSA program.
SB 486 (Hanger) -- rewords requirements for uniform data collection and requires client specific database. Localities currently are required to collect and submit to the state information about every child served through CSA.
SB 489 (Hanger) -- requires community management teams to identify children in residential care who can be served at home or in the community and develop a plan, including services necessary, for their return to the community.
A number of budget amendments affecting CSA, most of them specifically addressing the initiatives included in Gov. Kaine's proposed budget have been introduced on behalf of local governments. A summary of these amendments will be included in the next bulletin.
Staff contact: Janet Areson (jareson@vml.org)
2 committees to hold joint public hearing on mountain of mental health bills
With more than 80 bills already introduced regarding mental health issues, two Senate committees have joined forces to hold a public hearing and review proposed legislation. A subcommittee of the Senate Education and Health Committee and a subcommittee of the Senate Courts of Justice Committee will meet together to work on mental health legislation.
The special joint subcommittee will hold a public hearing on Jan. 23 at 7 p.m. in House Room D of the General Assembly Building. The subcommittee has tentatively scheduled a meeting on Jan. 25 to start reviewing the legislation before it. The members of the special joint subcommittee are Sens. Janet Howell (chair); John Edwards, Richard Saslaw, Louise Lucas, Frederick Quayle and Ken Cuccinelli.
Bill would grant more protections to law enforcement officers during disciplinary hearings
A bill extending procedural guarantees to law enforcement officers was reported out of a Senate Courts of Justice subcommittee on Jan. 17.
SB 76 (Cuccinelli) strengthens the protections afforded to law enforcement officers during internal investigations, questioning and disciplinary hearings. The bill requires a 24-hour notice to an officer prior to questioning, allows officers the right to an attorney during the hearing, and allows officers the opportunity to review their investigation files. Language was added to the bill stating that names and other identifying information of any witness or complainant would be deleted prior to the review of the file by the investigating officer where there is a foreseeable risk that retaliatory action would be taken against such a person.
The bill would not apply to criminal investigations of an officer. Sen. Fred Quayle was the only subcommittee member to vote against the bill. The bill was scheduled to be heard in the Senate Courts of Justice Committee on Monday, Jan. 21. Staff contact: Kimberly Pollard (kpollard@vml.org).
Subcommittee delays vote on law enforcement OT bill that would affect small localities
A Senate Courts of Justice subcommittee delayed action on legislation that would extend coverage of overtime laws to localities with fewer than 100 law-enforcement employees. The subcommittee delayed action Jan. 14 on SB 269 (Deeds) to allow VML more time to assess its fiscal ramifications.
The overtime provisions in the bill went into effect for most firefighters in 2001 and for law enforcement agencies with more than 100 employees in 2005.
The 2001 law requires localities to add in all hours in which the law enforcement employee is in paid status (annual, sick leave as examples) when calculating overtime, if the extra hours are worked during part of the employee's regular work schedule. If a police officer or deputy sheriff is on paid leave of any sort, but works a shift during the pay period, the locality would have to pay that one shift that he worked at the overtime rate. Under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, that shift would be paid at straight-time rate.
If your locality regularly schedules overtime hours in every pay period, the impact would be somewhat less, since many localities with that work schedule already include the paid leave hours.
If you have a senator on the Courts of Justice Committee, please call or email the Senator to voice your opposition to the bill and mention the fiscal impact it will have on your locality. The bill will be in civil subcommittee on Thursday, Jan. 24.
Here is contact information for the full committee members; members of the subcommittee have an asterisk by their name.
Senate Courts of Justice
Member Capitol Office Email Address Blevins, Harry B. (804) 698-7514 district14@sov.state.va.us **Cuccinelli, Ken, II (804) 698-7537 district37@sov.state.va.us **Deeds, R. Creigh (804) 698-7525 district25@sov.state.va.us **Edwards, John S. (804) 698-7521 district21@sov.state.va.us Howell, Janet D. (804) 698-7532 district32@sov.state.va.us **Lucas, L. Louise (804) 698-7518 district18@sov.state.va.us **Marsh, Henry L., III (804) 698-7516 district16@sov.state.va.us McDougle, Ryan T. (804) 698-7504 district04@sov.state.va.us Norment, Thomas K., Jr. (804) 698-7503 district03@sov.state.va.us **Obenshain, Mark D. (804) 698-7526 district26@sov.state.va.us **Puller, Toddy (804) 698-7536 district36@sov.state.va.us **Quayle, Frederick M. (804) 698-7513 district13@sov.state.va.us Reynolds, Wm. Roscoe (804) 698-7520 district20@sov.state.va.us Saslaw, Richard L. (804) 698-7535 district35@sov.state.va.us Stolle, Kenneth W. (804) 698-7508 district08@sov.state.va.us Staff contact: Kimberly Pollard (kpollard@vml.org).
Mandatory November municipal elections proposed
HB 328 (Saxman) would require that all municipal elections be held in November. The bill is in the House Privileges & Elections Subcommittee on Elections, which meets Fridays at 7 a.m. The bill is not yet scheduled for subcommittee review, but could be on the docket for Friday, Jan. 25. VML opposes the bill. Cities and towns already have the authority to move their elections to November. They should retain that authority in order to have an electoral arrangement that best meets the needs of their jurisdictions. Please call members of the subcommittee in opposition. Staff contact: Mary Jo Fields (mfields@vml.org).
Subcommittee members:
Bell, Robert B. (804) 698-1058 DelRBell@house.state.va.us Brink, Robert H. (804) 698-1048 DelRBrink@house.state.va.us Dance, Rosalyn R. (804) 698-1063 DelRDance@house.state.va.us Jones, S. Chris (chair) (804) 698-1076 DelCJones@house.state.va.us O'Bannon, John M., III (804) 698-1073 DelJOBannon@house.state.va.us Suit, Terrie L. (804) 698-1081 DelTSuit@house.state.va.us Bill dealing with government payment of employees professional association dues improved
SB 338 (Cuccinelli) is intended to prohibit government agencies from requiring that employees be members of a professional organization, unless the membership is required for the position in which the employee works. The wording in the original version was confusing and led to a possible interpretation that it would prohibit payment of dues by a local government to such entities as the Virginia Local Government Managers Association, the Local Government Attorneys Association, and others.
Sen. Ken Cuccinelli, the patron, has cooperated with VML, LGA and others to replace the confusing language with much clearer wording. The new language hasn't been published yet, but is likely to say the following: "Except to the extent that membership in a professional association is necessary to maintain a professional or occupational license, certification, or registration that is directly related to the performance of official duties, no employee of any locality may be required to join a professional association as a condition of employment."
This bill will probably come up Tuesday afternoon in the Senate Local Government Committee. Staff contact: Mark Flynn mflynn@vml.org.
Important dam safety regulations could prove costly
Major legislation under development by the Department of Conservation and Recreation over the past year would require upgrades for publicly owned dams and give localities additional planning and zoning authority to address development in "dam break inundation zones." Preliminary cost estimates for upgrading dam spillways totaled $250 million, although the economic impact could be considerably greater.
The dam break inundation zone is the area downstream of a dam that would be inundated or otherwise directly affected by the failure of a dam, resulting in loss of life or serious property damage. HB 837 (Sherwood) also would direct developers to assist dam owners with required upgrades to dams that lie upstream of their development, and create disclosure and notification responsibilities related to property transfers and construction of new dams. Fifty-eight Virginia localities own or maintain state-regulated impounding structures (114 dams) and would be required to map the dam break zones as well as upgrade impounding structures.
The proposed legislation also incorporates significant land use and property rights issues. Specifically, the legislation would:
- Regulate or limit future development/redevelopment within dam break inundation zones unless a land developer agrees to contribute to the necessary upgrades to the dam.
- Require mapping of dam break inundation zones when a development is proposed downstream of a dam.
- Require surveying and study of dam break inundation zones as part of the preparation of a comprehensive plan.
- Require the inclusion of regulations for drainage and flood control in subdivision ordinances.
- Allow localities to provide in their subdivision ordinances requirements for developers to pay costs for upgrades and improvements to dams that are necessitated by proposed development.
The Department of Planning and Budget's economic impact analysis (PDF)
HB 837 was assigned to the House Committee on Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources, and may be taken up as early as Wed. Jan 23. Staff contact: Denise Thompson (dthompson@vml.org).
Eminent Domain bill dies in subcommittee
Sen. Ken Cuccinelli struck SB 77 from the Senate Courts of Justice Civil subcommittee docket. The bill would have made the "offer to the former owner to repurchase" language under eminent domain law apply to any interest acquired by the condemner. Staff contact: Kimberly Pollard (kpollard@vml.org).
Campaign finance disclosure option for towns
Legislation to allow towns with populations of less than 25,000 the option of complying with stricter regulations for campaign finance disclosure was approved by the House Privileges & Elections Committee. Towns over 25,000 are currently required to meet those regulations. HB 637 (May) was requested by the town of Purcellville. Staff contact: Mary Jo Fields (mfields@vml.org)
Unexpended funds bill recommended for tabling
Legislation to require that school boards be allowed to retain unexpended funds was tabled by a House Education subcommittee on Jan. 17 (HB 449 - Rust) be tabled. The bill would require that money appropriated by a locality to a school board, but not spent by the end of the year, be reappropriated to the school board instead of reverting to the locality. Current law requires that the money revert to the locality. Under the rules of the House, the chairman of the full committee does not have to bring legislation not recommended by a subcommittee back before the full committee, so the legislation is likely dead for the session. Staff contact: Mary Jo Fields (mfields@vml.org)
Senate Finance and House Appropriations Committees review governor's budget proposals
Transportation: Both the Senate Finance and House Appropriations Subcommittees on Transportation listened this week to Secretary of Transportation, Pierce Homer, recount the administration's successes in 2007 and plans for the upcoming biennium. Some members expressed concern regarding the proposed reversion in FY09 of $180.0 million of general fund dollars appropriated last year for transportation projects. The administration says the 15 projects funded from these dollars do not need the cash in FY09. The budget redirects these dollars for other general fund spending. In FY10, the governor proposes to restore the $180.0 million to the projects to meet construction cash needs.
Economic Development and Natural Resources: The Secretary of Commerce and Trade, Patrick Gottschalk, presented his case for new spending to the Senate Finance Subcommittee on Economic Development and Natural Resources and to the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Economic Development, Agriculture and Natural Resources. Gottschalk emphasized the importance of additional money for the Governor's Opportunity Fund and for several incentive programs tied to business expansion projects, including performance grants for Micron (Manassas) and Qimonda (Henrico) semiconductor manufacturers, research and training for Rolls-Royce (Prince George) and SRI (Harrisonburg), and others. The House Subcommittee members questioned the Secretary about program needs and the required timing for the incentive payments.
Public Education: Dr. Billy K. Cannaday, Jr., Superintendent of Public Instruction, spoke to the Senate Finance Subcommittee on Education about the need for continued state support for "at-risk add-on" programs. At-risk add-on funding recognizes the higher cost of educating economically disadvantaged students. The program provides considerable flexibility for localities to tailor educational activities best suited for their needs. Senator William Wampler, Jr., a budget conferee, noted that funding for this program has always been controversial.
The Superintendent also provided information about state efforts to better track graduation and dropout rates in Virginia. Senator Tommy Norment expressed frustration, shared by other members of the subcommittee, about the lack of data currently available.
2005-2006 2006-2007 All Students 73.0% 74.0% African American Students 62.0% 62.0% Hispanic Students 64.0% 63.0% White Students 78.0% 78.0% Students with Disabilities Not available 61.0% Students Identified as Disadvantaged Not available 53.0% Limited English Proficient Students Not available 59.0% Source: VA Board of Education Annual Reports Staff contact: Neal Menkes (nmenkes@vml.org), Janet Areson (jareson@vml.org), Mary Jo Fields (mfields@vml.org)
Line of Duty questions raised at subcommittee meeting
Delegate Chris Jones during a presentation at a Jan. 17 House Appropriations subcommittee meeting asked why the state was making Line of Duty payments for so many local employees. Virginia State Comptroller David A. Von Moll answered that the Line of Duty Act was a state program, and that he thought that local governments probably had not been a party to making the decision to include local employees in the program. Von Moll's presentation showed that $9 million is budgeted for the LOD program for FY 2008; 65 percent of the current actual claimants are local employees, with the remaining 35 percent being state employees.
Law enforcement officers, corrections officers, sheriffs and deputies, professional and volunteer firefighters, rescue squad members, HAZMAT officers and team members and some groups of specific state employees are eligible for Line of Duty benefits. The program provides cash payments, health insurance coverage and tuition waivers for eligible employees who are killed or disabled in the line of duty. Employees covered by the heart/lung presumption are eligible for the program. These benefits include a death benefit, tuition waiver, and health insurance coverage for surviving spouses and dependents.
The issue is important to VML members because bills have been introduced in past sessions to shift responsibility for the LOD payments for local employees to local governments. This type of legislation has not been introduced this year, but VML and local officials will need to examine the budgets presented by the money committees to ensure that such approaches are not included. Staff contact: Mary Jo Fields (mfields@vml.org).
House subcommittees assume greater importance
The role of subcommittees was strengthened even further under changes adopted by the House of Delegates on Jan. 9 to the rules governing the legislative process. If a subcommittee votes to not recommend a bill, only the chairman of the full committee can decide to bring the bill out of subcommittee to the full committee. In past sessions, any member of the full committee could ask that a bill not recommended by a subcommittee be brought before the full committee. That language was deleted in the rules changes adopted for this session. This makes the role of subcommittees in killing legislation even more important, and makes it even more important for local governments to comment on legislation before subcommittees. Staff contact: Mary Jo Fields (mfields@vml.org)
What's new | Marketplace | VML Insurance Programs | About the League | Calendar | Sustaining membership
Legislative activities | Publications | Conferences | Affiliate organizations | Links
©2008 Virginia Municipal League. Comments and questions about this page or the data provided may be addressed to Manuel Timbreza.
Special thanks to the Virginia Institute of Government for hosting this site.
