HB405 Please leave the decision on Solar Farms to the locality it’s proposed to be placed. The loss of agriculture and trees is a danger to the environment and fiscal health of the location and therefore the residents should have the final say. Studies of long term land pollution should be made available to all citizens in a manner that reaches a large portion of the state

On behalf of the Clarke County Board of Supervisors, please accept our comments in opposition to HB 636. The Clarke County BOS does not oppose solar, we were one of the first in our region to approve a utility solar plant. If solar projects currently in the review process in our County are approved and built, we estimate solar power generated in Clarke County would equal the power we use in our County. We aren't the reason Virginia isn't meeting its solar goals. The influx of data centers is driving the Commonwealth's energy needs. > > Agriculture is the number one industry in Virginia and the driving force for our zoning and comprehensive planning in Clarke County. We oppose any legislation which takes away our ability to protect our agricultural lands. We aren't creating the demand for solar energy and our farmland is too valuable to sacrifice for this purpose.

Please vote No to HB 636. The power to decide what we want in our counties should be left in the hands of our local governments. We the people have expressed our opposition to the siting of solar farms and we deserve the respect of having our decisions respected. We in the rural areas are being negatively impacted by the siting of these solar farms. Politicians in Richmond should not be allowed to dictate how our farmlands are used. NO TO SOLAR FARMS!

I'm asking that HB636 be denied. The tax paying citizens of each county should have the right to have input on what happens in there county. We do not need a bunch of bureaucrats telling local government how to govern their county. This would be the first of many steps of state government taking away the rights of the citizens of the local counties. Local officials know the wants and needs of their county, with input of the citizens, the state does not. How would Mr. Sullivan feel in Joe Biden made excutive orders for the state???

I ask that these bills be thrown out. They are a state government overreach because they remove the ability of local government to govern their communities through existing planning and zoning in the siting of energy facilities. They also overrule local moratoriums which have been put in place to control the real impacts of these facilities on concerned communities.

These decisions need to remain on the local level with each locality deciding for itself.

Please consider the implications of HB 636. It should not be the SCC who decides location of utility solar farms. This should be left to the individual counties and citizens in Virginia and their own locally drafted and approved ordinances. Farmland and forests are precious resources and we could loose more acreage if this bill passes the House. Please vote no and consider research to install solar panels on urban structures.

This bill should not be allowed to pass. In Page County, our main sources of income are in agriculture and tourism. We are losing farmland at an alarming rate. Farmland must be protected at all cost. These large scale, industrial solar facilities can only be built on large farms. in our county, we fought for three years to come up with a comprehensive solar ordinance. It was very effective. Richmond has no rights to come into our county and tell us what we can and can’t do when we as the citizens of the county ,who pay taxes, made a decision what works best for us .

Please vote no on HB 636. This bill would cause local people to not have a say on what happens to their land because these solar farms often destroy neighboring land, which has negative effects on wildlife, farms, agriculture, etc. Many of these projects have already been voted down, so the voices of local communities that have already made decisions on what they would/wouldn't like in their area should not be taken away.

Please vote no on HB 636. Some of these solar projects are being rejected by the Local Board of Supervisors who are truly representing the people the people they represent. Local residents, especially of rural communities, recognize that many of the solar projects are actually harmful to agriculture and will destroy land which is necessary for farming, timber, and local wildlife. If you destroy farmland in these local communities, you are also taking away jobs, which further harms local communities. People in the communities for which solar "farms" are being proposed, have the right to determine if they want surrounding land impacted by the detrimental effects of these projects.

As a farm owners, we strongly oppose Bill 636, We strongly support local government deciding what is best for the land in their area. It is important to be good stewards of our land and continue many long standing traditions of our past. We need land that grows crops, not solar panels that will ruin the land forever.

I oppose House Bill 636. I understand that Dominion Energy and the Virginia Association of Counties (VAC) oppose House Bill 636 (as well as Senate Bill 567). As a Virginia citizen for 63 years, I strongly favor local governments deciding what is best for their land use decisions because local governments are elected by their citizens. Local administration must not be infringed by those who think they know better than local county and city citizens. Thank you.

I oppose House Bill 636. I understand that Dominion Energy and the Virginia Association of Counties (VAC) oppose House Bill 636 (as well as Senate Bill 567). As a Virginia citizen for 36 years, I strongly favor local governments deciding what is best for their land use decisions because local governments are elected by their citizens. Thank you. Joseph F Moore Henrico, VA

I oppose House Bill 636. I understand that Dominion Energy and the Virginia Association of Counties (VAC) oppose House Bill 636 (as well as Senate Bill 567). As a Virginia citizen for 36 years, I strongly favor local governments deciding what is best for their land use decisions because local governments are elected by their citizens. Thank you. Joseph F Moore Henrico, VA

Comments Document

I oppose House Bill 636. I understand Dominion Energy and Virginia Association of Counties (VAC) also oppose House Bill 636 (as well as Senate Bill 567). As local government are elected by citizens, I strongly favor local government's decide what is best for their land use.

I write to alsk that HB636 be denied. The State should not mandate specific land use projects on counties. Counties are responsible for its development planning, not the state. Solar farms in particular are not a proven viable energy solution and pose secondary and unintended consequences which the county would be responsible for. Thank you for your support. Please deny HB636.

This is communism at its best. The Civil War was fought over big government telling little government what to do.

Please do not take the right for our communities to control our own land. I ask you to oppose the bill proposed that takes away our local rights. I have attended many meeting for and against solar power. I am convinced in an effort to be green, you are actually destroying our land. Even though solar farms promise to restore after 20-30 years, the land will be destroyed, along with plants , animals and our creeks and rivers. The farms will never dig up the 16 foot pylons that support the panels. Therefore, the remaining carcass will be un-farmable. ETC

I Warren Whitworth of Buckingham county want to go on board to express my opposition to HB 636. While I am not against solar power, I am strongly against the bringing solar power into a predominantly poor and relatively black area of Buckingham county. The Bear Garden Creek power plant is less than 3 miles from the proposed solar plant near me, which wraps around 2/3 of my property. Furthermore, the runoff from into Bear Garden Creek from either the solar power panels or erosion, will adversely affect the health of the predominantly poor Black people who live along Bear Garden Creek. This is not an area that needs 1000 acres of solar power especially when a gas powered plant is less than 2.5 miles from the proposed site. This is Environmental Injustice at its core! Additionally much of the land on this proposed site has a steep grade of about 40%. The EPA recommends a sloping grade no more than 5 to 10%. Before anyone supports this bill and approves this bill they should come out to Buckingham county to the to the proposed site and see for themselves. I ask you to be sensible, be practical and be respectful of the citizen in rural Buckingham county. This bill should not remove power from the citizens of Virginia. Our citizens of this Commonwealth deserve better than that. Most citizens in rural Virginia know what they want for their counties, their homes and their livelihood. Their choice to remain GREEN should not be taken away because someone from Northern Virginia decides he needs more green($) in their pockets. Thank you! Warren Whitworth

I am oppose to bill HB636. As a resident I believe representatives closest to an area should make recommendation on what is in their county ‘s best interest. They are cognizant of populations, social justice/burdens, etc.

I oppose House Bill 636. I understand that Dominion Energy and the Virginia Association of Counties (VAC) oppose House Bill 636 (as well as Senate Bill 567). As a Virginia citizen for 36 years, I strongly favor local governments deciding what is best for their land use decisions because local governments are elected by the residents. Thank you.

Sirs: Upon reading several recent articles concerning HR and HS Bills that would permit the State Corporate Commission to mandate solar farms, I feel compelled to request you to vote NO for the following bills: House Bill 106 House Bill HB-636 As residents of a rural county in which a large population of the homes uses well water, it is imperative that you protect those major resources that solar farms will detrimentally impact. Solar farm environmental studies that I've read show innumerable instances of failure of these facilities to cause contamination of water sheds, groundwater, and major aquifers. The facilities have been fined, but with little impact on containing such failure to protect the resources. Many of the solar developers target economically challenged, low income residents with the dream of instant wealth and is equal to that of a snake oil salesman. The dream is often sold with offers of contracts to rent hundreds of acres of land at phenomenal rates, offering County governments low-ball surety bonds, and very thinly veiled information of mitigation of land after decommissions. When the facility is decommissioned, the landowner will be left with footing the bill to mitigate the damage to the land, a state requirement. The end result is decimation of agricultural and forestry lands that can never be restored. Your time is valuable, as is the very nature and essence of our rural communities. We respectfully ask that you vote NO to the bills under your authority. Jerry K. and Sandra L. Radford 121 Mulberry Drive Palmyra, VA 22963

As a Virginia resident, I am opposed to HB636. Land use and zoning decisions should remain at the local county level, not approved by the SCC, especially for large-scale industrial solar power plants. It is well-documented that areas in Virginia, like Essex and Louisa counties, have suffered negative effects from uncontrolled runoff of water and topsoil due to industrial solar facilities. Work needs to be done to protect agricultural and forestry-zoned land and advocate for responsible solar policies such as siting these on brownfields, industrial-zoned land, and on commercial and residential rooftops. The destruction of tens of thousands of acres of farmland and timberland is not green nor good for the environment. Please vote no to HB636.

In regards to House Bill 636, We elect local officials to represent our voices. Our elected local officials have our best interests in mind when making decisions based on the localities. Turning power over to SCC to make decisions based on my behalf or my business’s regarding solar and wind is not in our best interests. This bill removes all power from the local governments deciding traditional land use decisions and hands it over to Richmond. The SCC should not have the authority to make decisions for counties and local governments regarding issues that could potentially affect a persons health or property values. Please leave the power with the local governments to decide their own land use in regards to solar and wind farms.

I oppose House Bill 636. I understand that Dominion Energy and the Virginia Association of Counties (VAC) oppose House Bill 636 (as well as Senate Bill 567). As a Virginia citizen, I strongly favor local governments to decide what is best for their land use decisions. Thank you. Mario Kuhar Scottsville, VA

I wish to express my opposition to the passage of HB636. This bill takes away the authority of the local governing bodies to make decisions based on what is best for their locality and its residents. Land use should be determined by those directly affected, not by the SCC or any person or agency at the state level. Thank you!

Ladies and Gentlemen: We that live in rural Virginia are fighting against utility scale solar developers for our way of life, the preservation of Virginia's farms and forrest, the preservation of watersheds and wildlife corridors, and the preservation of what makes rural Virginia such a beautiful and wonderful place to live and raise a family. Utility scale solar developments continue to invade the Commonwealth at alarming rates. Fluvanna County, and many other rural Counties, are ground-zero for this debate. Our local politicians, both Planning Commissioners and Members of Board of Supervisors, are expressly running for re-election on the issue of supporting or opposing utility scale solar projects. People vote in large numbers based on support or opposition to the Solar Land Grab. It would be unjust to the local citizens of the Commonwealth to remove their ability to debate this issue locally at the ballot box. If decisions re solar development are removed to Richmond, the solar developers will simply concentrate lobbying efforts on a small number of decision makers far removed from the many problems caused by large-scale solar utility projects. Don't take power away from the local politicians most knowledgeable about local needs to preserve the rural character of Virginia. Prior generations of Virginians have protected our farms and forests and country lifestyle. Please don't be the generation that drops the ball. -- Jason Sweeney, Esq. Board Member, Citizen Defenders of Fluvanna County, Inc.

Denial of HB 636 is a must. Mandating to counties what they must do, especially if the residents oppose the activities or item, is an over reach of authority that should not be instituted. County officials working with their constituents can best determine the needs and desires of the residents. Additionally, solar farms and other related activities should be denied as well. It is unclear, vague actually, what the long term consequences are of solar farms on the environment. Disposal of failed, broken, depleted solar cells, batteries, etc have yet to successfully been solved. Jumping on a green bandwagon without environmental safeguard is as unhealthy as the perceived problems. Deny HB 636 now. Deny, deny Deny HB 636. Thank you for the opportunity to respond.

Please vote to DENY Please DO NOT supersede local government rights Solar farms destroy and devastate the land, soil and potentially ground water. These solar farms CREATE BROWNFIELDS Protect our farmland, pastures and green space DENY THIS BILL

As a Virginia resident and landowner, I ask that you stop HB636 Localities should NOT lose control of siting for utility-scale solar facilities. Land use decisions should remain at the local level. We must prioritize the protection of our forests and farms. Solar development should be on already-developed lands. Virginia needs to protect our natural and working lands. We should work towards a balanced solar build-out that not only benefits our environment but also supports our communities, wildlife and waters. We need stronger policies that redirect industrial solar facilities towards already-developed lands and the built environment.

As a Virginia landowner whose land is at risk for habitat disruption and flooding from an adjacent industrial solar facility, I ask that you oppose HB636. This bill will remove local zoning authority for the siting of utility-scale solar facilities and prohibit moratoriums on these projects. HB636 contradicts Virginia’s longstanding respect for local government authority. The majority of utility-scale solar installations in Virginia continue to be sited on our farms and forestlands. The solar facility directly adjacent to my property in Buckingham County is in the process of removing approximately 2,000 acres of trees. The runoff from the massive project will flow into the James River. The habitat destruction that inevitably takes place when denuding forests can never be restored. Solar projects must be sited on rooftops, marginal land, brownfields, and other sub-prime lands as decided by a locality to ensure consistency with their comprehensive plan. Vote NO on HB636 for your landowners and for the environment in Virginia.

On February 5, 2024 the Rappahannock County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to express their opposition to all bills that remove or overrule local county decisions related to utility scale solar. All localities are different and what might be appropriate for one, might not be for another. Our county has expressed in our Comprehensive Plan that "... we the people of Rappahannock County declare it to be a "scenic county" and all goals, principles, and policies will reflect and devolve from this fundamental recognition." This is particularly important with the Shenandoah National Park occupying more than 20% or our land area with towering views that eliminate the effectiveness of most typical roadside buffers. We do allow utility scale solar projects that meet certain size and density requirements that FIT our locality. We strongly oppose granting the State Corporation Commission, a body that cannot understand our local goals, the authority to overrule local decisions regarding utility scale solar.

Bill HB 636 should not be passed. I am a farmer in Southampton county and the AG and Forestry both carry a big role in our county, this bill will do nothing but cause problems and issues. I think it is important to be a good steward of the land and carry on the traditions that our past generations worked so hard for. NO TO BILL HB 636

Taking the rights away from citizens to have their local elected representatives make important local decisions is more than wrong. I can say that i know no one in this county or in the citizens association I am in, Republican or Democrat, that supports this bill. Its the one thing that no matter the political party we agree on. Any representative supporting this should and probably pay a price in their next election or primary. A primary opponent can win over almost any incumbent that has supported this horrible legislation.

This bill proposes the circumvention of the local governments and the will of Virginia citizens by consolidating an extreme amount of authority in one organization; and based on the description of the Commission this bill exceeds its authorities. “The bill provides that an applicant who is issued a certificate by the Commission for an energy facility is exempt from obtaining approvals or permits, including any land use approvals or permits under the regulations and ordinances of the locality.” From the SCC’s website – “The SCC’s powers, which range from issuing rules and regulations to setting rates charged by large investor-owned utilities, are delineated by the state constitution and state law.” No description of authorities enabling the SCC to override local governments exists in the commission’s description. This bill replicates all the actions of eminent domain without calling it that. It appears the landowners/property owners are not going to be compensated for their losses if the commission approves issuing a certificate. Per the Code of Virginia 1-219.1 Limitations on Eminent Domain, A. The right to private property being a fundamental right, the General Assembly shall not pass any law whereby private property shall be taken or damaged for public uses without just compensation. Electric utilities or independent power providers should not be allowed to simply overrule a municipality’s decision based on the fact the decision did not go in their favor or simply meeting a threshold established by the Commission, “The bill applies to any solar energy facility with a capacity of 50 megawatts or more, any wind energy facility with a capacity of 100 megawatts or more, and any energy storage facility with a nameplate capacity of 50 megawatts or more and an energy discharge capability of 200 megawatt hours or more”. Nor is there any discussion within the bill to allow municipalities or citizens to present information, issues, concerns regarding their case for denial prior to a decision by the SCC. Municipalities have put forth great efforts in developing policies concerning land usage which adhere to the many environmental rules and regulations, zoning rules and regulations for future development, the vision of the municipality, and the will of the citizens of said municipality. Circumventing these efforts through the authorization of the Commission to override the local authorities does not bold well. Another reason to veto this bill is the building of wealth by citizenry. For most citizens, the building of wealth begins with the American dream, owning property. The siting of electric utilities or independent power provider facilities within or adjacent to established communities seriously impacts the abilities of citizens to create and hold wealth through property ownership. Studies show the detrimental affects these solar and wind facilities have on personal property values. Again, this bill does not demonstrate any concern for individual property rights.

Mecklenburg County stands in firm opposition to this proposed legislation. We object to legislation that erodes and abrogates local government land use decision making. We also are concerned that the structure of this bill, as designed, places undue pressure solely upon local governments. Essentially, the framework of this bill provides local governments with a choice: take a deal quickly and get paid or if any push back occurs, decision making is removed and the financial terms weaken. This structure does not promote sound land use determinations in this Commonwealth nor does it lend itself to fostering relationships between the private and public sector. Currently, the market rate in siting agreements per megawatt payments, negotiated in good faith between parties, significantly dwarfs the “community agreement” terms set out in the proposed §56-632. Therefore, if counties wish to continue to achieve the better benefits hitherto provided to local governments by the General Assembly over the last few sessions in exchange for solar development, they must act – and act quickly, within only 120 days. This assumes that investigation of necessary conditions in areas such as buffers, screening, environmental protection, and the like; exchange of paper; scheduling appearances before Planning Commissions and Boards of Supervisors; advertising; holding public hearing; and a vote, among other actions, can all occur in those 120 days. This is unreasonable and not in conjunction with process realities; indeed, this is shown by granting the SCC one year to do what local governments are given only four months, with many of the same documents required to be submitted. Forcing a decision in this sector will not lead to better outcomes nor yield more positive benefits for Virginia’s residents. Additionally, this process provides an applicant with perverse incentives, whereby one could deliberately slow their negotiations in order to get before the SCC and potentially pay for less for a project. Yet, at no point does the bill provide an avenue to deny the agreement due to applicant inaction. If this bill were to proceed, Mecklenburg County suggests the following revisions: 1. Increase the megawatts for solar energy and energy storage facilities for when this bill applies to 100 megawatts, to mirror the amount listed for wind; 2. Increase the length of time for siting negotiations to occur and to be no less than that provided to the SCC; 3. Divorce the limited time frame for negotiations from the time frame necessary for advertising, public hearings, and public Board votes; 4. Create a penalty for applicants who do not negotiate in good faith, such as removal of their ability to appeal; 5. Eliminate the set out dollar amount in the proposed §56-632; or increase the amount significantly; or set out a no less than dollar amount.

Siting of energy facilities should remain under local control. Battery storage facilities in particular present fire risks that should be managed through local zoning.

I and the residents in PG County are actively organizing and speaking out at our local Board of Supervisors meetings against excessive desire to turn all farmland and forests into solar farm sites. Some applications are for the sites that are located in a declared RURAL CONSERVATION area, or at least residential and agricultural zoned land. The property owners DO NOT live in the Pr. George county – they are only looking to make money on the land in the area they don’t have any personal connection to. We can express our views and be heard on the local level and be effective. This bill by Del. Sullivan is telling the rural residents that they have no say about their neighborhood and land conservation preferences. If this bill passes, the decision will be made at the top by the SCC and not by the residents who actually have to live in the area and risk their health and safety by being in proximity to the solar farm site. Del. Sullivan does not represent the rural communities like Pr. George and Sussex.

HB 636 is is NOT about solar utility installations alone. It is about who gets to decide. Counties have done well deciding how to use their land and they do not need the Commonwealth legislators who are lobbied by solar companies, or any other large corporations, to do that job for them. This is a bill that takes the responsibility and the right of counties to decide land use away from the county and puts into the hands of legislators, many of whom have no stake in the county affected or in question, and in many cases, these same legislators have not even visited the county where they intend to decide land use. So, they wouldn't or even couldn't know the impact of their decision on that county or its land owners and residents. Counties need to decide for themselves the best use of their land in accordance with their comprehensive planning and zoning efforts - and this is not the job of the legislators who work at the Capital in Richmond.

This bill takes away our right to have our local officials , essentially us, to control what we live near. It is totally wrong. I can say this for it, it is the one piece of legislation I have seen that everyone here, no matter their political party agree on, that it is a horrible bill and should not pass. I implore you to vote against this piece of legislation that takes away citizens direct representation on an important issue. It has been proven in Europe that solar does not work. Why we want to use something already proven unsuccessful on a large scale can only be described as stupid.

As a resident of Southampton County and landowner, the locality should have the authority to make decisions on solar farms. If the delegate is passionate regarding having solar farms, then they should promote it in their locality. I strongly oppose this bill!

Power to make decisions on solar farms needs to be left to the localities in which they would be built. In addition solar farms do not need to be built on productive farm or forest lands.

I oppose bill HB636 and ask Governor Youngkin to veto this bill if it makes it to his desk! The people that live in northern Virginia should not determine the way of life for those of us who live in rural areas. … our communities have for the most part rejected Solar, for many reasons but mainly because it affects our way of life - farming, hunting and timber crops, etc. . And because we all have rejected it, now you are trying to force us to live with this eyesore for your benefit!! Mr. Sullivan should propose a bill to stick all this solar nonsense on top of the roofs of the buildings in his own community of Alexandra, Arlington, Fairfax & surrounding areas, not on farmland that will be destroyed by solar once being placed on it, it will ruin the land and long after their solar lease agreement is over, the farmland will never be able to be used to grow anything again…. I will remind those in the big city, food is not grown in the grocery stores but on farms!! Governor Youngkin, do not let NOVA tell us how to live, our own communities should decide our own way of life, and those that like the big city & the way of life it offers, please stay there because we don’t want you!

I am opposed to HB636. I do not agree with taking the decision away from the people that live near the soil panels much less the damage it will do to the soil.

I oppose HB636 and all that it wishes to accomplish. The Virginia Clean Economy Act is the vehicle being used to push this “sustainable” form of energy on Virginians and proposing a bill to circumvent the wishes of the localities and its citizens is quite appalling. Even more appalling is the fact that we are completely upending our energy sector in this state and country for a ~0.02% increase in atmospheric CO2 over a 175 year span. Working forests, native grasslands and agricultural crops naturally capture and sequester the appropriate amounts of CO2 and are actually sustainable, and aesthetically pleasing. I respectfully ask, that you not push this bill through.

I do not agree with the proposed subject. I fully believe it should be left the elected officials of our locality that have to live with the decisions rather then politicians in Richmond that don’t know personally what is at stake.

The buzz word that everyone has been shouting for many years is “sustainability”. The influx of solar farms throughout Virginia is destroying much of the “sustainable”, productive agricultural and forest lands that would continue to furnish food and fiber for our growing population for many years into the future, and replacing it with fields of panels that will destroy the productive nature of the soil. Destroying this land for a short life span of solar panels is not “sustainable”. Please let the local jurisdictions decide the fate of their own communities and vote “NO” to HB636. Thank you.

NO to solar farms. We don't want them.

NO to all industrial solar in Sussex County.

I VOTE NO to HB636!!!!! You are trying to take away the rights and voices of the citizens. PLEASE STOP!

Stop solar farms from being built where residents are opposed to them. They don’t make good neighbors. Heavy metals, increased, radiation, higher temperatures and farmland that will be useless in the future because the soil has been stripped off of it and is laden with heavy metals will be of no good for our children in the future. if the citizens who have to live within the areas of the solar firms, make the decisions not the solar companies . Stop HB636.

NO TO SOLAR IN VIRGINIA!

The federal government should not interfere with the decisions of the localities. This allows for our own local governments to make our communities great.

Vote NO

It is critically important for local residents and local government officials to maintain responsibility for decisions regarding local land use. Such decisions, made within the parameters of state policy, need to be made at the local level, with local residents’ input and involvement.

I as a Resident of Sussex County find that taking away the voice of her citizens to decide what is right for the County. It is not in the spirit of what the Founders intended

The issue of land use and development holds great significance in every community and to me personally. When it comes to making decisions about how land should be utilized, it is crucial to consider the input and opinions of the residents and landowners who will be directly affected. House Bill 636, a proposed bill that seeks to bypass the involvement of the county government and residents in land use decisions, undermines the democratic process and disregards the voices of those who live in the community. By voting against HB 636 we are advocating for a transparent and inclusive approach to land use planning, one that places power back into the hands of the people. It fosters a sense of ownership and pride as residents are empowered to shape the future of their own neighborhoods. Let us stand together and vote against HB636. We need to encourage Governor Youngkin to prioritize the wellbeing and rights of all individuals by vetoing this harmful legislation.

Please vote NO to HB 636, the SCC should not dictate the ok or presence of solar farms. This is a power that needs to remain in the hands of cities, towns and county leaders.

I am writing to express my OPPOSITION for HB636 which would take away the authority of localities in Virginia to have control over the placement, development and regulation of solar energy facilities. Local governing agencies need to have the power to regulate solar farms as well as their destruction of heavily forested land in VA. It is an abuse of eminent domain and will further create burden and hardship on Virginia localities.

I wish to express my opposition to the passage of HB636. This bill takes away the authority of the local governing bodies to make decisions based on what is best for their locality and its residents. Land use should be determined by those directly affected, not by the SCC or any person or agency at the state level. Thank you

I urge you to vote against HB 636. If necessary, I urge Gov. Youngkin to veto it!! Our farmland is one of our most precious resources. A nation that can’t feed itself (control its food supply) is a nation that cannot defend itself. Every local county has a right to govern itself. I hope we never see the day that the signs on the highway say: Welcome to Virginia, owned and operated by Dominion Energy.

Vote NO to this bill. My family and I are vehemently opposed to Solar development in our area.

Vote NO to this bill. The localities should be making these decisions, as should the people who live in and around this area. Stop trying to turn our area into your wasteland.

I am certain that Delegate “Rip” Sullivan will not be placing any of these solar facilities in part of his congressional district of Great Falls, Virginia. If these solar atrocities are so beneficial to Virginians, start with your own backyard. These “farms” are detrimental to the land, to the property values, and to the quality of life for residents. Leave local governments to decide what is best for their communities. The only people who promote solar power are the people who do not have to live near or around panels.

This bill is in direct opposition to the democratic process. This essentially says that solar companies can circumvent any local governments’ plans for their communities at the expense of those localities. Why should a company be allowed to erect these monstrosities anywhere they wish without any input from the citizens who will be affected most? Doesn’t it seem strange that the only people who promote solar power are the people who do not have to live with panels in their backyards? If you want solar energy so badly, begin by eliciting voters in your own district and put them where you live.

Vote NO to this Bill. STOP taking the voices from residents! Allow the localities to make the decision! They know what is best, they live there!

Approval and siting of solar facilities should remain with each locality. The SCC should have no authority to dictate what type of industry a county should approve. Please vote no to HB636.

I vehemently oppose this bill. The local government should remain the entity to decide what the needs are for the county. I feel it is easier for the local government to monitor the needs, wants, desires, etc of its residents. Making it a state government position would be a rubber stamp approval, and would take away the voices of those most affected by granting approval for future solar projects. No no no to this bill.

HB 636: Please vote down HB 636. Taking the control of land use and rural planning away from local governments is a recipe for disaster. This is a bill that will negatively impact rural communities throughout Virginia. Each county should have the authority to shape its community based on the interests of the local residents rather than a statewide quota to reach an energy goal set by the state, without regard to the unique qualities of each county. Again, I ask you to vote down HB 636.

SOLAR SHOULD BE LEFT UP TO LOCALITIES. WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH EVERYTHING AFTER THE FACT AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE UNKNOWN HAZARDS THAT MAY COME WITH THE SOLAR PANELS BOTH SHORT TERM AND LONG TERM.

Whom do all these "improvements" benefit?

I am opposing HB636. Our community has already been inundated with industrial scale solar facilities. Our valuable agricultural and timber land has greatly decreased negatively impacting the rural character of Hicksford District, Greensville County, Va. Solar development has divided families and friends. It is expensive to generate. Southside Virginia communities will not allow the SCC to dictate to our elected officials what we can and cannot do. This bill is ridiculous.

Please rethink this bill on letting State decide over the local authority on whether solar farms should be built or not. Think of the people it will affect the most. The bill originator would NEVER LET THIS BE HAPPENING in his backyard nor any of his affluent neighbors, but yet he thinks it is ok to throw this bill out there to us “little people” and we should just put up with it. We live and love our land. How many in the epa would scream cutting down special trees but yet they have no problem tearing down trees for the benefit of solar.yet it is known that solar farms will destroy the environment and make toxic the land. You cant bring back what has been destroyed. It will take many decades to return the soil to usable conditions and that will be the bare minimum amount of time. Solar is heating the atmosphere more than coal or nuclear. Passing bills without truly assessing the pros and cons/ side effects of what will be happening is both a negative for our country never alone negative for our state. Solar is being passed on by other countries becau it is ineffective. Electricity cannot be provided to those that need it.. using solar.. Ask an electrician!

This bill is a perfect example of government overreach, placing the government’s priorities ahead of the wants and needs of hard-working, informed Virginians who the bill would directly affect. Removing the voice of Virginians is a slippery slope, particularly when the reason for the overreach is tied to money (federal incentives, lobbyist buy-offs). Solar is a bad investment and the only ones who are arguing otherwise are those who stand to gain financially. This bill allows the government to select the places it deems most attractive for solar investment, so let’s just recognize that means the poor, racial minority as a majority, and rural counties will be victim. Great look, Sullivan; STOP THIS BILL HERE AND LET VIRGINIANS KEEP OUR VOICES. MONEY SHOULDN’T BE THE REASON WE HAVE OUR FREEDOMS TAKEN! Why even have locally elected officials if this is the path Virginia’s government is taking?

Solar farms cause behavioral problems in children, also a small number of people can have electromagnetic sensitive when living close to solar farms. All solar farms must be 1.3 miles from any home or children.solar has a high up front cost and are not very efficient with an 18% energy conversion rate and on top of that solar panels can be harmful to both humans and and wildlife due to toxin materials in them. Use of the land after solar farm is done may take as long as an additional 30 years before you can plant or live on the land. All of these facts that have been presented to all of you has to have you scratching your head ,wondering why are we allowing solar panels take up 100rds of acres of land and do so much harm! But the man in the Whitehouse is pushing something very toxic and even experts and scientists and researchers say we have jump the gun on solar and wind. Someone is making a big kickback at the TAX PAYERS EXPENSE., WE do not want to be guinea pigs for politicians

I am opposed to this bill. I believe County residents should decide on what is good or bad for their county. Ultimately we the residents will have to live with the consequences of what happens in our county. So therefore we the residents should decide what Ultimately is right for us. Thank you for your time.

Please table and reject HB 636 which takes land use decision making away from localities and the people ( voters) living there.

This bill must be defeated. Residents of rural localities must be able to decide what happens in their communities and what their land conservation preferences are. Del. Sullivan does not represent rural communities like Prince George and Sussex. Vote NO on H B 636.

This bill must be defeated. Residents of rural localities must be able to decide what happens in their communities and what their land conservation preferences are. Del. Sullivan does not represent rural communities like Prince George and Sussex. Vote NO on H B 636.

HB636 needs to be defeated and local governments need to maintain their sovereign rights to approve or disapprove the projects. The state has no right or reason to interfere with local approval of these projects. This bill is just trying to justify and support the Virginia Clean Economy Act now that opposition is building to these projects. Please vote no on HB636.

Please vote No and kill SB 636. SB 636 seeks to strip local Boards of Supervisors of their authority to reject or approve solar farms. If this bill is passed, the State Corporation Commission will have the authority to override County Boards of Supervisors who reject these projects. Some projects are being rejected because many of these local governing boards are listening to and representing their constituents who are overwhelmingly opposed to these projects. Local citizens in rural areas need to be represented by their local governing bodies who understand the local economy, culture and the will of the local citizens. These decisions should not be taken away from the local boards because some state leaders are not getting the results they want. This is usurping the will of the local citizens. Rural citizens need and deserve a voice. Please do not take this voice away from us. Rural citizens have stood together to defeat many of these destructive projects which really are not “green”. Many of the proposed projects will destroy farmland, timberland and natural recreational opportunities. These projects are destroying wildlife and causing devasting erosion ruining wetland, ponds, and other bodies of water. Agriculture and Forestry are the engines that run our rural economies and create jobs. The proliferation of these large solar farms may have devastating effects on our economies. These solar projects create very few permanent jobs. Destroying farmland and timberland will certainly increase already out of control inflationary pressure by raising the cost of food and paper products while eliminating jobs in these industries. I have seen a map that indicates that Dominion Virginia Power wants 5 million solar panels in Greensville County alone. These solar "farms" are not farms. They are industrial power plants and rural residents do not want to live in an industrial area considering the proven risks associated with these projects. If urban areas want to subsidize solar (which I am against) they should at least subsidize the installation of solar panels on buildings and parking lots. I understand that Walmart and JP Morgan Chase are considering covering their parking lots with flat roofs and then they plan to install solar panels on these roofs. This strategy utilizes solar while protecting valuable natural resources including the safety our water supply. I understand that New Jersey is providing subsidies for residents to install solar on residential roofs. Rural Virginians should have the ability to determine what is and isn’t constructed in their communities. Rural Virginians are going to have to live with the negative consequences of these projects, therefore our local leaders should hold the authority to make informed decisions that are based on the input of the citizens they represent. Thank you for your consideration of my position in this matter.

Leave lower level issues on the table for lower level agencies. Town and counties should oversee if a commercial use of our precious wetlands and farmable areas is agreeable with the community standards or not.

Please vote NO on HB636. Make no mistake that these out of town energy companies riding the not so clean wave of Solar Farms do not have the County interests at heart. Prince George County is full of wet swamp lands and abundant wildlife. The energy companies do not want what we have set aside for them. They want our residential areas and planning zones. Solar Farms are Industrial Commercial sites. Please, do not take away the rights of Counties to plan their communities. I encourage you to visit some of these Solar Farms and talk to the people living next to them. The issues with these sites are all over the news. Please vote NO.

Vote NO to Bill HB636. Leave land use and long term facilities in the hands of the folks that put you in office at the local level with the towns and counties it directly affects, Rural Virginia deserves better!

I and the residents in PG County are actively organizing and speaking out at our local Board of Supervisors meetings against excessive desire to turn all farmland and forests into solar farm sites. Some applications are for the sites that are located in a declared RURAL CONSERVATION area, or at least residential and agricultural zoned land. The property owners DO NOT live in the Pr. George county – they are only looking to make money on the land in the area they don’t have any personal connection to. We can express our views and be heard on the local level and be effective. This bill by Del. Sullivan is telling the rural residents that they have no say about their neighborhood and land conservation preferences. If this bill passes, the decision will be made at the top by the SCC and not by the residents who actually have to live in the area and risk their health and safety by being in proximity to the solar farm site. Del. Sullivan does not represent the rural communities like Pr. George and Sussex. Vote NO on HB 636. (Copy/pasted because it said everything perfectly. )

Please table and reject HB 636 which takes land use decision making away from localities and the people ( voters) living there.

I urge our legislators to kill this bill. Local communities know better how to protect the resources in their jurisdictions over state legislators who have little to no knowledge of those resources because in many cases the circumstances are different throughout the state. To give the State Corporation Commission the right to override a local Government’s decision in these matters is tantamount to a Government Taking! If so called Green Energy was as good for communities as preached, localities would be jumping on the bandwagon to have them built rather than legislators in populated areas pushing this on the back of rural areas. Put those panels on your houses, government buildings, parking garages, shopping centers, schools etc. Not on our pristine forest and productive farm land.

I and the residents in PG County are actively organizing and speaking out at our local Board of Supervisors meetings against excessive desire to turn all farmland and forests into solar farm sites. Some applications are for the sites that are located in a declared RURAL CONSERVATION area, or at least residential and agricultural zoned land. The property owners DO NOT live in the Pr. George county – they are only looking to make money on the land in the area they don’t have any personal connection to. We can express our views and be heard on the local level and be effective. This bill by Del. Sullivan is telling the rural residents that they have no say about their neighborhood and land conservation preferences. If this bill passes, the decision will be made at the top by the SCC and not by the residents who actually have to live in the area and risk their health and safety by being in proximity to the solar farm site. Del. Sullivan does not represent the rural communities like Pr. George and Sussex. Vote NO on HB 636.

Please vote NO on HB636. Local issues should be dealt with by local residents and property owners - not by legislators that don't fully understand the impact of their decisions.

Lay this bill on the table. Leave planning and land use at the local level. Thanks

HB636 is nothing more than an attempt at eminent domain regarding placement of solar facilities. Land-use decisions should be the responsibility of the locality's governing body--not politicians and bureaucrats in Richmond, northern Virginia or Washington DC. This is a bad bill that does not represent the will of the people. Vote NO.

HB636 is a vailed attempt by wealthy companies to obtain and exercise a version of eminent domain over the taxpaying citizens of the commonwealth of Virginia. Currently, local governments are the only entity that can slow down these fly by night solar companies and their quest of destroying millions of acres of agricultural land and wildlife habitat. The elected officials of a local government disagrees and votes no to a solar project site, this bill will allow the solar company to completely disregard the elected governing body of municipality. That is dangerous precedent that should not be set. You would remove the ability to govern from the hands of the people voted to represent the citizens of their communities. Vote no to HB636!

HB636 is a vailed attempt by wealthy companies to obtain and exercise a version of eminent domain over the taxpaying citizens of the commonwealth of Virginia. Currently, local governments are the only entity that can slow down these fly by night solar companies and their quest of destroying millions of acres of agricultural land and wildlife habitat. The elected officials of a local government disagrees and votes no to a solar project site, this bill will allow the solar company to completely disregard the elected governing body of municipality. That is dangerous precedent that should not be set. You would remove the ability to govern from the hands of the people voted to represent the citizens of their communities. Vote no to HB636!

The residents of Prince George county should have a say in what is done in our county not some person who sits in an office somewhere who doesn’t have to live with the decisions that he makes. Some of these people who want solar sites don’t even live here. We are going to use our vote against people that go against the wishes of the people of this county.

We need to let the citizens of the locality choose where they want solar farms

I and the residents in PG County are actively organizing and speaking out at our local Board of Supervisors meetings against excessive desire to turn all farmland and forests into solar farm sites. Some applications are for the sites that are located in a declared RURAL CONSERVATION area, or at least residential and agricultural zoned land. The property owners DO NOT live in the Pr. George county – they are only looking to make money on the land in the area they don’t have any personal connection to. We can express our views and be heard on the local level and be effective. This bill by Del. Sullivan is telling the rural residents that they have no say about their neighborhood and land conservation preferences. If this bill passes, the decision will be made at the top by the SCC and not by the residents who actually have to live in the area and risk their health and safety by being in proximity to the solar farm site. Del. Sullivan does not represent the rural communities like Pr. George and Sussex. Vote NO on HB 636.

I'm have been a resident of Prince George County for 19 years. We as residents have been fighting to keep the solar farms from being built in our county. We thought as residents got through to our counties BOS to NOT build anymore of these farms in our county. They voted against it and then we see THIS HB636 bill surface it's ugly head. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE VOTE AGINST THIS BILL! PLEASE help those who do NOT want to ruin our environment with stuff that will not help our children. Please work on BILLS that'll HELP our current farmers and future farmers. Just in the past couple of weeks Farm land all around us is going up for sell. Then i see our county has raised taxes 36% for our farmers. WHY? So that Solar can buy it out?! We want to see fields growing crops and pastures with livestock because that is our future. We can live with limited Energy but we can not live without trees and farmers. I want to stay here in PG in Virginia because this is where i have now called home. Not the robotic mountainsides of AZ/ CA with their wind farm forests and black solar farm seas. We NEED to help our farmers! We need to protect our lands from these mechanical devices that hurt us more to make/create and hurts our environment in the long run. We need bills that help people. PLEASE help us. PLEASE VOTE NO on HB636!

I am writing to express my opposition to proposed bill HB636: Siting of Energy Facilities. The bill is coming on the heels of a year-long city-wide review of the Kitty Hawk Offshore Wind Project and we are very concerned that Avangrid Renewables is using the state legislature to circumvent the results of this local review. This bill in its current form would set a terrible precedent, allowing an offshore wind developer to override local municipality decisions on transmission line infrastructure siting and landfall. This legislation, if implemented, will result in the diminishment of the right of municipalities to determine what is best for their community. It flies in the face of a more through, reasoned approach to easements and permitting. Avangrid Renewable’s proposal to land six 60-centimeter cables on Sandbridge Beach, and run them only 48 inches below the ground through neighborhoods and under busy streets was determined to not be in the best interests of the City of Virginia Beach. Since they would not listen to or amend their plans to emphasize the health and safety of Virginians (your constituents), they turned to a ploy to have the Virginia State Legislature force the issue. Under this legislation, a bad / faulty design (like the one proposed by Avangrid Renewables) will haunt the citizens and visitors to the City of Virginia Beach for decades.

Please vote no on bill hb636. As a farmer in mecklenburg county I am strongly against anymore solar farms to be installed in our county. They have taken to much farmland in our county as it is. Enough is enough! Thank you

Greetings: Please reject this House Bill 636. The placement of a solar site is a “local” issue that the local taxpaying property owners in the “local” community must deal with “locally”. Placement of a solar sites has a direct impact on the local tax paying property owners/families, neighbors and community and those “local residents” directly affected must have the easiest access possible to voice their concerns. That “easiest access” to be heard is at the LOCAL level. This HB 636 undermines and removes from the local community, and the authority elected by local residents, their voices. This bill would put persons NOT from the locale being affected and who have no clue about the local families/ property that would be affected, to make decisions that would affect the local residents. THEREFORE, since issues that directly affect local tax paying residents and families MUST remain at the local level and not usurped by the state body that will have no knowledge of the locale affected, this HB 636 must not pass out of this committee. Thank you. W. Bill Steele Disputanta, VA., 23842

Solar farms are industrial. I think elected officials should not take away our rights as citizens to say no to solar.1) not to live 1 3 miles from a industrial solar farm. ( these are facts)2) cause behavioral problems in children! Those 2 facts should scare the heck out of you.3) solar has higher potential to have negative impact by decreasing the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere 4) bad effects of solar impacts on areas flora and fauna 5) some governments deem solar as toxic.6)you only get 20% energy . If no sun no energy.,snow hail,winds can effect solar. 7) solar produces 300 times more toxic waste per unit of energy than nuclear. 8)the protection of wetlands and conservation land should be protected at all cost which the solar companies have not cared. You put one near wetlands then you cut off the wetlands by having solar nearby THAT IS NOT PROTECTING WETLANDS. 9)Soil compaction and erosion as well as blockage of drainage channels resulting in land degradation!10) solar farms are fire hazards. IF the catch fire there will be a person in Texas that takes care of it. When asked salesman what happens then. They said let it burn!! 69% of these solar companies have gone belly up. These salesman can make up to 100,000$ in just commission, so you better believe they are going to sell you. Goverment works for us not we work for government. After the allotted time frame of 30 years that solar farm will be there it it just guesstimate by experts that you can not use the land for farming or homes for ANOTHER 30 years. I bet none of you have done your proper research on the I'll effects of solar. Right now thousands of people can sue just over the fact that you are not to live 1.3 miles from a solar farm. They only have less than 2 % of panel can be recycled. So what are you going to do then?? They can't go to the local dump.And the biggest of them all our home values plummet drastically. Drastically! On Rives Road they tired to sell. No one even looked at their home. Noone! As well as removing trees that are way better for the environment than solar. Big one too, a solar farm can raise the temperature in a 3 miles radius up to 10 to 12 degrees hotter. Which kills animals, has negative impact on soil, and humans. At least a tree can shade you ,clean the air,etc. So I am Totally against your power grab. So please stop the displacement of animals, some who are protected,like eagles,hawks,certain almost extinct birds/ animals. Solar is not green and we will pay the price of next generation, which I hope you care about. So these facts are facts and someone needs to do their research! Research! Research before you damage our lands for good!

This bill would take away the right of citizens to determine what happens in their locality as well as take away the duty of our elected representatives to do the job they were elected to do. It would put the decisions for energy projects in the hands of unelected, unaccountable members of a committee decisions that effect the daily lives and fortunes of citizens they do not know. Please do not pass this bill.

Stop killing our trees and polluting our water. The panels already installed are not properly maintained. This whole scheme amounts to the Government spending our money on infrastructure that destroys agriculture with no benefit. Let’s attempt to maintain what’s already installed in order to determine how beneficial the technology may be. Stop spending our money on infrastructure that only benefits the wealthy and results in little to no benefit for the majority of tax payers.

Mecklenburg county doesn't need more Solar, its nothing buy a eye sore for the community an really has no benefit for Mecklenburg

To whom it may concern, Please vote NO to HB636. We all know that this bill is padding the pocket of the one who patroned this bill. The state should not be micro managing the counties. We are losing more and more farm and timberland to these solar farms that do not benefit anyone except for the wealthy people that own the land. The farms are not efficient and are a complete government hack and tax break. If they were so efficient the companies around my way would fix theirs more frequently when they are not working. Once again , I am in opposition of HB636 and ask that you all vote NO to this bill. James

We want to express our frustration and strong opposition to this unnecessary move by the legislature. We were informed that this action is being influenced by Avangrid Renewables to bypass the local review process. This is misguided for many reasons: -Virginia Beach is working cooperatively in support of the VCEA & has committed to the Dominion CVOW Project. This project will be very disruptive for communities along the cable route. It is proceeding at pace and will cover 50% of the VCEA requirement. -Avangrid's Kitty Hawk Wind (KHW) proposal was fairly and publicly debated for over a year, and it was concluded that the project had too many open issues to move forward. Avangrid was able to have their say. Communities were able to share their research and concerns. The process worked the way it should. As proposed, the project was simply not workable. -BOEM has approved a new lease area east of Dominion CVOW schedule for bids later this year. The new lease area will cover the remaining VCEA requirements while minimizing impact to Virginia Beach residents by potentially routing cables with current CVOW route. -Where the KHW project makes landfall has no impact on the economic opportunity for Hampton Roads. A 2019 study performed by the Virginia Dept of Energy indicates the target market for the Hampton Roads Offshore Wind Hub covers projects from New York to SC. The long term job creation is tied to construction, operation and maintenance of the offshore windfarm itself . KHW could connect to the grid at any location and it would still be served by Hampton Roads Offshore Wind hub. -Avangrid corp earnings presentations note intent to sell a portion of the KHW lease area IAW their asset rotation strategy. The value reported to analysts is $0.24-0.28/share or approximately $100M yielding a favorable return on their $9M lease purchase. The planned sale is included in their 2023 earnings outlook 2Q & 3Q reports. They have indicated their willingness to sell the lease area to the North Carolina Utilities Comm in support of the NC Carbon plan (NCUC docket E-100, Sub 179). Therefore, Virginia does not know who will ultimately own and develop the KHW lease area. The city of Virginia Beach has acted IAW authority granted by the VA Constitution and the City Charter approved by the Gen Assy. There is no compelling reason for the state to override the actions of City Council and the will of the Virginia Beach citizenry. As a community we are supporting req’s of VCEA. Local officials&citizens are best positioned to understand the issues in our community. Avangrid has not been honest or transparent with stakeholders and decision makers. The CityCouncil was right to say NO. All stakeholders understand the importance of the VCEA, working to find solutions that work for the Commonwealth and the local community. Virginia Beach & its residents have acted with clear understanding of civic responsibility. We are asking that you trust the process and trust citizens to do what is in the best interest of the Commonwealth and our local communities. The SCC is not positioned to lead this level of comprehensive review nor can it fully investigate land use issues at the local level. Local government is best positioned to fulfill this vital role. Political leaders call on citizens to get involved. Please don't reward civic engagement by overriding our work. For all these reasons and more, we respectfully ask that you withdraw consideration of HB636

This bill proposes the circumvention the local governments and the will of Virginia citizens by consolidating an extreme amount of authority in one organization; and based on the description of the Commission this bill exceeds its authorities. “The bill provides that an applicant who is issued a certificate by the Commission for an energy facility is exempt from obtaining approvals or permits, including any land use approvals or permits under the regulations and ordinances of the locality.” From the SCC’s website – “The SCC’s powers, which range from issuing rules and regulations to setting rates charged by large investor-owned utilities, are delineated by the state constitution and state law.” No description of authorities enabling the SCC to override local governments exists in the commission’s description. This bill replicates all the actions of eminent domain without calling it that. It appears the landowners/property owners are not going to be compensated for their losses if the commission approves issuing a certificate. Per the Code of Virginia 1-219.1 Limitations on Eminent Domain, A. The right to private property being a fundamental right, the General Assembly shall not pass any law whereby private property shall be taken or damaged for public uses without just compensation. Electric utilities or independent power providers should not be allowed to simply overrule a municipality’s decision based on the fact the decision did not go in their favor or simply meeting a threshold established by the Commission, “The bill applies to any solar energy facility with a capacity of 50 megawatts or more, any wind energy facility with a capacity of 100 megawatts or more, and any energy storage facility with a nameplate capacity of 50 megawatts or more and an energy discharge capability of 200 megawatt hours or more”. Nor is there any discussion within the bill to allow municipalities or citizens to present information, issues, concerns regarding their case for denial prior to a decision by the SCC. Municipalities have put forth great efforts in developing policies concerning land usage which adhere to the many environmental rules and regulations, zoning rules and regulations for future development, the vision of the municipality, and the will of the citizens of said municipality. Circumventing these efforts through the authorization of the Commission to override the local authorities does not bold well. Another reason to veto this bill is the building of wealth by citizenry. For most citizens, the building of wealth begins with the American dream, owning property. The siting of electric utilities or independent power provider facilities within or adjacent to established communities seriously impacts the abilities of citizens to create and hold wealth through property ownership. Studies show the detrimental affects these solar and wind facilities have on personal property values. Again, this bill does not demonstrate any concern for individual property rights. It clearly takes away the power of the citizenry and places it in a Commission with no ties to the community. This bill represents the excessive consolidation of authority into a centralized government commission, clearly not what our Founding Fathers envisioned when they wrote the U.S. Constitution.

To Whom It May Concern, The Isle of Wight County Board of Supervisors strongly objects to the passage of HB636. This undermines and takes away the local authority and, in turn, the voice of the citizens to make land use decisions. We strongly request that this be laid on the table, passed over, or any other terms you may apply to this bill. Thank you! Sincerely, Pastor William M. McCarty Sr. District 2 Supervisor Isle of Wight County Board of Supervisors Chairman - HRTPO (Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization) VACo - 1st Vice President