This law shouldn't pass until all of the kinks are ironed out of the system. I had to file for unemployment in May of 2022 and I thought I was going to have a heart attack just trying to get registered to use the online system. What a mess. A person can get logged on one week and then the next week, thee system can't "authorize" them. That goes on for days/weeks at a time. I even filed an appeal because it took over a month and there was no movement in my account towards receiving any money. I was told that the people in charge of hearing the appeals check in every now and then. Just within the last 2 weeks, I was told my tax document was available. I could not log back into my account. I sent the webmaster an email letting them know there was a problem and, once again, I got no response. How do people keep their jobs when they just keep ignoring their customers?

Because of obstacles beyond the control of appellants, the time to file an appeal should NOT be reduced. Justice cannot be done when the filing of appeals is impeded. Virginians are already navigating an unfriendly/confusing and broken employment system, a system where calls for assistance go unanswered, online services are frequently down and faxes don't make it through. Therefore, this voter and taxpayer is calling on you to vote no!

.. Vote NO to legislation that reduces the appeal rights of workers and fails to address the backlog of claims at the Virginia Employment Commission.

This bill should not pass for several reasons: 1. The mail has been unreliable to guarantee an unemployment compensation claimant sufficient notice if 15 days were the deadline. 2. A claimant needs sufficient time to consider seeking legal advice, doing their own research, and gathering evidence. Anyone familiar with a legal dispute knows that even 30 days can be a tight deadline. 3. Whatever the intent, the impact of the bill would be to wrongly deny qualified Virginia workers promised benefits. 4. The bill would reward unscrupulous employers who do not fully disclose the circumstances of the employment termination at the deputy examiner stage and who get lucky when a former employee misses the very short deadline, allowing the employer to lower the unemployment compensation taxes it pays. In Virginia, we should not give unscrupulous employers a competitive edge over honest employers.

RISE for Youth OPPOSES this bill

As a young person under eighteen, I've had my fair share of experiences in the workforce. During my junior year, I was taking six AP classes and worked three jobs during the week and weekend. Despite the fact that I was not supporting my family, I was still saving up for important things like the laptop I needed for school and money for college. Our age should not define how much we earn, as circumstances vary so much between individuals. Additionally, I worked retail, a job often labeled as "unskilled." In reality, I was on my feet for over six hours a day, working without long breaks and dealing with customers who could be rude and at worst racist to me and my coworkers. I would challenge any person who views this job as "unskilled" to come to spend a day with me in the store and see how they feel afterward. Youth are just as valuable and skilled workers as their adult colleagues and deserve to be paid as such. We work just as hard.

I am completely against this bill because it negatively effects the youth of Virginia. This bill would basically penalize young adults and would hurt them when saving for college, helping their families, and much more. Young adults deserve the same amount of respect as everyone else. Virginia's youth not only work hard, they also provide for their communities and this bill if it passes would be a giant slap in the face to all those young adults in the commonwealth who work. This would not only effect everyday Virginians, but also my friends who have jobs in my county and it would negatively effect them. This legislation will hurt all parts of Virginia. This legislation would also be especially bad for those in rural communities and for African American young adults who work. I hope that you will all vote NO on this piece of legislation.

House Bill 1669 further guts House Bill 395 and Virginia's Youth won't stand for it. We stand in solidarity with neighbors under the age 18 and the skills they provide to the workforce. They deserve to be fairly compensated for said skills and time. Most underage youth are adding financial benefits to their household whether its by saving to have their own, paying their way through college, or supporting the household. Age should not determine if a worker is compensated fairly. Instead of gutting House Bill 395 we should be closing the gaps . Thank you for your time.

Comments Document

The American Chemistry Council (ACC) must respectfully oppose HB 1855, legislation that proposes to prohibit the use of any “PFAS substances” in any “juvenile product.” Product safety is a top priority for our industries and we believe consumers deserve to have confidence that the products they buy are safe for their intended use. While we appreciate the intent of this legislation, we unfortunately have several concerns. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), or fluorotechnology, are a diverse universe of chemistries that play a critical role in a variety of applications ranging from smart phones, tablets and telecommunications products; clean energy systems such as solar panels, lithium batteries and hydrogen fuel cell bladders; lifesaving medical devices; sterile packaging for vaccines and other pharmaceuticals; aircraft and automotive electrical and safety systems; building and construction products; and weatherproof outdoor equipment and apparel. It is important to note that not all PFAS chemistries are the same. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “approximately 600 PFAS are manufactured (including imported) and/or used in the United States.” The fundamental physical, chemical, and biological properties of solids, liquids and gases are clearly different from one another and individual PFAS chemistries should be evaluated on this basis. As drafted, HB 1855 utilizes a general definition of “PFAS” that treats all of these chemistries the same, regardless of their distinct physical and chemical properties or if they are used in a product where potential exposure is minimal to non-existent. These properties define the risk the product poses to the user. A grouping approach ignores potential indicators of health risk and may be cited as justification for use restrictions on many other products regardless of whether those actions would be beneficial or harmful to the public. Such decisions should be grounded in science and evaluation of particular product-chemical combinations. Other entities have also examined using a grouping approach for regulatory purposes and made some cautionary statements which you can read in the attached document. Given the extremely broad definition of “juvenile product” the bill has the potential to impact an expansive array of businesses and manufacturers. As noted above, products that may be impacted include electronics such as life-saving medical devices designed for children, smart phones or tablets, outdoor apparel and equipment, toys, healthcare equipment, and even motorcycles that are marketed for children under 12 that may be manufactured with or contain components where “PFAS” or some variation of fluorotechnology may be found. The mere presence of these chemistries does not automatically equate to any risk to human health or the environment. Furthermore, the proposed definition in the bill is inconsistent with existing definitions of “juvenile product” found in California law and federal statutes. For these reasons, we are opposed to HB 1855. We look forward to continuing the discussion on this bill in hopes of addressing some of these concerns. Sincerely, Shawn Swearingen American Chemistry Council

I support HB 1895. As I am sure you all are aware, retaliation in the work place happens all of the time. Employees need this protection. Please support HB 1895.

https://richmond.com/opinion/columnists/column-virginia-can-lead-nation-in-protecting-survivors-of-workplace-abuse/article_cf3facba-9915-11ed-b83f-67bd09cce1ab.html

Birth In Color RVA is a doula collective with over 100 doulas around the Commonwealth. We support patients going throughout pregnancy, during the pre- and post- partum period and birth. 40% of US women have faced gender-related discrimination in their careers. 42% of US employees confirm they have faced or witnessed workplace racism and sexism. Our clients are no different, and each of our doulas has heard stories about discrimination in the workplace experienced by a client at some point in their work, including retaliation for trying to address the problems. As an organization committed to the health and welfare of our patients and our doulas, we know how devastating workplace discrimination can be. We strongly support both bills, HB 1895 and HB 2148 - as important steps towards ensuring that those who face workplace discrimination know their rights and are able to exercise them. We thank the patrons, Delegate Filler-Corn and Delegate Guzman for bringing these important pieces of legislation and hope that they are met with the support they deserve from the members of this Committee. Thank you for your consideration, Galina Varchena, Birth In Color RVA.

AAUW strongly advocates for new laws and policies to battle the problem of workplace harassment and discrimination based on gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity or religion. Workplace sexual and other harassment threatens women’s mental health and physical safety, erodes women’s short- and long-term economic security, and contributes to the leadership gap. Alhough Title VII protects women in the workplace, one study published in the Harvard business Review found that 34% of female employees say they have been sexually harassed by a colleague. Although federal law appears comprehensive and robust, employees who are harassed or experience inequity at work are often unable to access justice. Barriers include: business size (small businesses are exempt); exclusion of various categories of workers, e.g., contractors, interns, from coverage; limited time frame for bringing federal charges; onerous standards of proof; reduced liability; and nondisclosure agreements and mandatory arbitration. • HB1895 (Del. Eileen Filler-Corn), The Silenced No More Act, would limit the abusive use of Nondisclosure Agreements and Nondisparagement agreements (NDAs) to silence employees from speaking up about discrimination, including harassment, retaliation, sexual assault, wage and hour violations, and waste, fraud, or abuse. • HB2148 (Del. Elizabeth Guzman) , Know Your Rights requires employers to inform workers of their rights to file a charge of discrimination with the U.S. EEOC or the Virginia Office of the Attorney General within 300 days after an alleged unlawful discriminatory practice occurred. The bill requires an employer to provide this information as part of any new employee training provided at the commencement of employment or anti-discrimination training provided to an employee and when an employee makes a complaint. These two bills will be important steps in protecting Virginia workers.

Comments Document

This letter was submitted to Delegate Batten's office on Friday, January 27. I am respectfully resubmitting it, as an attached PDF, for your consideration. Thank you.

I am writing to encourage your support for HB 1974. This common sense legislation shall ensure: “The construction and reconstruction, of any underground, in whole or in part, electrical transmission lines of at least 69 kilovolts along a highway right-of-way under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation in Planning District 8 where a data center proposal is under construction in an area located within a half mile of a National Battlefield Park and within one mile of a state forest is in the public interest.” Responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines is essential to maintain historic viewsheds and ensure the respect, preservation and enjoyment of our natural and historic assets for future generations. Thank you.

I am writing to encourage your support for HB 1974. This legislation is essential to ensure that the historical/cultural facilities and private homes in our county will not be subjected to the audible, visual, health and aesthetic pollution posed by runaway data center construction in PWC. Please support this legislation to limit the construction and reconstruction, of any underground, in whole or in part, electrical transmission lines of at least 69 kilovolts along a highway right-of-way under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation in Planning District 8 where a data center proposal is under construction in an area located within a half mile of a National Battlefield Park and within one mile of a state forest is in the public interest. This is common-sense legislation that protects our county and those of us who have chosen to make our homes in PWC. Responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines is essential to maintain historic viewsheds and ensure the respect, preservation and enjoyment of our natural and historic assets for future generations. Thank you. Dan Cassil 15251 Royal Crest Dr, #103 Haymarket, Va 20169

I oppose HB 1974

I oppose this bill, HB1974. Please vote no.

I oppose HB1974

OUT OF THE CLOSET: Reading through these comments, I see that 2 other Heritage Hunt residents have "come out of the closet" and expressed their opposition to HB1974 and even went further saying they support the PW Digital Gateway. Anyone reading this, I just want to say that not ALL people in HH are against the Gateway. My wife and I don't have any problems with it. Neither do a lot of our friends and neighbors here. What we do have a problem with is state interference into local matters that have already been decided. WE DO NOT SUPPORT HB1974.

Oppose bill 1974!

Oppose bill 1974!

I oppose HB1974.

I oppose HB 1974

I oppose HB 1974. - This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner - This bill is a direct attack on individual property right's - This bill will diminish the ability of localities to make their own decisions about land use cases and economic development activities

I OPPOSE HB 1974 (Roem)

This bill is not needed and adds undue cost to the Data Center project.

Please oppose HB1974. It targets the Prince William Digital Gateway project that our Board of supervisors approved after two years of exhaustive study and public hearings. Delegate Roem, unlike our Board, has only heard from the opponents. They don't tell her about all of the stringent environmental requirements our Board has mandated.

Oppose HB1974. This bill targets data centers. It's not fair to other counties to inact laws to prevent them from attracting the same businesses that have made Loudon and Fairfax counties rich. The State shouldn't interfere with local land use decisions.

Vote NO to HB1974. The State shouldn't interfere with local land use decisions.

Vote NO for HB1974 - I can't believe a Delegate from PWC would try to interfere with our local board right to change land use. She didn't do anything to stop the 3 million square foot data center, the Sheetz , or the 2500 VDOT commuter parking lot next to Conway Forest, Battlefield and Pageland Lane. Actually, the people at Heritage Hunt didn't complain about that either. This is a bad bill.

I ask that you vote NO on HB 1974 Oppose HB 1974. The intent of this bill is clear to see and who’s interest the Delegate is working for. This bill is definitely not in Va’s best interest.

Vote No to HB 1974 - Let's don't KILL Virginia's economy

Say NO to HB 1974 -

Oppose HB 1974 - I've lived in PWC 80 years long before there was I-66 or Heritage Hunt. Land use is a local issue. The Delegate has no business using us as her political pawns.

Obviously a third attempt to sabotage the PWDG. Oppose HB 1974 (Roem)

Oppose HB1974

Oppose HB 1974 We need the data center jobs and the revenue.

This is ridiculous, this is yet another attempt to slow or stop the progress of the PWDG. This project has been thoroughly studied, for two years I will add, and all the concerns have been addressed and can be seen on PWC’s website. HB 1974 and the other bills proposed by Roem are obvious attempts to derail the PWDG and are wrong from any angle you look at it. This is selective governance against this one project that is a once in very long time opportunity for PWC and the state of Va to reap the significant benefits that will provide for growth and services moving forward and so that residential property owners don’t bear the full tax burden of supporting the county. Please OPPOSE HB 1974

Bill is way too broad. Let local governments set their own land use policies.

I oppose HB 1974 for obvious reasons. The Digital Gateway plan has been carefully planned and scrutinized. This ridiculous bill is simply the latest of Del. Roem’s efforts to derail the Digital Gateway - for no legitimate reason. Please oppose HB 1974.

NO to 1974. What is Roem thinking? This bill will cost $Millions for Virginia ratepayers, and kill our economy. Kill this misguided proposal instead. Reject HB 1974!

I oppose this HR 1974. The PWC government has adopted a plan for the Digital Gateway that includes protections for the parks and environment. This bill seeks to undermine that plan and stall the development. Vote NO on HR 1974.

I oppose HB 1974. I belong to a labor union here in Prince William County. We all don’t like this bill. I am looking forward to working in data centers here in our county. They employ lots of union people to build them. This rule that is coming to you to vote on is bad for us workers because it will probly make the data centers go somewhere else. VOTE NO for HB 1974.

I’m not in favor of HB 1974. My name isn’t really Jane, but I do live in Heritage Hunt. Believe me, there are more residents here who support the data centers than you would imagine. In the beginning, I was convinced to oppose the plan, but after watching all the hearings on my computer, I firmly believe that the data centers will be good for Prince William County. I’m convinced it will be better, with all the public land, parks, trails, new historic markers, and improvements. It will not cause pollution like some are claiming; the rules are very stringent. Please read the studies and requirements on the County website. If you’ve only been listening to one side, you’ll be amazed at what this really is. I believe everyone will benefit from this project, including Heritage Hunt.

Dear members of the House Committee on Commerce and Energy As long-term resident of Virginia (and Prince William County as well), I am writing to you to let you know that I oppose HB 1974 proposed by Delegate Roem on both general and specific principles. Like it or not, this country is moving towards a highly data centric existence and data centers are a necessary part of that existence, and it is a key economic factor in the economic future of Virginia as well. To the best of my knowledge, I believe that Delegate Roem’s HB 1974 is a not so subtle attempt to derail the Prince William County Digital Gateway by involving the Department of Commerce and Energy in the review process, ostensibly for data centers through Virginia. This should not be the function of the General Assembly, because it undermines local autonomy and would disrupt one of the most studied, comprehensive, and thorough rezoning and development efforts in Virginia. Even worse it could set a precedent for negating the responsibility of ANY Board of County Supervisors to be represent local citizen needs and permitting non-resident legislators in Richmond to effectively overrule “locally-elected” city and county politicians! Having the General Assembly restrict the ability of local communities to oversee local development and zoning is a pernicious abuse of power and diminishes local authority over what should rightly be local issues. This level of interference in local affairs also diminishes the rights of individual citizens by adding another level of “state” government control over property rights. I urge the members of the House Committee on Commerce and Energy to decline to review or further proceed with Roem’s HB 1974 or any similar bill!

I object to HB 1974 because it is yet another blatant attempt by Delegate Danica Roemer (her 3rd attempt so far) to sabotage one particular development (PW Digital Gateway) while trying to undermine the authority of local government to make local land-use decisions. The area targeted in this bill already has massive transmission towers running along Pageland lane and the Manassas Battlefield Park. This bill proposes burying powerlines underneath powerlines. Let that sink in for a moment. House Bill 1974 was not introduced to protect anything other than the self serving interests of a privileged few from the wealthy Heritage Hunt gated community. Their NIMBY mentality risks robbing an untold number of PWC residents and other Virginians of well paying jobs, tax revenues to support the local communities, and access to newly created parks, trails and cultural heritage sites. Enough already with these nonsensical bills. Please vote against HB 1974.

Oppose HB 1974. Another attempt from Roem to kill a massive local revenue producing project while in doing so hurting PWC’s teachers, first responders, school children and county tax payers. A bad bill for PWC and Virginia at large. Please Vote NO on HB 1974.

Oppose HB 1974. Sanders Lane has become a cut through for traffic coming in and out of Loudon County. It is becoming very difficult for residents. What was a quiet area is now overrun with commuter traffic. The traffic coming from Loudon and turning onto Sudley Road is backed up with commuters during the week and will only get worse when the small extension connecting Lightner Road to Rt 50 is completed. There are few subdivisions with a limited number of homes and the residents who live in Catharpin are for the PW Digital Gateway. Prince William badly needs a face-lift and the funds that this project will bring in will truly help revitalize a town that is quite sad. This project will bring in an extreme source of revenue into the county. It is an amazing opportunity that few counties are fortunate enough to benefit from. Oppose HB 1974!

I oppose HB1974. Delegate Roem introduced this bill and her failed HJ522 and HB1986 bills to protect her constituents in the retirement community of Heritage Hunt. Please do not support HB1974. Leave local land use to the local governments, who are more versed than Delegate Roem, who has been woefully misled by the misinformation the vocal minority has been feeding her. Thank you!

I say NO to HR 1974. We need the jobs here. The construction of data centers will give us plenty of years of work and will help us union workers. Why are we trying to make it harder for them? Vote No on HB 1974!

I oppose HB 1974.

I too strongly oppose HB1974. Delegate Roem introduced this bill and her failed HJ522 and HB1986 bills to protect her constituents in the retirement community of Heritage Hunt. Please do not support HB1974. Leave local land use to the local governments, who are more versed than Delegate Roem, who has been woefully misled by the misinformation the vocal minority has been feeding her. Thank you!

I also strongly oppose HB1974. Delegate Roem introduced this bill and her failed HJ522 and HB1986 bills to protect her constituents in the retirement community of Heritage Hunt. Please do not support HB1974. Leave local land use to the local governments, who are more versed than Delegate Roem, who has been woefully misled by the misinformation the vocal minority has been feeding her. Thank you!

Oppose HB 1974. I’ve been following the data center issues in PWC. I don’t live there, but I do worry that bills such as this one will cause problems in my own county in the future. Data centers and technology represent our best investment in our future. I have no problem with giving them incentives to locate here because the benefits they bring locally, and even to the state, far outweigh any costs. Therefore, I AM OPPOSED TO THIS BILL, 1974.

I strongly oppose HB1974. Delegate Roem introduced this bill and her failed HJ522 and HB1986 bills to protect her constituents in the retirement community of Heritage Hunt. Please do not support HB1974. Leave local land use to the local governments, who are more versed than Delegate Roem, who has been woefully misled by the misinformation the vocal minority has been feeding her. Thank you!

Vote NO on HB 1974. I strongly oppose this bill. It is just wrong, and will cost taxpayers lots of money. Please vote AGAINST this bill. Thank you very much

I oppose HB 1974. I think state shouldn’t interfere with the county matter so please vote AGAINST this bill. Thank you!

I oppose HB 1974. I think state shouldn’t interfere with the county matter so please vote AGAINST this bill. Thank you!

OPPOSED

OPPOSED

Oppose HB 1974. It’s amazing the depths to which someone will sink for a few votes. Clearly, Roem is not interested in smart growth, but pandering to a few constituents, a very few, compared to the other 480,000 people in PWC! Think about what you want this area of PW County to look like in 10 years. A few data centers, complete with parks and green spaces, or, THOUSANDS OF NEW HOMES further clogging our already at capacity roads and schools. This is completely ridiculous. Vote No to HB 1974.

I oppose HB 1974. Delegate Roem is using this and other bills to put stumbling blocks in the way of development that the Prince William County Board of Supervisors has already voted to pursue, in a 5 to 2 vote. Delegate Roem is attempting to override local governance with state leverage; an offensive use of a delegate’s authority.

I Oppose HB 1974. This is another attempt by Delegate Roem to place obstacles and delays to our local land use decisions. In trying to stall the Prince William Digital Gateway, if passed, her bill would also place unreasonable requirements on all the counties in Virginia. Prince William County has already conducted exhaustive studies, met with residents in long public hearings, and has listened to everyone’s concerns. Delegate Roem has only listened to one side and, unlike our County officials, she does not have all the facts. As a result of the two years of studies and public meetings, the County has placed stringent environmental restrictions to ensure the power lines and power stations are not visible to either the Manassas National Battlefield Park or the Heritage Hunt retirees, who are the main proponents of this bill. Additional studies and requirements are a waste of time and taxpayer’s money. Defeat HB1974.

Oppose HB 1974. This bill will diminish the ability of localities to make their own decisions about land use cases and economic development activities. It’s bad for everyone in VA! Oppose HB 1974

Oppose HB 1974! PWC has already studied this and plans are in place! Give people the progression they need to thrive in this area! Only a small group is behind these ridiculous bills. Oppose HB 1974!

I oppose HB 1974. After attending all of our Board of Supervisors public meetings on the Prince William Digital Gateway project, I trust my Board’s decision. They’ve addressed all aspects of environmental impact. A requirement for stormwater is that peak flow runoff be reduced to what it was 200 years ago when the entire area was forested. This exceeds current requirements. They’ve also instituted measures to work with the Water Authority on reducing contaminants. Any electrical substations visible from the Manassas National Battlefield Park or surrounding major roadways must use innovative designs to enhance screening. The data center submitted site plans that go even further, ensuring their substations will NOT be visible from the Park. Data center buildings must keep their heights below the site line of the Park. They set the height limitations by conducting balloon tests to determine at what height someone standing at the edge of the Park could see them. Another thing the opponents haven’t revealed to Delegate Roem is that Park officials favor the PW Digital Gateway, because the expansion of Pageland lane into four lanes will allow them to shut off the Park’s through road to commuter traffic. It will not take any land from the Park - it adds some, and the developers will bear the cost. The developers will also pay for the data center’s water and sewage infrastructure. In addition, they will provide 800 acres for parks, trails, and interpretive markers, again at no cost to the taxpayers. With the current zoning restrictions of 10 acres, the only alternative is to sell 10-acre lots with wells and septic systems that are far more detrimental to water quality than data centers. We elected our Board to make local decisions, not the State. So why should the State interfere with local land use? What will they interfere with next? Please vote NO to SB1078. It will adversely affect not only Prince William County, but also every county in Virginia.

I oppose HB 1974. After attending all of our Board of Supervisors public meetings on the Prince William Digital Gateway project, I trust my Board’s decision. They’ve addressed all aspects of environmental impact. A requirement for stormwater is that peak flow runoff be reduced to what it was 200 years ago when the entire area was forested. This exceeds current requirements. They’ve also instituted measures to work with the Water Authority on reducing contaminants. Any electrical substations visible from the Manassas National Battlefield Park or surrounding major roadways must use innovative designs to enhance screening. The data center submitted site plans that go even further, ensuring their substations will NOT be visible from the Park. Data center buildings must keep their heights below the site line of the Park. They set the height limitations by conducting balloon tests to determine at what height someone standing at the edge of the Park could see them. Another thing the opponents haven’t revealed to Delegate Roem is that Park officials favor the PW Digital Gateway, because the expansion of Pageland lane into four lanes will allow them to shut off the Park’s through road to commuter traffic. It will not take any land from the Park - it adds some, and the developers will bear the cost. The developers will also pay for the data center’s water and sewage infrastructure. In addition, they will provide 800 acres for parks, trails, and interpretive markers, again at no cost to the taxpayers. With the current zoning restrictions of 10 acres, the only alternative is to sell 10-acre lots with wells and septic systems that are far more detrimental to water quality than data centers. We elected our Board to make local decisions, not the State. So why should the State interfere with local land use? What will they interfere with next? Please vote NO to SB1078. It will adversely affect not only Prince William County, but also every county in Virginia.

Oppose HB 1974. Local land use is up to the County BOS. It’s Bad precedent for General Assembly to focus on one specific target. All environmental issues surrounding the PW Gateway have already been addressed, studied, and publically debated. Kill this bill. Oppose HB 1974

I strongly oppose HB 1974. This bill is allowing the State Legislature to usurp local governments’ rights and ability to govern in their own localities. Vote No HB 1974.

Vote no to HB 1974 I am not sure who is trying to stall longer.....Heritage Hunt or Roem

Oppose HB 1974! This bill is Bad for All of Virginia. Our State Legislatures have no business inserting themselves into local land use decisions! I'm pretty sure your own districts would not support this. This is a precedent setting and dangerously slippery slope for everyone in the Commonwealth. We elected our own officials to make these decisions, and removing their ability to do so reeks of paternalism and sends a message that they cannot be trusted to do what is right for their own localities. Vote No on HB 1974!

I appeal to Right Reason. Please kill this misguided proposal.

I’m against HB 1974. My family opposes this bill. They are proposing a data center project across the street from our neighborhood. It’s good for everyone, good for jobs! Vote No for HB 1974

Please Vote Against HB 1974! We have owned our home for the last ten years. Progress takes place everywhere. Local communities know best how to plan their futures. We support data center revenue. Please support Virginia business. Please Oppose HB 1974!

I oppose to HB 1974 as this bill will directly attack individual property rights.

Oppose HB 1974! Loudon County has prospered for well over a decade due to data center tax revenue. We have not experienced any environmental issues or issues with power lines above ground. Oppose HB 1974!

Bury power lines UNDER the power line towers?? Haha! Hahaha! Huh? Oh, wait - Seriously??? Please dock Danica Roem’s pay to cover the cost the taxpayers are paying for her crazy bills. Please vote this down without discussion - at least save the taxpayers some wasted time. Oppose HB 1974!

Oppose HB1974!

I vehemently oppose HB 1974. This bill has been introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County, the development of data centers off Pageland Ln. Why? Because a vocal group of activists were unhappy with the Board of Supervisors decision. Do we want every decision made by local governments to be challenged in the state legislature?

I Oppose HB 1974

HB 1974 will cost the ratepayers all over Virginia $100’s of Millions! This bizarre plan - burying power lines directly beneath Dominion Towers - is specifically aimed at one project, but with this bill, Del. Roem has exceeded herself! Every new Dominion powerline, from any project, will have to be buried! At incalculable cost to all Dominion rate payers! Has Del. Roem suffered a head injury? That’s the only explanation I can find for this. OPPOSE HB 1974!

OPPOSE HB1974 - I am originally from Bristow and Gainesville. The data centers are a great opportunity for PWC.

oppose 1974 please

Loudon County has prospered for well over a decade due to data center taxes. We have not experienced any environmental issues or have issues with power lines above ground.

We have owned our home for the last ten years. Progress takes place everywhere. Local communities know best how to plan their futures. We support data center revenue.

I opposed HB1974. My family lives near a future data center site.

Opposed HB1974, it is a proposed state over-reach.

My family opposes this bill. They are proposing a data center project across the street from our neighborhood.

Oppose HB1974. The planned PWC data centers are good for the county and the State. Do not place the burdensome requirement of this bill in the way.

PWC has suffered those heinous power lines for 47 years solely to supply electricity to Loudon County! They provide NO POWER to PWC! And, just when the tree line got high enough to camouflage them, Dominion stole more of our land, (through imminent domain - with NO compensation), almost doubled the size and height of these behemoths, and dramatically increased voltage, all to provide the electricity needed for Loudon County DATA CENTERS! They were deliberately overbuilt “in order to provide for projected future energy needs.” After devaluing our land, destroying our site view, and eliminating our waterfront value, Del. Roem now seeks to add insult to injury by denying us the opportunity to derive any benefit! This is just another spurious bill designed to quash the PW Digital Gateway, by adding $400,000 Million in unnecessary extra cost, and creating more “potential pollution from runoff” by digging a huge trench across battlefield land, and directly adjacent to the Little Bull Run. This is (so far) the most nonsensical of her ludicrous bills! Nobody’s sight view will be impacted by a few more wires added to those monstrous towers. If she truly cared, this bill would require Dominion to remove the towers and bury all those lines! And require Loudon County to pay the cost, since they’re the only ones being served by them! Del. Roem needs to be thrown out, along with BS 1974. I don’t know why I’m even bothering to repond - no one in their right mind will support this bill. Enjoy your early retirement, Del. Roem. Oppose HB 1974!

I oppose HB1974

I oppose HB 1974

I oppose HB 1974, offered by Delegate Danica Roem. This proposed legislation is another attempt to stop one specific project by diminishing individual property rights and reducing the Commonwealth's ability to attract economic development opportunities.

I OPPOSE HB1974. The SCC is best positioned to decide where it makes sense to place transmission lines underground and what portions of a line would best be placed underground. This bill forces the SCC’s hands and is way too broad in its approach and impact.

Please oppose HB1974. It will set a bad precedent of State interference for all Counties in Virginia by hindering their ability to make local land-use decisions beneficial to their economic future.

I am writing to ask that you oppose House Bill 1974 offered by Delegate Danica Roem. This proposed legislation is a disingenuous tactic to target a specific current land use request with prohibitive developmental costs by attempting to disguise it as legitimate, caring, legislation for the common good. It asks you to join in delivering an onerous message to existing and potential economic development partners that will inhibit local communities' decisions on the use their land, diminish individual property rights, and jeopardize the Commonwealth's ability to attract economic development opportunities that could benefit the future of our families and our communities. Please oppose this shameful duplicity being proposed as HB 1974. And please know we sincerely respect and appreciate your reasoned, responsible leadership and dedication to serving the public good. Thank you.

I oppose this bill. The PWC government has adopted a plan for the Digital Gateway that includes protections for the parks. This bill seeks to undermine that plan and stall the development.

I am writing to ask that you oppose House Bill 1974 offered by Delegate Danica Roem. This proposed legislation is another attempt to stop one specific project. I’m not sure why anyone would want a bill that specifically requires power lines to be buried on Pageland in the future. There are already huge transmission lines along Pageland. It seems like a bill that will require a lot of funds and work for no gain. No pristine views will be retained by burying future power lines. They are already here and visible from everywhere.

OPPOSE HB1974. This is a local issue, not a state issue. It can be handled by the locality involved and the utility company. The state should not intervene.

I belong to a labor union here in Prince William County. I am looking forwerd to working in data centers here in our county. They employ lots of union people to build them. This rule that is coming to you to vote on is bad for us workers becasue it will probly make the data centers go somewhere else. VOTE NO.

Please oppose Delegate Roem's HB1974. After her failed bills HJ522 and HB1986, it is yet another stalling tactic to kill the Prince William Digital Gateway, which our County officials has already spent 2-years studyiing and for which it has conducted numerous public hearings to hear all sides of the issue. As a result, they have placed stringent measures to mitigate negative impacts on the environment, including a requirement that electric transmission lines and stations be visible to neither the National Battlefield Park nor the Heritage Hunt retirement community. Another study is a waste of time and taxpayer's money. It would not only hurt Prince William County, but such State interference with local land use issues would also undermine the ability of all counties in the commonwealth's to determine their economic future. Besides, there are already unsightly transmission lines next to the Battlefield Park and along all the farms on Pageland Lane.

NO, NO, NO, NO TO BILL 1974. Are you trying to ruin our future. I hope we get more data centers here. And if this bill passes, data centers will walk out on us. Give them incentives! Don't force them underground or they will go somewhere else.

Please oppose HB1974. It is a ploy to kill the Prince William Digital Gateway with stalling tactics. If it passes, my County will lose high paying technical and union jobs and the revenue it needs to fund County services.

I oppose HB1974. Prince William County government has taken steps to ensure that the electrical lines of the data center development in issue will not be visible to the Battlefield Park and Heritage Hunt neighborhood. The bill therefore has no purpose other than to delay or defeat the development. We need the revenue and the business. Vote no to this bill.

I oppose HB1974. It is an attempt to kill the Prince William Digital Gateway, which will provide much needed jobs for Prince William County. By targeting the data center industry it will be bad for all the counties in Virginia.

Vote No to HB 1974

oppose 1974 Just another one of Roem stall tactics If she knew the truth about the data center project, she would not be trying to stall this project Before you speak up and create more stall tactics, know what you are try to stall

I oppose HB 1974 on behalf of the property owners and present and future residents of Prince William county. The land in question already has enormous towers and electric lines that past BOS deemed acceptable for the area. To now require the lines to be buried is a disingenuous ploy to further block this project that was passed in significant majority vote.

VOTE NO on HB 1974. Let Prince William’s elected local officials decide what is best for the 480,000+ people of Prince William County. Senator Roem nor the State should be attempting to meddle in local government business.

I ask that you oppose House Bill 1974 offered by Delegate Danica Roem. This proposed legislation is another attempt to stop one specific project by diminishing individual property rights and reducing the Commonwealth's ability to attract economic development opportunities. Local development projects should not be managed at the state level. This bill is, manifestly, a ridiculous waste of time and resources.

VOTE NO on HB1974. The students and teachers of Prince William County (not to mention first responders) need the revenue that the Prince William Digital Gateway will produce. There is no reason for Senator Roem to try to obstruct or involve herself in local land use decisions as her bill is clearly an attempt to do. This is not a good bill for PWC or Virginia. VOTE NO.

VOTE NO on HB1974. Prince William County needs the Digital Gateway project with its $26 Billion local investment on the front side and Billions of local tax revenue once completed. Amazed one of my local representatives could be opposed to something like this. HB1974 is only meant to obstruct. VOTE NO on HB 1974.

Oppose HB 1974! Last week, Del Roem pretended to be concerned about water pollution from construction runoff - Now she wants to dig up miles of dirt directly under existing power lines that are as huge as they are in order to carry the load needed for the forseeable future! A few more lines on those hideous towers aren’t going to create any more site view pollution. —Yet another spurious bill designed to kill the PW Digital Gateway, the best thing that’s ever happened to PWC! Don’t dishonor yourselves or your office by being complicit in this duplicitous scheme! ————-Oppose HB 1974!

I appose bill HB1974 This bill would allow the state to override local land use issues, needlessly insert the SCC into local government decisions, and make unreasonable demands across the state.

I oppose HB1974.

Another terrible bill from Roem. Literally wasting the committees time. Prince William needs tax revenue from sources other than housing. Prince William Digital Gateway is that answer. Roem obstructs for the few instead of helping the almost 480,000 in PWC. Please VOTE NO HB 1974

Oppose HB 1974! Abject Stupidity!

I oppose HB 1974.

Yes, I live in Heritage Hunt and I oppose all of Delegate Roem's bills. I've read all about the Digital Gateway on the PWC website and it sounds pretty darn good to me. The plans include plenty of buffers , parks, trails, historic sites, tree planting, and it will not cause pollution like some are claiming. Read the studies. I want my grandchildren to get good jobs here. I want my real estate taxes to go down. I want our whole county to thrive. This latest Roem bill is pure and simple just an end run to hinder the project.

Oppose 1974. Hurts PWC’s ability to derive revenue by trying to kill the PW Digital Gateway. Therefore it hurts our teachers, school children, first responders and tax payers. Obstructionist bill that does nothing for PWC or Virginia. VOTE NO.

I oppose HB 1974 This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner This bill is a direct attack on individual property rights This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists. This bill will diminish the ability of localities to make their own decisions about land use cases and economic development activities

Another attempt from Roem to kill a massive local revenue producing project while in doing so hurting PWC’s teachers, first responders, school children and county tax payers. A bad bill for PWC and Virginia at large. Please Vote NO

Sanders Lane has become a cut through for traffic coming in and out of Loudon County. It is becoming very difficult for residents. What was a quiet area is now overrun with commuter traffic. The traffic coming from Loudon and turning onto Sudley Road is backed up with commuters during the week and will only get worse when the small extension connecting Lightner Road to Rt 50 is completed. There are few subdivisions with a limited number of homes and the residents who live in Catharpin are for the change. Prince William badly needs a face-lift and the funds that this project will bring in will truly help revitalize a town that is quite sad. This project will bring in an extreme source of revenue into the county. It is an amazing opportunity that few counties are fortunate enough to benefit from.

Oppose 1974…bad for PWC’s teachers, students, first responders, tax payers and economy. Does nothing positive for Virginia in any way.

Please vote NO the HB1974. Our County has already spent two years studying and approving the Prince William Digital Gateway, and this is a delaying tactic by Del. Roem to stall it. She is trying to use the State to interfere with land-use decisions, about which our County officials are fully versed on all the issues from both sides. She has only listened to one side, the wealthy retirees of Heritage Hunt. Her bill would not only be bad for Prince William County, but it would also be bad for all Virginia's counties.

I oppose HB 1974. This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists. This is bad for Prince William County and Virginia

Dear Committee, Please do not move HB1974 forward. I believe in property rights. And I truly believe this bill is to screw the farmers on Pageland out of their constitutional rights to develop their properties, just so the Heritage Hunt group can keep the farmers maintaining their property so they have a nice view. If they don't get data centers, I hope they build apartments and townhouses right next to Heritage Hunt. We may not get the revenue we need from data centers, but at least we would get attainable housing. Which, by the way, will cost the taxpayers a lot more. Their farms will be developed one way or another.

I oppose HB 1974. This bill could restrict the ability of localities to determine their own economic development strategies. This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists.

I oppose HB 1974. This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner. This bill could restrict the ability of localities to determine their own economic development strategies. This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists.

I oppose HB 1974. This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner. This bill could restrict the ability of localities to determine their own economic development strategies. This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists.

I oppose HB 1974. The Bill seeks to declare that burying high voltage power lines in a certain location are in the "public interest" when that exact area already has above-ground high voltage power lines. Clearly burying the lines is not required or in the "public interest," else the current towers would not exist. This hypocritical Bill should be recognized for what it is: an attempt to frustrate a county land use planning decision to permit data centers. Data centers are good for our State and this County. And data centers are far better than the alternative, which will be high density subdivisions. Subdivisions bring traffic, congestion, and noise. The data center brings none of these things. Given the existing above-ground high voltage power lines, the need for future power lines to be buried cannot be in the "public interest." This Bill caters to a special interest group, not the best interest of the entire public or the State. Accordingly, please vote against HB 1974 as being disingenuous, unduly intrusive into a local land use issue, and needlessly antagonistic to data center development

I oppose HB 1974. This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner. This bill could restrict the ability of localities to determine their own economic development strategies. This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists.

I oppose HB 1974. This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner. This bill could restrict the ability of localities to determine their own economic development strategies. This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists.

I oppose HB 1974. This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner. This bill could restrict the ability of localities to determine their own economic development strategies. This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists.

I oppose HB 1974. This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner. This bill could restrict the ability of localities to determine their own economic development strategies. This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists.

I oppose HB 1974. This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner. This bill could restrict the ability of localities to determine their own economic development strategies. This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists.

I oppose HB1974. This is another attempt by Roem to delay the development of the PWC Digital Gateway. PWC has already decided on a plan, after 2 years of hearings and studies. The placement of electrical lines is a local matter that can be negotiated with the utility companies, not a concern of the state.

I say NO to this bill. We need the jobs here. The construction of data centers will give us plenty of years of work and will help us union workers. Why are we trying to make it harder for them?

Been reading about the data center issues in PWC. I don't live there, but I do worry that bills such as this one will cause problems in my own county in the future. Data centers and technology represent our best investment in our future. I have no problem with giving them incentives to locate here because the benefits that bring locally, and even to the state, far outweigh any costs. Therefore, I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS BILL. We shouldn't make it harder for them to grow here. They truly are the golden goose.

I strongly oppose this bill. Please vote AGAINST this bill. Thank you very much

PLEASE VOTE AGAINST HB1974

I think state shouldn't interfere with the county matter so please vote AGAINST this bill. Thank you!

I oppose HB1974.

I oppose HB 1974 Roem. This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner. This bill is a direct attack on individual property rights. This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists. - This bill will diminish the ability of localities to make their own decisions about land use cases and economic development activities. Thank you for your consideration. Sadia Safdar

I strongly oppose this onerous legislation, HB 1974, that Delegate Roem has presented. There are already huge overhead transmission lines and it is absolutely silly to suggest that the area would benefit from burying future electrical lines. It seems that children are trying to run the state by trying to keep data centers out of Prince William County, and possibly the entire state. By running off industry from the state, it places the entire tax burden on the adults who are paying taxes for services and state employee salaries. Please use your salaries responsibly and take the mature decision to oppose HB 1974. Thank you!

I oppose HB 1974 Roem. This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner. This bill is a direct attack on individual property rights. This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists. - This bill will diminish the ability of localities to make their own decisions about land use cases and economic development activities. Thank you for your consideration. Asad Safdar

This is a very unfair bill targeting a specific project. I oppose this bill.

I live at 5302 Pageland Lane and OPPOSE this bill. This county can not provide the basic services to its citizens now. To object to the Digital Gateway is hurting the citizens further by not allowing tax dollars from the Digital Gateway to help bring the county ahead in the market as the place to live. Police, Fire, and Schools would all benefit as well as many other county services. Building more houses is not the answer and is worse for the environment. I have witnessed it many times as I am an avid outdoorsman. Thanks Mike Deane 5302 Pageland Lane Catharpin VA 20143

I oppose HB 1974. This bill is solely intended to obstruct progress on the Prince William Digital Gateway, a project which has already been approved by the Prince William Board of County Supervisors and the PWC Planning Commission. The project is of vital importance to the future of Prince William County.

I object to Delegate Roem’s HB1974. This is foolish legislation that is designed to put onerous requirements on one specific industry simply because there are a few, vocal, entitled, rich retirees that are unhappy with the decision that our BOCS made about local land use and for the benefit of the entire county. If this legislation had anything to do with actually wanting buried electric lines there would have been an outcry when the huge transmission lines went up years ago. Yet, no one said anything even though those of us who are local objected. Now that they are here, there is NO reason to require future lines to be buried. This legislation looks like the tantrum that it is!

Reject this blatant attempt to target not only one industry in particular, but even worse, one specific project. This bill will do nothing to stop growth in western PW County, but will merely replace a few data centers with a few thousand new homes. I find it HILARIOUS that the few residents who oppose the data centers and complain about the development of the so-called "rural cresent" are living in neighborhoods that are a direct result of past development of the precious rural cresent. What was once undisturbed forest and open green spaces is now Dominion Valley, Piedmont, Heritage Hunt, Heathcote Blvd, Walmart, Kohls, Home Depot, Hilton Hotel, Novant Hospital and Medical Bldg, and the construction in Haymarket is continuing as we speak. In court we call this "dirty hands."

I strongly oppose HB1974 on several ground: but mostly because this bill will interfere with a local land use issue in Prince William County.

I oppose HB 1974 - Enormous above ground lines already exist on the Battlefield - This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner.

I oppose House Bill 1974 offered by Delegate Danica Roem. This is another attempt to stop one specific project by diminishing individual property rights and reducing the Commonwealth's ability to attract economic development opportunities. There is already above ground high voltage power lines on Pageland Lane no one seemed bothered by them until now. This bill is only trying to stop or increase the costs of the PW Digital Gateway. Land use policies should remain within the local government and the targeted project should be no different

OPPOSE HB1974

Please vote no to HB1974.

I oppose HB 1974. This bill will diminish the ability of localities to make their own decisions about land use cases and economic development activities

Oppose HB1974

The depths to which someone will sink for a few votes. Clearly, roam is not interested in smart growth, but appeasing a few constituents, and I do mean a "few." Think about what you want this area of PW County to look like in 10 years. A few data centers, complete with parks and green spaces, or, THOUSANDS OF NEW HOMES further clogging our already at capacity roads and schools. This is completely ridiculous.

I oppose HB1974. Del Roem is having another knee jerk reaction to something she has not studied.

I am opposed to this bill. This bill is a direct attack on individual property rights - This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists. - This bill will diminish the ability of localities to make their own decisions about land use cases and economic development activities Thank you for your willingness to help and we will continue to everything we can to stop this harmful legislation.

I am writing to ask that you oppose House Bill 1974 offered by Delegate Danica Roem. This proposed legislation is another attempt to stop one specific project by diminishing individual property rights and reducing the Commonwealth's ability to attract economic development opportunities. HB 1974 needlessly inserts the SCC into a local land use decision and is designed to increase the costs of a single data center in Prince William County. Land use policies have always been up to localities and the PWC Digital Gateway should be no different. It is not right for a bill to target a specific local development project so please do not allow this bill to move forward.

I oppose HB 1974

I am writing to ask that you oppose House Bill 1974 offered by Delegate Danica Roem. This proposed legislation is another attempt to stop one specific project by diminishing individual property rights and reducing the Commonwealth's ability to attract economic development opportunities. This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner.

I adamantly oppose HB1974. Let’s get these data centers built so the people can benefit from the jobs and technology.

I oppose HB 1974 for the following reasons: - This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists. - This bill will diminish the ability of localities to make their own decisions about land use cases and economic development activities

I OPPOSE HB1974

This is another attempt by Delegate Roem to place obstacles and delays to our local land use decisions. In trying to stall the Prince William Digital Gateway, if passed, her bill would also place unreasonable requirements on all the counties in Virginia. Prince William County has already conducted exhaustive studies, met with residents in long public hearings, and has listened to everyone's concerns. Delegate Roem has only listened to one side and, unlike our County officials, does not have all the facts. As a result of the two years of studies and public meetings, the County has placed stringent environmental restrictions to ensure the power lines and power stations are not visible to either the Manassas National Battlefield Park or the Heritage Hunt retirees, who are the main proponents of this bill. Additional studies and requirements are a waste of time and taxpayer's money.

I oppose HB 1974 This nonsense bill is coming from a small group on 25 that oppose the datacenter project. The state should not be interfearing with local development projects which are beneficial to virginia.

I oppose HB 1974 There is already a huge overhead powerline in the battlefield and a datacenter across the street from the state park. This nonsense bill is coming from a small group on 25 that oppose the datacenter project. The state should not be interfearing with local development projects which are beneficial to virginia.

I oppose HB 1974. This is clearly an attempt of the State to overstep a local county issue.

I oppose HB1974

I am writing to ask that you oppose House Bill 1974 offered by Delegate Danica Roem. This proposed legislation is another attempt to stop one specific project by diminishing individual property rights and reducing the Commonwealth's ability to attract economic development opportunities. It is clear that Delegate Roem is working on behalf of a small group of individuals who are opposed to the progress that Prince William County is attempting to make via the PW Digital Gateway. These loud residents and Delegate Roem are NOT speaking on behalf of ALL Prince William County. What a shame it would be if you begin to legislate for the entire state based on the misguided opposition of a few loud citizens, while discounting what is in the best interest for the entire county.

I oppose HB1974

I oppose HB1974

I OPPOSE HB 1974. This nonsense bill is being raised as a result of a small group of 25 people in opposition to a local datacenter project the PWC Local Government has already studied and approved. The development plan already provides more than adequate buffers as park land adjacent to the battlefield and state forest. Comically, this bill wasn't called for last year when they approved a datacenter directly across the street from the state forest, but now it's a thing that the State should get involved in.

I OPPOSE HB 1974. This nonsense bill is being raised as a result of a small group of 25 people in opposition to a local datacenter project the PWC Local Government has already studied and approved. The development plan already provides more than adequate buffers as park land adjacent to the battlefield and state forest. Comically, this bill wasn't called for last year when they approved a datacenter directly across the street from the state forest, but now it's a thing that the State should get involved in.

I OPPOSE HB 1974. This nonsense bill is being raised as a result of a small group of 25 people in opposition to a local datacenter project the PWC Local Government has already studied and approved. The development plan already provides more than adequate buffers as park land adjacent to the battlefield and state forest. Comically, this bill wasn't called for last year when they approved a datacenter directly across the street from the state forest, but now it's a thing that the State should get involved in.

I strongly oppose HB1974 on several ground: 1) This bill is designed to interfere with a local land use issue in Prince William County. 2) This bill will have a broad and damaging effect on economic development across Virginia, but especially in northern counties. 3) This bill is an overreach of State power in what should remain the purview of localities to make their own decisions.

This bill will diminish the ability of localities to make their own decisions about land use cases and economic development activities.

- I oppose HB 1974 - Enormous above ground lines already exist on the Battlefield - This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner - This bill is a direct attack on individual property rights - This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists. - This bill will diminish the ability of localities to make their own decisions about land use cases and economic development activities

I OPPOSE HB 1974. This nonsense bill is being raised as a result of a small group of 25 people in opposition to a local datacenter project the PWC Local Government has already studied and approved. The development plan already provides more than adequate buffers as park land adjacent to the battlefield and state forest. Comically, this bill wasn't called for last year when they approved a datacenter directly across the street from the state forest, but now it's a thing that the State should get involved in.

I OPPOSE HB 1974. This nonsense bill is being raised as a result of a small group of 25 people in opposition to a local datacenter project the PWC Local Government has already studied and approved. The development plan already provides more than adequate buffers as park land adjacent to the battlefield and state forest. Comically, this bill wasn't called for last year when they approved a datacenter directly across the street from the state forest, but now it's a thing that the State should get involved in.

I OPPOSE Roem 1974. This opporotunity is huge for families and new generations of tax payers. The previous studies were thorough and dont need to be repeated at the behest of one small community. We need this!

• HB 1974 needlessly inserts the SCC into a local land use decision • The bill is, in our opinion, designed to increase the costs of a single data center project in Prince William County, the PW Digital Gateway. It is not right for a bill to target a specific local development project • Land use policies have always been up to localities and the PW Digital Gateway should be no different Please lay this Bill gently on the table. Thank you.

I oppose HB1974 because it would restrict the ability of localities to determine their own economic development strategies. I have been a Prince William County Virginia resident for more than 17 years and I support data centers in Prince William County. Please oppose HB1974 by Roem.

PWC has already studied this and plans are in place! Give people the progression they need to thrive in this area! Only a small group is behind these bills.

I oppose HB 1974 This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner This bill is a direct attack on individual property rights This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists. This bill will diminish the ability of localities to make their own decisions about land use cases and economic development activities Thank you for your consideration.

Please oppose HB1974 by Roem. I oppose HB1974 because it would restrict the ability of localities to determine their own economic development strategies. I support data centers in Prince William County.

I oppose HB 1974. This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists.

I oppose HB 1974. This bill was introduced to target one specific land use case in Prince William County and to appease a small, but vocal group of activists. This bill is a direct attack on individual property rights. This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner. This bill will diminish the ability of localities to make their own decisions about land use cases and economic development activities. Thank you.

I strongly oppose HB 1974. This bill will send a clear message to the data center industry that the Commonwealth is questioning its relationship with this important economic development partner.

I opposed to HB1974 legislation, because it is just an excuse to delay economic progress in our county regarding Data centers development,

I oppose HB1974.

I opposed HB 1974

I oppose HB 1974. This bill is aimed at taking away a great opportunity from our county that will negatively affect our residents for years to come. We can not and will not support this bill.

I oppose HB1974. It is a small but loud special interest group behind this bill. This will undermine the citizens and those that have been appointed to run the counties.

I do not support this bill. It's bad for data center development and what they can do to save our economy.

I am opposed to hp1974

I oppose HB 1974

Please Oppose HB 1974. Jennifer Simpson Gainesville

I oppose HB 1974 PERIOD!!!

Please oppose this bill by Roem. This bill would restrict the ability of localities to determine their own economic development strategies. I support data centers in Prince William County.

Please Oppose HB 1974. Linda Simpson Gainesville

OPPOSE bill 1974. It will cause more problems for data center development and hurt our future economy.

Local land use is up to the locality. Bad precedent for GA to focus one specific target. All environmental issues addressed and publically debated.

I oppose HB 1974. This is a thinly veiled obstruction of the decision of the Prince William County Board of Supervisors regarding the PW Digital Gateway proposal. This attempts to use legislation to negate the results of the last two years of studies, reports, and deliberations about this project. The National Park Service representing the Manassas Battlefield does not oppose this project as it helps them achieve one of their longstanding goals of reducing commuter traffic through the park. This is a local land-use issue best handled through local ordinances and requirements specific to the county, not broadly legislated by the General Assembly. Please deny the passage of this bill.

Please Oppose HB 1974. Higdon Simpson Gainesville

Opposed. Opposed. Opposed HB1974

I vehemently oppose HB1974

I Oppose HB 1974

I oppose HB1974

I oppose HB1974

I oppose Hb1974

I oppose HB1974 - Roem. When I retired from the U.S. Army in 2011, after 23+ years of service, I chose to retire and spend the rest of my life in Virginia. I was born and raised in West Virginia and have literally lived all over the United States and around the globe. So why would I choose Virginia, over anyplace else? Answer: Virginia encourages economic growth and offers greater opportunity for prosperity and individual freedom than any other place. This bill is another attempt to restrict economic growth and infringe on individual freedom. Please ensure this bill fails. Thank you. Curt Burner

I OPPOSE HB 1974. This bill is trying to stop the much needed progress in Prince William County and will negatively affect our residents, our schools, and our emergency services in our county.

I oppose HB1974.

I oppose HB1974.

I OPPOSE HB1974

Here we go again: another bad bill submitted by Del Roem to try to impede data center development. This bill is aimed at the Prince William Digital Gateway but will negatively affect data centers looking to locate anywhere in VA/ OPPOSE THIS BILL.

I am a property owner in PWC. I oppose HB1974

I oppose HB1974.

This bill is allowing the Commonwealth Legislature to usurp local governments' rights and ability to govern in their own localities. Again -- those supporting this bill want simply to disempower our locally elected officials simply because they disagree with the economic development opportunities the PW Board of County Supervisors is finally allowing to move forward here.

I OPPOSE HB1974.

Oppose HB1974

I oppose HP 1974. This is a bill that is targeting a specific project. This is elitist.

I oppose HB1974. This is another attempt by a vocal minority to usurp the authority of local government by targeting one specific data center project. They're all for data centers just as long as they are built in someone else's back yard. This argument to "save" the Manassas Battle field is just smoke and mirrors. There's a data center on RT 29 and University almost completely constructed, located directly south of the battlefield headquarters on Rt 29 and Pageland. Where is the public outcry against that project? Where's the public outcry over the Sheetz gas station under construction across the street from the almost completed data center? There isn't any. It's just more Not in My Backyard arguments. Prince William County Board of Supervisors have already approved the development of Pageland Lane by data center developers and the proponents of this bill are hoping Richmond will go along with them in telling local governments that their decisions may be overturned by Richmond delegates. Please oppose this bill and let local governments make decisions as they deem appropriate to the benefit of their citizens.

I oppose HB 1974

I oppose HB1974 as a selective bill targeting a specific project. This is elitist and I believe it is over reach coming from the state level disregarding local rule where there are existing regulations.

I oppose this bill

I oppose this bill.

I oppose this bill

I oppose this bill

I oppose this bill.

Please view this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vky3h5_mFYY Evidence that the proliferation of Mega Data Center Complexes in Northern VA are not the way to go for data storage. Don’t let the destruction of the little lands we have remaining be destroyed by Corporations’ greed . Synthetic DNA right around the corner.

I am in favor of the passage of HB1974. My husband and I moved to Prince William County in 1976. We have seen the highs and lows over the past 47 years in our county, but the recent passage of the CPA for the Prince William Digital Gateway for more massive data center development has got to be the lowest point.

The U.S. Department of the Interior, the Superintendent of the Manassas National Battlefield Park, Fairfax Water Authority, historical and preservation commissions, Print William County appointed boards, and even Ken Burns who filmed the Civil War here at the Battlefield Park, have all stated their disapproval of this massive use of 2,000+ acres of land adjoining the sacred, hallowed grounds of our Manassas National Battlefield Park for data center development. The placement of all data centers should be done with the utmost respect to our present citizens and to preserve the memory of our forefathers.

 I ask you to please require that municipalities study all impacts of data center infrastructure development. We must not let the Almighty Dollar take precedence on our Commonwealth’s environment, economy, energy resources, ability to meet carbon-reduction goals, and most importantly, our health and well-being.

I urge you to support this bill. Prince William County Board of Supervisors, taking advantage of one Supervisor absenting himself from his duties, has pushed forward at maximum speed, plans to pave over the western part of the county, disregarding the wishes of the residents of this part of the county, and ignoring the evidence of environmental and water quality issues in order to serve their corporate masters. The damage done to Manassas National Battlefield Park alone will bring shame to all of Virginia. I have heard supporters of the data centers call for the park to be paved over. At the very least, these plans must be slowed down to allow a rational look at this before irreparable damage is done to the state.

I am strongly in support HB 1974. The bill does not seek to usurp the power of the local government as the bill's opponents would have one believe. It is a scare tactic designed to make state officials "back off--particularly when the local government is failing to be responsible to its citizens or their environment. Don't fall for the hype. A cascade effect will not happen if you support this bill. Chaos will not ensue. This bill is an effort to have responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines in order to maintain historic viewsheds. The bill will also ensure the respect, preservation and enjoyment of our natural and historic assets for future generations to come. That is in your job description now to protect-- and we expect you as our elected officials to do no less. Virginia is special. Please do you very best to protect it and its citizens as local governments cannot always be trusted to do so.

Dear Delegates, I am writing to encourage your support for HB 1974, it is a common sense-legislation to ensure prudent environmental measures and appropriate locations for data center siting and operations. Responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines is essential to maintain historic viewsheds and ensure the respect, preservation and enjoyment of our natural and historic assets for future generations. As a resident of Prince William County where there are some 75 million square feet of data centers on the books even though the County’s own need study identifies a demand of just about one half of that -- in its most optimistic projection. I am particularly concerned about the development on some 70 massive and noise-generating data center buildings, more power lines and a four-lane highway immediately along the western and northern boundaries of Manassas National Battlefield Park and the eastern edge of Conway Robinson State Demonstration Forest. The square miles of grading, paving and covering represented by the proposed Prince William Digital Gateway will also likely harm regional drinking supplies and call upon state-regulated utilities to provide for an amount of electricity equivalent to that used of the entire State of New Hampshire. I am not against data center development in the County, however, there are more appropriate and suitable locations here than the 2,000-acre rural and historic Pageland Lane site being proposed by the big tech companies QTS and Compass. This land was the location of important and tragic Civil War-era events and the critical history and lasting heritage of post-war African American community development in PW County. The County’s own cultural resource commission recommended against the Pageland/Prince William Digital Gateway for the reasons noted above. Protecting Virginia’s unique and irreplaceable cultural heritage can, indeed, be woven into a more thoughtful and less damaging program of planning for our cyber future. This legislation helps support that. Responsible data center siting and environmental stewardship is essential if Virginia’s citizens are to live in harmony with these necessary industrial facilities. Citizens throughout the Commonwealth require the reasonable precautions this bill prescribes to ensure that growth of this industry is managed in a prudent manner which protects our natural and historic assets. I implore you to resist voices of those who oppose such environmentally responsible measures solely because they inhibit unfettered profiteering. Thank you!

I am writing to encourage your support for HB1974. In fact while I support this and ask that support as well. The Bill MUST BE EXPANDED to include not just our national parks and batt fields but our residential areas and our schools. This common sense legislation shall ensure: “The construction and reconstruction, of any underground, in whole or in part, electrical transmission lines of at least 69 kilovolts along a highway right-of-way under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation in Planning District 8 where a data center proposal is under construction in an area located within a half mile of a National Battlefield Park and within one mile of a state forest is in the public interest.” Responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines is essential to maintain residents safety as well as the children in our schools. It will also maintain historic viewsheds and ensure the respect, preservation and enjoyment of our natural and historic assets for future generations. Thank you.

I want to express my support for HB1974. I appreciate Representative Roem putting it forward. I live in Prince William County, but not near the data center campus planned near the Battlefield. I know the argument has been made that this is a "local land use issue" and not a State Legislature issue, but I disagree. This bill is in defense of a critically historic Federal Battlefield which is the source of significant local and state tourism and a Virginia State Forest. I would argue that these lands belong to and are important to all of the residents of the State of Virginia and the all of the Residents of the United States. Additionally, as a resident of Prince William County, I am not satisfied with local land use decisions that have been made by the local elected officials.

Please support HB 1974. This common sense legislation shall ensure: “The construction and reconstruction, of any underground, in whole or in part, electrical transmission lines of at least 69 kilovolts along a highway right-of-way under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation in Planning District 8 where a data center proposal is under construction in an area located within a half mile of a National Battlefield Park and within one mile of a state forest is in the public interest.” Residents in NOVA are continually being whipsawed with development ranging from necessary and good to out of control, rushed without regard for communities and our historical and cultural resources. Then, when the development is approved on the local level, citizens are again fighting Dominion Power for our communities and our historical and cultural resources. It is exhausting. I am 76 years old and have never felt the need to participate in local, county government because I never felt I needed to protect myself and my neighbors from our elected officials. It has been a full-time job for the last 15 months. Please listen, please consider, please help to make our lives easier. Thank you.

I SUPPORT HB1974. The National Battlefield should be protected at all costs. The State parks of Virginia should be protected at all costs. The residents of Virginia should be protected at all costs. Requiring a multi-Billion dollar industry to be responsible at preserving the National Battlefield and State Parks and protecting Virginia residents by burying their electrical transmission lines is a reasonable request. Please put Virginians and the Commonwealth's history above greed of a few landowners and multi-Billion companies. This legislation is a step in the right direction- especially as Governor Youngkin recently announced Amazon's $35 Billion investment, data centers will reconsider purchasing land against our historic battlefields, which are throughout the Commonwealth.

I am writing to encourage your support for HB 1974. This common sense legislation shall ensure: “The construction and reconstruction, of any underground, in whole or in part, electrical transmission lines of at least 69 kilovolts along a highway right-of-way under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation in Planning District 8 where a data center proposal is under construction in an area located within a half mile of a National Battlefield Park and within one mile of a state forest is in the public interest.” Responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines is essential to maintain historic viewsheds and ensure the respect, preservation and enjoyment of our natural and historic assets for future generations. Thank you.

I am writing to encourage your support for HB 1974. We are disappointed to see such negative comments from the PWDG proponents to this common sense legislation. My wife and I encourage support for HB 1974 which will ensure: “The construction and reconstruction, of any underground, in whole or in part, electrical transmission lines of at least 69 kilovolts along a highway right-of-way under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation in Planning District 8 where a data center proposal is under construction in an area located within a half mile of a National Battlefield Park and within one mile of a state forest is in the public interest.” Responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines is essential to maintain historic viewsheds and ensure the respect, preservation and enjoyment of our natural and historic assets for future generations. Thank you.

I am a registered voter and resident of PWC. I am writing in SUPPORT of HB 1974. This is a common sense legislation that comes among many late non-sense proposals related to data centers in western PWC. Responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines are essential to maintain historic viewsheds and ensure the respect, preservation, and enjoyment of our natural and historic assets for future generations.

I am writing to encourage your support for HB 1974. If you look at the ranting of some of the Pageland Lane residents, who stand to make upwards of $500,000 to $1,000,000 an acre, you will definitely see more than a bit of ageism leveraged against the residents of Heritage Hunt community. We have been accused of NIMBY...and YES...NIMBY...not in anyone's back yard. In fact, our elected supervisor who abandoned us, Pete Candland, used these words "I don't want to live among a sea of data centers" to justify his jumping on board with the rest of the prospective millionaires on Pageland Lane. Pageland Lane folks have characterized the HH residents as privileged, rich, elitist, "not long for this world", and more ageist stereotypes. Here's the deal...yes, we are privileged to have worked the majority of our lives, just like most everyone in the world will have to do, and have saved enough to afford to live in HH. Most of us have endured mind-numbing commutes to DC and beyond, in order to earn the right to retire. For many residents here, this is the investment of their lives. Most of us have not had the good luck to have inherited 40 acres of land from their parents who will undoubtedly make them multi-millionaires if and when they sell their property to the data center conglomerates. That being said the amount of misinformation about using existing electric towers and substations for the proposed data centers is a load of bull. NOVEC attended the planning commission meeting and very specifically said that the citizens of PWC will have to foot the bill for additional substations and towers. The Pageland residents of course will be long gone having moved to more environmentally safer, quieter, greener, bigger, quieter spaces. Please support Delegate Roem's bill 1974 which will protect not only the residents of HH but also residents of other areas of PWC whose quality of life and property values are being threatened. This common sense legislation shall ensure: “The construction and reconstruction, of any underground, in whole or in part, electrical transmission lines of at least 69 kilovolts along a highway right-of-way under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation in Planning District 8 where a data center proposal is under construction in an area located within a half mile of a National Battlefield Park and within one mile of a state forest is in the public interest.” Responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines is essential to maintain historic viewsheds and ensure the respect, preservation and enjoyment of our natural and historic assets for future generations. Thank you. Carolyn Cameron

I have lived in this nice small community for 20 years and have enjoyed the quiet peace that is here, but now that is being ripped from my wife and my self . We are both retired and on social security. We have chosen to live our last years next to the nice woods behind our home. Now this beautiful community is being turned into a loud massive loud data center in closing in our community on 3 sides . This is unacceptable and should be placed in proper places that won’t destroy the lives of thousands of families that chose to live in in these communities. PLEASE STOP big business from stomping out our lives!!!! Gregory Herrity Amberleigh station Bristow va

I encourage support of HB1974. This common-sense legislation will protect our parks and battlefields.

I strongly urge that you vote for HB 1974. The National Park viewscape and Occoquan watershed badly need your support.

We support Delete Roem’s HB1974.

I am writing to encourage your support for HB 1974. This common sense legislation shall ensure: “The construction and reconstruction, of any underground, in whole or in part, electrical transmission lines of at least 69 kilovolts along a highway right-of-way under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation in Planning District 8 where a data center proposal is under construction in an area located within a half mile of a National Battlefield Park and within one mile of a state forest is in the public interest.” Responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines is essential to maintain historic viewsheds and ensure the respect, preservation and enjoyment of our natural and historic assets for future generations. Thank you.

I am writing to encourage your support for HB 1974. This common sense legislation shall ensure: “The construction and reconstruction, of any underground, in whole or in part, electrical transmission lines of at least 69 kilovolts along a highway right-of-way under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation in Planning District 8 where a data center proposal is under construction in an area located within a half mile of a National Battlefield Park and within one mile of a state forest is in the public interest.” Responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines is essential to maintain historic viewsheds and ensure the respect, preservation and enjoyment of our natural and historic assets for future generations. PWC does not nee the eyesore of transmission lines that mar the beauty of the county. Thank you.

Comments Document

I represent the most adversely affected community in Virginia that will be surrounded by 11 data centers 100 ft tall and built to within 100 feet of our homes. The billionaire owner of the Hunter Property, Chuck Kuhn, wants to place an electrical substation on the property requiring more overhead power lines. We are now dealing with an adjacent property, the proposed Devlin Technology Park, whose 14 mega data centers will require additional overhead wires and substations. Our 650 men, women and children are in danger of losing their quality of life to Big Business and Big Tech. Data centers will encroach on our three public schools in the area. It seems almost criminal that our County Supervisors have cited this massive buildings so close to residential dwellings. I speak for 650 people that support HB1974 and even more stringent legislation in the future. Thank you-

I encourage your support for HB 1974. Thank you.

I am in support of HB1974 and I encourage you to support it as well. Citizens across the county are standing up to say NO to data centers until at least the appropriate measure like responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines in a subterranean manner are required. This is an essential aspect to ensure the wellbeing of our historic parks for future generations.

Dear Delegate, Please support HB 1974. This bill will ensure the responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines thus preserving our natural and historic resources for current and future generations. Thank you. Paul Cuddihy Gainesville District

I was born and raised in Long Island, New York, a hotbed of what I always referred to as the NIMBY (Not in my backyard) movement. The real estate taxes in many places on Long Island now exceed $20,000 a year. While not the sole cause of this, NIMBY played a role, and as a result, I have held strong personal beliefs about the need for economic development and appreciate the desire for the County to expand its tax base. I do, however, view data centers as a short-sighted strategy. There is a short-term gain in revenue, but they don't provide the type of permanent flow that should be the goal of economic development. It is my understanding that within years of coming online, these centers become obsolete, and it is less expensive to build new ones than to retrofit existing structures. What happens, then? We have an endless number of vacant buildings with no plan on what to do with them when their short-lived use is up. Vacant structures become targets of vandalism and lead to other quality-of-life issues. I am also a capitalist at heart and favor property rights. I support landowners and their right to sell their land for a profit. However, I have a problem with what I call the "H" word, HYPROCISY! If asked to use one word to describe the times we live in, this would be it. Not long ago, the Pageland Road owners wrapped themselves in the cloak of environmentalism and protection for our historical heritage when it suited them. Now they oppose any restrictions in these areas, which might impact their ability to cash out and make a fortune. Talk about wanting to have their cake and eat it too. Our County officials have demonstrated that they are tone-deaf and refuse to listen to their constituents who are civilly but loudly stating our position on data centers. Their failure to "put the brakes on" this initiative leaves us no alternative but to turn to our state representatives in the hope that they will. I support this bill and any other one that will curb this insanity before it goes any further.

I fully support HB 1976, the excavation and placement of electrical infrastructure in a subterranean manner, if it must be done at all. Installing the cabling beneath ground level will preserve the viewshed and maintain some of the rural and bucolic qualities of the area. This is by no means, however, support for data center construction. They have no business in the Gainesville area.

I am in strong support of HB 1974. Virginia communities should not be left to fend for themselves when dealing with the richest corporations in the history of the United States and the massive clusters of MEGA sized data center campuses they are planning to build. It is in the public interest to make sure that there is responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines. Without that, entire neighborhoods and Manassas National Battlefield Park are at risk.

Please support HB1974. It is incumbent upon the state to provide some protections for residents who will be directly adversely impacted by the required electrical infastructure of the bulk load customers that demand giggiwatts of power. Where is the interest of the most important stakeholders in areas where a minority of landowners will benefit with obscene amounts of money per acre as they sell to the data center industry and move away, while those residents who remain bear the brunt of the impacts? It is unresonable to incentivize the data center industry and not adopt protections for the residents who will live in proximity of THEIR required "extension cords". Do not forget the debacle of the 2015 Haymarket transmission line pilot program that was ultimatey adopted in 2018 into the Dominion Energy Modernizaiton Act. It is time for the elected leaders in Virgnia to ensure citizens are protected from decisions that are tearing communities apart. Turning a blind eye to the unique infrastructure required to support these bulk load customers will not make it disappear, it's hard to make a 110 ft or taller transmission line invisible. HB 1974 is an opportunity to be pro active. Thank yor for your consideration, Elena Schlossberg Haymarket VA

I am writing to encourage your support for HB 1974. The only militant groups are those people that are are defending this and the large amounts they will make if the Prince William Digital Gateway is not stopped. They try to make it seem like only one group is behind the support for this bill, but that could not be further from the truth. People like myself from all over Prince William county have been against it from early on and at had to relied upon and were failed by our local board. Please research the names posting here against this bill against the known list of landowners in the PW digital gateway. I am sure you will find what we all do that the two line up perfectly. This common sense legislation shall ensure: “The construction and reconstruction, of any underground, in whole or in part, electrical transmission lines of at least 69 kilovolts along a highway right-of-way under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation in Planning District 8 where a data center proposal is under construction in an area located within a half mile of a National Battlefield Park and within one mile of a state forest is in the public interest.” Responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines is essential to maintain historic viewsheds and ensure the respect, preservation and enjoyment of our natural and historic assets for future generations. Thank you. -----------------

I am writing to encourage your support for HB 1974. This common sense legislation shall ensure: “The construction and reconstruction, of any underground, in whole or in part, electrical transmission lines of at least 69 kilovolts along a highway right-of-way under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation in Planning District 8 where a data center proposal is under construction in an area located within a half mile of a National Battlefield Park and within one mile of a state forest is in the public interest.” Responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines is essential to maintain historic viewsheds and ensure the respect, preservation and enjoyment of our natural and historic assets for future generations. Thank you.

What a shame to see the Pageland crew using this forum to spew scandalous comments about ONE community, when we are supposed to be commenting on a piece of legislation. I am amazed at the childishness of that action. HB 1974 is a common sense piece of legislation. In the Gainesville area, historic viewsheds and historic land preservation are essential to maintaining our historic integrity. Our local Board has approved almost 100 data centers in a small 2 mile area. The land will be forever changed and residents forever impacted negatively. Placing and rerouting electrical transmission lines in a responsible manner is extremely important to maintain SOME land preservation and care of the health of constituents.

Please support HB 1974. Putting 69 kilovolts transmission lines within a mile of a National battlefield or a state forest is not in the interest of the public. The installation and routing should be respectful to these historic places. Thank You

I am in support of HB1974. The majority of my community supports this bill. The ones who don't support this are the ones who will have huge financial gains as a result of the Prince William Digital Gateway, while leaving the rest of us to live with the disaster that will ensue.

The Pageland Lane crowd is at it again, this time over Danica Roem’s bill HB 1974 (attached). See their handiwork at: https://hodspeak.house.virginia.gov/committees/H23/bills/HB1974/comments. Note this choice entry: image001.png Some of you “militant activists” may wish to respond. Here’s how: Go to: House of Delegates Speak (virginia.gov) . Scroll down and click the check box next to HB 1974. Click the “Next” button at the bottom of the page. Enter your comments. Click the green “Submit Comments” button at the bottom of the page. Below is what I posted, but please write your own comments. -------------------------------------------------------------- I am writing to encourage your support for HB 1974. Responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines is essential to maintain historic viewsheds and ensure the respect, preservation and enjoyment of our natural and historic assets for future generations. Thank you. ----Brenda Quanstrom 13521 Tallyrand Way-------- Gainesville VA. 20155---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is very interesting to note that it is mostly the residents of the Pageland area who are the ones pushing for the Data Centers (DCs) because of the huge windfall of money they will receive from the buyout of their land for this specific development. Others pro DC seem also to be able in some way to profit off this deal. These same residents of the Pageland area will then be long gone when the destruction of this wonderful land next to the National Battlefields even begins. We who are left in the area will then deal with the ugly consequences. My land will not back up to these DCs, but they will have a great effect on our family. We came out here to Gainesville from having previously lived in Fairfax because of the rural crescent. While that has been chipped away by more and more construction of shopping and housing, at least housing has grass, trees, walking trails and many have water features/ponds with recycled water. This land would be better suited and used for homes on large parcels of acreage where animals will be welcome and there won't be the bright lights, the constant din of the DCs and the substations that would be needed for their support. There is also the question of water usage and the runoff from Data Centers and what happens when they become obsolete and we are left with this concrete jungle. I have no issue with residents of Pageland selling their land, but they need to understand that it has to suit the area and those left behind. I can't imagine that wouldn't get a fair deal from a developer of housing that will work with consideration of the land and area. One last thing I feel I must note is that my daughter works for a DC and is doing incredibly well. She is crushed that our area, where she grew up, will be ruined if the Data Center Gateway goes through and this area becomes overrun with with concrete the way Ashburn has. There are many appropriate places for Data Centers (such as along 66 and in other already industrialized areas) but up the Pageland corridor and by the battlefields is not one. We all know that the development of the DCs will certainly then bring in the Bi or Tri-County Parkway. Thank you for your consideration.

----------- Please support HB 1974! Industrial Data Center development is unprecedented and out of control in northern Virginia. They are being constructed in VERY inappropriate places, near homes, schools, national and state parks. These industrial complexes are noisy, visually ugly and overall bad for the environment. They provide nothing of value for the communities that are forced to host them and severely degrade their environment and quality of life. These projects are driven by unscrupulous developers with very deep pockets and greedy landowners who plan to take the money and run, leaving the rest of us “holding the bag” of their destruction. In Prince William County, they have our incompetent Democratic Supervisors in their pockets and these projects are pushing forward without reasonable study and restrictions. This common sense legislation shall ensure: “The construction and reconstruction, of any underground, in whole or in part, electrical transmission lines of at least 69 kilovolts along a highway right-of-way under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation in Planning District 8 where a data center proposal is under construction in an area located within a half mile of a National Battlefield Park and within one mile of a state forest is in the public interest.” Responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines is essential to maintain historic viewsheds and ensure the respect, preservation and enjoyment of our natural and historic assets for future generations. Thank you.

This bill is allowing the Commonwealth Legislature to usurp local governments' rights and ability to govern in their own localities. Again -- those supporting this bill want simply to disempower our locally elected officials simply because they disagree with the economic development opportunities the PW Board of County Supervisors is finally allowing to move forward here. Please - leave the citizens and leadership in Prince William County free to determine our own future.

My name is Sally Chandler and I am a resident of Prince William County and a retired teacher.   I am opposed to House Bills 1986 and 1974.  When I found out that Sen Petersen wanted to ban data centers within one mile of historically significant sites, I knew that his bill was targeting the proposed data center on Pageland Lane which has gone through and passed rigorous studies  and stringent guidelines by our Board of Supervisors.  I wondered why the senator was taking such an interest in Prince Williams proposed data center and it’s proximity to a historical site.  I found his reason in an ABC news article. And I quote “of course the data centers, by and large, are built for bitcoin mining. It's effectively a site where they're running these bitcoin mines and generating whatever that is.” And from the same story “I look around and the crypto industry is not the most stable in the world, and yet, we're making all these investments and tearing up farm land.”   And yet Senator Petersen who has clearly not done his homework wants to propose a house bill on something he knows nothing about.  Mr.Peterson has no business in the decision making process of PWCBOS.  Please do not support HB 1986 and HB 1974. Thank you.

I’m opposed to HB 1974 submitted by Delegate Roem. As a resident of Prince William County, I am familiar with the county’s decision concerning the property to be included in the PWC Digital Gateway, and I believe it is sound. The development plan provides substantial buffers and other items that protect the Battlefield park and the Heritage Hunt development adjacent to Pageland Farm. Additionally, this is a land use issue that lays squarely within the realm of the county government; it should not be usurped by the State. Please vote no to HB 1974.

After attending all of our Board of Supervisors public meetings on the Prince William Digital Gateway project, I trust my Board’s decision. They’ve addressed all aspects of environmental impact. A requirement for stormwater is that peak flow runoff be reduced to what it was 200 years ago when the entire area was forested. This exceeds current requirements. They’ve also instituted measures to work with the Water Authority on reducing contaminants. Any electrical substations visible from the Manassas National Battlefield Park or surrounding major roadways must use innovative designs to enhance screening. The data center submitted site plans that go even further, ensuring their substations will NOT be visible from the Park. Data center buildings must keep their heights below the site line of the Park. They set the height limitations by conducting balloon tests to determine at what height someone standing at the edge of the Park could see them. Another thing the opponents haven’t revealed to Delegate Roem is that Park officials acknowledge that the expansion of Pageland lane into four lanes will allow them to shut off the Park's through road to commuter traffic. It will not take any land from the Park, and the developers will bear the cost. The developers will also pay for the data center’s water and sewage infrastructure. In addition, they will provide 800 acres for parks, trails, and interpretive markers, again at no cost to the taxpayers. With the current zoning restrictions of 10 acres, the only alternative is to sell 10-acre lots with wells and septic systems that would be far more detrimental to water quality than data centers. We elected our Board to make local decisions, not the State. So why should the State interfere with local land use? What will they interfere with next? Please vote NO to SB1078. It will adversely affect not only Prince William County, but also every county in Virginia.

I strongly oppose this bill. This bill is allowing the State Legislature to usurp local governments' rights and ability to govern in their own localities.

This bill is Bad for All of Virginia. Our State Legislatures have no business inserting themselves into local land use decisions? I'm pretty sure your own districts would not support this. This is a precedent setting and dangerously slippery slope for everyone in the Commonwealth. We elected our own officials to make these decisions, and removing their ability to do so reeks of paternalism and sends a message that they cannot be trusted to do what is right for their own localities. Also consider that Del. Roem's overreaching extensive 1 mile designation is much more than 1 mile since it will extend one mile in ALL directions. Here's my thoughts : The 3500 home retirement community of Heritage Hunt which is not on Pageland Lane but borders the Snyder property, contains a small group of militant activists, most of whom will vote for Del. Roem in the upcoming election for Senate because she has vowed to kill the Prince William Digital Gateway. And all that media attention will help. This group has garnered the support of Special Interest Groups, PEC and other environmental and conservation groups (that have spent the last 30 years protecting Fauquier County by controlling opportunity in PWC) by spreading untruths, making wild and unsubstantiated claims and doomsday scenarios to inflame and incite. What does Heritage Hunt really want? Protection for themselves. If they really cared about the Parks, they would have opposed the massive transmission corridor in 2008, 2500 space commuter parking lot, the Sheetz under construction and 3 million square foot Data Center Gainesville Crossing. All of these projects are adjacent to Heritage Hunt, Conway Forest, MNBP and Pageland Lane. They claim they will see and hear the data centers, but if anyone of them has actually taken the time to review the plans, they will see that this is not the case. Just like Del.Roem, they've made up their minds and don't want to hear the facts. The PWDG has created plans that set new and highest standards for data centers everywhere in their historical, viewshed, buffers, and environmental protection. Pageland Farm has 40 acres of dense forest separating the entirety of Heritage Hunt from the data centers who have agreed to leave the forest intact and undisturbed and available as a trail network for the public. My farm has approx.. 40 acres bordering the park as open space at the request of the MNBP . We have asked to meet with the Heritage Hunt community since the inception of the plan, and they have refused all overtures. None of our state elected officials have met with us to do their due diligence and instead our jumping on the media bandwagon for publicity and votes. We have met several times with the MNBP and are working collegially with them to make the PWDG a win win for all of us.

I am writing to encourage your support for HB 1974, which your Committee will consider on Tuesday morning. This common sense legislation shall ensure: • The construction and reconstruction, of any underground, in whole or in part, electrical transmission lines of at least 69 kilovolts along a highway right-of-way under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation in Planning District 8 where a data center proposal is under construction in an area located within a half mile of a National Battlefield Park and within one mile of a state forest is in the public interest. Responsible routing and installation of electrical transmission lines is essential to maintain historic viewsheds and ensure the respect, preservation and enjoyment of our natural and historic assets for future generations. Thank you.

Comments Document

The National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) supports HB 2116 (Hudson), which restricts the use of credit reports for employment purposes. This bill protects workers from an unfair and harmful practice , ie., using credit reports to deny workers jobs or promotions, or even terminate them. This practice threatens the ability of workers to re-enter or remain in the workforce as they struggle back to normal in the wake of a personal crisis or a broader economic disruption

The League of Women Voters of Virginia supports HB 2148. Not being informed about law(s) should not be a barrier for a Virginian who would otherwise seek justice for experiencing unlawful discrimination in the workplace. We should strive to equip all Virginians with knowledge about their rights so that they are able to fully utilize the protections that have been granted to them. No one should have to endure a toxic work environment, or have to resign from their position, therefore subjecting themselves to financial uncertainty, because they are being subjected to illegal behavior in the form of discrimination. I urge you to support HB 2148.

Birth In Color RVA is a doula collective with over 100 doulas around the Commonwealth. We support patients going throughout pregnancy, during the pre- and post- partum period and birth. 40% of US women have faced gender-related discrimination in their careers. 42% of US employees confirm they have faced or witnessed workplace racism and sexism. Our clients are no different, and each of our doulas has heard stories about discrimination in the workplace experienced by a client at some point in their work, including retaliation for trying to address the problems. As an organization committed to the health and welfare of our patients and our doulas, we know how devastating workplace discrimination can be. We strongly support both bills, HB 1895 and HB 2148 - as important steps towards ensuring that those who face workplace discrimination know their rights and are able to exercise them. We thank the patrons, Delegate Filler-Corn and Delegate Guzman for bringing these important pieces of legislation and hope that they are met with the support they deserve from the members of this Committee. Thank you for your consideration, Galina Varchena, Birth In Color RVA.

AAUW strongly advocates for new laws and policies to battle the problem of workplace harassment and discrimination based on gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity or religion. Workplace sexual and other harassment threatens women’s mental health and physical safety, erodes women’s short- and long-term economic security, and contributes to the leadership gap. Alhough Title VII protects women in the workplace, one study published in the Harvard business Review found that 34% of female employees say they have been sexually harassed by a colleague. Although federal law appears comprehensive and robust, employees who are harassed or experience inequity at work are often unable to access justice. Barriers include: business size (small businesses are exempt); exclusion of various categories of workers, e.g., contractors, interns, from coverage; limited time frame for bringing federal charges; onerous standards of proof; reduced liability; and nondisclosure agreements and mandatory arbitration. • HB1895 (Del. Eileen Filler-Corn), The Silenced No More Act, would limit the abusive use of Nondisclosure Agreements and Nondisparagement agreements (NDAs) to silence employees from speaking up about discrimination, including harassment, retaliation, sexual assault, wage and hour violations, and waste, fraud, or abuse. • HB2148 (Del. Elizabeth Guzman) , Know Your Rights requires employers to inform workers of their rights to file a charge of discrimination with the U.S. EEOC or the Virginia Office of the Attorney General within 300 days after an alleged unlawful discriminatory practice occurred. The bill requires an employer to provide this information as part of any new employee training provided at the commencement of employment or anti-discrimination training provided to an employee and when an employee makes a complaint. These two bills will be important steps in protecting Virginia workers.

Comments Document

Cornerstones strongly supports H.B.2283, introduced by Delegate Shin. This commonsense bill provides vital protection for vulnerable individuals and families against losing essential public utilities during a state of emergency. It allows residents to keep heat or air conditioning in their homes during extreme weather emergencies, regardless of their ability to pay. Each year, Cornerstones provides support and advocacy for over 16,000 individuals and families in need. Our services include affordable rental housing, financial assistance for rent and utilities, winter hypothermia prevention and summer cooling centers. We know well that loss of utilities during a crisis can be life-threatening. The pandemic highlighted the vulnerability of too many members of our community when a crisis hit – and fell hardest on seniors, people with disabilities, and low-income working families. We are proud of the Commonwealth’s extraordinary response to support residents, businesses, institutions and communities during the pandemic. Our state level leaders understood the crisis, and enabled organizations like ours to offer a safety net. After any crisis, it is important to review lessons learned in order to plan ahead and mitigate future public health impacts. H.B.2283 does just that by offering a commonsense bill that would prevent shut-offs in the event of a sustained public emergency declared by our Governor. Please be proactive in strengthening our emergency planning. This will help prevent unnecessary burden on emergency responders so that the resources of communities and the Commonwealth remain focused on the larger emergency.

I respectfully ask House Commerce and Energy Subcommittee #1 to support HB 2283. Virginia currently has among the weakest utility disconnection protections for customers of any state in the south and southeast, even during times of crisis or extreme weather events. As a person of faith, it is important to me that our Commonwealth ensure resilience for families financially burdened by utility bills in times of crisis. Establishing utility shut-off protections for our neighbors at higher risk of being affected by extreme weather ensures life-saving access to those who need gas, electric, and water services the most. Thank you!

We support the bill which suspends electric and gas utilities from disconnecting service to a residential customer for nonpayment of bills or fees when the forecasted temperature low is at or below 32 degrees Fahrenheit and suspends electric utilities from disconnecting any such customer from service when the forecasted temperature high is at or above 95 degrees. We work with many poor people in Arlington that need this help. Thank you, Jaydee Hanson

We represent Small business owners and are a Chamber of Commerce that from northern Virginia and small retailers, including gas station owners. We believe it’s important to level the playing field between retailers and their suppliers. Currently, the way the bill is written, wholesalers can charge, exorbitant rents, increase prices on gasoline, and not engage in fair market practices. we are requesting that wholesalers be treated as franchisers . Small business owners be thrown out of there establishments with 30 day notice. The passage of this bill will ensure lower gas prices for consumers. In addition, small wholesalers will not be impacted by this legislation.

Comments Document

We ask that you oppose House Bill 2363 and any efforts to impose additional regulations on an industry that is already highly regulated, fragmented, and subject to the forces of a very competitive marketplace. Supplying fuel is highly competitive and is not dominated by any one company in the Commonwealth or across the country, where there are approximately 3,000 suppliers. Independent fuel suppliers like GPM Investments are not refiners. Suppliers lower the barrier to entry into a growing and attractive industry for lessee-dealers, the entrepreneurial operators who lease gas stations and/or convenience stores and purchase motor fuel from suppliers. HB 2363 will fundamentally alter the relationship between suppliers and lessee-dealers. Suppliers who offer lessee-dealers an advantageous entry into the growing convenience store market will not want to take on the risks this legislation creates. This will harm businesses and consumers across the Commonwealth. Lessee-dealers increase competition for Virginians who benefit from a robust marketplace for fuel. Convenience stores have always been an attractive business for entrepreneurs. In fact, single-store operators grew by 1,087 stores in 2022, to a total of 90,423 stores, or 60.2 percent of all U.S. convenience stores. Fuel suppliers are essential to ensure smaller operators have a dependable supply of motor fuel products at a competitive price. Lessee-dealers lack the scale necessary to negotiate directly with refiners and major oil companies, and major oil companies do not contract with companies that do not have a minimum number of stores and/or gallonage. Non-refiner suppliers, like GPM, also bear otherwise onerous capital requirements that might otherwise create high barriers to entry to the industry, often paying to modernize vital equipment like fuel pumps and for the upkeep of fuel storage, which is highly regulated and must be compliant with local, state, and federal laws and regulations. We believe GPM offers lessee-dealers flexible lease terms to help them establish themselves in the industry. These leases are generally for periods of up to 10 years, with an option or series of renewal options. These lease terms are similar to many others across a variety of businesses. They are negotiated, transparent, and have set timeframes. Lessee-dealers are thus given ample time to plan should a lease not be renewed, an instance in which they are given ample warning according to contracted terms. This is no different than many other retail businesses. Lessee-dealers are also given options to control how they earn money from fuel sales in this highly competitive marketplace. Many lessee-dealers choose a consignment supply relationship where a supplier owns, bears the carrying costs and prices the fuel to the retail consumer, and split the profit with the dealer at a pre-negotiated rate. In that model, the lessee-dealer benefits from being less capital constrained, because they do not need to pay for fuel inventory in the tanks, and both parties benefit from pricing fuel competitively. Other lessee-dealers choose to purchase and own their fuel inventory and sell the fuel to the retail consumer at a price they choose. The costs to these dealers are transparent. It is important to note that every supplier is already restricted by law from discussing retail pricing with its dealers. For these reasons we ask that you oppose HB 2363.