The City of Portsmouth, VA strongly support Senate Bills 48, 49, and 595. These are good public policy measures, and we ask that you please support their passage. Thank you.

The City of Portsmouth, VA strongly support Senate Bills 48, 49, and 595. These are good public policy measures, and we ask that you please support their passage. Thank you.

The City of Portsmouth strongly supports this bill. We sincerely thank Senator Lucas (SB106) and Delegate Hayes (HB 1208) for their assistance with this most important matter. We further thank this august Body for their support and passage of this bill.

SB121 (Subramanyam) Trees; conservation during land development process in certain localities. This Legislation Would: Provide additional flexibility in how localities with tree conservation ordinances can use funds. Provide increased incentives to preserve healthy mature trees onsite. Reasons to SUPPORT SB121 Virginia continues to lose tree canopy–limiting the Commonwealth’s ability to improve water quality, reduce flooding and mitigate the impact of climate change. Virginia is far behind in meeting its urban tree canopy goals under the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement. SB595 (Aird/Bagby) Comprehensive plan; healthy communities strategy. This legislation would: Allow localities to adopt healthy community strategies as part of future comprehensive plans. This would allow for the consideration of many environmental health impacts, identifying large pollution sources, promoting clean air and water, preventing flooding and urban heat exposure. Reasons to SUPPORT SB 595: This bill would allow local governments to plan around community health and increase public engagement in the comprehensive planning process. Low income qualified households often are situated in environmentally unhealthy areas. This bill would provide those communities with opportunities for increased protections from environmental and health hazards.

The Virginia Airport Operators Council (VAOC) Board of Directors authorized this position paper on SB354 on behalf of its membership, comprised of representatives from Virginia’s 66 public-use airports. BACKGROUND: The VAOC believes that an airport serves its community best when it operates as a responsible community partner. Since most public airports in Virginia are either owned by cities and counties (i.e., “airport sponsors”), or have representation by city or county officials on an advisory board or commission that oversees the airport, it is in every locality’s best interest to ensure its comprehensive planning, zoning, and land use matters are a collaborative process that involve airport personnel, real estate professionals, developers, and government officials. By ensuring that key stakeholders are represented, a community can make informed decisions about land-use decisions that affect its constituents and the capability of its local aviation infrastructure. We are pleased that Virginia code already acknowledges the unique protections that airports require by its mandate for safety zoning: “Every locality (i) in whose jurisdiction a licensed airport or United States government or military air facility is located or (ii) over whose jurisdiction the approach slopes and other safety zones of a licensed airport, including United States government or military air facility extend shall, by ordinance, provide for the regulation of the height of structures and natural growth for the purpose of protecting the safety of air navigation and the public investment in air navigation facilities.” (ref: § 15.2-2294. Airport safety zoning). Furthermore, consideration of surrounding land use compatibility is a requirement for airport sponsors that receive federal assistance under Grant Assurance #21, Compatible Land Use: “It will take appropriate action, to the extent reasonable, including the adoption of zoning laws, to restrict the use of land adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the airport to activities and purposes compatible with normal airport operations, including landing and takeoff of aircraft…” POSITION: The VAOC is concerned that the language of SB354 appears to restrict a locality’s ability to establish or maintain mandatory real estate disclosures - an industry best practice - to inform citizens about airport noise, environmental impacts, or proximity to aircraft flight paths. Our position is that any legislation that addresses mandatory real estate disclosures should not interfere with a locality’s legal authority to prescribe measures that responsibly inform citizens about airport operations, promote compatible land use, and achieve compliance with federal Grant Assurance #21. Furthermore, we support the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority’s (MWAA) proposed amendment to this legislation.

“Please support the MWAA amendment to SB354” Dulles International Airport is a regional economic engine and is responsible for over 28,000 jobs in and around the airport complex with unrestricted 24-hour operations. The Committee for Dulles has concerns with the impact of SB354 as written and strongly encourage including the proposed MWAA amendment to protect the airport and future residents. Airport noise changes with active runways and aircraft which may not be active when prospective residents view properties and make decisions. Future residents deserve appropriate notifications regarding potential airport noise levels. Transparency is good business, good governance and in the best interest of the Dulles Region. Thank you, Scott York Executive Director - Committee for Dulles scott.york@committeefordulles.com (The Committee for Dulles was established in 1966 and has been a cornerstone in establishing great community relations with Dulles International Airport)

The Virginia Airport Operators Council (VAOC) Board of Directors authorized this position paper on SB354 and HB467 on behalf of its membership, comprised of representatives from Virginia’s 66 public-use airports. BACKGROUND: The VAOC believes that an airport serves its community best when it operates as a responsible community partner. Since most public airports in Virginia are either owned by cities and counties (i.e., “airport sponsors”), or have representation by city or county officials on an advisory board or commission that oversees the airport, it is in every locality’s best interest to ensure its comprehensive planning, zoning, and land use matters are a collaborative process that involve airport personnel, real estate professionals, developers, and government officials. By ensuring that key stakeholders are represented, a community can make informed decisions about land-use decisions that affect its constituents and the capability of its local aviation infrastructure. We are pleased that Virginia code already acknowledges the unique protections that airports require by its mandate for safety zoning: “Every locality (i) in whose jurisdiction a licensed airport or United States government or military air facility is located or (ii) over whose jurisdiction the approach slopes and other safety zones of a licensed airport, including United States government or military air facility extend shall, by ordinance, provide for the regulation of the height of structures and natural growth for the purpose of protecting the safety of air navigation and the public investment in air navigation facilities.” (ref: § 15.2-2294. Airport safety zoning). Furthermore, consideration of surrounding land use compatibility is a requirement for airport sponsors that receive federal assistance under Grant Assurance #21, Compatible Land Use: “It will take appropriate action, to the extent reasonable, including the adoption of zoning laws, to restrict the use of land adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the airport to activities and purposes compatible with normal airport operations, including landing and takeoff of aircraft…” POSITION: The VAOC is concerned that the language of HB467 and SB354 appears to restrict a locality’s ability to establish or maintain mandatory real estate disclosures - an industry best practice - to inform citizens about airport noise, environmental impacts, or proximity to aircraft flight paths. Our position is that any legislation that addresses mandatory real estate disclosures should not interfere with a locality’s legal authority to prescribe measures that responsibly inform citizens about airport operations, promote compatible land use, and achieve compliance with federal Grant Assurance #21. Furthermore, we support the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority’s (MWAA) proposed amendment to this legislation.

SB121 (Subramanyam) Trees; conservation during land development process in certain localities. This Legislation Would: Provide additional flexibility in how localities with tree conservation ordinances can use funds. Provide increased incentives to preserve healthy mature trees onsite. Reasons to SUPPORT SB121 Virginia continues to lose tree canopy–limiting the Commonwealth’s ability to improve water quality, reduce flooding and mitigate the impact of climate change. Virginia is far behind in meeting its urban tree canopy goals under the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement. SB595 (Aird/Bagby) Comprehensive plan; healthy communities strategy. This legislation would: Allow localities to adopt healthy community strategies as part of future comprehensive plans. This would allow for the consideration of many environmental health impacts, identifying large pollution sources, promoting clean air and water, preventing flooding and urban heat exposure. Reasons to SUPPORT SB 595: This bill would allow local governments to plan around community health and increase public engagement in the comprehensive planning process. Low income qualified households often are situated in environmentally unhealthy areas. This bill would provide those communities with opportunities for increased protections from environmental and health hazards.

The City of Portsmouth, VA strongly support Senate Bills 48, 49, and 595. These are good public policy measures, and we ask that you please support their passage. Thank you.

LOCAL issues, such as land usage, solar sites, and other concerns that DIRECTLY affects the LOCAL residents, LOCAL tax payers, and the LOCAL community, must remain at the LOCAL level. One area of the state, such as the densely, over populated, concrete covered northern Virginia does NOT have the right to tell the tax paying residents of rural counties / communities how to use their lands - especially when the intent of Northern Va. politicians is to destroy the open, conservation districts located in our rural counties/communities for their benefit. THEREFORE, SB 679 must be defeated and the issue of land usage MUST remain at the LOCAL level because LOCAL residents know what is best for their LOCAL communities. PLEASE defeat SB 679 and prevent it from moving forward. .

The City of Portsmouth, VA strongly supports the proposed legislation as it will provide for an increase to the allowable renewal periods for the City of Portsmouth's two existing Enterprise Zones. This will provide for an extension of available state and local economic incentive programs and will encourage business development and private investment within the City of Portsmouth.