I signed up to speak and received confirmation, but no link this morning. I'm a good-government advocate from Petersburg and strongly support this bill. Petersburg STILL needs this early warning system. Our city leadership believes that having accumulated a healthy cash balance means AAA fiscal management. Rather, we have 10 recurring material weakness findings in our latest ACFR, FY 2022 -- we're late (as usual) for FY 2023 submission. 5 of those material weakness in internal controls findings have recurred for 7 years. The city lacks the in-house ability to prepare up-to-date financial reconciliations -- so we are flying blind, until our paid accounting and auditing consultants untangle it for us. When I was budget director at VDH and VITA, material weaknesses, particularly recurring ones, were a real big no-no. Localities need to have the same healthy fear of adverse ACFR findings.

Good Morning Everyone, My name is Johnny Partin, and I am the Mayor for the City of Hopewell. Today I am speaking as 1 of 2 members on our city council that support this legislation. Our city can trace its problems back to approximately 2015. Had legislation like this been passed and in place back then, our present situation in the city would have been prevented. These issues and problems would have been addressed and fixed back in 2017 before I even got elected to city council. But we are here today addressing local governments experiencing fiscal distress. You all are in a great position to prevent what is currently happening in Hopewell from other localities across the Commonwealth. You all are in a great position to protect the financial health of all localities and improve the Commonwealth's, and lastly you are in a great position to protect our citizens and improve their quality of life. I urge you all to support this bill. You may not have a community in your district that is in fiscal distress today, but you may one day. No community is immune from fiscal distress. And wouldn't it be great to have a safeguard like this legislation in place to protect the citizens and get the community the help it needs. Thank you Johnny Partin

I am submitting the following comments on the proposed HB655. Through my 25+ years in closely following Hopewell government, coupled with my 45 years in Banking, and my recent four years on Hopewell City Council, I would like to say that while I am not totally opposed to this bill, I believe that the State's early intervention to help localities is much more critical than takeover should ever be. Coming in and having to take over a locality should not be the state's agenda unless absolutely necessary and then done so working with the locality to build for a sustainable future. The recognition a locality has an issue must start in the process much earlier to help review and assist that locality. The audit process is in place for that very reason and the state is not utilizing it to the ability I believe they should. As a Banker, I must adhere to strict audits from both the Federal and State levels, or risk penalties. The safety of taxpayer's dollars is paramount. Banks are audited on many aspects and are required to pass those audits. Why would the state allow even one annual audit to go past due without questions or one financial portion of an APA audit to fail without having a presence in the locality to follow up and work with the locality? Approximately, five to six years ago, our elected Treasurer at the time, failed APA audits. I called the APA Director myself to ask what was being done with regards to our failed audits and her response was that the APA did not have the schedule nor the staff to come back in to follow up. When localities transact with millions of local taxpayers' dollars and they cannot pass APA audits, and APA does not step in for discovery at that time because of staff and scheduling shortages, that makes NO sense and is wrong. Why do the audits? This is exactly where some of the initial emphasis needs to be placed. Audits, both by APA and outside firms, are only as good as the state's follow up on the audit's content and findings allows them to be! Hopewell is the poster child of how a new accounting system implemented poorly, can negatively impact everything and when of audits are not completed for years! Doesn't mean takeover should be immanent. The second issue I have is allowing elected Treasurers to have no knowledge and experience criteria required for election. I spoke with both Deputy Finance Director John Markowitz and Delegate Coyner about this issue last year. I do not know that either have any plans to suggest to the state that these criteria might be helpful to our localities, so I will. I do not understand why the State would allow anyone to be elected to a local Treasurer position with no knowledge of accounting or finance! Treasurers are independent of the locality authority as an elected official. Someone handling millions of dollars of taxpayer's money should have at least a basic knowledge of accounting or municipal accounting. As a citizen of Virginia, that is what I want. Would you let a Commonwealth's Attorney be elected without a law degree? Knowledge and experience is important for local financial health. It is time to focus attention to the issues to help localities early in the process and not threaten a takeover which ultimately benefits no one. Set up standards for audits and the process. Review and assist localities as soon as they fail an audit or get behind. Do not wait for years to pass.

Richmond has become one of the most unaffordable states in the country to rent, only state action can keep rents down.

I support this bill because of the soaring prices for rent. Please vote YES!

Vote YES on SB366/HB721! This bill would tackle soaring rent prices in Virginia by allowing localities to adopt anti-rent gouging provisions, stating that any rent increases would be based upon the CPI or 7% (whichever is less); exemptions can be made. The locality would also be allowed to establish civil penalties for non-compliance. -Lakevia Randolph Burrell

In my work at Peninsula Agency on Aging, I often hear from older adults who are struggling to pay rent on their fixed incomes, only to be faced with a massive rent hike as housing costs go up across the region. Rent gouging is leading to housing insecurity and homelessness for far too many already-vulnerable citizens across our state. SB366/HB721 puts in place reasonable limits that protect renters. As a voter, a person of faith, and a resident invested in my community, I support this bill, and I ask that you vote yes on this bill when it comes before you. Thank you.

Vote YES on SB366! This bill would tackle soaring rent prices in Virginia by allowing localities to adopt anti-rent gouging provisions, stating that any rent increases would be based upon the CPI or 7% (whichever is less); exemptions can be made. The locality would also be allowed to establish civil penalties for non-compliance. -Vivian Daniels

Dear Members of the General Assembly, I know you are aware of the plight of Virginians who constantly deal with the soaring cost of housing in the Commonwealth. All one must do is listen to the local news to realize the seriousness of the problems surrounding affordable housing, especially if one is in a low economic status. SB 366/HB721 provides the necessary steps to ensure rent stabilization. It is imperative for localities to adopt anti-rent gouging provisions. Likewise, localities should also be allowed to establish civil penalties for non-compliance, at their discretion. For those claiming the status of Evangelical (Black or White), remember these admonishments as this is not about the separation of Church and State but is how the Christian is to demonstrate the love and loyalty to YAHWEH. Proverbs 19:17 says, “Whoever is kind to the poor lends to the LORD, and He will reward them for what they have done.” Deuteronomy 15:11 says “For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore, I command you, 'You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land. Kind Regards, Reverend Carol A. Graham-Lee (CMSgt, USAF, retired)

Hello, my name is Carlos Hunter and I live in Hampton Virginia, 91st district. I thank you for allowing me to discuss Senate Bill 366/HB721 with you. I am writing to express my strong support for SB 366/HB721, which aims to tackle the issue of rent gouging in Virginia. I am deeply concerned about the rising rent prices in our state, this bill presents a crucial opportunity to protect tenants and ensure affordable housing for all. SB 366/HB721 proposes empowering localities to adopt anti-rent gouging provisions, which would establish reasonable limits on rent increases. Specifically, the bill suggests tying rent increases to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) or a maximum of 7%, whichever is less. I believe this approach not only safeguards tenants from excessive rent hikes but also provides landlords with a fair and predictable framework for managing their properties. Furthermore, SB 366/HB721 allows localities to establish civil penalties for non-compliance, ensuring accountability and enforcement of these provisions. By providing tools for local governments to address rent gouging, this bill promotes stability in our housing market and fosters healthier communities. Housing is a fundamental human right, and it is imperative that we take proactive measures to address the affordability crisis facing many Virginians. SB 366/HB721 represents a significant step towards achieving this goal by striking a balance between the interests of tenants and landlords. I urge you to support SB 366/HB721 and to advocate for its passage in the legislature. Your commitment to addressing rent gouging will not only benefit countless individuals and families struggling to afford housing but also contribute to building a more equitable and prosperous future for our state. Thank you for your attention to this critical issue. Please vote yes to SB 366/HB721 and to work together to ensure that all Virginians have access to safe, stable, and affordable housing. Respectfully, Carlos Hunter USN Retired

In a time of slow growth and an uncertain political future, this bill would tackle soaring rent prices in Virginia by allowing localities to adopt anti-rent gouging provisions, stating that any rent increases would be based upon the CPI or 7% (whichever is less); exemptions can be made. The locality would also be allowed to establish civil penalties for non-compliance. Many Virginia families have yet to recover from Covid pandemic and yet are faced with higher cost of living in all areas. They can try to economize on food but living quarters are a different matter. Being unable to find or afford housing can break a family. I urge support of this bill. Eileen Engel

Hello!My name is Natela and I been struggling for so long finding affordable housing in Fairfax County,Virginia.I am 58 years old female who have a very low income.I contacted more then 500 places trying to find one bedroom apartment or private basement and all this places asking for income 3-3.5 times bigger then cost of apartment.Making any person who is trying to rent one bedroom apartment in Fairfax county need to make around 5-6000 dollars per month.How many percent of people having this high salary jobs?I DON’T. I’m making now 12.00 dollars per hour.This amount of money disqualified me from any housing I applied.My question to HUD and all other housing authorities WHAT ARE YOU SUGGESTING PEOPLE WITH LOW INCOME??????? WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO SURVIVE LIVING IN FAIRFAX AREA?HOUSING PRICES IS ASTRONOMICAL!GROCERY PRICES IS ASTRONOMICAL! ALL AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAMS ARE CLOSED.ALL WAITING LISTS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING CLOSED TO. I BET YOU ALL JUST DON’T CARE ABOUT US!

Comments Document

We have all heard the definition of insanity is “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” HB 721 is a perfect example of that definition! Rent control policies across the country have proven to be an absolute failure. No jurisdiction that has adopted rent control policies has succeeded in keeping housing affordable. Further, not a single city which implemented rent control has seen an increase in housing availability or an increase in the quality of housing. It has not worked in Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York or St. Paul, MN. One only needs to do a quick google search of "rent control and St. Paul" to see how devastating rent control has been to the construction of more rental housing in that city. According to HUD’s count (https://socds.huduser.gov/permits/), St. Paul’s apartment construction permits fell 48% after rent control passed in 2021, and that 48% is only after the city went back and revised their ordinance to exempt new construction for 20 years. We can also look at suburban Maryland to see exactly what will happen to VA if rent control is allowed to pass. Rental housing investment in Prince George’s County has ground to a halt in the past year in response to the County’s temporary rent control law and uncertainty over the County Council’s consideration of a permanent ordinance. In Montgomery County, longtime investors have sounded the alarm about the dangers of the recently passed rent control ordinance, arguing it will hamstring the County’s ability to expand its tax base and attract new businesses. Lastly, Takoma Park has had rent control in place since 1981. According to a city-commissioned report published in 2017, no new multifamily rental properties have been constructed since rent control passed. In summary: • Has rent control in any city made housing more affordable? NO! • Has rent control in any city made housing more available? NO! • Has rent control in any city lead to better quality housing? NO! Let’s avoid repeating the mistakes of Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York, St. Paul and suburban Maryland. Vote NO on HB 721! (Attachment is a graph from HUD data of building permits in St. Paul illustrating what happened after Rent Control passed in St. Paul.)

Comments Document

The attached PDF is being submitted by African Communities Together in support of the passage of H.B. 721. All across the nation, renters have made it clear: the rent is too high and Virginia is unfortunately no exception. Twenty-two percent of Virginia renters fall within income ranges below 30% AMI and can therefore only afford to pay $855/month in rent without becoming housing cost burdened. Fair market rate one bedroom apartments in Virginia cost on average $1,203/month, putting our most vulnerable renters at a deficit of $348 each month. That’s $348 that could be spent on food, clothing, medical expenses, and other necessities. To put this into further context, the hourly wage needed to afford the average one bedroom apartment in Virginia is $23.13. Here is a list of a few workers who make less than that: service workers, teaching assistants, nursing assistants, security guards, maintenance workers, accounting clerks, home health aides. The list goes on and we must do something now to protect all these vital members of our community who are in constant threat of displacement because they can no longer afford to live here. House Bill 721 addresses these issues by giving localities the power to implement rent control and prevent the displacement of working class families from the communities they have made home. Please note, the bill does not force localities to pass rent control ordinances, but simply gives them the option to do so when in the best interest of their residents. Some opponents to the bill argue that rent control negatively affects housing supply. However, studies show that in jurisdictions where rent control has been implemented, there has been no statistically relevant effect on supply. Conversely, lack of rent control has also not been shown to increase housing supply. Additionally, economists have pointed to the economic benefits of rent control, as it prevents evictions and homelessness thereby reducing government spending on related systems. We must also acknowledge that rent control is not a new concept, nor is it one we should shy away from. Homeowners have their own version of rent control through fixed 30-year mortgages, and we encourage and applaud homeownership yet ignore the needs of renters who wish to have a similar level of financial security. Housing is a human right, and it is time that our laws reflect that, which is why I sincerely hope you will join us in supporting the passage of HB721. Thank you for your consideration.

HB721 is a strong step in the right direction to address the housing crisis in Virginia. To be clear, the affordability of housing in Virginia is a major facet of this complicated crisis, and protecting Virginia tenants from the practice of rent-gouging is critical to maintaining the state's affordable housing stock. In the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commissions 2020 review of Affordable Housing in Virginia it was found that in 2019 (Pre-COVID-19) 29% of Virginia households were housing cost-burdened (meaning they spent at least 30% of their income on housing expenses) with half of cost-burdened Virginians spending 50% of their income on housing. According to the JLARC review, "approximately 44 percent of renting households are cost burdened compared with 21 percent of owning households." These JLARC findings should emphasize how there is an urgent need to address how almost ONE THIRD of Virginians have financial stress imposed upon themselves in order to keep a roof over their heads. Individuals and families are regularly forced to make painful prioritizations of one basic need over the other (such as food over medication) because their rent costs 50% of their income. Despite this growing crisis, there are Property Management Companies and Private Landlords - a growing number of which are LLCs, private equity firms, and aggregators from out-of-state - that seek to exploit the times by extracting larger and larger quantities of rent from Virginians who are already struggling to survive in the midst of this housing crisis. Hopefully the testimony from today will have highlighted some of the ways in which people's lives can be derailed by exploitative corporate tactics, like rent-gouging. Virginia tenants who come into conflict with these entities over issues like rent-gouging are frequently bullied into either submission or eviction purely because of the amount of legal resources, time, and bodies that are available to these corporations, and typically unavailable to tenants especially those who are low-income. HB721 is vital for the preservation of Virginia's affordable housing stock in that it will preserve existing affordable rental rates and critically prevent and punish corporations that try to exploit the most vulnerable Virginians via rent-gouging. In the midst of this state-wide housing crisis I implore you, our elected leaders, to vote for and advocate strongly in favor of HB721 which will protect Virginia tenants right to affordable housing. If you are not convinced, I highly recommend you to revisit the testimony of your constituents and other documented cases of rent-gouging. Truly it is a vile business tactic that only services the greed of out-of-state corporations, and devastates the lives of your neighbors.

ChamberRVA opposes HB 721. Limiting rent increases to escalation in the Consumer Price Increase is far too tight a limitation. and does not account for the many, varied, individual circumstances of a landlord and tenant. At this low rate of inflation, this really is not an anti-gouging provision that deals with very large rent increases; it's rent control. In other areas of the country, such rent control has had the adverse impact of decreasing the availability of housing. Given the shortage of affordable housing, this is not a result Virginia should use.

The Goldwater Institute engages on housing and property rights issues nationwide. HB721 and similar rent control measures fail to solve the underlying supply issues facing our housing market and can even raise market prices in some scenarios. Many economists and policy analysts have studied rent control policies, and the verdict is clear: these policies disincentivize development of new housing supply and incentivize the conversion of rental units into owner occupied units, which exacerbates the true pricing problem this legislation purportedly hopes to solve. For more information on how rent control policies negatively impact housing markets, please consult the Goldwater Institute paper examining this issue at the following link: https://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/policy-report/rentcontrol/ Instead of misguided rent-control policies, the legislature should turn its focus to market-oriented solutions that expand housing supply. These solutions include: removing (or reforming) minimum lot size and density requirements; restoring the right of property owners to build duplexes and triplexes on single-family zoned lots; streamlining the permitting process and prohibiting the use of vague or ambiguous design requirements; legalizing ADU's on single-family residential lots; and allowing by-right multi-family development on commercially zoned land. This is certainly not an exhaustive list of policy tools at your disposal, but each of these policies would represent progress toward truly alleviating the housing crisis in Virginia. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Allow the free market to function as designed! Oppose bill HB 721. If there is evidence of rent gouging from a housing provider, then focus on that party, not the whole industry.

My name is Sue Frankel Streit and I teach English as a Second Language in Louisa. Over the last few years I have seen rent prices in both apartments and trailers climb steeply in the county, just as they have in much of the rest of the county. But on top of inflation, some landlords, especially trailer park absentee landlords, are engaging in price gouging. This is bad for the community, as hard-working people whose children attend our schools are being forced out to leave even the cheapest housing available. Please help us maintain affordable housing!

Complex owners excessively increase the rent from 2022, from $200 and more each year when renewing the contract, this figure is excessive, if this continues, housing in Virginia will no longer be insurable for our working class communities of color, we urgently need a rent stabilization in Virginia. Because the problems do not even ensure that we have optimally maintained homes, they only seek to increase their bank accounts regardless of the crisis that their tenants are going through. Please Vote YES HB721.

This bill, HB 721, imposes rent control, which economists say is bad. It punishes landlords for inflation, since the ordinances it would allow local governments to enact would limit rent increases to the LESSER of inflation, or 7 percent. So if the inflation rate is over 10 percent, the ordinance would not allow any increase over 7 percent, even if the landlord's costs are going up over 10 percent, and the tenants' wages are going up over 10 percent. That's unfair. Raising rent by the same amount as inflation to keep up with costs is not "gouging." Almost all economists think rent control is a bad idea: In a 1992 poll, 93% of them agreed that rent control reduces the quantity and quality of housing available. The Wall Street Journal said, "If there’s any consensus in economics, it’s that rent control achieves the opposite of its intended goal. It leads to housing shortages by discouraging new development and maintenance of existing properties." Reason Magazine says "rent control has a history of constricting the supply of rental housing and reducing housing quality.” Rent control reduces rental housing's value, shrinking the property tax revenue that funds schools and local governments. "Researchers at the University of Southern California said rent control hurt property values in St. Paul, Minn. by $1.6 billion," reported Market Watch. Similar past legislation to allow local rent control ordinances failed to advance not just in this House, but also in a committee of the Democratic-controlled Senate in 2023. A ranking progressive member of the committee, who is now its chair, worried “that the proposal could keep landlords from paying for maintenance needs or changes. ‘I’m sympathetic, I have a lot of constituents, including some who spoke about the high cost of housing, and I’ve got a lot rental housing in my district,’ Sen. Ebbin said…'But I’m wondering if we’re going to limit them to consumer price index, if you have a apartment complex, particularly a large one that needs some kind of major renovations or wants to upgrade, that you’re really kind of handcuffing them.'" This is a concern shared by both liberal and conservative economists. As the liberal Brookings Institution notes, “Rent control can also lead to decay of the rental housing stock; landlords may not invest in maintenance because they can’t recoup these investment by raising rents." When landlords can’t raise rents to pay for repairs and renovations, they may let buildings decay. After New York limited rent increases to pay for major capital improvements to 2 percent, landlords cut back on improvements. A survey of rent-stabilized landlords found that when rent increases were curbed, "Three out of four reported cutting back on essential building-wide repairs, such as a roof or boiler replacement, since the rent law passed. Nearly 90 percent said they had forgone kitchen or bathroom renovations. Just over half decided against revamping their buildings’ security systems to include cameras or video intercoms or adding storage lockers for deliveries to thwart porch pirates. Efficiency upgrades have also been pushed to the back burner. Over 40 percent of respondents said they would not replace lighting with LED fixtures that use 90 percent less energy — a budget saver for tenants. A quarter said they opted against installing fuel computers, which better regulate heat and hot water systems and reduce a building’s energy consumption"

I oppose this bill although the Town of Cape Charles, by ordinance, allows ADUs by-right. We want ADUs to allow for a greater diversification of affordable housing stock. Inserting language in the state code regarding 'no locality shall require compliance with any other requirements except as provided in this section' is a problem. First it is an erosion of local government control. Second it limits the locality to tailor ADU criteria without tailoring requirements to the locality (e.g., min lot size, requirement for separate trash receptacles, or any setback requirements regarding accessory structures to name a few). Allowing an ADU up to 1500 SF is like allowing another SF dwelling unit on the lot. Cape Charles limits ADUs not to exceed 45% of floor area of main building which typically results in a one bedroom sized housing unit. That is fine with us given our housing density. Eliminating dedicated parking is a show-stopper for us. With our historic district lots being 40'x140', we currently have a street parking problem given all our STRs. Our ordinance requires off-street parking. Erosion of a locality's control over ADUs should be enough to kill this bill.

NVBCL supports local authority for Virginia Beach, and all localities in Virginia, to regulate land use (zoning) and planning, including local determination for compatible uses of property in each district (e.g. residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural). So we advocate for the General Assembly to give Virginia Beach MORE authority, not less, to enact and enforce local ordinances for land use and planning. We are in direct communication with Citu Councilman Worth Remick, Commissioner of Revenue Phil Kellam, Senator Bill DeSteph, Delegate Anne Tata, and others about our concerns. We oppose this bill because it requires Virginia Beach to allow ADUs in every residential district, without permits or conditions, such as requiring adequate parking, water, or sewer capacity.

Comments Document

(Please see our attached letter for a more readable formatting of our exceptions to this bill.) The North Virginia Beach Civic League (NVBCL) requests the following modifications to resolve our exception to this bills: 1. Modify paragraph B to give localities authority to determine whether and where ADUs shall be a permitted use, whether to require a special use permit for an ADU, and how zoning ordinances, building codes, or other requirements shall apply to ADUs. 2. Modify paragraph C to allow localities to determine the amount of permit fees for ADUs, and to determine the zoning ordinances, building codes, and other requirements that will apply to ADUs. Localities need authority to regulate ADU as appropriate and applicable to the circumstances and needs of their communities. 3. In paragraph D.6, include “local zoning ordinances” in the list of requirements that localities may require. 4. Delete paragraph E.1. Conditions and capacities for parking vary across localities, and across neighborhoods within localities. Localities must retain authority to determine parking requirements that apply to ADUs. 5. Move paragraph E.2 to subsection D, removing it from the list of what localities shall NOT require, and adding it to the list of what localities MAY require. Localities must have authority to determine lot sizes and setbacks as applicable to conditions and needs of localities and neighborhoods. 6. Move paragraph E.4 to subsection D, removing it from the list of what localities shall NOT require, and adding it to the list of what localities MAY require. Localities must retain the authority to manage water, sewer, and septic capacity. Thank you

HB 900 -- STRONGLY OPPOSE any action by the Virginia General Assembly that would: • Compel localities to allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), or • Limit the ability of localities to regulate ADUs, • Override local authority for ADU zoning, land use or planning. I support the process in Virginia Beach that is currently underway to draft ADU ordinances, encourage the Virginia General Assembly to give localities MORE authority, not less, to draft and enforce ordinances regarding ADUs.

Comments Document

The North Virginia Beach Civic League (NVBCL), STRONGLY OPPOSES any action by the Virginia General Assembly that would: • Compel localities to allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), or • Limit the ability of localities to regulate ADUs, • Override local authority for ADU zoning, land use or planning. We support the process in Virginia Beach that is currently underway to draft ADU ordinances. We encourage the Virginia General Assembly to give localities MORE authority, not less, to draft and enforce ordinances regarding ADUs. Accordingly, NVBCL requests the following modifications to resolve our exceptions to these bills: 1. We request that paragraph B be modified to give localities full authority to determine whether and where ADUs shall be a permitted use, whether to require a special use permit for an ADU, and what zoning ordinances, building codes, or other requirements shall apply to ADUs. 2. We request that paragraph C be modified to allow localities to determine the amount of permit fees for ADUs, and to determine the zoning ordinances, building codes, and other requirements that will apply to ADUs. Localities need authority to regulate ADU as appropriate and applicable to the circumstances and needs of their communities. 3. We request that paragraph D.6 include “local zoning ordinances” in the list of requirements that localities may require. 4. We request that paragraph E.1 be deleted. Conditions and capacities for parking vary across localities, and across neighborhoods within localities. Localities must retain authority to determine parking requirements that apply to ADUs. 5. We request that paragraph E.2 be moved to subsection D, removing it from the list of what localities shall NOT require, and adding it to the list of what localities MAY require. Localities must have authority to determine lot sizes and setbacks as applicable to conditions and needs of localities and neighborhoods. 6. We request that paragraph E.4 be moved to subsection D, removing it from the list of what localities shall NOT require, and adding it to the list of what localities MAY require. Localities must retain the authority to manage water, sewer, and septic capacity. Please see our attached letter to see our commends in a more readable format.

On behalf of the Virginia PACE Authority, the program administrator for Virginia’s statewide C-PACE program, I write to state our opposition to HB 952, which seeks to create a statewide residential PACE (R-PACE) program in Virginia. To be very clear, we do not oppose R-PACE itself; we only oppose how an R-PACE program would be created by this bill. Currently, Virginia’s C-PACE statute prohibits financing residential condominiums or properties with 1-4 dwelling units. HB 952 would remove this prohibition, indirectly creating a R-PACE program by this one change. The most important defect of this approach is that HB 952 does not include the consumer protections for R-PACE which most states with R-PACE programs have instituted. Secondly, attempting to launch an R-PACE program within the same statute as C-PACE will create a drafting nightmare that will confuse the public and stakeholders alike as to which provisions apply to which program. C-PACE and R-PACE each need to have their own, dedicated section of the Virginia Code. VPA recommends R-PACE proponents spend the coming year drafting a separate code section that stands alone and is not intertwined with C-PACE, and includes appropriate consumer protections that other states have put into place for R-PACE. Such a stakeholder group is what the General Assembly required of C-PACE stakeholders in conjunction with its adoption of the 2015 amendments that substantially revised the C-PACE statute, so there is precedent for such an approach, and it lays the groundwork for a much stronger - and safer - proposal in 2025. But as it stands today, HB 952 will unintentionally lead to confusion, inefficiency, and potential financial harm to homeowners. HB 952 is not a prudent or proper way to develop a R-PACE program. We strongly recommend that the bill be stricken or PBI’d, and instead that 2024 be spent in preparation and consultation with the R-PACE stakeholders to craft an appropriate and balanced statutory framework, in anticipation of returning to the 2025 General Assembly with a well-thought out, complete proposal.

When discussing a transition from extremely harmful gas-powered lawn care equipment such as leaf blowers to much less harmful electric-powered equipment, people frequently raise concerns that such a transition is financially challenging for homeowners and small businesses. HB 953 is a great step toward easing any such concerns and taking urgent action to protect our health, well-being, environment, and climate.

Do not weaken important financial oversight of this state authority by exempting it from Virginia Public Procurement Act requirements. This authority has a documented track record of exhibiting minimal public transparency with respect to its finances (see a September 2022 investigative report by the Virginia Center for Investigative Journalism), has acknowledged mismanagement of public funds and contracts in discussions among its own board (see March 2023 SRRA Board of Directors minutes), and within the past year has sought a forensic audit. Loosening the critical financial oversight provided to SRRA by the Virginia Public Procurement Act and removing a requirement for competitive bidding from most of the authority’s transactions, which this bill would do, will only heighten the risk of continued mismanagement of public funds by the authority.

Hi, I"m Alice Tousignant, Richmond City resident and affordable housing advocate. HB 1122 is about promoting and creating mixed income housing, decontrating poverty and housing choice. In the past few years, I've seen thousands of market rate housing going up in various parts of the City, while there is a serious need for housing that households at or below 80% of Area Median Income can afford. Richmond City has tried coaxing developers into adding affordable units to no avail. My friend was at a meeting recently for a new multi-family development. Several area residents who attended the meeting quizzed the developer about adding a few units of affordable housing in the new development. The developer said the numbers didn't work charging a lower rent, but if the City gave him local funds and other incentives in exchange for the units, he could afford to do it. But left to left to their own devices, most developers will not. Thank you.