Congress to Hold Hearings on Proposal to Scale Back Government Contracting
Last week, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates proposed to reduce defense contracting by ten percent each year for the next three years. This sparked immediate criticism from many members of Virginia’s Congressional delegation. Government contracting, in the area of defense in particular, accounts for a sizable portion of the region’s economy and has been often been considered a key factor in the resiliency of the Washington metropolitan area.
The move proposed by Gates would have substantial negative consequences for the local economy, including the already challenged commercial real estate market in Northern Virginia. Responding to a request by Northern Virginia Congressman Gerry Connolly, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform has agreed to have one of its subcommittees hold hearings to examine the Defense Secretary’s reasoning and justification for this decision, and whether any analysis was conducted into its potential impacts.
Housing Policy Advisory Committee to Present Interim Report in November
Governor Bob McDonnell’s Housing Policy Advisory Committee met July 30, and provided some clarification of the body’s mission and timeline. The Governor’s executive order creating the group charges it with creation of a housing policy framework for the Commonwealth of Virginia, and gives it an extremely broad mandate, i.e. that the policy should address homelessness, affordable and workforce housing, economic development, healthy neighborhoods, effective coordination of transportation and environmental issues and other opportunities. Adding to the difficulty of meeting this charge, the group was asked to develop and submit a final policy by this fall.
At the meeting, representatives from the Governor’s staff clarified that the goal of developing a statewide housing policy would be an ongoing effort over the course of the Governor’s four-year term, and that submission of the Committee’s report in the fall would not conclude the McDonnell Administration’s focus on housing issues. Rather, the Committee will be asked initially to hone its focus on making low- and no-cost recommendations in the following areas:
- Recognizing the role of housing in economic development
- Promoting sustainable communities
- Ensuring that a range of housing options are available to meet the needs of a changing population, and
- Addressing the needs of homeless Virginians.
It is anticipated that the Committee’s initial report will be unveiled at the Governor’s Housing Conference on November 17-19 in Richmond. Public input into the statewide housing policy may be submitted through the Governor’s new housing policy website: http://www.virginiahousingpolicy.com.
Virginia Once Again Named Most Pro-Business State
For the second straight year, Virginia ranks at the top of the Pollina Corporate Top 10 list for pro-business states. The rankings are based on 31 factors controlled by state government, including taxes, human resources, education, right-to-work legislation, energy costs, infrastructure spending, workers compensation laws, economic incentive programs, and state economic development efforts. Maryland and the District of Columbia were not ranked.
Arlington Group Falls Short in Effort to Change Form of Government
Last month, the Committee for a Better Arlington, an interest group formed to advocate for a change in the form of Arlington County’s government, submitted petitions to court officials in an attempt to allow voters to weigh in on the issue. A total of 14,350 petitions are required in order to place a measure on the ballot for the November general election. The County registrar’s office, however, was able to validate just over 13,000 petitions, meaning that the issue will not go before voters in the 2010 election cycle.
The proponents’ proposed change of government sought to create a weaker County Manager, and allow for County Board members to be elected by districts rather than at-large. The proposal received support from the County’s Republican and Green parties, but was opposed by the Arlington County Democratic Committee. The real force behind the initiative, however, was the County’s police and fire unions who have griped about not having enough access to, or influence over, the County’s elected Board, particularly as it relates to budget decisions. The unions resent having to work through an appointed County Manager to secure funding in the annual budget process.
It appears the supporters and opponents of the movement will not be fading away quietly: in the wake of the measure’s defeat, both sides have publicly lobbed accusations of procedural and ethical violations at each other. Opponents alleged, in a letter to the Commonwealth Attorney, that petition-gatherers were illegally signing affidavits for signatures collected by others who were not qualified to perform such duties because they were not County residents. Proponents fired back with allegations that supporters had posted the social security numbers of petition circulators on their website. A Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request has also been filed seeking all materials and correspondence of County officials regarding the subject, implying suspected wrongdoing on the part of the local government, as well.
The County registrar will issue a report to the Circuit Court containing a final count of petition signatures. A judge will then issue a court order that will preclude the placement of a ballot question concerning the issue on the general election ballot. Under Virginia law, there is no avenue for appeal of such a decision.
Virginia Power Energy Efficiency Rebates: Update for Multifamily Members
In response to an inquiry from AOBA, Dominion Virginia Power has provided clarification regarding participation of multi-family owners/managers in its $15.4 million, three-year energy efficiency rebate program. For the two commercial programs (HVAC and Lighting) approved by the State Corporation Commission, rebates currently will only apply to owners of buildings where a commercial account exists.
The Company indicates that the program is designed this way to ensure that energy savings from the installed efficiency can be measured and verified. However, in response to AOBA’s continued efforts, Dominion has committed to review its program to ensure that multifamily owners/managers with individually metered accounts can also participate in its energy efficiency programs.
Fairfax City Rental Inspections Program Challenge: Progress and Setback
Members will recall that, in November of last year, with the approval of your Executive Board of Directors, AOBA joined with several other Northern Virginia real estate organizations in litigation challenging the validity of a 2008 rental inspection ordinance adopted by the Fairfax City Council. Subsequently, our coalition worked with city staff in an effort to remedy, short of the litigation running its full course, what we believed were clear illegalities and other questionable aspects of the City’s adopted rental inspection program.
The coalition sought corrective action from the city on five specific complaints. The City agreed to the coalition’s requests on four of these items. On the fifth point of conflict—whether the City could simply split the entire city into two districts and still be in compliance with State law—it refused to yield to the coalition’s requests, and opted instead to roll the dice and see us in court. Regrettably, last month a Fairfax County judge ruled against the coalition and upheld the authority of Fairfax City to enact the rental inspection ordinance in that manner.
The coalition had felt confident in its position because, in 2004, AOBA sought and obtained legislation in the General Assembly requiring that jurisdictions adopting rental inspection schemes could not simply adopt a program for the entire jurisdiction-- they must be confined to specific areas where the jurisdiction has determined that inspections are necessary to maintain safe, decent and sanitary living conditions. After the state law was changed, Fairfax City let its previous, city-wide rental inspection ordinance expire, because it was not based on such findings. The City then tried to get the General Assembly, in the next session, to repeal the restrictions adopted in 2004-- but its efforts were thwarted by a concerted effort of AOBA and other organizations. Then, last year, Fairfax City summarily adopted a new ordinance—thumbing its nose at the specificity the General Assembly had required, it adopted a scheme that simply divided the entire City into two inspection districts, rather than one. So we went to court.
In ruling against the coalition, the Court focused on language the General Assembly had adopted which exempted rental inspection ordinances adopted prior to January 1, 2009 from its 2009 action which prohibited “one or more” locality-wide rental inspection districts. As everyone who lobbies in Richmond knows, the General Assembly has a tradition of not adopting legislation that would interfere with a pending lawsuit. It was solely to be consistent with that practice that the General Assembly included the language in question—to maintain neutrality, but not to explicitly condone and exempt the Fairfax City ordinance because it was in litigation. The judge, however, interpreted it to do just that.
At this point, the coalition has determined not to appeal the judge’s ruling. Rather, we will return to the General Assembly in January with new legislation to make even more abundantly clear that localities cannot adopt city-wide rental inspection districts. And, while we lost on this one point in court, it is important to recall the areas that our lawsuit previously forced the city to acquiesce on. The City agreed to the coalition’s requests on these four items:
1. The ordinance had included a provision requiring rental inspections to be conducted at any change of tenancy-- in clear violation of state code, which stipulates that inspections cannot be required more than once each calendar year and grants a minimum four-year exemption from inspections to properties that are inspected and found to have no serious building code violations. The City agreed to eliminate language in the ordinance that would allow rental inspections upon a change in tenancy.
2. The City agreed to amend the ordinance to clarify that enforcement of a violation would be suspended during an appeal, unless the nature of the violation involves an “unsafe structure” as defined in the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code.
3. The City further agreed to eliminate language allowing the enforcement of rental inspection program provisions against “any agent” of the owner. This change will conform the local ordinance to the state code, which places the duty of compliance exclusively on the owner of a rental dwelling unit.
4. The City agreed, in concept, to draft language exempting multifamily dwelling units from the ordinance, on the following conditions: the property consists of more than ten dwelling units; the property is “professionally managed;” no building code violations are found in an initial inspection of a sampling, not to exceed ten percent, of dwelling units in the property; and, smoke detectors are in working condition.
This last point is a significant concession our group won from the City. Its representatives had repeatedly made assurances that single-family properties are the primary target of the ordinance because they are where most violations are believed to occur in such dwelling units. However, because the actual wording of the ordinance already on the books clearly has broader applicability, AOBA members will continue to be at risk until the ordinance is amended. Stay tuned.
|
