|
Legislative proposals: What's the status?
BY ANNE ADAMS • STAFF WRITER
RICHMOND - Some of the legislation being watched by Highland and Bath citizens has survived the General Assembly now; other bills remain hung up in committees. Here's an update:
Environmental impact of renewable power plants
Sen. Frank Wagner's Senate Bill 321, which would amend the Code of Virginia related to the environmental impact of renewable energy electric utilities, was communicated to the House Feb. 12, where it passed unanimously Feb. 29.
It reads, "When considering the environmental impact of any renewable energy electrical utility facility, the department shall consult with interested agencies of the commonwealth that have expertise in natural resource management. The department shall submit recommendations to the State Corporation Commission that take into account the information and comments submitted by such natural resource agencies concerning the potential environmental impacts of the proposed electric generating facility. The department's recommendations shall include: (i) specific mitigation measures considered necessary to minimize adverse environmental impacts; (ii) any additional site-specific studies considered to be necessary; and (iii) the scope and duration of any such studies. Nothing in this subsection shall alter or affect the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the State Corporation Commission."
The related house bill (HB 1466), which would have required the Department of Environmental Quality to evaluate all the information from other state agencies and pull together a consensus recommendation for the SCC, was left in the House commerce and labor committee.
What the new legislation means for Virginia's first wind energy utility in Highland County remains unknown, since that project has already received its SCC review and approval for construction, set to begin in the next 12 months if its permit conditions are met. The bill is unlikely to effect any changes to the project. Highland New Wind Development's state application received its permit with mitigation measures in place attached as conditions.
If another project were proposed in Virginia, however, the bill's requirements would apply to any new application before the SCC.
Streamlining the review
Wagner's second bill (SB 324) was intended to exempt smaller renewable electric facilities from SCC authority by amending language under the Utility Facilities Act that redefines what a renewable energy, public utility is, such that any plant generating less than 50 megawatts does not fall under such SCC review.
Wagner, who had introduced it primarily in response to the length of time Highland New Wind Development's project was under review by the SCC, removed it from consideration; it was continued to 2009.
The house version (HB 1443), which called for a streamlined permitting process on utilities generating power with solar, wind or biomass, keeping permitting fees at $50 or less, and requiring the SCC to act on permit applications in 60 days, was amended to exclude solar and wind projects. The bill now applies only to biomassgenerated electricity. It was passed by the assembly Feb. 26 and approved by the governor March 4.
Amended school funding
bill passes
The bill to give other localities an opportunity to increase education funding from the state passed the full assembly March 8, but as an amended version.
Sen. Mark Obenshain (RHarrisonburg) introduced Senate Bill 559 to allow other counties besides Highland to negotiate for more education dollars by striking agreements with neighboring school divisions to use lower composite index ratings - an arrange- ment Highland has used with Augusta County for several years.
The composite index figure is based on a state funding formula that considers real estate property taxes, sales tax revenue, population numbers, and the number of students enrolled in a locality's schools.
The original legislation allowed Highland to combine forces with Augusta because it affected school divisions with fewer than 350 students; Highland was the only division that qualified.
Obenshain's bill as introduced would adjust the minimum student number up from 350 to 1,200, which would affect several more divisions. But before it was turned over to the House, it was amended to drop the student number to 1,100, and a stipulation was added that the bill would affect only those localities with an index rating of .60 or greater, meaning the counties or cities pay for 60 percent of the cost of education. In addition, it was changed such that only ones with 65 percent or more of their local taxes coming from real estate can qualify.
Its impact statement notes that according to the Department of Education, only Rappahannock County schools can join Highland in qualifying. Assuming Rappahannock uses neighboring Culpeper's composite index rating, there would be an additional $146,000 in year one, and $202,000 in year two from the state when the bill would become effective.
'Homestead exemption'
bill in committee Legislation dubbed the "home- stead exemption" passed the Senate 36-3, was referred to the House, Feb. 12, and then to a constitutional subcommittee of the Committee on Privileges and Elections, where it remains. It would provide tax relief for certain property owners in Virginia, allows localities to provide tax exemptions by ordinance.
Senate Bill 496 was introduced by Senator Ralph Northam (DNorfolk). It would give local governments the ability to cut property taxes for residential or farm property by an amount not to exceed 20 percent of the value of any single parcel.
The bill would affect tax years beginning on or after Jan. 1, 2009. Each governing body (county, city or town) could create an ordinance to exempt, or partially exempt, certain property owners from real property taxes, allow for deferring property taxes, or provide for a combination of exemptions and deferrals.
Properties that qualify would include residential or farm properties designed for continuous habitation, and that are occupied as of the tax day as the primary dwelling of the owners, who must be individuals.
The referendum to allow this amendment would be on the November ballots. Should this legislation pass, it would still have to survive a statewide referendum.
| 
