Join

Northern Virginia Chamber Partnership

 NORTHERN VIRGINIA CHAMBER PARTNERSHIP

Week 3 Session Update on Partnership Priorities

January 23, 2020

The following status report on the Partnership’s priorities at this point in the 2020 session.

Protect Virginia’s right-to-work law. The Partnership continues to fight efforts to repeal or weaken Virginia’s right-to-work law. There are two bills that are the focus of our efforts on this issue.

  • HB 153, introduced by Del. Lee Carter, would repeal Virginia’s right-to-work law. This bill has still not yet been assigned to a committee.
  • SB 426, introduced by Sen. Dick Saslaw, would authorize an employer to require, as a condition of employment, that any employee who is not a member of a labor union and is a member of a collective bargaining unit to pay a “fair share fee” to compensate the labor union for the costs of representing the non-member employee. This bill is expected to be considered by the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee on Monday, January 27.

Thanks to all who have contacted Sen. Saslaw to express opposition to this bill. Per the advocacy alert message sent earlier today, at this point, we are focused on urging Senate Democrats on the committee to vote NO on this bill. We remain concerned that if this bill is passed by the Senate, it will very likely be passed by the House so we are doing all we can to stop it at this point in the process.

Provide parity funding for George Mason University. Among the Partnership’s top priorities is to reduce the long-standing resource gap George Mason University has experienced relative to its peer institutions across Virginia. Over the past decade, George Mason has become one of Virginia’s top research universities while significantly growing the student population and achieving new heights in every major ranking of quality and excellence. To ensure Mason can continue to balance its growing prestige with providing access to students who want to attend Mason, the Partnership is pushing to protect the funding proposed in the Governor’s budget to enable GMU to have commiserate funding with Virginia’s other doctoral institutions. This includes $10 million in the first year of the budget and $12 million in the second year. Working hand-in-hand with Mason, we are focusing on the following messages:

Access, Student Success and Enrollment Growth

  • George Mason University has been and continues to be committed to the Commonwealth’s higher education goals for enrollment growth, two-year transfers and educational program development to support economic growth.
    • Over the past decade, Mason has been a major contributor to Virginia’s growing in-state enrollment.
    • Mason’s undergraduate enrollment growth has accounted for approximately 60 percent of the overall state’s increase.
    • Mason continues to have the largest transfer student body from two-year institutions – more than 3,000 students per year – representing more than 25% of the total transfer population for the Commonwealth each year.
  • George Mason has shown that growth is compatible with improvements in quality, with increases in average SAT scores and high school GPAs among the students choosing GMU.
  • Given the current enrollment levels, if Mason is to continue its trajectory of academic and research excellence, it would require a total of $41.3M to bring Mason’s per student funding for in-state students in line with the mean of the other doctoral institutions in Virginia.
    • During the last two legislative sessions, the Governor and General Assembly provided a down payment toward the additional operating funds for Mason to address the enrollment growth funding shortfall.
    • It is critical to support the next installment of funding, which is included in the Governor’s proposed budget, to bring greater parity in funding for George Mason.

In order to protect the funding allotted in the Governor’s budget, we will focus on emphasizing these messages with members of the House and Senate money committees to urge them to include this funding in each of their budgets.

Support policies that increase access to affordable housing. The Partnership strongly supports policies that increase the availability of a wide range of housing options to meet the needs of the Northern Virginia workforce. We are working closely with the Home Builders Association of Virginia on a number of bills to increase access to affordable housing. Brief overviews of these bills, as well as updates on these at this point of the session, are outlined below.

HB 810 (Bourne) – Virginia Housing Opportunity Tax Credit Program
As a reminder, this bill directs the Department of Housing and Community Development and the Virginia Housing Development Authority to convene a stakeholder advisory group to develop draft legislation establishing a Virginia housing opportunity tax credit program to provide incentives for the use of private equity in the development and construction of affordable housing in the Commonwealth and regulations for implementing such a program.

It also directs the stakeholder group to conduct financial modeling to determine the fiscal impact to the Commonwealth of various levels of funding for a Virginia housing opportunity tax credit and to determine the most effective and efficient way to administer the program in conjunction with the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program.

Finally, the stakeholder group is directed to provide recommendations to the Governor, the Secretary of Commerce and Trade, the Director of the Department of Housing and Community Development, and the commissioners of the Virginia Housing Development Authority by September 1, 2020.

This legislation was passed in the House General Laws Committee by a vote of 21-1 and is under consideration by the full House.

HJ 2 (Bourne) – Tax Abatement for New Construction Affordable Housing
The purpose of this legislation is to authorize local governments to enact tax abatement programs for new construction affordable housing. Under the current Constitution and Code of Virginia, localities are only permitted to enact tax abatement programs for the rehabilitation or renovation of existing structures and new construction projects only in limited circumstances.  Rehabilitation tax abatement programs have been used to transform dilapidated, vacant, and under-utilized structures into revenue-generating residential and commercial opportunities.  Tax abatements for new construction affordable housing would incentivize the construction of affordable housing units by reducing soft costs during development and construction.

The specific language proposed is shown below:

 (l) The General Assembly may by general law authorize the governing body of any county, city, town, or regional government to provide for the exemption from local real property taxation, or a portion thereof, within such restrictions and upon such conditions as may be prescribed, of real estate on which affordable housing, as defined by the General Assembly, is constructed.

Like any Constitutional amendment, this would need to pass two consecutive years with an intervening election between the two years with exactly the same language. This would then allow the language to be included on the ballot to be considered by Virginia voters. This has been assigned to the House Rules Committee.

HB 1101 (Carr)/SB 834 (McClellan) – Affordable Dwelling Unit Ordinance Policy
This legislation would create a new, optional tool for localities to reduce the economic barriers to entry for affordable housing projects by offering density bonuses and waivers or reductions of local development standards such as parking requirements, height restrictions, setbacks, buffers, and other local regulations.  The intent is to reduce the impacts of antiquated zoning ordinances, excessive parking requirements, height restrictions, setback requirements, and other local policies that can be barriers to meeting the growing demand for new affordable housing units.

While the Code of Virginia already contains several statutes that allow localities to enact affordable dwelling unit ordinances, these types of incentives have proven to be effective ways to help the private-sector and non-profit development community offset the cost of providing below-market-rate units.

Specific details on this legislation is shown below.

Any locality where current affordable housing provisions do not apply would be authorized to amend their zoning ordinance to provide for an affordable housing dwelling unit program that does the following;

  • Address housing needs;
  • Promote a full range of housing choices; and
  • Encourage the construction and continued existence of housing affordable to low-and-moderate-income citizens by providing for increases in density to the applicant in exchange for the applicant voluntarily electing to provide affordable housing.

Any local ordinance may authorize the governing body to:

  • Establish qualifying jurisdiction-wide affordable dwelling unit sales prices based on local market conditions;
  • Establish jurisdiction-wide affordable dwelling unit qualifying income guidelines; and
  • Offer incentives other than density increases, such as reductions or waiver of permit, development, and infrastructure fees, as deemed appropriate to encourage the provision of affordable housing.

Any zoning ordinance establishing an affordable housing dwelling unit program under this legislation may include reasonable regulations and provisions on the following:

  • Application of the requirements of an affordable housing dwelling unit program to any site that is the subject of an application for rezoning or special exception or site plan or subdivision plat that yields, as submitted by the applicant, at an equivalent density greater than one unit per acre and that is located within an approved sewer area;
  • Waiver of any fees associated with the construction, renovation, or rehabilitation of a structure, including building permit fees, application review fees, and water and sewer connection fees; and
  • Standards of compliance with the provisions of an affordable housing dwelling unit program and for the authority to enforce compliance and impose reasonable penalties for non-compliance, provided that there be an appeal process for any party aggrieved by a decision of the locality.

Any zoning ordinance establishing an affordable housing dwelling unit program per this legislation must adopt the regulations and provisions set out in the bill to establish an affordable housing density bonus and development standards relief program. 

As affordable housing developments are becoming increasingly more difficult to finance and build and the rising cost of land, labor, and materials has widened the gap between the cost of construction and the rent/sales price that most individuals and families can afford, the hope is that this legislation can help to reduce some of the costs associated with providing affordable housing.

HB 1101 has been referred to the House Counties, Cities and Towns Land Use Subcommittee and SB 834 has been assigned to the Senate Local Government Committee.

HB 929 (Jones/Coyner) – Right-of-Way Dedications
For larger master-planned communities, the initial costs of land acquisition, planning, infrastructure, and development are high. As a result, these communities are typically built in phases to allow developers to manage their workload,
evaluate future economic conditions and housing demand, minimize impact to adjacent existing communities, and secure financing.

To facilitate this type of smart growth, the Code of Virginia contains several provisions which provide property owners predictability in the constantly evolving local land-use environment. In master-planned phased communities, developers rely on a locality’s acceptance of public rights of way (ROW) for future phases.  The Code of Virginia currently allows a developer to rely on ROW dedications indefinitely, but only if the dedication was made on a final recorded subdivision plat that also shows a residential lot that has been sold.  If the plat does not contain a sold residential lot, the locality is able to vacate the ROW after five years, which negatively impacts a developer’s ability to pursue phased communities.

This legislation eliminates the unique “lot sale” distinction and allows a property owner to rely on a dedication indefinitely as long as the plat is recorded and accepted by the locality. It has also been referred to the House Counties, Cities and Towns Land Use Subcommittee.

In addition to these bills, we are evaluating the following additional bills to determine how they may support the Partnership’s affordable housing goals. We invite you to share your thoughts on the following:

  • HB 765 (Orrock) — Zoning; affordable housing. Provides that a locality, within the residential district classifications of its zoning ordinance, may include districts specifically designated for affordable housing.
  • HB 854 (Murphy) — Study; Department of Housing and Community Development and Virginia Housing and Development Authority; ways to incentivize the development of affordable housing in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Directs the Department of Housing and Community Development and the Virginia Housing and Development Authority to convene a stakeholder advisory group to (i) determine the quantity and quality of affordable housing across the Commonwealth, (ii) conduct a review of current programs and policies to determine the effectiveness of current housing policy efforts, (iii) develop an informed projection of future housing needs in the Commonwealth and determine the order of priority of those needs, and (iv) make recommendations for the improvement of housing policy in the Commonwealth.
  • HJ 31 (Lopez) — Study; Department of Housing and Community Development; Commonwealth-wide housing needs. Directs the Department of Housing and Community Development to (i) determine the quantity and quality of affordable housing across the Commonwealth, (ii) conduct a review of current programs and policies to determine the effectiveness of current housing policy efforts, (iii) develop an informed projection of future housing needs in the Commonwealth and determine the order of priority of those needs, and (iv) make recommendations for the improvement of housing policy in the Commonwealth.HJ 67 — Study; Virginia Housing Commission; definition of “affordable housing”; report. Directs the Virginia Housing Commission (the Commission) to study the definition of affordable housing. In conducting the study, the Commission shall examine the current usage of “affordable housing” in the Commonwealth and among its political subdivisions and the meaning or criteria associated with the phrase. The Commission shall make any recommendations regarding uniformity or statewide standards as appropriate.

The Partnership will also support budget items that help to increase access to affordable housing in Virginia.

Protect against unreasonable mandated employee benefits. As Virginia seeks to maintain its economic growth and steady job creation, the Partnership is fighting bills that interfere with the employer/employee relationship, including mandates related to paid family and medical leave. While the Partnership supports employee leave programs, we have significant concerns about creating a government-run leave program that dictates what employers must provide to their employees, costing taxpayers millions of dollars to create such a program and manage it on an ongoing basis. The Partnership is also concerned that proposed mandated government leave programs rely on significant increases to state payroll taxes paid not only by employers but by employees as well. Below is the list of bills of concern related to this issue:

  • HB 55 (Carter) — Worker cooperatives. Establishes worker cooperatives as a category of cooperative associations. A worker cooperative is a stock corporation that has elected to be governed by provisions established by this measure, which include (i) conducting its business primarily for the mutual benefit of its members, (ii) allowing only current and retired employees to be members, (iii) limiting voting rights to current employees, (iv) providing that each employee is entitled to one vote, (v) prohibiting any person from owning more than one membership share, (vi) requiring at least two-thirds of employees to own membership shares, and (vii) requiring that net earnings be paid or credited to members in accordance with the ratio that each member’s amount of work performed during a period bears to the total amount of work performed by all members during that period. This bill has been assigned to the House Labor and Commerce Committee. 
  • HB 328 (Levine) — Family and Medical Leave Insurance Program. Entitles individuals to a family and medical leave insurance (FMLI) benefit payment for each month they are engaged in qualified caregiving, not to exceed 60 qualified caregiving days per year. Qualified caregiving means an activity, except regular employment, for a reason an individual is entitled to leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. Benefits would amount to 66 percent of an individual’s monthly wages, based on highest annual earnings from the prior three years, up to a capped monthly amount, and would be indexed to the national average wage index. If a person takes the maximum number of days, the benefits would range from a minimum benefit of $580 to a maximum benefit of $4,000 per month in the program’s first year. To be eligible for benefits, an individual is required to (i) be insured for disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act at the time his application is filed; (ii) have earned income from employment during the 12 months before filing the application; (iii) have filed an application for a FMLI benefit; and (iv) have been engaged in qualified caregiving, or anticipate being so engaged, during the 90-day period before the application is filed or within 30 days thereafter. The measure establishes the Family and Medical Leave Insurance Fund and requires FMLI benefit payments to be made only from this Fund. A tax of 0.2 percent is imposed on the wages received by every individual, and an excise tax of
    0.2 percent of the wages paid in any calendar year by the employer with respect to their employment is imposed on employers. The measure has a delayed effective date of January 1, 2021. This bill is in Subcommittee #1 of the House Labor and Commerce Committee. 
  • HB 418 (Cole, J.) — Earned sick leave for employees; civil penalties. Requires employers to provide earned sick leave to employees at a rate of one hour per 30 hours worked, up to 24 hours in any 12-month period. For employers with more than five employees, the employee is paid for sick leave taken; for employers with fewer than five employees, not more than 32 hours of sick leave in a year are required to be paid leave. The measure authorizes the Commissioner of Labor and Industry to impose a civil penalty of not more than $1,000 for a violation. This bill is in Subcommittee #1 of the House Labor and Commerce Committee. 
  • HB 825 (Carroll Foy) — Paid family and medical leave program. Requires the Virginia Employment Commission to establish and administer a paid family and medical leave program with benefits beginning January 1, 2023. Under the program, benefits are paid to eligible employees for family and medical leave. Funding for the program is provided through premiums assessed to employers and employees beginning in 2022. The amount of a benefit is 80 percent of the employee’s average weekly wage, not to exceed 80 percent of the state weekly wage, which amount is required to be adjusted annually to reflect changes in the statewide average weekly wage. The measure caps the duration of paid leave at 12 weeks in any application year. The bill provides self-employed individuals the option of participating in the program. This bill is in Subcommittee #1 of the House Labor and Commerce Committee. 
  • HB 898 (Guzman) — Earned paid sick time. Requires public and private employers with six or more employees to provide those employees with earned paid sick time. The measure provides for an employee to earn at least one hour of paid sick leave benefit for every 30 hours worked. An employee shall not use more than 40 hours of earned paid sick time in a year, unless the employer selects a higher limit. Employees shall not be entitled to use accrued earned paid sick time until the ninetieth calendar day following commencement of their employment, unless otherwise permitted by the employer. The bill provides that earned paid sick time may be used (i) for an employee’s mental or physical illness, injury, or health condition; an employee’s need for medical diagnosis, care, or treatment of a mental or physical illness, injury, or health condition; or an employee’s need for preventive medical care; (ii) to provide care to a family member under similar circumstances; (iii) when there is a closure of the employee’s place of business or the employee’s child’s school or place of care due to a public health emergency; or (iv) when an employee’s or employee’s family member’s presence in the community may jeopardize the health of others because of their exposure to a communicable disease. The bill authorizes the Commissioner of Labor and Industry, in the case of a knowing violation, to subject an employer to a civil penalty not to exceed $150 for the first violation, $300 for the second violation, and $500 for each successive violation, if the second or successive violation occurs within two years of the previous violation. The Commissioner of Labor and Industry may institute proceedings on behalf of an employee to enforce compliance with this measure and to collect specified amounts from the employer, which shall be awarded to the employee. Alternatively, an aggrieved employee is authorized to bring a civil action against the employer in which he may recover double the amount of any unpaid earned sick time and the amount of any actual damages suffered as the result of the employer’s violation. The measure has a delayed effective date of January 1, 2021. This bill is in Subcommittee #1 of the House Labor and Commerce Committee. 
  • HB 1684 (Sickles) — Earned paid sick time. Requires public and private employers with 25 or more employees to provide those employees with earned paid sick time. The measure provides for an employee to earn at least one hour of paid sick leave benefit for every 30 hours worked. An employee shall not use more than 40 hours of earned paid sick time in a year, unless the employer selects a higher limit. Employees shall not be entitled to use accrued earned paid sick time until the ninetieth calendar day following commencement of their employment, unless otherwise permitted by the employer. The bill provides that earned paid sick time may be used (i) for an employee’s mental or physical illness, injury, or health condition; an employee’s need for medical diagnosis, care, or treatment of a mental or physical illness, injury, or health condition; or an employee’s need for preventive medical care; (ii) to provide care to a family member under similar circumstances; (iii) when there is a closure of the employee’s place of business or the employee’s child’s school or place of care due to a public health emergency; or (iv) when an employee’s or employee’s family member’s presence in the community may jeopardize the health of others because of their exposure to a communicable disease. The bill authorizes the Commissioner of Labor and Industry, in the case of a knowing violation, to subject an employer to a civil penalty not to exceed $150 for the first violation, $300 for the second violation, and $500 for each successive violation, if the second or successive violation occurs within two years of the previous violation. The Commissioner of Labor and Industry may institute proceedings on behalf of an employee to enforce compliance with this measure and to collect specified amounts from the employer, which shall be awarded to the employee. Alternatively, an aggrieved employee is authorized to bring a civil action against the employer in which he may recover double the amount of any unpaid earned sick time and the amount of any actual damages suffered as the result of the employer’s violation. The measure also prohibits an employer of any size from discharging an employee for taking unpaid absences totaling more than 16 hours in a year for a purpose described in clauses (i) through (iv). The measure has a delayed effective date of January 1, 2021. This bill is the House Labor and Commerce Committee, but it has not yet been assigned to a subcommittee. 
  • SB 481 (Favola) — Earned paid sick time. Requires public and private employers with six or more employees to provide those employees with earned paid sick time. The measure provides for an employee to earn at least one hour of paid sick leave benefit for every 30 hours worked. An employee shall not use more than 40 hours of earned paid sick time in a year, unless the employer selects a higher limit. Employees shall not be entitled to use accrued earned paid sick time until the ninetieth calendar day following commencement of their employment, unless otherwise permitted by the employer. The bill provides that earned paid sick time may be used (i) for an employee’s mental or physical illness, injury, or health condition; an employee’s need for medical diagnosis, care, or treatment of a mental or physical illness, injury, or health condition; or an employee’s need for preventive medical care; (ii) to provide care to a family member under similar circumstances; (iii) when there is a closure of the employee’s place of business or the employee’s child’s school or place of care due to a public health emergency; or (iv) when an employee’s or employee’s family member’s presence in the community may jeopardize the health of others because of their exposure to a communicable disease. The bill authorizes the Commissioner of Labor and Industry, in the case of a knowing violation, to subject an employer to a civil penalty not to exceed $150 for the first violation, $300 for the second violation, and $500 for each successive violation, if the second or successive violation occurs within two years of the previous violation. The Commissioner of Labor and Industry may institute proceedings on behalf of an employee to enforce compliance with this measure and to collect specified amounts from the employer, which shall be awarded to the employee. Alternatively, an aggrieved employee is authorized to bring a civil action against the employer in which he may recover double the amount of any unpaid earned sick time and the amount of any actual damages suffered as the result of the employer’s violation. The measure has a delayed effective date of January 1, 2021. This bill is the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee. 
  • SB 770 (Boysko) — Paid family and medical leave program. Requires the Virginia Employment Commission to establish and administer a paid family and medical leave program with benefits beginning January 1, 2023. Under the program, benefits are paid to eligible employees for family and medical leave. Funding for the program is provided through premiums assessed to employers and employees beginning in 2022. The amount of a benefit is 80 percent of the employee’s average weekly wage, not to exceed 80 percent of the state weekly wage, which amount is required to be adjusted annually to reflect changes in the statewide average weekly wage. The measure caps the duration of paid leave at 12 weeks in any application year. The bill provides self-employed individuals the option of participating in the program. This bill is in the Senate Finance and Appropriations Committee. 
  • SB 1069 (Barker) — Earned paid sick time. Requires public and private employers with 25 or more employees to provide those employees with earned paid sick time. The measure provides for an employee to earn at least one hour of paid sick leave benefit for every 30 hours worked. An employee shall not use more than 40 hours of earned paid sick time in a year, unless the employer selects a higher limit. Employees shall not be entitled to use accrued earned paid sick time until the ninetieth calendar day following commencement of their employment, unless otherwise permitted by the employer. The bill provides that earned paid sick time may be used (i) for an employee’s mental or physical illness, injury, or health condition; an employee’s need for medical diagnosis, care, or treatment of a mental or physical illness, injury, or health condition; or an employee’s need for preventive medical care; (ii) to provide care to a family member under similar circumstances; (iii) when there is a closure of the employee’s place of business or the employee’s child’s school or place of care due to a public health emergency; or (iv) when an employee’s or employee’s family member’s presence in the community may jeopardize the health of others because of their exposure to a communicable disease. The bill authorizes the Commissioner of Labor and Industry, in the case of a knowing violation, to subject an employer to a civil penalty not to exceed $150 for the first violation, $300 for the second violation, and $500 for each successive violation, if the second or successive violation occurs within two years of the previous violation. The Commissioner of Labor and Industry may institute proceedings on behalf of an employee to enforce compliance with this measure and to collect specified amounts from the employer, which shall be awarded to the employee. Alternatively, an aggrieved employee is authorized to bring a civil action against the employer in which he may recover double the amount of any unpaid earned sick time and the amount of any actual damages suffered as the result of the employer’s violation. The measure also prohibits an employer of any size from discharging an employee for taking unpaid absences totaling more than 16 hours in a year for a purpose described in clauses (i) through (iv). The measure has a delayed effective date of January 1, 2021. This bill is the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee.

More information will be provided in the coming week regarding the differences between these bills and our efforts to advance the Partnership’s priorities on this issue.

Support continued access to affordable, efficient reliable energy. Keeping energy costs affordable is important for all Virginians. To keep pace with demand in Virginia, the Partnership supports a strategic mix of energy options for power generation, including increased utilization of conservation and energy efficiency programs, and new sources of conventional and renewable energy, coupled with enhanced transmission and distribution infrastructure, including smart grid technology. For the 2020 session, the Partnership is focused on urging our elected leaders to reject policies that will increase energy prices, restrict access and diminish reliability of energy, including the Regional Greenhouse Initiative and proposed Green New Deal. In next week’s report, we will provide additional information about the bills on which we are focused related to energy policy.