It’s a legal question expected to be handled in court, primarily because of different interpretations of Chesapeake’s city charter — seemingly the only charter for a major Hampton Roads city that puts the city in this novel position.

Multiple council members are challenging mayors this November elections in surrounding cities, like Virginia Beach and Portsmouth. Yet Chesapeake finds itself in this situation as it’s the only Hampton Roads city with a provision in the city charter that requires council members to formally resign from their council seat during their mayoral election bid instead of after. Carey’s council term is set to end Dec. 31. Chesapeake’s charter provision calls for a council resignation by June 30, though it was established when Chesapeake held city elections in May.

The ongoing legal question has spurred division among council members, some of whom are practicing a boycott of certain city business they don’t believe Carey should be part of, like closed sessions, as a result.

At a July 23 meeting, some residents said Carey was being penalized for an oversight issue in the charter, and called for council to make the appropriate changes in lieu of legal action. But that’s challenging in a Dillon’s Rule state like Virginia, where the General Assembly determines the scope of local governments’ power. That means when a city needs to update its charter, state legislators are the ones who can make it happen.

“No two local government situations are alike, and they’re often quite obscure provisions that are at issue,” said Richard Schragger, a law professor at the University of Virginia.

He added that in Chesapeake’s case, it can be tricky because even if the dates should have been changed, the charter also clearly states June 30.

“So then the question becomes, if there’s ambiguities in the interpretation of that provision, who makes that decision? And generally we end up in courts when that’s the case,” Schragger said.

For most Hampton Roads cities, council members who declare candidacy in a mayor’s race must formally resign their council position following the election or upon the start of the newly elected mayor’s term, according to the respective city charters. That includes Norfolk, Hampton, Suffolk and Virginia Beach.

In Virginia Beach, Councilman Chris Taylor, representing District 8, has joined a crowded field to challenge the sitting mayor. To do so, Taylor had to file a formal resignation letter effective after the election since his council term spans until 2026, which will necessitate a special election. His resignation will take effect Dec. 31, regardless of whether he wins or loses the mayoral race.

Sabrina Wooten is another Virginia Beach council member challenging the mayor, but her term ends at the end of the year.

Portsmouth’s charter lacks any resign-to-run requirement. The current vice mayor, Lisa Lucas-Burke, is challenging sitting Mayor Shannon Glover. There is no apparent provision in Newport News’ charter that addresses resign-to-rule stipulations, but a process for filling vacancies is included.

General Assembly action in 2021 shifted Chesapeake’s elections from May to November, but the accompanying provision for resignation was not altered, according to an opinion issued in May by Republican Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares. His opinion concluded that Carey was required to step down by June 30.

In March, Carey declared a bid to challenge Mayor Rick West. On July 9, a majority of council members directed the city attorney’s office to file a writ of mandamus with the Circuit Court asking a judge to compel Carey to resign from his position as he seeks election as mayor.

While it’s still unclear when the city will formally file the petition in Circuit Court, Carey said he was officially served last week by the city with a notice of intent to file. City Attorney Catherine Lindley previously said a “reasonable time” must lapse before filing with Circuit Court, though she has declined to specify what that timeframe will be.

Carey has previously called the move political and unethical.

“Citizens realize how foolish this endeavor is for council to waste taxpayer dollars to attack a political opponent,” he said in a phone interview Monday.

Carey was first elected to City Council in May 2020. He assumed his role July 1 when Chesapeake still held local elections in May instead of November. In Miyares’ opinion, he stated that though resignation would have the effect of shortening Carey’s term, it’s “due to his voluntary decision to seek election to the office of mayor, as was the case prior to the 2021 amendments for council members seeking to become mayor in middle of their otherwise four-year term.”

Around a dozen residents spoke at a July 23 meeting, mostly expressing frustration with division among council and the city money and resources that will be dedicated to litigating the issue. Others said he should stay in his seat through the end of his current term.

Resident Nancy Pettigrew and George Reed of the New Chesapeake Men for Progress argued that the intent of the charter change law wasn’t to result in a monthslong vacancy when a council member runs for mayor.

“Forcing Councilman Carey off the council at this point in the year will hamper the work that the City Council does,” Pettigrew said. “And in fact, we are already seeing that happen.”

Reed cited a summary document about the 2021 law when it was passed, which states the terms of mayor, council and school board members should not be shortened as a result of shifting elections to November. It also states all those members elected at a May general election and whose terms end as of June 30 “shall continue in office until their successors have been elected at the November general election and have been qualified to serve.”

Another election-related bill passed that year amended that portion of state code and the clause Reed cited was removed.

“We ought to have a writ of mandamus to get our city attorney to configure our charter to meet the state law,” Reed said. “I say to you there must be a different agenda. You should explain that agenda to the public. Because it’s certainly not running good governance with transparency and accountability.”

Natalie Anderson, 757-732-1133, natalie.anderson@virginiamedia.com

The 30-day grace period for the first set of new cameras ended Monday, and drivers who run past red lights at three intersections will face $50 penalties. Those include Twin Pines and Towne Point roads, Frederick Boulevard and Turnpike Road, and Victory Boulevard and Greenwood Drive.

Another six cameras will be activated later at these intersections:

• Victory Boulevard and George Washington Highway.
• Frederick and Airline boulevards.
• Airline and Victory boulevards.
• Portsmouth and Airline boulevards.
• Portsmouth Boulevard and Elmhurst Lane.
• W High Street and Cedar Lane.

Police Chief Stephen Jenkins told City Council members in Tuesday’s work session that state law limits the maximum number of red-light cameras, and Portsmouth can have up to nine. Intersections were selected based on speed zone studies, accident history and driving behavior from test cameras used to help determine the best locations, he said.

The chief also said in light of legal challenges playing out in surrounding jurisdictions for speed cameras, his department is working to recreate citations to ensure they’re the same official Virginia uniform summons that would be issued for other violations.

Citations include videos and can be contested in court. Violations are issued to vehicles, not necessarily drivers, Jenkins said.

“The goal here is to correct people’s behavior,” he said.

The new red-light cameras come months after police began enforcing more than a dozen school speed zone cameras across the city. Any excess revenue received from speed camera citations are intended for police and local schools.

As of May, the city has netted nearly $335,000 from speeding cameras since enforcement began in January, which amounts to about 40% of the overall revenue received from citations. The remaining share, about $475,000, goes to Altumint, the vendor that installed and maintains the equipment.

City Council expects to discuss revenue allocations in September.

Natalie Anderson, 757-732-1133, natalie.anderson@virginiamedia.com

The additional severance payouts for top employees reveal $1.02 million has been paid out to 14 top city employees since 2019. That’s up from $896,318 paid to 11 top city employees as exclusively reported by The Virginian-Pilot in June.

The incomplete disclosure was an unintentional oversight, according to city spokesperson Dana Woodson, who said in an email that it was “the City’s good faith belief that all relevant records were provided at the time.” As a result of the error, the city is now working to purchase a records management system to better track Freedom of Information Act requests.

While the city has previously told The Pilot it does not keep logs of FOIA requests received, it did not provide information in response to inquiries for this article about current FOIA tracking and response practices.

The error also prompted City Manager Steven Carter to apologize on the city’s behalf, noting the city “stumbled” in its attempt to respond to the FOIA request.

In a separate statement provided this week, Carter said the city strives to be as transparent and accountable as possible when responding to information requests.

“However, at the end of the day, we will fall short sometimes,” he said. “This was one of those times. We have learned a lot through this process and will continue to work hard to improve all of our processes in the future.”

Severance payout data was reported because of high turnover in top city positions in Portsmouth, a concern residents often raise to decision-makers, even likening city leadership to a “revolving door” at times. Over the past four years, the city has seen three city managers and four police chiefs, in addition to shakeups in the city assessor’s office.

But leaders say severance agreements are sometimes necessary in a region where surrounding municipalities frequently try to lure top talent away.

Portsmouth has paid nearly $900,000 in severance to departing employees over last 5 years

Following The Pilot’s reporting, a former employee who received a severance payout contacted the newspaper and said the information wasn’t comprehensive. After The Pilot questioned the city about the discovery, more records were provided to The Pilot by the city, disclosing four additional payouts and three other employees.

The recipient who reached out was Thomas Stallings, who served two stints as General Services Director. He told The Pilot he shared the discrepancy for the sake of transparency and accuracy. It was previously reported that Stallings received $10,803, but he’s also entitled to $22,705. Stallings held the role first from 2015 to 2022, when he was terminated by former City Manager Tonya Chapman. He was brought back in 2023 under former Interim City Manager Mimi Terry before being let go by former Interim City Manager Lydia Pettis Patton earlier this year, he said.

The employees who received the largest single payouts remain the same as previously reported: Pettis Patton and former City Attorney Solomon Ashby. But in disclosing the additional set of records, the city also corrected the payout amount for Ashby, who was entitled to $113,476, not $133,476 as previously reported. Pettis Patton received $133,436.

Pettis Patton resigned and Ashby was fired amid protests and controversy over criminal charges filed in the vandalism of a Confederate monument in 2020.

But the largest total payout amount went to Terry, who was paid twice after parting ways with the city and returning, collectively receiving $153,435.

Other employees not included in the original reporting who were authorized for severance payouts upon departure include former Chief Information Officer Daniel Jones for $25,270 and former Interim Deputy City Manager Robert Moore for $40,539, according to the city. Moore began his tenure with the city in 2016 before resigning in 2022 and previously led the city’s economic development department. Jones was hired in 2016 and also parted ways with the city in 2022.

Neither Jones nor Moore could be reached for comment.

Former City Assessor Patrick Dorris, who was terminated by a majority of Portsmouth City Council in March 2023, was granted $57,224, or about six months worth of severance. Dorris had been working for the city since 2021.

He’s since sued the city for wrongful termination, but no hearing is scheduled at this time.

City policy authorizes the city manager to offer severance agreements to department heads and deputy city managers, though it’s ultimately up to the manager’s discretion. Employees who are terminated with cause, however, aren’t entitled to severance.

City policy as of May 2023 states that payment can’t exceed more than 12 weeks of the employee’s salary and doesn’t extend to health or retirement benefits. The source of funding from the city’s budget for the severance must be identified, and severance must be coordinated with the city attorney’s office to ensure it is only granted if the employee is terminated without cause.

Woodson said current human resources and financial records are not indexed in a manner that allows a search for severance payments or severance agreements. Instead, records had to be searched manually and institutional knowledge used to identify which employees may have severance agreements or payments. Additionally, city staff used records from the Human Resources and Finance departments to manually calculate severance amounts since that pay could be included as part of a departing employee’s total pay in the following paycheck, for example.

The discrepancies and errors in providing all relevant records to The Pilot have prompted the city to seek a records management system.

“(This) particular exercise has revealed flaws in our process that we are working to swiftly mitigate,” Woodson said in an email. “These differences highlight the need for a more integrated and searchable records system that can streamline the process and enhance accuracy.”

Natalie Anderson, 757-732-1133, natalie.anderson@virginiamedia.com

A divided and tense vote at the July 9 council meeting tasked the City Attorney’s office with filing a writ of mandamus with the Circuit Court asking a judge to compel Carey to resign from his position as he seeks election as mayor — a move some members say is required by the city’s charter.

In March, Carey declared a bid to challenge Mayor Rick West in November — even switching political parties to do so.

At this time, the question of whether Carey is required to step down from his seat as he runs for mayor may be determined by a judge. But disintegration already is on display as council members Amanda Newins and Debbie Ritter did not join their colleagues in Tuesday’s closed session discussion.

Newins and Ritter voted “no” to go into Tuesday’s closed session, which was to discuss active litigation against the city. When council members reentered council chambers to vote on certifying the closed session, which declares that only lawful closed-session matters were discussed, Newins and Ritter abstained.

Newins led the vote this month to petition the court, noting that it was about “transparency” and the “integrity of the council.” A writ of mandamus is a judicial order that requires a government official to comply with the law. In this case, it’s Section 3.02 of the city’s charter, which states that any sitting member of council who decides to run for mayor is eligible to do so but shall resign by June 30 of the election year.

“It’s very disappointing that Mr. Carey has placed the City in this unprecedented situation by not resigning when required by law,” Newins told The Virginian-Pilot via text Friday. “I cannot be a party to disclosing privacy issues of our City and citizens in a closed session to any individual who by law should not be there.”

Ritter could not be reached for comment.

Reached by phone Friday, Carey said he didn’t know whether council members were boycotting certain business. He previously called Newins’ push for the writ of mandamus “unethical, disingenuous and politically motivated.”

“I hope that there aren’t any theatrics and council members who are wanting to make a name for themselves or grandstand,” Carey said Friday. “I think we ought to be professional and continue to conduct the business of the city.”

When Newins was asked whether she was boycotting Tuesday’s closed session due to Carey’s participation, she contested the term but confirmed she was not participating in the typical closed session meeting.

“This is not a boycott,” Newins said. “I’m still conducting city business, but in a manner that protects the integrity of the closed session by conferring with staff one on one instead of going into the closed session.”

The fractures on council amidst this legal action are falling along party lines. Though local elections in Chesapeake are nonpartisan, Carey has the support of the Democratic Party, while West and Ritter have been endorsed by the local GOP. Newins was previously endorsed by local Republicans but is not up for reelection this year.

The city is required to serve Carey advanced notice of the intent to file a petition for mandamus, according to City Attorney Catherine Lindley. The city must then wait a “reasonable time” before filing to allow Carey time to comply with the mandamus.

Carey said as of Friday, he has not yet been served. He declined to provide additional details about stepping down or the legal matter at hand.

“I have full confidence that council will be able to continue to conduct business of the city in a professional manner,” Carey said. “Any disagreements on council about the charter should be played out in the courtroom. A judge can arbitrate that.”

Once filed, the petition becomes the purview of the court.

Lindley said the two most common outcomes of such legal action would be either a court order directing Carey to comply with the city charter and resign from his seat or a determination that Carey isn’t required to resign. The writ is only related to Carey’s current council seat and would not address his eligibility to run for mayor in the November 2024 election.

The city declined to elaborate on how long a “reasonable time” is, and it also declined to disclose whether the city attorney’s office or a third party would be handling the case to avoid any perceived conflicts of interest. Head city attorneys, who lead the office, are council-appointed positions.

Natalie Anderson, 757-732-1133, nataie.anderson@virginiamedia.com

City Council members voted unanimously at the July 9 meeting to approve two separate use permits to operate shipping container and chassis storage yards — one at 0 Coast Guard Boulevard in the Churchland area and one at 0 Syer Road near the Martin Luther King Jr. Expressway.

The yard at 0 Coast Guard Boulevard was requested by Matt Mader and Ken Rodman, who wish to operate on a 30-acre parcel in an industrial zoning district. The property is owned by Virginia Holding Company. It will accommodate 310 truck parking spaces and container laydown spaces.

Chris Gullickson, director of development and transportation policy at the Virginia Port Authority, said at the council meeting the storage yard would operate in conjunction with the port and aid transportation of the domestic supply chain.

One speaker discussed potential noise and the presence of hazardous materials. Rodman, on behalf of VHB civil engineering firm in Virginia Beach, said most containers would be empty on their way back from the Port of Virginia and that noise shouldn’t be a major concern since there are no immediate neighbors. A representative from the adjacent U.S. Coast Guard base previously indicated he wasn’t opposed to the project but expressed concern for potential safety and security issues, including continuous and uninhibited entrance and exit points via Coast Guard Boulevard and protection from nearby ammunition storage.

The project was approved with conditions, including agreements applicants made to mitigate the Coast Guard’s concerns. Applicants will install surveillance cameras, additional fencing, emergency access to the Coast Guard base and a left-turn lane on Coast Guard Boulevard. Applicants also agreed to suspend parking during Coast Guard training exercises.

The other approved yard would operate on a 7-acre portion of a 96.5-acre parcel at 0 Syer Road near the Martin Luther King Jr. Expressway in an industrial-zoned area. The request was made by Paul Tschiderer of AES Consulting on behalf of CSX Transportation, Inc., which owns the irregularly shaped parcel bounded to the north by an existing CSX railway, bounded south by 1420 and 1400 Columbus Avenue, located east of the northern dead-end of South Street and west of the Martin Luther King Jr. Freeway.

The site would accommodate the storage of roughly 200 chassis with containers. On behalf of the applicant, Randy Marcus of CSX said the containers would not store hazardous or flammable materials. Following concerns raised from neighboring Murro Chemical Co. about traffic and proximity to a hydrogen tank, the applicants agreed to a few changes, including an increase in the fence height, additional signage for entrance, restricted access points and additional buffer to protect the Martin Luther King bridge piers that overpass the site. Instead of installing surveillance cameras, operators will rely on CSX railroad police services.

Council member Mark Whitaker expressed concern for traffic congestion at the on-ramp near I.C. Norcom High School in the mornings, but a report from city staff noted the project isn’t expected to negatively affect existing traffic.

Both projects received unanimous support from Planning Commission and approval from city planning staff. It’s not known at this time how much tax revenue the city would expect to draw from the properties.

Natalie Anderson, 757-732-1133, natalie.anderson@virginiamedia.com

Since 2022, Dragas Associates Inc. has been working to rezone a large area of the Dominion Boulevard Corridor District for a suburban mixed use development. The request at Tuesday’s City Council meeting was to rezone about 173 acres from A1 agriculture and R15 residential to a PUD, or a planned unit development. But following a request to defer a vote from attorney J. Bryan Plumlee, who’s representing the applicant, City Council voted 6-1 to postpone the rezoning request indefinitely.

Council member Amanda Newins opposed, council member Robert Ike was excused and council member Debbie Ritter abstained due to a relationship with an individual associated with the project.

Plumlee told council members the applicants would work with city staff to amend the plan to mitigate school overcrowding concerns, which required an indefinite continuance. Council member Don Carey said he supported the continuance request to allow applicants that due diligence.

The project, called Springton at Grassfield, proposes a variety of housing options, including 528 multi-family units, 169 carriage homes, 120 three-story townhomes, 166 two-story townhomes, 192 luxury villas and 117 single-family detached units. About 6 acres will comprise commercial space that can accommodate a building measuring 75,000 to 250,000 square feet. Plans also include nearly 50 acres of open space with a trail network, community amenities and a public park dedication.

The property, owned by Dominion Boulevard Partners LLC, straddles the suburban and rural overlay districts, with about 1.5 miles of frontage along Dominion Boulevard and two large triangular areas connected by a 3-acre parcel owned by the Dome of Canaan Church. The church will be rezoned to PUD and continue operations.

The Planning Commission approved the project 4-2 in June, but city planning staff recommend denial.

“The proposed PUD fails to achieve the level of community quality expected of a planned unit development in the city of Chesapeake and promotes typical suburban development forms inconsistent with the vision of Dominion Boulevard Corridor study,” said Planning Director Jimmy McNamara. “The proposed PUD also allows certain uses in the commercial center to be permitted by-right when normally the land use has required a conditional use permit.”

McNamara said the proposed project would lead to more overcrowding at nearby schools, including Grassfield Elementary, which would be at 174% capacity, exceeding the 120% threshold. But a new elementary school at Culpepper Landing is scheduled to open for the 2027-28 school year to help relieve the overcrowding.

In a letter submitted to city staff this week, Plumlee said the applicant agreed to not request any permits for the residential units until after a building permit has been requested for the new school in Culpepper Landing. Additionally, applicants said they wouldn’t request a certificate of occupancy until January 2027 or the certificate of occupancy is issued to the new school, whichever occurs first.

Several speakers at Tuesday’s meeting, who were told to only speak to the deferral and not the merits of the project, opposed the continuance, noting that residents often bear the brunt of additional costs incurred from multiple deferrals. Plumlee said project applicants told supporters not to attend Tuesday’s meeting because of the deferral request.

The project was first submitted in June 2022 and subsequently withdrawn by the applicant in October 2022. The planning commission granted the project an indefinite continuance in July 2023 after it had been submitted to city staff again in February 2023.

Before approving the project, the planning commission considered 10 emails and six speakers in opposition, with the main concerns being the high density, impact to local schools, loss of rural lifestyle and agricultural land, potential environmental impacts, traffic and the burden on city services.

Natalie Anderson, 757-732-1133, natalie.anderson@virginiamedia.com

A divided and tense vote Tuesday tasked the City Attorney’s office with filing a writ of mandamus with the Circuit Court, which is a judicial order that requires a government official to comply with the law. In this case, it’s Section 3.02 of the city’s charter, which states that any sitting member of council who decides to run for mayor is eligible to do so but shall resign by June 30 of the election year.

The vote passed 5-3, with Mayor Rick West abstaining. Robert Ike and Ella Ward joined Carey in voting against the measure put forth by council member Amanda Newins, who said it was about “transparency” and the “integrity of the council.” She likened Carey to being “a private citizen” acting as a council member.

“I think most of us assumed Mr. Carey was going to do the right thing and resign before June 30 but now we’re all in a very uncomfortable position,” Newins said. “And people say you have to have courage over comfort. And that’s what this is.”

In March, Carey declared a bid to challenge West — even switching parties to do so. Though local elections in Chesapeake are nonpartisan, Carey has the support of the Democratic Party, while West has been endorsed by the local GOP.

Though the charter provision calls for a resignation by June 30, it was established when Chesapeake held elections in May. General Assembly action in 2021 shifted the city’s elections to November, but the accompanying provision for resignation was not altered, according to an opinion issued in May by Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares. His opinion concluded that Carey was required to step down by June 30.

Carey’s term is slated to end Dec. 31. Miyares’ opinion states that though resignation would have the effect of shortening Carey’s term, it’s “due to his voluntary decision to seek election to the office of mayor, as was the case prior to the 2021 amendments for council members seeking to become mayor in middle of their otherwise four-year term.”

Opinions from the state’s attorney general provide analysis and interpretation of current law, but do not establish new law.

“Because the shortening, instead, is one caused by the council member’s own independent action, the recently mandated transition to November elections does not negate the effect of the resignation requirement contained in § 3.02(c) of the city charter,” the opinion said.

Only West and Carey filed to run for mayor. It’s unclear whether a judge’s ruling would force Carey to resign to remain in the mayor’s race or if he would be deemed ineligible for the ballot.

Before Newins’ motion passed, Ike was unsuccessful in an attempt to defer the vote to next week. Ike, who characterized Newins’ reasoning for her motion as “smoke and mirrors,” said he wanted the city to advertise a public hearing and hear from the public before taking any action.

“We understand the legislators messed it up,” Ike said. “They changed one part of the law but didn’t change the other. In all fairness, he should be able to stay until Dec. 31.”

Ike also noted Miyares’ opinion was not as a binding ruling.

Ward, meanwhile, said General Assembly members, including House Speaker Don Scott, have opined that Carey should be able stay in his current position and that the charter change should have extended to that provision.

Following the November election, the new Chesapeake City Council would be seated Jan. 1.

Natalie Anderson, 757-732-1133, natalie.anderson@virginiamedia.com

On Tuesday, City Council approved 8-1 a request to place an advisory referendum on the ballot in the general election. The referendum will ask voters whether City Council should “adopt an ordinance imposing a mandatory fee of up to $10 per month on all households that receive city trash service in order to reestablish curbside recycling for those households only.”

Council member Daniel Whitaker voted against it.

The ballot referendum initiative comes two years after council voted to cut the city’s free curbside recycling services to help fund a public safety plan. Since then, the city established eight public drop-off sites staff said have outperformed expectations, saved the city money, expanded access for residents and resulted in a lower contamination rate. In a June 11 briefing to council, Deputy City Manager Bob Geis said the city has collected more than 3,900 tons of recyclables since July 1, 2023. The projected collection total for fiscal year 2024 is 4,281 tons of recyclables.

The city also allows for subscription-based services, though interest has been low. As of June, Recyclops continues to offer subscription-based curbside recycling in Chesapeake starting at $26 a month per household for collection every other week. Recyclops reported collecting 148 tons of co-mingled recyclables in calendar year 2023, according to city staff.

Council initially deferred the vote at the June 11 meeting following a request that an estimated fee be included in the language of the referendum question. City Manager Chris Price said the “up to $10” fee is based on the estimated price escalation of previous curbside agreements, which he said were most recently $5.35 per month per household. The fee would cover collection, replenishment of blue can inventory, billing system setup and continued operation of four drop-off sites.

Tuesday’s vote comes as the operator of a regional waste authority is working to select a new vendor that could process, recycle, reuse and/or dispose of 100% of the region’s waste. The Southeastern Public Service Authority has an eye toward an all-in-one solution such as a single-stream, mixed waste sorting facility that would take added pressure off the Suffolk landfill. The authority handles waste for Chesapeake, Norfolk, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach and some surrounding localities.

SPSA is specifically looking for technologies that could divert at least 60% of the region’s waste from the landfill. At the June 11 work session, Geis said under the previous program in Chesapeake, only 5-7% of items collected through curbside recycling were diverted from the landfill and recycled.

Council member Don Carey asked how the referendum and potential return to curbside services would impact the contract being sought by SPSA. Price said curbside recycling agreements have historically spanned five years, so if SPSA’s single-stream solution came to fruition before then, council could cancel the curbside services early again or the city would be “double paying.”

Mayor Rick West and Carey said they weren’t necessarily supportive of restoring curbside services at this time but did support posing the question to voters.

Two of the three speakers Tuesday spoke in support, but one stated he’d rather see the city fund curbside recycling services from its own coffers instead of levying another fee on residents.

The process for getting a referendum on the ballot is carried out primarily through the Circuit Court. Once council approves any resolutions calling for one, the city attorney’s office then petitions the court for a referendum order, according to City Attorney Catherine Lindley, who cites state code. If approved, the petition and order must be entered by the court at least 81 days before the Nov. 5 election in order to make it on the ballot in time.

Since it’s an advisory referendum, council will still need to decide and act on next steps after hearing from voters.

Natalie Anderson, 757-732-1133, natalie.anderson@virginiamedia.com

The city budgets, that fund local governments for the fiscal year, set rates for real estate and personal property taxes. Here are tax rates adopted by seven Hampton Roads cities, and the revenue those taxes are expected to generate in the new fiscal year. Personal property tax varies by property type and the rate charged for personal vehicles is included.

Cities may offer different relief programs that can reduce tax liability.

Chesapeake

Real estate tax rate: $1.01 per $100 of assessed value, same rate unchanged for a few years. The city is expected to collect $390.5 million in revenue in fiscal 2025.

Personal property tax rate for vehicles: $4.08 per $100 of assessed value. Same as previous years. The city is expected to collect $76.2 million from all personal property taxes in fiscal 2025.

Chesapeake adopts $1.6 billion operating budget that will expand some tax relief, increase city worker pay

___

Hampton

Real estate tax rate: $1.15 per $100 of assessed value, a 1-cent decrease from last year. Real estate tax revenue is anticipated to total $176.5 million in fiscal 2025.

Personal property tax rate for vehicles: $4.50 per $100 of assessed value, no change. Hampton is expected to collect $50.8 million in all personal property taxes in fiscal 2025.

Hampton adopts $643 million budget boosting employee pay, adding speed cameras and increasing waste fees

___

Newport News

Real estate tax rate: $1.18 per $100 of assessed value, no change from last year. The city is expected to collect $266.4 million in real estate taxes in fiscal 2025.

Personal property tax rate for vehicles: $4.50 per $100 of assessed value. Personal property taxes for all items is expected to total $69.2 million in fiscal 2025.

Newport News adopts $1.14 billion budget, raises salaries for city workers and public safety

___

Norfolk

Real estate tax rate: $1.23 per $100 of assessed value, a 2-cent decrease from last year. Real estate tax revenue is anticipated to total $328.1 million in fiscal 2025.

Personal property tax rate for vehicles: $4.33 per $100 of assessed value. Norfolk is expected to collect $61.8 million in all personal property taxes in fiscal 2025.

Norfolk passes $1.9 billion budget with city worker raises, real estate tax cut

___

Portsmouth

Real estate tax rate: $1.30 per $100 of assessed value, with a 5-cent credit bringing the effective tax rate to $1.25 per $100 of assessed value. Same as last year. The city is expected to collect $130.5 million in fiscal 2025.

Personal property tax rate for vehicles: $5 per $100 of assessed value. The city is expected to collect $36.9 million from all personal property taxes in fiscal 2025.

Portsmouth adopts $934 million budget reducing real estate tax, fully funding schools

___

Suffolk

Real estate tax rate: $1.07 per $100 of assessed value, a nominal 2-cent reduction. Last year the rate was $1.09 but the city offered a 2-cent tax credit, putting the effective rate at $1.07. The city is expected to collect $165 million in real estate taxes in fiscal 2025.

Personal property tax rate for vehicles: $4.25 per $100 of assessed value. The city is expected to collect $36 million in fiscal 2025 in personal property taxes.

___

Virginia Beach

Real estate tax rate: 97 cents per $100 of assessed value, 2-cent decrease from last year. The city is expected to collect $700 million in real estate taxes in fiscal 2025.

Personal property tax rate for vehicles: $4 per $100 of assessed value. The city is expected to collect $206.7 million from all personal property taxes in fiscal 2025.

Virginia Beach adopts $2.6 billion budget, cutting taxes and increasing city worker pay

For several months, Dominion Energy has been planning and gathering feedback from customers and nearby residents. The replacement of the decades-old infrastructure is also necessary to deliver the renewable energy generated by the Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind project — a planned 176-turbine, $9.8 billion project expected to provide enough energy to power up to 660,000 homes once completed by the end of 2026.

The project includes the construction of two new 500-kilovolt lines. The current weathering steel lattice structures measuring about 115 feet tall would be replaced with single-circuit monopoles that are 65 feet higher. It’s estimated to cost a total of $202 million, according to the application filed with the Virginia State Corporation Commission.

Since April, Dominion has received feedback from customers both in person and from surveys. In June, the utility filed an application to the State Corporation Commission seeking approval, which is expected by early next year, according to Janae Johnson, a spokesperson for Dominion who recently briefed Chesapeake City Council on the project.

If uncontested, approval could be given within eight months. Once approved, construction would be done in two phases beginning next spring. It’s estimated completion will be the end of 2026. The first phase would replace the line from the Yadkin substation to the middle of the transmission line, and the second phase would complete that route to the Fentress substation.

Johnson told council members that, since the project still awaits final SCC approval, it’s not yet known whether it’ll be Dominion employees carrying out the project or subcontractors.

Dominion recently paid Virginia Beach $19 million for about 4 miles of city easements to transmit energy from offshore. Roughly 38 acres of tree canopy in Virginia Beach will be razed to make way for the power lines. Some of the money will be used to replace trees, according to the city.

Dominion’s application states the existing right-of-way and company property provides adaquate room for the Chesapeake project.

Natalie Anderson, 757-732-1133, natalie.anderson@virginiamedia.com