A BILL to amend and reenact § 33.2-2605 of the Code of Virginia and to amend the Code of Virginia by adding sections numbered 33.2-2600.2 and 33.2-2600.3, relating to Hampton Roads Interstate Highway Corridor Improvement Program and Fund; Hampton Roads Highway Coastal Resilience Program and Fund; Planning District 23.
HB583 creates two new special nonreverting funds and corresponding programs for Planning District 23, which is Hampton Roads. The first is the Hampton Roads Interstate Highway Corridor Improvement Program and Fund, aimed at planning, developing, financing, constructing, and maintaining highway corridor projects connected to, surrounding, or paralleling interstate highways. The program specifically targets corridors that serve as ingress and egress to interstates or as alternative routes, including U.S. Routes 58 and 460, and requires the Commission to prioritize congestion relief, highway safety, project readiness, and the effects of Port of Virginia traffic.
The second is the Hampton Roads Highway Coastal Resilience Program and Fund, designed to address transportation infrastructure at risk from recurrent and coastal flooding. This program would require the Commission to identify vulnerable transportation assets, develop a long-term resilience plan, and fund projects that mitigate flooding and other coastal resilience issues. Both funds would be held in the state treasury, would not revert to the general fund at year-end, and could receive appropriations, gifts, grants, donations, and bequests.
The bill would add new sections to the Code of Virginia and expand § 33.2-2605 to incorporate the new funds into the Commission’s budget and administrative framework. It would give the Commission authority to administer both programs, select projects, manage nonreverting special funds, and use excess balances for investment under rules similar to the Transportation Trust Fund. The bill also provides that money in these funds cannot be used to reduce other state, federal, or local revenue shares for participating localities and cannot be counted in the local ability-to-pay formula used for public education aid.
The bill appears to be generally supportive of Hampton Roads transportation needs, with a focus on congestion, safety, and resilience in a region facing both heavy freight traffic and coastal flooding. However, the bill did not advance out of the Appropriations Committee and was left in committee, suggesting that while the policy goals may have been viewed favorably, there was not enough support or available funding to move it forward. No recorded votes or committee transcripts were provided, so the public record here does not show direct debate or amendments.
The main potential points of contention are fiscal and regional: the bill creates dedicated, nonreverting funds and commits state resources to a specific planning district, which may raise questions about budget priority, long-term funding commitments, and whether the programs should be funded through the general transportation system instead. Another likely issue is the scope of Commission authority in selecting projects and the extent to which the bill directs resources toward Hampton Roads corridors and coastal resilience needs versus other statewide transportation demands. Because the bill was left in Appropriations and no transcripts are available, the specific objections are not documented in the provided materials.