25.03.2013 Views

to view - Home Builders Association of Virginia

to view - Home Builders Association of Virginia

to view - Home Builders Association of Virginia

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

CounseL’s Corner<br />

The <strong>Home</strong> <strong>Builders</strong> <strong>Association</strong> <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>Virginia</strong>, the Peninsula Housing &<br />

<strong>Builders</strong> <strong>Association</strong>, NAHB and<br />

certain member builders recently<br />

enjoyed a significant vic<strong>to</strong>ry in an ongoing legal<br />

battle over a state law enacted in 2010 <strong>to</strong> provide<br />

temporary relief <strong>to</strong> the building industry. That<br />

law, for which HBAV was the leading advocate,<br />

provides a short-term benefit <strong>to</strong> the building<br />

industry by delaying certain cash pr<strong>of</strong>fer payments<br />

until a time when such payments might be more<br />

quickly recouped through sales.<br />

The law in question, codified as § 15.2-2303.1:1<br />

<strong>of</strong> the Code <strong>of</strong> <strong>Virginia</strong>, provides that, notwith-<br />

18 HBaV annual RepoRt 2012<br />

Leading the charge<br />

HBaV and peninsula developers challenge<br />

James City County cash pr<strong>of</strong>fer policy<br />

by Edward A. Mullen, Esq.<br />

standing the terms <strong>of</strong> any cash pr<strong>of</strong>fer agreement,<br />

cash payments owed on a per-unit/per-home basis<br />

may not be collected or accepted by a locality prior<br />

<strong>to</strong> the final inspection on the subject property or<br />

after the certificate <strong>of</strong> occupancy has been issued.<br />

Prior <strong>to</strong> July 1, 2010, when the statute <strong>to</strong>ok<br />

effect, localities were authorized <strong>to</strong> accept cash<br />

pr<strong>of</strong>fer payments at any time agreed <strong>to</strong> by the<br />

parties. This allowance resulted in many localities<br />

demanding cash pr<strong>of</strong>fer payments at a point so<br />

early in the development process (e.g., site plan<br />

approval or building permit approval) that it could<br />

take months or even years for builders <strong>to</strong> recoup<br />

their costs through sales, if at all. Acknowledging<br />

Preferred Propane Provider by<br />

<strong>Virginia</strong> <strong>Builders</strong> since 1960.<br />

“Call me. I’ll hammer out your job site’s<br />

propane details so you don’t have <strong>to</strong>.”<br />

Rick Hamlet<br />

804.783.9518<br />

Richard.Hamlet@amerigas.com<br />

www.AmeriGas.com<br />

the impact <strong>of</strong> the economic downturn on the building<br />

industry, the General Assembly elected <strong>to</strong> curb<br />

this local practice for a limited period <strong>of</strong> time (the<br />

statute is now set <strong>to</strong> expire July 1, 2017).<br />

Application was not uniform<br />

Unfortunately, application <strong>of</strong> the statute has not<br />

been uniform across the Commonwealth. Since its<br />

enactment, certain local governments have questioned<br />

whether the statute applies <strong>to</strong> cash payments owed<br />

pursuant <strong>to</strong> pr<strong>of</strong>fer agreements entered prior <strong>to</strong> the<br />

statute’s July 1, 2010, effective date.<br />

As a result, in July 2010, HBAV asked Delegate<br />

Chris Peace <strong>of</strong> Hanover <strong>to</strong> support the building industry<br />

by requesting an <strong>of</strong>ficial opinion <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Virginia</strong><br />

at<strong>to</strong>rney general declaring that the statute applied<br />

<strong>to</strong> pr<strong>of</strong>fer agreements entered prior <strong>to</strong> its effective<br />

date. Peace gladly made the request and on Sept.<br />

13, 2010, At<strong>to</strong>rney General Ken Cuccinelli opined<br />

that, so long as it is effective, the plain language <strong>of</strong><br />

the statute and its legislative his<strong>to</strong>ry make clear that<br />

the General Assembly intended the statute <strong>to</strong> be<br />

retroactive (i.e., applying <strong>to</strong> pr<strong>of</strong>fers formed prior<br />

<strong>to</strong> its effective date).<br />

Even after the at<strong>to</strong>rney general’s opinion was<br />

issued, a very few localities, including James City<br />

County and Chesterfield County, still refused <strong>to</strong><br />

apply the statute <strong>to</strong> per-lot cash pr<strong>of</strong>fers formed prior<br />

<strong>to</strong> July 1, 2010, without condition. As a result, the<br />

2011 General Assembly passed, and the governor<br />

signed, an act <strong>to</strong> extend the effective period <strong>of</strong><br />

the statute from its original expiration (July 1,<br />

2014) until July 1, 2015. It also allows landowners<br />

forced <strong>to</strong> enforce their rights under the statute <strong>to</strong><br />

collect reasonable at<strong>to</strong>rney’s fees and costs from<br />

recalcitrant localities.<br />

Further, the 2012 General Assembly passed<br />

legislation <strong>to</strong> extend the statute’s sunset date until<br />

July 1, 2017, and <strong>to</strong> prohibit localities from penalizing<br />

landowners for asserting their rights under the

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!