Greening Chesapeake: 2026

August Newsletter

In this edition ● Follow us on Facebook ● Data Center Ordinance and Policy ● Chesapeake Sustainability Network ● Planning Commission ● City Council ● Green Drinks ● Action Alerts ● Volunteer Opportunities ● In the News

Topics of Interest

Data Center Policy

Chesapeake Comp Plan

Greenbrier Area Plan

Streetscape rendering from Plan

General Assembly 2026

Urban Forestry

Bike & Ped Facilities

Candidate Survey Responses - Amanda Newins

1. Considering data center ordinance changes under consideration in Chesapeake, what policies would you support regarding the siting of data centers and the management of associated impacts, such as setbacks, noise, pollution, water use, energy demand, backup generators, environmental impacts, and infrastructure costs?

Answer: Chesapeake should not sacrifice our neighborhoods, rural communities, natural resources, water supply, or quality of life for unchecked industrial growth. I have been one of the strongest voices on Council pushing back against inappropriate data center development. Last year, I led the charge against a proposed data center on Centerville Turnpike that was positioned immediately adjacent to a residential neighborhood. I have also led the charge to prevent the expansion of data centers into rural Chesapeake, where these massive industrial facilities are fundamentally incompatible with our agricultural land, rural character, and surrounding communities.
More recently, I moved to eliminate data centers as a by-right use and establishing a moratorium while the City develops stronger standards. I have also asked for an opinion from the Virginia Attorney General to determine whether Chesapeake has the legal authority to ban data centers altogether, because our legal staff has advised Council that the City currently cannot do so. I believe we have an obligation to fully explore every legal option available to protect our residents.
Going forward, if we cannot ban data centers, they should be located only where they are compatible with surrounding land uses and where the developer, not existing residents, is responsible for the infrastructure costs created by the project. I support meaningful setbacks from homes, stronger noise and lighting standards, careful review of water consumption and groundwater impacts, requirements addressing air pollution and backup generators, and consideration of the demands placed on our electric grid and infrastructure. We need to take a comprehensive approach without sacrificing the quality of life, natural resources, and character that make our city special.

2. How would you promote making more clean energy available to residents, businesses, and institutions in Chesapeake? What is your position on siting of battery energy storage systems (BESS) and utility scale solar? What do you believe the City can do to promote rooftop, balcony, and parking lot solar?

Answer: I support expanding access to reliable, affordable clean energy in ways that make sense for Chesapeake. We should encourage rooftop solar on homes and businesses, solar on appropriate parking facilities, and other projects that use already-developed land rather than unnecessarily converting productive farmland, forests, or open space.
I believe battery energy storage systems and utility-scale solar should be carefully and appropriately sited. I have opposed industrial uses such as large battery storage facilities when they are proposed too close to homes, schools, and established communities. Clean energy should not come at the expense of residents’ safety or quality of life.
For rooftop and parking-lot solar, Chesapeake can lead by making permitting straightforward, identifying appropriate public facilities and parking areas, and considering solar opportunities when constructing or renovating City facilities if cost efficient.

3. Between 2014 and 2021, the City had a net loss of over 800 acres of trees, largely to development. What polices will you support to protect tree canopy during development? Would you support increasing the tree canopy requirement on site plans for low-density single-family home development?

Answer: Chesapeake’s trees are an important part of our quality of life, helping manage stormwater, reduce heat, protect air and water quality, and preserve the character of our communities. Protecting tree canopy should be part of responsible development rather than something considered after the fact.
I would support stronger tree-preservation and replanting requirements where appropriate, particularly on large development projects, while recognizing that requirements need to be practical for individual homeowners as well. We should prioritize preserving mature trees and meaningful natural areas rather than simply replacing trees one-for-one after they are removed.

4. Our region faces a significant shortage of housing that is affordable to people earning the area median income or less. How would you promote building more housing in communities that maintains a high quality of life and a healthy and livable environment?

Answer: We can expand housing opportunities without abandoning the character that makes Chesapeake a desirable place to live. I support responsible growth that puts housing where existing roads, schools, utilities, public safety services, and other infrastructure can support it.
We should encourage appropriate infill and redevelopment and development that is close to existing services and employment centers when appropriate. At the same time, we should not solve a housing shortage by simply pushing development farther into rural areas, forests, wetlands, and agricultural land. Good planning means creating housing opportunities while protecting the infrastructure, open space, and quality of life residents depend on.

5. Chesapeake continues to experience flooding, sea level rise, and increasingly intense rainfall. What are your priorities for improving flood resilience to protect neighborhoods, businesses, and natural resources?

Answer: Flood resilience should be treated as both an infrastructure priority and an environmental priority. We need to continue investing in stormwater infrastructure, drainage improvements, culvert capacity, pump systems, and maintenance while making sure new development does not worsen flooding for existing neighborhoods. I also support protecting wetlands, forests, open space, and other natural areas that help absorb and manage stormwater.

6. One of the top resident priorities is "Preservation of large areas of open space and forest.*" How should Chesapeake balance continued economic growth with the preservation of open space, forests, wetlands, farms and rural character? How would you expand the City's urban forestry and natural lands management, such planting and maintaining trees, managing invasive plants, maintaining natural trails, and training staff on best practices? * As reported in the Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Master Plan study.

Answer: Economic growth and environmental stewardship do not have to be competing goals. My approach is to make sure growth occurs in the right places and does not undermine the qualities that make Chesapeake special. Protecting our farms, forests, wetlands, waterways, and rural communities is protecting our quality of life.
Chesapeake should continue to use thoughtful land-use planning, open-space preservation, conservation tools, and infrastructure planning to direct development toward appropriate areas. We should also look for opportunities to expand tree planting, maintain existing City trees, control invasive species, preserve and improve natural trails, and train City staff in modern urban forestry and natural-land management practices. Our character is one of Chesapeake’s greatest assets.

7. Considering that many daily trips that people make are over short distances, often less than 1 or 2 miles, how would you work to make our streets safer and more connected for people walking, biking, and using mobility devices?

Answer: I support a Chesapeake where residents can safely walk, bike, or use mobility devices when they choose to do so. That means continuing to invest in sidewalks, trails, crosswalks, lighting, safe crossings, and connections between neighborhoods, schools, parks, businesses, and other destinations.
Our Comprehensive Plan already recognizes the importance of sidewalks, infrastructure improvements, and connected communities. We should prioritize projects that close gaps in our existing network and make routes safer rather than simply building disconnected segments. Safety must remain the first consideration, particularly around schools and high-traffic roadways.

8. How would you improve access to public transportation in our City?

Answer: Public transportation should be convenient, reliable, safe, and connected to where people live and work. I would support continued coordination with regional transportation partners to identify opportunities to improve routes, frequency, and connections.

9. Considering the new 25-year contract the City signed with SPSA for combined single-bin trash and recycling collection, and considering the steadily increasing tipping fees (cost per ton collected) associated with the new contract, what steps should the City take to encourage residents, businesses, schools, and institutions to REDUCE the amount of solid waste put out for collection?

Answer: The best way to control long-term waste costs is to reduce the amount of waste we generate in the first place. The City should expand education about recycling and waste reduction and work with schools, businesses, and community organizations on practical programs that encourage reuse, composting where appropriate, and responsible disposal.
The City should measure the effectiveness of its waste-reduction efforts and look for opportunities to reduce costs while improving environmental outcomes.

10. Would you support implementing a 5¢ fee on plastic bags to encourage the use of reusable shopping bags and to fund local environmental cleanup, litter and pollution mitigation, or environmental education efforts, and/or to provide reusable bags to recipients of SNAP or WIC benefits? Why or why not?

Answer: No, I would not support a 5¢ tax or fee on plastic bags. I support the goal of reducing plastic waste, litter, and pollution, but I do not believe adding another cost to citizens, particularly families already struggling with the rising cost of living, is the best way to accomplish it.
Instead, I would support pursuing voluntary and incentive-based approaches that encourage reusable bags without placing an additional burden on residents. The City could partner with local businesses and community organizations to provide reusable bags, expand environmental education and litter-prevention programs, and encourage retailers to offer incentives or discounts for customers who bring reusable bags.
Protecting our environment is important, but we should find smarter solutions that change behavior and reduce waste without reaching further into the pockets of Chesapeake families.

11. What steps would you take to improve transparency and public engagement in land use and development decisions?

Answer: Residents deserve to understand what is being proposed in their neighborhoods, what the potential impacts are, and when they have an opportunity to be heard. I support earlier and more meaningful public engagement rather than waiting until a project reaches the final stages of the approval process.
The City should make development information easier to find and understand, provide clear explanations of proposed changes, and give residents adequate notice and meaningful opportunities to participate. Staff reports should clearly identify potential impacts on traffic, schools, utilities, public safety, water, stormwater, environmental resources, and surrounding neighborhoods.

12. What other sustainability, environmental, or quality-of-life issue do you believe deserves greater attention? Please elaborate.

Answer: I believe we need to place greater emphasis on the connection between quality of life, responsible development, and infrastructure capacity. Environmental protection is not separate from quality of life, it is a fundamental part of it.
That would mean protecting our waterways and drinking water, preserving forests and open space, reducing flooding, maintaining our rural character, and making sure development does not overwhelm roads, utilities, schools, or public safety services. It also means recognizing that once we lose a farm, mature forest, wetland, or natural area to
As a Council Member, I have focused on putting Chesapeake first and my most recent actions regarding data centers and industrial uses near residential communities reflect that approach. We can welcome investment and economic development while still insisting that growth be responsible, appropriately located, and compatible with the community.

Candidate Survey Responses - Dr. Janelle St Louis

Answer: I believe Chesapeake must approach data center development with extreme caution. My position begins with a simple principle: economic development should improve the quality of life of Chesapeake residents, not compromise their health, environment, infrastructure, or neighborhoods. I have listened to residents across Chesapeake, and the message I continue to hear is clear: they do not want our city transformed into another major data center corridor. As a candidate for City Council, I believe it is my responsibility to listen to those concerns and act accordingly.
I support the decision to eliminate the by right allowance for data centers under the city’s existing zoning framework. Facilities of this size, intensity, and potential environmental impact should never be permitted without public review and direct accountability from City Council. I also support the decision to defer opening additional areas of Chesapeake to data center development while the city develops a comprehensive policy.
The Planning Commission’s proposed amendments represented important additional protections. The Commission recommended increasing the proposed setbacks from 100 feet from a property line and 500 feet from an existing residence to 1,320 feet, or one-quarter mile, from the property line and 2,640 feet, or one half mile, from existing residences. The Commission also recommended lowering allowable low-frequency noise levels to 55 dBC at night and 60 dBC during the day and applying those protections to all neighboring property types, rather than limiting them only to residential properties. Additional language emphasized protecting existing communities and minimizing infrastructure impacts.
Although City Council did not adopt the Planning Commission amendments and instead placed a temporary eight-month moratorium on data centers while work continues on a final policy, I believe this period should be used to strengthen Chesapeake’s protections, not weaken them. If elected, the policies I would advocate for include:
1. Strong siting restrictions and meaningful setbacks. I support, at minimum, the Planning Commission’s recommended one-quarter-mile setback from property lines and one-half-mile setback from existing residences. I would also support additional protections for schools, childcare facilities, healthcare facilities, parks, environmentally sensitive areas, wetlands, conservation areas, and other locations where industrial development could negatively affect residents or natural resources. Setbacks should be viewed as minimum protections, not an automatic entitlement to build. Meaning a setback requirement should not, by itself, mean that a proposed data center is appropriate for a particular location.
2. No by-right data centers. Every proposed data center should require a conditional use permit and a public hearing before City Council. Residents deserve to know what is being proposed in their communities and to have a meaningful opportunity to influence the decision before a project is approved. I would support robust community engagement requirements before an application reaches City Council, including neighborhood meetings, accessible project information, disclosure of anticipated environmental and infrastructure impacts, and restrictions on nondisclosure agreements that prevent the public from understanding projects being considered in their community.
3. Strict and enforceable noise protections. Noise is not simply a nuisance issue; chronic noise can become a quality-of-life and public health concern. Data centers operate continuously, and cooling equipment, mechanical systems, electrical infrastructure, and backup generators can produce persistent sound, including low frequency noise. I support the Planning Commission’s recommendation of maximum low-frequency noise levels of 55 dBC at night and 60 dBC during the day, applicable to all neighboring properties. I would also require independent pre-construction sound modeling, post-construction testing, continuous monitoring where appropriate, publicly accessible compliance information, and meaningful enforcement when facilities exceed allowable limits. Noise-generating equipment should also be located and oriented away from homes, schools, parks, and other sensitive uses whenever possible.
4. Protection of Chesapeake’s water resources. Data centers can require significant amounts of water depending upon the cooling technology used. Chesapeake should not approve projects without knowing exactly how much potable water they will require and how that demand could affect residents, businesses, agriculture, emergency capacity, and future growth. I would require applicants to disclose projected annual and peak water consumption and identify their cooling technology before approval. Chesapeake should prioritize technologies that minimize potable water consumption, encourage closed loop or other water efficient cooling systems, and require water conservation and reuse wherever feasible. Our residents should never be asked to conserve water while extraordinarily water-intensive industrial facilities receive preferential access to our resources.
5. Energy demand and grid impacts. The extraordinary electricity demands associated with large data centers deserve serious scrutiny. Before approving a project, Chesapeake should understand its projected energy consumption, necessary transmission infrastructure, effects on grid reliability, and potential long term costs to residents. I support requiring comprehensive energy impact assessments and coordination with utilities before approval. I would also encourage renewable and clean energy procurement, energy efficiency standards, and technologies that reduce peak demand. Most importantly, residential customers and small businesses should not be forced to subsidize infrastructure upgrades necessitated primarily by large data center developments.
6. Backup generators, air pollution, and public health. Large data center campuses may require numerous diesel powered backup generators. While those generators may operate primarily during emergencies and testing, their cumulative emissions and noise must be considered. As a healthcare professional, I view environmental policy through a public health lens. Air quality matters, particularly for children, older adults, and people with respiratory or cardiovascular conditions. I would require applicants to disclose the number, type, capacity, emissions profile, testing schedule, and anticipated operation of backup generators. Chesapeake should establish limits on testing hours, require best available emissions control technology, encourage cleaner backup technologies as they become feasible, and evaluate cumulative emissions rather than treating each generator independently.
7. Developers must pay the infrastructure costs they create. This is one of my strongest positions. Chesapeake taxpayers should not subsidize private data center development. If a data center requires road improvements, electrical infrastructure, utility expansion, water or sewer improvements, stormwater facilities, emergency service capacity, or other public infrastructure, the developer should bear the costs attributable to that project. Before approving any data center, City Council should receive a transparent fiscal impact analysis comparing projected tax revenue with the full short and long term public costs associated with the development. Promises of increased tax revenue are not enough. We need to know the net benefit to Chesapeake after infrastructure, environmental, public safety, utility, and other costs are considered.
8. Protect existing communities first. My position ultimately comes down to whom local government is supposed to serve. Chesapeake’s residents have already invested in their homes, neighborhoods, farms, businesses, and communities. We should not force existing residents to absorb industrial noise, additional pollution, environmental risks, infrastructure costs, or dramatic changes to their quality of life simply to accommodate a new industry. I support the eight month moratorium because Chesapeake needs me to get this policy right. However, the moratorium should result in stronger protections and greater transparency, not simply a roadmap for where the industry can expand next. I am not convinced that large scale data center development is the right economic development strategy for Chesapeake. The burden should therefore be on the applicant to demonstrate that a project provides a genuine, measurable, long term benefit to our city without shifting environmental, health, infrastructure, or financial costs onto our residents. I have listened. Chesapeake residents are telling us they want their neighborhoods, environment, infrastructure, and quality of life protected. I intend to be their voice on City Council.

Answer: I support expanding clean and renewable energy in Chesapeake because reducing our carbon footprint is an investment in our environment, our public health, and the long-term resilience of our city. I believe solar energy should be a significant part of that strategy. The City can encourage greater access to rooftop, balcony, and parking lot solar by reviewing unnecessary permitting barriers, streamlining approval processes, educating residents and businesses about available incentives, and exploring solar installations on appropriate City owned buildings and parking facilities. We should also encourage partnerships that make solar more accessible to residents who may not be able to afford the upfront costs.
I support responsibly sited utility scale solar, but location matters. Projects should protect environmentally sensitive areas, agricultural land, neighborhoods, and Chesapeake’s character while providing meaningful benefits to our community.
I am more cautious about Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS). Battery storage can help make renewable energy more reliable, but large scale systems also present legitimate public safety concerns, including thermal runaway events that can be extremely difficult to extinguish and may require firefighters to focus on containment while the affected batteries burn. Before approving BESS facilities, I would want rigorous fire safety standards, appropriate setbacks, emergency response plans, environmental protections, and meaningful consultation with our Fire Department and surrounding communities.
Most importantly, I believe residents deserve a real voice in decisions that affect their neighborhoods. I am running to represent the people of Chesapeake, not to predetermine every land use decision before hearing from them. I support clean energy and reducing our carbon footprint, but our transition must also be safe, responsible, transparent, and responsive to the citizens we serve.

Answer: As Chesapeake continues to grow, we have to be intentional about protecting the natural resources that make our city a great place to live. Losing more than 800 acres of trees in just seven years is concerning, particularly as we face increased development, flooding, extreme heat, and stormwater challenges.
I support stronger policies that prioritize preserving mature trees during development, require thoughtful replacement when removal is unavoidable, and encourage developers to incorporate existing tree canopy and green space into site design rather than clearing first and replacing later.
I would also support increasing tree canopy requirements for low density single family developments, provided the requirements are practical, environmentally sound, and do not unnecessarily increase the cost of housing. Smart growth means finding that balance.
Trees are not simply an aesthetic amenity. They help manage stormwater, reduce flooding and heat, improve air quality, and protect the character of our neighborhoods. As a Councilwoman, I will support responsible development that allows Chesapeake to grow without sacrificing the environment and quality of life we are responsible for protecting for future generations.

Answer: Housing affordability is one of the most pressing challenges facing Chesapeake and Hampton Roads. I believe people who work in our city should have a realistic opportunity to live here, including our teachers, first responders, healthcare workers, young families, seniors, and other working residents.
I support increasing our housing supply through responsible, smart growth. That includes exploring the redevelopment of underutilized commercial properties, encouraging a variety of housing options at different price points, and reviewing zoning and development policies that unnecessarily drive up the cost of housing.
However, affordability cannot come at the expense of quality of life. New development must be supported by adequate roads, schools, drainage, utilities, green space, and public safety resources. We should also protect tree canopy, environmentally sensitive areas, and established neighborhoods.
I want Chesapeake to grow thoughtfully, not simply grow for the sake of growth. My goal is balanced development that creates attainable housing while protecting the healthy, safe, and livable communities that make people want to call Chesapeake home in the first place.

Answer: Flooding is not just an infrastructure issue. It is a public safety, economic, environmental, and quality of life issue. As a healthcare professional, I also recognize the public health consequences when families repeatedly experience flooding, property damage, mold, displacement, and financial hardship.
My priority is to make Chesapeake more proactive rather than simply responding after neighborhoods flood. I support investing in modern stormwater and drainage infrastructure, addressing chronic flooding areas, maintaining ditches and drainage systems, and incorporating updated rainfall and sea level rise projections into our long term planning and development decisions.
We also need to recognize that some of our best flood protection already exists in nature. Trees absorb rainfall and their root systems help water soak into the ground instead of immediately becoming stormwater runoff. Preserving tree canopy and reducing unnecessary clearing can decrease the amount and speed of water entering our drainage systems during heavy rainfall. Wetlands and other natural areas can also capture and temporarily store stormwater, helping reduce pressure on neighborhoods and infrastructure.
That is why I support protecting wetlands, preserving mature trees and tree canopy, expanding green infrastructure, and carefully considering development in environmentally sensitive areas and areas prone to flooding. We cannot continue removing natural protections, replacing them with impervious surfaces such as concrete and pavement, and then wonder why our drainage systems are overwhelmed. New development should be designed so that it does not worsen flooding for existing neighborhoods.
I will also advocate for Chesapeake to aggressively pursue state and federal resilience funding so the entire burden does not fall on local taxpayers. Protecting our homes, businesses, natural resources, and infrastructure requires us to plan today for the Chesapeake we will face tomorrow.

Answer: Chesapeake does not have to choose between economic growth and protecting the natural resources that make our city special. We need responsible growth that recognizes our forests, wetlands, farms, waterways, and rural communities as assets worth protecting.
I support directing growth toward areas where infrastructure can appropriately support it while being more intentional about preserving large areas of open space, environmentally sensitive land, wetlands, and Chesapeake’s rural character. Development decisions should consider the cumulative impact of removing forests and replacing natural land with impervious surfaces. Once mature forests, wetlands, and farmland are lost, they can be extremely difficult to restore.
I also support strengthening Chesapeake’s urban forestry and natural lands management. That means planting more trees on public property and in areas with limited tree canopy, but it also means maintaining the trees we already have. We should develop strong maintenance plans, manage invasive plants that threaten native vegetation, preserve and maintain natural trails, and ensure City staff receive training in current forestry, conservation, and land management practices. I would also support partnerships with community organizations, schools, environmental groups, and volunteers to help expand these efforts.
Preserving our natural environment is also part of our infrastructure strategy. Trees help absorb rainfall and reduce stormwater runoff. Wetlands naturally store water and provide protection during heavy rain and flooding. Forests improve air and water quality while providing wildlife habitat and recreational opportunities.
Economic development should improve our quality of life, not require us to sacrifice it. As Chesapeake grows, I want us to measure success not simply by how much we build, but by how responsibly we grow and how much of Chesapeake’s natural character we preserve for the generations that come after us.

Answer: Transportation infrastructure is about more than moving cars. It is about moving people safely. In a city as geographically large and diverse as Chesapeake, we will always need our road network, but residents should not have to get into a car simply to travel a mile to a park, school, neighborhood business, or community facility.
Chesapeake already has a framework to move us in the right direction. The City’s Trails and Connectivity Plan, adopted in 2024, calls for an integrated network of sidewalks, shared use paths, bikeways, trails, and other connections that are accessible to residents of all ages and abilities. Chesapeake 2045 goes even further by calling for a safe and equitable active transportation network, closing sidewalk gaps, installing crosswalks, and incorporating walking and biking infrastructure into new development and future roadway projects.
As a Councilwoman, I would focus on turning those plans into visible improvements in our neighborhoods. I support prioritizing sidewalk gaps, particularly around schools, parks, senior communities, commercial areas, and neighborhoods where residents currently have few safe alternatives to driving. I also support safer and more visible crosswalks, accessible curb ramps, appropriate lighting, protected bicycle infrastructure where feasible, and shared use paths that connect neighborhoods rather than ending abruptly.
Accessibility must be central to these decisions. A sidewalk that ends unexpectedly or lacks an accessible curb ramp is an inconvenience for some residents, but it can become a significant barrier for someone using a wheelchair, walker, or other mobility device. Chesapeake’s own planning for an aging population recognizes the importance of sidewalks, curb cuts, crosswalks, and accessible infrastructure connecting residents to medical, recreational, employment, and other community destinations.
I would also expect new development to contribute to connectivity. When we approve new neighborhoods and commercial developments, we should be thinking beyond the boundaries of an individual project and asking how people will safely walk or bike from that development to the surrounding community. Chesapeake 2045 specifically recommends incorporating active transportation facilities into new developments and City projects when they can connect neighborhoods with schools, libraries, commercial areas, parks, transit routes, and other destinations.
Finally, we need to prioritize investments based on safety, connectivity, and demonstrated community need while aggressively pursuing state and federal transportation grants to leverage local dollars. Chesapeake already has a Citywide Sidewalk Installation project intended to improve safety and connectivity between neighborhoods. I want to build upon that work and ensure our investments close meaningful gaps rather than creating isolated pieces of infrastructure.
For me, this is about giving people choices. A child should be able to walk or bike safely to a nearby park. A senior should be able to walk through their community without encountering an inaccessible intersection. A person using a wheelchair should be able to travel a continuous accessible route. Creating safer, more connected streets makes Chesapeake healthier, more accessible, and more livable for everyone.

8. How would you improve access to public transportation in our City?

Answer: Improving public transportation in Chesapeake requires us to acknowledge a basic reality. A transportation system is only useful if people can actually get where they need to go, when they need to get there.
Chesapeake currently has 12 HRT routes, including two express routes, but our own Chesapeake 2045 Comprehensive Plan identifies significant challenges. Many routes operate only once an hour, some stop service around 7:00 or 7:30 in the evening, and four routes do not operate on Sundays. That does not adequately serve someone working an evening shift, a weekend job, or a resident who depends on public transportation to reach healthcare, education, or essential services.
As a Councilwoman, I would focus on solutions in four areas: frequency, accessibility, connectivity, and innovation.
First, I would work with Hampton Roads Transit to evaluate our existing routes using ridership data and community input and identify where increased frequency and expanded evening and weekend service would have the greatest impact. Chesapeake helps fund HRT and provides guidance on preferred routes, so City Council has a responsibility to advocate for a system that better reflects the needs of our residents.
Second, we have to solve the first and last mile problem. A bus route may technically serve an area, but that means very li le if a resident lives too far from the stop or cannot safely reach it. Chesapeake’s OnDemand Ride sharing program is an opportunity to address that challenge. HRT expanded this micro-transit service into Chesapeake in January 2026 specifically to serve areas with limited fixed route service and connect residents to the larger transit network. I would closely evaluate the results of this program and, if the data demonstrate that it is working, advocate for its continuation and strategic expansion.
Third, transit planning and land use planning need to work together. I want better connections between residential communities and major employment centers, healthcare facilities, schools, shopping areas, and regional transportation hubs. We also need sidewalks, accessible curb ramps, safe crossings, lighting, and appropriate bus shelters so that seniors, people with disabilities, and residents without vehicles can safely reach transit. Public transportation cannot be planned in isolation from the infrastructure surrounding it.
Finally, I believe Chesapeake should continue evaluating higher capacity transit for our future. HRT and Chesapeake have already been studying options including express bus service, bus rapid transit, and light rail, and in 2026 HRT moved forward with additional feasibility analysis for bus rapid transit connecting Chesapeake with Downtown Norfolk. I am not interested in selecting a transportation mode simply because it sounds impressive. I want to understand the cost, projected ridership, economic development potential, regional connectivity, and long term benefit to Chesapeake taxpayers before making that investment.
My approach is practical. Improve the service we have, fill the gaps where traditional bus routes do not work, connect transportation investments to where people actually live and work, and pursue state and federal transportation dollars so Chesapeake taxpayers are not carrying the entire burden.
For residents who cannot drive because of age, disability, income, or circumstance, transportation can determine whether they can get to work, see a doctor, buy groceries, or participate in their community. I want Chesapeake to build a transportation system that provides people with greater access to opportunity, not one that assumes everyone has access to a car.

Answer: With Chesapeake entering a long term waste management agreement and facing increasing tipping fees, reducing the amount of waste we generate is no longer simply an environmental objective. It is also a fiscal responsibility. Every ton of unnecessary material we keep out of the waste stream represents an opportunity to control future costs for our residents.
My approach would begin with a simple principle: the least expensive ton of waste to manage is the ton we never generate. That is also consistent with the EPA’s waste management hierarchy, which prioritizes source reduction and reuse before recycling, energy recovery, and disposal.
First, Chesapeake should establish measurable waste reduction goals and begin routinely evaluating what is actually entering our waste stream. We cannot effectively manage what we do not measure. I would support periodic waste audits and publicly reporting our progress so Council and residents can see whether our strategies are actually reducing the number of tons for which the City is paying.
Second, we should launch a strong public education campaign focused on reducing waste before it reaches the bin. That means helping households understand how to reduce unnecessary packaging, reuse materials, donate usable household goods, and purchase more intentionally. Our schools can play an important role by teaching waste reduction and environmental stewardship early, while the City can provide businesses and institutions with practical guidance for reducing their waste.
Food waste deserves par cular a en on. EPA research identifies wasted food as the single most common material sent to landfills and incinerators nationally. Chesapeake should explore expanded opportunities for backyard and community composting, food donation partnerships, and eventually larger scale organics diversion where it is economically feasible. Restaurants, grocery stores, schools, hospitals, and other large institutions should be encouraged to conduct food waste audits, improve purchasing practices, and donate safe surplus food rather than disposing of it. EPA identifies preventing wasted food, donation, and up cycling among the most environmentally preferable approaches.
Third, the City should lead by example. I would support waste reduction standards within City government, including reducing unnecessary single use products, expanding electronic processes, purchasing durable and reusable products when practical, and incorporating recycled content and reduced packaging into procurement decisions. We should also work with Chesapeake Public Schools and other public institutions to identify opportunities to reduce waste across their operations.
I would also like Chesapeake to strengthen its culture of reuse. Community repair events, donation programs, textile collection, and convenient opportunities to reuse furniture, electronics, building materials, and other household goods can extend the useful life of products while keeping them out of our waste stream.
Finally, I believe incentives are generally more effective than simply telling people to produce less trash. I would explore recognition programs and other practical incentives for businesses, schools, neighborhoods, and institutions that demonstrate meaningful waste reduction. Before implementing any program that creates additional costs for residents or businesses, I would want clear data demonstrating that the program would reduce our overall waste disposal costs.
A 25 year agreement requires 25 year thinking. We should not spend the next quarter century simply figuring out how to dispose of an ever increasing amount of waste. We should be working upstream to reduce how much waste Chesapeake produces in the first place.
That is the approach I would bring to City Council: measure the problem, reduce waste at its source, expand reuse and organics diversion, educate and incentivize our community, and hold ourselves accountable for results. That protects our environment, extends the life of our regional waste infrastructure, and most importantly, helps protect Chesapeake taxpayers from unnecessary costs.

Answer: I would not support implementing a 5¢ plastic bag fee at this time. While I strongly believe we have a responsibility to protect Chesapeake’s environment and preserve it for future generations, I do not believe the answer should be another cost passed on to our residents. Families are already stretched financially. The cost of housing, groceries, transportation, utilities, healthcare, and other necessities continues to put pressure on household budgets. I see firsthand in healthcare that some people are making difficult decisions about how to pay for food, household expenses, and their prescriptions. Even a seemingly small additional fee can matter when families are counting every dollar.
Environmental stewardship and affordability should not have to compete with one another. Rather than beginning with a fee, I would support stronger environmental education, voluntary reusable-bag initiatives, partnerships with businesses to reduce single-use plastics, expanded litter and pollution prevention efforts, and programs that make reusable bags readily available—particularly to residents receiving SNAP or WIC benefits.
We also need to do a better job of helping residents understand how litter, plastic waste, flooding, water quality, loss of tree canopy, and other environmental challenges affect Chesapeake’s quality of life. When people understand what is at stake and are given practical and affordable ways to participate, we can build a culture of environmental responsibility without making everyday necessities more expensive.
My goal would be to protect both our environment and our residents’ pocketbooks. We can encourage responsible choices, reduce waste, and preserve Chesapeake for the next generation without automatically placing another financial burden on families who are already stretched thin.

11. What steps would you take to improve transparency and public engagement in land use and development decisions?

Answer: Land use decisions are some of the most consequential decisions City Council makes because they can permanently change the character of a neighborhood, affect traffic and flooding, place additional demands on schools and infrastructure, and impact property owners for generations. Residents should never feel as though they learned about a major development after the important decisions had already been made.
Chesapeake currently requires public notice for many land use applications through signs posted on the property, notification letters to adjacent property owners, newspaper advertisements, and public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council. The City also provides an online development map and allows residents to submit electronic comments to the Planning Commission. Those are important tools, but I believe we can do more.
As a Councilwoman, I would advocate for earlier public engagement. The first meaningful conversation with residents should not occur at the final public hearing. For major developments or projects with substantial impacts on surrounding communities, I would encourage community mee ngs earlier in the process so residents can ask questions, identify concerns, and potentially influence a proposal before it reaches the point of an up or down vote.
I would also support making development information easier for the average resident to understand. Chesapeake’s development mapping system allows residents to locate proposed developments and track applications, but accessing the underlying application documents requires residents to register for an eBUILD account. I would like us to move toward a more user friendly system where residents can easily see what is proposed, the location, number and type of housing units or commercial uses, traffic implications, environmental considerations, infrastructure impacts, upcoming meeting dates, and the current status of an application in one place.
Notification should also reflect how people communicate today. In addition to legally required notices, I would support exploring voluntary email or text alerts that residents could subscribe to based on their neighborhood, ZIP code, or geographic area. If a significant rezoning or development proposal is moving forward near someone’s home, they should have a reasonable opportunity to know about it and participate.
Transparency also means explaining decisions. Chesapeake 2045 makes clear that City Council considers the application, staff recommendation, Planning Commission recommendation, public comments, and the Comprehensive Plan before approving or denying a land use application. When Council makes a major land use decision, particularly when that decision differs from significant community input, residents deserve to understand the reasoning behind the vote.
Finally, public engagement must be meaningful, not performative. Listening to residents does not mean that every person will agree with every decision, but it does mean their concerns should be heard, considered, and addressed with facts. I want developers, residents, Planning Commission, City staff, and Council communicating earlier and more openly.
Growth will continue to come to Chesapeake. My responsibility on City Council would be to make sure it happens transparently, thoughtfully, and with residents at the table. People should not have to fight City Hall simply to understand what is being proposed in their own community.

12. What other sustainability, environmental, or quality-of-life issue do you believe deserves greater attention? Please elaborate.

Answer: One issue that deserves greater attention is the connection between our environment, our built infrastructure, and public health. As a clinical pharmacist and healthcare advocate, I view sustainability through a public health lens. Where we live, the air we breathe, our exposure to extreme heat, whether our neighborhoods flood, and whether residents can safely walk and be physically active all have consequences for health.
I believe Chesapeake should place greater emphasis on creating healthy neighborhoods, particularly as our city continues to grow. That means preserving tree canopy and expanding trees in areas where shade is limited. Trees do more than beautify a community. They provide shade, reduce surrounding temperatures, absorb stormwater, improve air quality, and make walking and outdoor activity more comfortable.
I also believe we need to consider environmental impacts when making land use decisions. Communities should not disproportionately experience increased truck traffic, noise, air pollution, flooding, or other environmental burdens because of where development is located. When considering major projects, I would ask not only what they contribute economically, but also what they mean for the health and quality of life of the people who already live nearby.
Another important component is designing communities that encourage healthy living. Sidewalks, connected trails, parks, safe crossings, green space, and access to recreation are not simply amenities. They give residents opportunities to walk, exercise, interact with their neighbors, and remain active as they age.
For me, sustainability is ultimately about stewardship. Economic development, environmental protection, infrastructure, and public health should not exist in separate conversations. The decisions we make about development today will determine what Chesapeake looks and feels like decades from now. I want us to build a city where economic progress and quality of life reinforce one another, while ensuring that the Chesapeake we leave to the next generation is healthier, more resilient, and just as beautiful as the one we inherited.

Candidate Survey Responses - Jennifer Naperala

Answer: I am entirely opposed to allowing the establishment of large-scale data centers in Chesapeake.
Evidence proves that data centers don’t offer anything valuable to residents: they will only provide short-term gig employment throughout the construction process. Once they are built, the need for employees drastically decreases, while the harm to residents and eco-systems is immeasurable.
Technology is constantly changing.
Why on earth would any city council entertain damaging quality of life on such a massive scale to appease any desire to profit from an evolving “resource” that draws closer to obsolescence every day?

Answer: To promote clean energy buy-in among our residents, businesses, and institutions, we should first look to Fairfax, Prince William, and Loudon Counties in order to inform ourselves about incentives that did and did not work for them. An informative public advertising campaign encouraging residents to explore clean solar energy would likely reap benefits.
I recognize the need for BESS as we move away from fossil fuels and don’t see a reason to be particularly concerned about the sites. HOWEVER, our public has almost no faith in city council’s motives, so we must tread lightly through this process. Citizens watched city council ignore all citizen input to force a VNG compressor station into a magically re-zoned residential area. The residents in the area the city was looking at for the BESS site are still stung by a fly-ash debacle. Those two instances alone are more than enough to tell residents they have no reason to trust the council has their best interest in mind.
While BESS sites are necessary, our city council has misrepresented their motives and project outcomes for years, justifiably losing the trust of their constituents.
With regard to utility scale solar, I think constituents will surprise us and be tolerant of a resource that will reduce our cost of living.

Answer: Tree canopies are essential. Therefore, I would argue to protect any mature tree within reason.
We can’t champion infrastructure improvements without also championing the tree canopies that will facilitate walking, outdoor recreation, and protecting our residents from the heat and sun.
As we provide needed infrastructure in northern areas of the city, I will advocate for the necessary tree canopies to accompany the upgrades.
I would certainly advocate for an increased tree canopy requirement on site plans for low-density single-family home development. An increase in cost at the outset would quickly pay for itself and shift to dividends both families and properties will enjoy.

Answer: I’d like to avoid more new construction. I prefer we explore opportunities to renovate existing structures.

Answer: It is important to improve flood resilience as naturally as possible. The Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act provides environmentally-conscious methods to protect communities from flooding, and exploring those options would allow Chesapeake to qualify for mitigation grants from the Commonwealth.

Answer: Chesapeake does not need to physically expand in order for us to grow. Chesapeake can continue to foster economic growth by focusing on overlooked areas of our city. By providing infrastructure to include school improvements, sidewalks, tree canopies, and community centers, Chesapeake will improve the beauty of the areas and entice businesses to explore the areas - a massive upside would ultimately be eliminating the food desert that folks in the northern areas of Chesapeake are forced to cope with. Furthermore, by addressing the lack of infrastructure in northern areas, we will be relieving the pressure infrastructure is struggling under in the southern areas.

Answer: The number of neighborhoods in Chesapeake that lack sidewalks is a huge problem. The obvious place to start is to install sidewalks with tree canopies in order to encourage safe walking and mobility scooters.

8. How would you improve access to public transportation in our City?

Answer: By expanding it. Chesapeake needs to recognize that unless our people who depend on public transportation can get around the city, they will not be able to live here long term.

Answer: An educational ad campaign with coupons for supplies to encourage residents to start composting could be a place to start. Educational institutions and high school culinary classes and cafeteria staff might also be able to explore the viability of composting.
Businesses could have a clause built into their contract that outlines solid waste management.

Answer: Given the rising cost of living, I don’t feel comfortable imposing any fees on our people at this point.

11. What steps would you take to improve transparency and public engagement in land use and development decisions?

Answer: City council has countless options to support improved transparency and public engagement in land use and development decisions. A simple, helpful fix would be a city council Instagram account that announces meetings, agendas, time, location, and information about registering to speak.

12. What other sustainability, environmental, or quality-of-life issue do you believe deserves greater attention? Please elaborate.

Answer: Coal dust and groundwater contamination

Candidate Survey Responses - Santiera Brown-Yearling

Answer: I support economic development, but I do not believe every development is right for every location. When we are talking about data centers, we have to look beyond the revenue and ask what the project will mean for the people who already live in that area. I support requiring data centers to go through a conditional use process so that each project can be reviewed on its own merits. I want us to look closely at setbacks, noise, water use, power demand, backup generators, emissions, traffic, wetlands, wildlife, and the infrastructure needed to support the facility. I also believe the developer should pay its fair share of the infrastructure costs the project creates. Existing residents should not be left paying for road, drainage, utility, or public safety improvements made necessary by a private development. I would be very cautious about placing large data centers near established neighborhoods, schools, senior communities, farmland, wetlands, or other environmentally sensitive areas. Most importantly, residents need to be involved early. I have said before that you cannot make a plan for the people without the people. Public engagement should happen before residents feel like a decision has already been made.

Answer: I believe Chesapeake can expand access to clean energy while protecting our neighborhoods, preserving our land, and keeping energy affordable for residents and businesses. The city can work with utilities, state agencies, developers, and community partners to identify incentives, streamline appropriate permitting, and connect residents with available federal, state, and utility programs that can reduce the upfront cost of energy improvements. When it comes to battery energy storage systems, or BESS, and utility-scale solar, I believe in responsible development not a blanket yes or no. These projects can provide important benefits, including greater energy resilience and diversification of our energy supply, but they must be properly sited. The City should carefully consider proximity to homes, schools, environmentally sensitive areas, emergency access, fire safety, noise, stormwater, visual impacts, and the long-term use of the land. Residents should have meaningful opportunities to understand and participate in decisions before projects are approved. I also believe Chesapeake should make better use of spaces we already have before placing additional pressure on undeveloped land. The City can lead by example by evaluating solar opportunities on municipal buildings and parking facilities and by making the permitting process for appropriate solar projects more predictable and efficient. Ultimately, my goal is to support clean energy in a way that is practical, equitable, and responsible. Chesapeake should embrace innovation while protecting the character of our communities, preserving our natural resources, and ensuring that residents and local businesses can benefit from the clean energy economy.

Answer: Yes, I would support looking at stronger tree canopy requirements, especially in low density developments where there is more opportunity to preserve existing trees. Trees are more than landscaping. They provide shade, help with stormwater, reduce heat, improve air quality, provide wildlife habitat, and make neighborhoods more attractive. What concerns me most is seeing mature trees cleared and then replaced with a few small trees that may take decades to provide the same benefit. I would rather see us preserve healthy mature trees whenever possible. I support stronger tree preservation plans, incentives for developers who preserve mature trees, reasonable replacement requirements, protection of trees during construction, and follow-up inspections to make sure what was promised is actually delivered. I also think Chesapeake should establish a measurable canopy goal. We should know whether we are gaining or losing tree cover over time, not just how many trees were planted in a particular year.

Answer: I would support a balanced approach that encourages a variety of housing options, including workforce housing, apartments, townhomes, smaller homes, and mixed-income communities. At the same time, affordability should not come at the expense of quality of life. New development should be accompanied by adequate roads, drainage, parks, schools, public safety, and other infrastructure. I also believe we should encourage energy efficient and environmentally responsible construction that helps reduce long-term utility costs for residents. For me, this is about responsible growth. We can build the housing our families, seniors, veterans, young professionals, and workforce need while preserving the character, natural resources, and quality of life that make Chesapeake a great place to live. We don't have to choose between affordability and a healthy environment.

Answer: My first priority is protecting the neighborhoods and businesses that are already here and making sure new development does not make an existing flooding problem worse. That means maintaining our ditches and drainage systems, upgrading aging infrastructure, protecting wetlands and natural drainage areas, improving stormwater capacity, and using current flood and rainfall information when we make development decisions. I also support using natural solutions where they make sense, trees, wetlands, rain gardens, living shorelines, floodplains, and other green infrastructure. Sometimes the answer is a larger pipe or drainage project, but sometimes nature can help us manage water more effectively and at the same time improve the environment. For new development, simply meeting today's minimum standard should not always be the end of the conversation. We should be asking what happens during the next major storm and what happens to the neighborhoods upstream and downstream. Whenever possible, Chesapeake should aggressively pursue state and federal resilience dollars so local taxpayers are not carrying the entire burden

Answer: I believe Chesapeake does not have to choose between economic growth and environmental stewardship. We can grow responsibly while protecting the forests, farms, wetlands, waterways, and open spaces that define the character of our city. As Chesapeake continues to grow, I would support a balanced growth strategy that prioritizes redevelopment and appropriate infill where infrastructure already exists, while being more intentional about protecting large areas of rural and environmentally sensitive land. We should work with landowners, farmers, developers, conservation organizations, and regional partners to identify opportunities for conservation easements, land preservation, and incentives that keep valuable properties from being unnecessarily developed. We should also invest in training City staff on current forestry, habitat management, stormwater, and conservation best practices so that our decisions are based on sound science and long-term stewardship. My approach would be simple: grow where growth makes sense, preserve what makes Chesapeake special, and be responsible stewards of the land we leave for the next generation.

Answer: A person should not have to get in a car just to safely travel a mile down the road. I support building a better connected network of sidewalks, crosswalks, trails, bicycle facilities, and safe pedestrian routes, especially around schools, parks, libraries, shopping areas, employment centers, neighborhoods, and transit stops. Sometimes the solution is not a huge project. There are places in Chesapeake where a sidewalk simply ends and leaves someone a few hundred feet away from the place they are trying to reach. Closing those small gaps can make a big difference. We should improve lighting, crosswalk visibility, ADA accessible curb ramps, pedestrian crossings, and traffic calming where it is appropriate. Accessibility has to be part of the conversation from the beginning. If someone using a wheelchair, walker, or mobility device cannot safely use a sidewalk, then we have not really built an accessible sidewalk. Walking and biking infrastructure is not just recreation. It is transportation, independence, health, and quality of life.

8. How would you improve access to public transportation in our City?

Answer: I believe public transportation is about more than getting from one place to another but more importantly it is about access to opportunity. Residents should be able to get to work, school, healthcare, grocery stores, and essential services without transportation being a barrier. I would work with Hampton Roads Transit and regional partners to identify gaps in service and pursue state and federal funding for expanded routes, bus stops, and shelters. We should also make sure transit stops are safe, accessible, well lit, and connected to sidewalks and bike infrastructure. Because Chesapeake is geographically large and includes rural communities, we also need to think beyond traditional fixed bus routes. Ultimately, improving public transportation strengthens our economy, supports our workforce, helps seniors and people with disabilities remain independent, and gives residents more choices in how they move around our city.

Answer: I believe Chesapeake should focus on reducing waste at the source and not simply managing more waste after it has been created. With a 25-year contract and increasing tipping fees, every additional ton of waste has a long-term financial impact on our residents and our City. The City should take a comprehensive approach that makes waste reduction convenient, practical, and measurable. First, we should expand public education so residents understand what can be recycled, what should be kept out of the waste stream can make a meaningful difference. I would also support making recycling and waste diversion more accessible. That could include community collection events, partnerships with nonprofits and businesses, and exploring incentives for organizations that demonstrate measurable reductions in the amount of waste they send to the landfill. Finally, I believe the City should track and publicly report progress. We need to know how much waste we are generating, how much we are diverting, and where additional improvements are needed.

Answer: I would be willing to support a five cent plastic bag fee, but I would want it implemented in a way that does not unfairly burden families who are already watching every dollar. The goal should be reducing plastic waste and litter, not raising money from residents. If Chesapeake moves forward with a fee, I would want reusable bags made readily available, especially to SNAP and WIC recipients and other families who may be financially affected. Libraries, community centers, schools, churches, and community organizations could help with distribution. I would also want the City to publicly report where the money goes and whether the program is actually reducing plastic bag use and litter. Five cents may not sound like much, but small costs add up for families. We can protect the environment while still being thoughtful about affordability.

11. What steps would you take to improve transparency and public engagement in land use and development decisions?

Answer: I believe residents should not feel like development decisions are being made around them instead of with them. Transparency and meaningful public engagement are essential to building trust in local government. I would work to make land use and development information easier for residents to understand and access. That means providing clear, plain language explanations of proposed rezonings, comprehensive plan amendments, major developments, traffic and infrastructure impacts, and environmental considerations well before a public hearing. I would also support earlier community engagement and not simply ask residents for input after a project has already been designed. The City should provide multiple opportunities for residents to participate through neighborhood meetings, online engagement, public workshops, and accessible public hearings. Meetings should be communicated widely and scheduled in ways that allow working families to participate. I also believe residents deserve to know what was heard and how their input influenced the decision. When significant public concerns are raised, the City should clearly explain how those concerns were addressed or why a different decision was made. Good development should not be adversarial. When people have accurate information, a meaningful seat at the table, and confidence that their voices are being heard, we can make better decisions.

12. What other sustainability, environmental, or quality-of-life issue do you believe deserves greater attention? Please elaborate.

Answer: Sometimes when we say “sustainability,” people think about something big or abstract. But for most residents, sustainability is much more personal. It is whether your street floods when it rains. Whether your child can safely walk to school. Whether there is shade at the playground. Whether your neighborhood has trees. Whether a senior can get to the grocery store. Whether families have clean air and clean water. Whether industrial development is being concentrated near the same communities over and over again. I would like Chesapeake to look at those things neighborhood by neighborhood, tree canopy, flooding, parks, pedestrian safety, transportation, environmental conditions, and infrastructure, and use that information when we decide where City investments are needed most. For me, sustainability is not about Chesapeake simply being called a “green city.” It is about leaving behind a Chesapeake where the next generation can afford to live here, raise their families here, enjoy the outdoors, and have the same or better quality of life than we have today. I want Chesapeake to remain a place where people can live, learn, work, farm, and play for generations to come.

Candidate Survey Respones - Dr. George Yacus

Answer: Since our governing state statutes do not allow us to ban certain types of businesses and industry, the best we can do in our governance is to regulate limitations for the community’s best interest. I would try to ensure that the data center was located in a non-residential area, had appropriate setbacks , set a specific measurable noise level limit in decibels, ensure that the proposal included expected environmental pollution impacts to the community, would ensure that the site plan had adequate drainage and parking in accordance with city codes, and ensure that an engineering study would indicate that water and electrical usage would not adversely affect our community customers and result in an additional negative burden, either service-wise or economically. We can only develop as far as our infrastructure will support the development. I would also stress that the data center be CEEDA certified and have ISO 30134 certification.

Answer: As a former government federal employee from the office of Fossil Energy in the U.S. Department of Energy, I have a good knowledge of the energy sector and I am a firm supporter of multiple energy sources, including clean coal, natural gas, oil, hydroelectric, nuclear, wind, and solar. We are technologically finding new solutions to meet electric demand, so innovation is leading the way and I don’t know what new systems it will bring to the market. From a personal point of view demonstrating support for clean energy, I have solar hot water and solar PEV panels in my home, as well as a large battery bank, so I’m a believer. I don’t foresee any special subsidies from the city to fund personal clean energy in private homes, but I do endorse building codes and planning that supports these initiatives. Our codes have to be balanced to support new materials, better HVAC and lighting, and other initiatives while not burdening builders and buyers into only being allowed to build unaffordable homes. Federal programs like Grid-interactive Efficient Buildings (GEB), state initiatives, and industry initiatives are plentiful and supporting clean energy.

Answer: I can’t make a decision on this initiative at this time that would endorse this proposal, because it could be considered an overreach of government authority. I think we could partner and collaborate with developers to strongly encourage site planning to maintain or grow our tree canopy in developments.

Answer: We have areas in the city where lower-income homes are more prevalent and available for sale. Generally, people that have bought properties and homes want to maximize the return on their investment, so I don’t believe that forcing them to build low-income homes would be fair, especially if it changes the character of the community to something different than what they and their neighbors bought. I believe that we have established communities with multi-family dwellings that are more affordable and will continue to do so. From a rental housing perspective, I own a recently refurbished 4 BR rental home in the city with Section 8 tenant that seems to be working out well, because it is managed by a rental agency, maintained by me, and supported with government funding. The tenants are integrated in a vibrant neighborhood instead of a city-owned project that would deteriorate over time.

Answer: I live on the water on Indian River and have not experienced a significant sea-level rise and I believe it is just a natural climate variation over time and the threat may be overstated. The best we can do is maintain storm-water systems to the best of our ability, ensure that builders install the required drainage (including required French drains where stipulated), and ensure that any new development be designed with adequate infrastructure to support our mid-Atlantic climate.

Answer: As a member of the city’s Citizen Advisory Committee for the Chesapeake Land Bank Authority, we do our best to repurpose blighted or unused properties for the good of the community. I think we have a good record of already doing the things mentioned in this question and will continue to do so. Blue Heron Park, a quarter of a mile from my home, is a good success story. Chesapeake is Virginia’s 2nd largest city and will continue to grow, so there needs to be a balance between development and preservation. We have a master plan to guide us and execute. With the proper oversight, we can maintain a healthy urban/rural balance. City Council members have some influence, but not overall control in this area.

Answer: Some of this is already occurring in our community and we have a good record of accomplishment. Indian River Road next to my house has reduced travel lanes from 3 to 2 and new bike paths have been instituted and marked just this month. I would like to continue to see sidewalks and bike-paths retrofitted where feasible in our city, and have developers include sidewalks in their site plans. I am a strong supporter of finishing the shoulders/sidewalks of Military Highway between Auburn Avenue and Greenbrier Parkway, which is a busy commercial corridor.

8. How would you improve access to public transportation in our City?

Answer: I will continue to support HRT and their programs to serve the community, possibly including point-to-point transport.

Answer: I personally somewhat favor curbside recycling in some form because it provides convenience for citizens that wish to recycle and promotes slightly better efficiency in recycling. It has been discontinued due to affordability for citizens and I support that decision. I endorse citizens voluntarily paying extra for curbside recycling if such a plan could be designed, and I will continue to recycle as I do now, bringing materials to the Indian River Library recycling site.

Answer: More fees for citizens to pay just makes it more difficult for them to afford the basics of housing, fuel, groceries, etc. so I don’t support the 5-cent fee. I believe that we have the necessary resources already in place through non-profits like yourself, school systems, and volunteers to clean up Chesapeake and mitigate litter. I would fully support a city campaign to focus on Adopt-A-Highway programs and other similar initiatives. Almost every morning I walk 4 miles and I regularly pick up bottles and trash between Lilac Avenue and the Indian River Shopping Center, disposing of many handfuls of trash each time. We can attempt to change our culture to stop people from littering our streets with limited success, but we need to mitigate their bad behavior by cleaning it up. When I don’t pick up the litter, it remains there for weeks. I don’t believe that this has a government solution, but the government is a stakeholder and partner.

11. What steps would you take to improve transparency and public engagement in land use and development decisions?

Answer: I would like to see current rules enforced. If a property is sold and a house is being built, there should be a posted building permit with a developer’s name on it. I am not sure, but I think that neighbors are supposed to be informed when a home is sold and a new building/demolition is to occur.

12. What other sustainability, environmental, or quality-of-life issue do you believe deserves greater attention? Please elaborate.

Answer: As co-chair of the Norfolk Highlands Civic League, the major complaints are neighborhood speeding, inadequate drainage, bad neighbors that don’t comply with parking or are running businesses out of their homes, and lack of responsiveness by the city. I can’t fix bad behavior as a city council member, but I can focus on city response to citizen requests so that we have a government that works for the people. I consider the city as a service provider, and the citizens as our customers. Customers want good services and good value at affordable prices. Ultimately, I believe in quality government that provides the best quality-of-life in this city at the best value.