agriculture – Care4Suffolk

A Slap in the Face to Suffolk Citizens

Care4Suffolk — Thu, 22 May 2025 13:17:13 +0000

At the State of the City, held on Tuesday, May 13, 2025, Mayor Michael Duman described how “cool” Suffolk is and touted many achievements in Suffolk over the past year, as well as many positive aspects of living in Suffolk. He also spoke about “a vision shaped by our community to guide Suffolk’s growth.”

Then a video entitled “Cool Opportunities” was played. Part of it focused on the 2045 Comprehensive Plan and emphasized the importance of agriculture in Suffolk. The video gave the impression that the 2045 Comprehensive Plan was designed around citizen input and would help preserve Suffolk’s agricultural lands. Neither of those two things are true.

The video shows images of beautiful farmland describing how the new 2045 Comprehensive Plan is at the “heart of Suffolk’s future.” The video stated that the plan was “shaped by extensive citizen input” that will preserve “our agricultural heritage”. It goes on further to talk about how agriculture is a huge part of our economy and the importance of rural landscapes as they “define our city’s character.”

In reality the 2045 Comprehensive Plan lays down a framework to destroy significant amounts of farmland, by increasing the growth areas by about 11.5 square miles. This growth will extend into what are predominantly agricultural lands. That is a 15% growth from the previous existing growth area. It makes for the largest comp plan growth area expansion in Suffolk’s history- that is NOT preserving farmland.

The video mentions citizen engagement. Yes, the City did get a tremendous amount of citizen input and kudos to the City for going out into the communities and obtaining all this feedback from its residents. Unfortunately, the City did NOT base the comp plan on that input. Instead, the City of Suffolk ignored the citizens, and focused the comp plan on serving the regional goals of providing more land for warehouses and workforce housing. This video is completely misleading and distorts both the 2045 Comprehensive process and its contents.

During the 2045 Comprehensive Plan process the City received more than 7,500 responses from citizens telling the City what they want for the future of Suffolk. The responses were documented and then summarized, and you can read those here.

WHAT THE PEOPLE ASKED FOR:	2045 COMP PLAN TO DELIVER
Small town feel	NO
Downtown Investment	NO
Open Space and Parks	NO
Well planned development	NO
Fix traffic issues	NO
Safe, walkable communities	NO
Invest in public transportation, trails, and rail	MAYBE
Well planned economic development	NO
More amenities	MAYBE
Affordable housing	MAYBE
Limit warehouses	NO
Preserve agriculture	NO
Engage public about their wants and needs	NO

With the demand from citizens to invest in downtown, City leadership could have focused economic development on downtown, but instead, they carved out new areas for even more warehouses (we already lead Hampton Roads in warehouses.) Instead of limiting warehouse development to existing space and fixing our traffic problems, the 2045 Comprehensive Plan will exacerbate these problems, destroy the open space and farmland that people want to preserve, and ruin that small town feel that Suffolk has.

Before getting public comments, the City met with ‘focus groups’ and staff. It is pretty clear that early on that staff and certain groups of people were able to sway this plan to their desires, and it definitely wasn’t the citizens.

Here are some highlights from those meetings (full summary is here):

WHAT ‘FOCUS GROUPS’ ASKED FOR:	2045 COMP PLAN TO DELIVER
Interest in expanding Growth Areas	YES
Vacant, rural land provides areas for transformative development projects	YES
Demand is there for continued growth	YES
Efficient and predictable review process, “speed to build” or will look at other communities.	YES
Infrastructure costs – water, sewer, and roads can become barriers for industrial development.	YES
Growth of industrial areas is what drives many of the housing developments.	YES
There is a shifting need to invest in infrastructure prior to building homes (initial investments for long-term returns) would assist developers.	YES
City should either allow for more industrial development or limit based on current boundaries; there is a demand so this is a choice for the City to make.	YES
Renewable energy is looking within the region, planning for this in rural areas is important.	YES

And in case there is any doubt about the Regional push to shape Suffolk’s 2045 Comprehensive Plan, here is Planning Commissioner Johnny Edwards proclaiming this document as the beginning of shaping Suffolk into a regional leader based on serving the needs of the Port of Virginia.

Planning Commissioner Johnnie Edwards discussing the Planning Commission retreat he attended with a presentation given by the Port of Virginia. (mark 3:55, clipped video from the Planning Commission meeting, August 20, 2024.)

“We are the future of the Region. And we have to start acting like we are the leader of the Region. Because guess what? Those other big cities, they don’t want to be leaders. And someone said in the room, ‘It should be Suffolk’. Well this is where it starts. Because you know what? The port is coming, and it’s going to be great – it’s going to change us forever. And we need to start capitalizing, because the whole world is trying to come to our area. And this plan, in my personal opinion, is the beginning. So yes, it’s time to vote and send this on to City Council.”

After a presentation by the Port of Virginia, the Planning Commissioner explains why this 2045 Comprehensive Plan is so important – it is needed for Suffolk to lead the region in supporting the Port of Virginia. The City chose to focus on the needs of the Port at the expense of the citizens. All of this is in the name of Economic Development.

Here is another video of the Comprehensive Plan’s lead planner, Keith Cannady, giving a presentation as a precursor to the first draft coming out in February 2024. He stated,

“Another major driver, and this is somewhat unique for this particular plan update, is really an historic investment in the Port of Virginia and growth in container traffic at that facility and really changing the dynamic for the state and for the region in terms of economic development and opportunities.”

Comprehensive Plan’s lead planner, Keith Cannady, giving a presentation as a precursor to the first draft coming out in February 2024.

We have the lead planner of the comp plan and a Planning Commissioner both stating that this plan is all about the Port of Virginia, and they should know because the former was in charge of the development of the plan and the latter was on the Planning Commission, the lead body in charge of the whole plan.

This 2045 Comp Plan is the opposite of what the citizen’s of Suffolk said they wanted.

Community Engagement sessions and Open Houses were held throughout the city and during these, the collective voice of the citizens was clear: people were frustrated with traffic and didn’t want any more warehouses. Time after time, the residents from all areas of Suffolk expressed concern that their quality of life was being negatively impacted by warehouses and the heavy truck traffic that comes with them.

The City wants to push warehouses as economic development but they flatly refused to do a fiscal analysis on the comp plan, something which is typically done and had been part of the original plan. There is absolutely no data to demonstrate that this plan is economically sound for Suffolk’s fiscal future, but plenty to suggest we could be running into financial troubles at the rate we are developing.

Just recently, the Smithfield Times reported on a fiscal impact analysis done for the Isle of Wight. The county was examining “at what point would increased tax revenue fail to offset the added cost to the county’s schools and other public services?”

They found that if they grow 2%+ then their expenses started to out pace their revenues. Suffolk has seen its population grow by 8.7% since 2021.

In September 2022, at a comp plan steering committee meeting, there was quite a lengthy presentation about the role of a fiscal impact analysis in the comprehensive planning process. One slide from the presentation shows a comparison of growth beyond the service area compared to growth within the service area, where infrastructure was already in place. It costs more money to extend into areas that lack infrastructure, like roads, water, sewers, storm water drainage, etc. versus building within areas that already contain many of these services. Suffolk’s “managed growth approach” for decades has been to extend growth areas into predominantly agricultural areas, which tend to lack the essential infrastructure needed for large residential neighborhoods and non-residential uses. This method of growth can be more expensive. This was known to those working on the comp plan, and still they refused to do a fiscal impact analysis.

This slide, Capacity of Infrastructure, contains a real life example from Champaign, IL and the two model types it was comparing. Champaign was comparing “Growth Within the Service Area” and “Growth Beyond the Service Area” and the fiscal impact analysis showed that “Growth Beyond the Service Area” created a $50 million difference in additional capital infrastructure costs.

Other data was presented to City Leadership during the comp plan process about how warehousing and distribution may not be a fiscal net positive. Considering how much area was being dedicated to warehouse development for economic development, the citizens felt strongly there should be a fiscal analysis to determine this. The City refused. You can read more about this here, here, and here.

This image is from the Cost of Land Use Fiscal Impact Analysis for the Town of Davidson, North Carolina (p. 17). The Town of Davidson is comparing the fiscal impact (surplus vs deficit) of various non-residential land use types from 2014 compared to 2020. Notice that the warehouses are net negative, from 2014 to 2020.

This is an excerpt from Fiscal Impact Analysis: Reader Beware: Some Caveats by Paul Tischler of TischlerBise. This excerpt states that a fiscal analysis should be completed prior to developing the plan.

It also states that it “does not advocate ‘sprawl’ at the expense of open space. In fact we completed a study for Lancaster County, Pennsylvania Planning Commission, in which we found that open space provided greater fiscal benefits than residential developments.”

Workforce housing is the counterpart to the warehouse development in this plan, with the majority of new uses being designated for these two components.

The 2045 Comprehensive Plan dragged on beyond its original schedule in part BECAUSE of public opposition. The plan went through several council leadership changes due to controversies. Additionally, it was an election year and the mayor and three other council members were up for re-election. The vote on the plan was continually pushed back through 2024. On November 20, 2024, AFTER the election, the City held the last public hearing on the 2045 Comprehensive Plan. However, they held off voting on it that night when the Council Chamber was filled with frustrated citizens. Council pushed the comp plan vote to the December 18 meeting, the last meeting that would have Council Member Roger Fawcett, Chair of the 2045 Comprehensive Plan, because he failed to win re-election and recently elected Ebony Wright would be taking his seat in January of 2025.

The City failed to give public notice before voting to approve the comprehensive plan, despite the requirement by Virginia State law.

The City claimed that no public notice was required because there was no public hearing scheduled for the agenda item “to amend the comprehensive plan for 2035 and adopt Suffolk 2045, The City of Suffolk Comprehensive Plan as the City of Suffolk’s

comprehensive plan.”

However, the law reads as follows:

“The local planning commission shall not recommend nor the governing body adopt any plan, ordinance or amendment thereof until notice of intention to do so has been published twice in some newspaper published or having general circulation in the locality, with the first notice appearing no more than 28 days before and the second notice appearing no less than seven days before the date of the meeting referenced in the notice;”

The Mayor, City Council, the Clerk’s Office, the City Manager, the Deputy City Manager, and the Lead Planner on the comp plan were all notified about the failure to provide the public with proper notice prior to the vote. Yet City Council proceeded as planned.

Not only did City Council fail to provide notice before approving the plan, they literally added changes to the land use map at the eleventh hour. They were presented with the changes at the Work Session which was scheduled at 4pm, two hours before the Council meeting when it was approved. They added about 3.5 square miles of land on Rt. 58 that would allow warehouses to be built to the north and high density housing to be built to the south, on land that is predominantly agricultural. This area was not part of the comp plan when the final public hearing was held, nor was there any public notice given that this 3.5 square mile was to be added.

The 2045 Comprehensive Plan is about providing land for warehouses and workforce housing for the Port of Virginia- not about what the citizens of Suffolk want for their city and future. The citizens’ feedback was ignored in favor of what staff and the ‘focus groups’ wanted. Then City Council went about approving the comp plan with NO transparency and a total disregard to the rights of the citizens: by refusing to conduct a fiscal analysis, by delaying, adding last minute changes of a drastic nature, failing to provide another public hearing, failing to provide the Virginia state mandated public notice, and then voting for the plan and against the will of the people.

For all of these reasons, this video from the State of City was an insult to the citizens of Suffolk. These images of farming, rural landscapes, and the agricultural aspects of Suffolk were the qualities the citizens wanted to preserve during the comp plan process, but we were told that in the name of economic development, we need to sacrifice this land. This video shows the beauty of Suffolk that the 2045 Comprehensive Plan will be destroying, not protecting. City Leadership knows Suffolk is proud of its agricultural heritage, and pays lip service to it on occasion, but when it comes right down to it, the 2045 Comprehensive Plan and the State of the City of Suffolk is all about regional goals. (You can read more here, here, and here.) The State of the City is not hosted by the City itself. It is sponsored and supported by the Hampton Roads Chamber, which does this as a series each year to highlight economic development throughout the Hampton Roads Region.

“You know, one of the things that we as a region take great pride in is the fact that we’ve got literally the best port in the entire United States, their CEO is with us today. I want to recognize him, Mr. Stephen Edwards is here.”

– Bryan K. Stephens, President and CEO of Hampton Roads Chamber, during the Suffolk State of the City

(mark 18:04-18:16)

It’s no wonder the presenter wanted to acknowledge the Port of Virginia and its representative- it’s listed as one of their strategic partners. This video may have played well in a room full of who’s who in the political and business nexus of Hampton Roads, but to the thousands of citizens of Suffolk who provided feedback to help shape Suffolk’s future, this video is a slap in the face. These images are what we wanted but instead we will be getting more warehouses, more traffic, more overcrowded schools, and more taxes to pay for the infrastructure. Those are the true images that will be the results of this new 2045 Comprehensive Plan, but then, most of these regional figures won’t have to deal with the aftermath.

Comparison of Suffolk’s Comp Plans

Care4Suffolk — Wed, 02 Oct 2024 16:35:09 +0000

Suffolk’s 2018 Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1998 and was the first of three comprehensive plans adopted by the City. Currently, the City is working on the fourth iteration which is scheduled to be voted on by City Council on November 20th, after the election but just before Thanksgiving.

Care4Suffolk recently obtained a copy of the 2018 Comprehensive Plan. It is not available online, but we had a member go in and take photos of each of the roughly 700 pages of the document and accompanying appendices. We are hoping to provide the public with a copy online in the future.

With the new comp plan still under way, I thought this was a good opportunity to share some of the aspects of the first comprehensive plan, especially in light of the recent admission by a city leader that this new plan is about Suffolk’s role in supporting the Port of Virginia.

The 2018 Comprehensive Plan emphasized balanced growth, specifically about keeping the growth healthy and sustainable. There were no ‘market trends’ which seems to be a focus in the 2045 Comp Plan. The second major focus of the 2018 plan was an environmental theme with a lot of focus on protecting ground water, reservoirs, and rivers.

Another theme in the old plan is preserving rural character, including a focus on rural, agricultural land, and open space. This was an actual focus, not just lip service like it is in the 2045 Comp Plan, which does mention these ideals, but it is a low priority and is juxtaposed to the massive land use changes that contradict protecting rural areas.

Core revitalizing in downtown Suffolk with economic development made up the last major theme. Economic development included agriculture and tourism along with manufacturing, office, and commercial development. This is a huge contrast to the 2045 Comp Plan which focuses heavily on creating more warehousing space to serve the Port of Virginia.

The part that stood out most about the 2018 Comp Plan was the part where is stated:

“These key ideas are a result of an intensive two-year planning process. They reflect ideas from many citizens who attended and participated in many meetings and responded on public comment forms.”

What a contrast to the 2045 Comp Plan which did a great job getting public input, but focused on the ideas of the ‘other stakeholders’ (Port of Virginia and developers) over the vision of the citizens.

Another contrast between the original comp plan and the prosed 2045 plan – the original was based on a wealth of data. The 2018 Comp Plan contained a Fiscal Impact Analysis (FIA). Current city leaders are unconcerned with the fact that staff decided AGAINST doing the FIA, a frustration with citizens who are looking for fiscal responsibility from city leaders.

These pages are from Chapter 1of the 2018 Comprehensive Plan.

The 2018 Comp Plan also had a substantial amount of data on agriculture in Suffolk. One map included in the plan showed the soil conditions throughout the city.

This image is from the 2018 Comp Plan and shows the soil map – conditions of the soil throughout the city. The original map is completely in black and white. The green highlighted was done by Care4Suffolk to delineate the good soil land.

The green highlighted area represent good soil – suitable for farming. Compare the good soil map with the proposed growth areas in the 2045 Comp Plan highlighted in red. Please note that a lot of the red is actually from the current growth area under the 2035 comp plan, but the 2045 additional growth areas have been added as well to represent what will be the Growth Area if the 2045 Comp Plan is passed.

The growth areas will not stop there, however. The 2045 Comprehensive Plan contains language that allows for both utility solar and industrial projects that the City deems desirable, on agricultural lands outside the growth area. Additionally, in five years, the City will evaluate the comp plan again and can add additional growth areas if they chose. The City’s original growth area expansion in the February 2024 draft was even more extensive, but they pulled back on some of those areas due to public outcry.

The map below includes all the areas from the February draft and is telling of the City’s thinking about future growth. Each successive draft gobbles up more and more of that good soil area, chipping away at the agricultural industry in Suffolk.

How well the 2018 Comprehensive Plan was implemented, I can’t say. The2018 plan states itself:

“In some communities, the Comprehensive Plan is all but invisible, used for little else than as a reference point for contentious rezonings. It is often no more than the servant of the marketplace, simply ratifying the status quo. In other places, it is a rallying point for citizens and leaders who say, ‘this is the way we want our community to look!'”

I don’t want a comprehensive plan that’s sole purpose is to serve the needs of other stake-holders. I want a comprehensive plan that is of the people, for the people, by the people. The people have told the City what they want for Suffolk’s future – it is time for the City to start listening to us.

City’s Vision Lacking: Suffolk to Support Regional Goals

Care4Suffolk — Mon, 06 May 2024 19:44:56 +0000

At the Joint City Council and Planning Commission meeting on May 1, 2024, city leaders highlighted their extraordinary efforts to reach out to the community during the development of the 2045 Comprehensive Plan. They were right! They did get a lot of engagement and input from the public and we applaud them for that. Unfortunately, the City didn’t listen to us. This new comprehensive plan is NOT reflective of the comments from the citizens of Suffolk.

We said that we want to maintain our small town feel, preserve our open space, focus on creating a vibrant and flourishing downtown, have affordable housing, and respect our agricultural history. The public feedback overwhelmingly told the City that we are growing too fast and our infrastructure can’t keep up. The citizens want to maintain what makes us special: a city with a small town feel and strong agricultural roots.

In contrast, City Staff chose to focus this new comprehensive plan on Regionalism and Suffolk’s role in the economic engine that is the Port of Virginia. The City’s vision for Suffolk’s future is one of warehouses, congested roads, and suburban sprawl.

Why do the citizens of Suffolk have to sacrifice our wide-open spaces, prime farmland, and our small-town feel, to make room for more warehouses, more truck traffic, and more suburban sprawl?

Instead of taking this public feedback and creating a vision the people can support, the City disregarded our desires in order to follow ‘recent trends’ and capitalize on the Port of Virginia. As citizens of Suffolk, we deserve better! We deserve a comprehensive plan that is focused on OUR priorities, encompassing the values we have and not just paying lip-service to them.

What if, instead of focusing on being one of the fastest growing cities in Virginia, we focus on being the city everyone wants to visit? What if we take the special qualities we already have and make them more visible and interconnected? An alternative vision for Suffolk is one where nature, agriculture and a vibrant and thriving downtown come together. We can achieve this if we discard that vision of warehouse and suburban sprawl and instead look inwards on how we can improve the Suffolk we have.

Tourism in Suffolk had an economic impact of $217.8 million in 2022. Compare that to neighboring Chesapeake, with almost $800 million dollars of impact; it is clear there is significant room for growth in the tourism industry here. (source) Even more impressively, the greater Richmond area brought in $3.5 billion in direct tourist spending in 2022 ,with Henrico County alone accounting for $1.7 billion dollars of that tourist money. (source) Richmond and its surrounding areas focus on youth sports. Suffolk should have its own focus and is well-poised to capitalize on its small-town charm, agricultural community and its ecological and outdoor adventure possibilities.

Suffolk already has so much to offer with its unique character, history, and culture. It is rich in natural resources with a mild climate that allows for year-round outdoor activity. Our villages each have their own charm and there are abundant historical sites throughout the City. A more focused emphasis on connecting our parks, waterways, bike paths, historical sites, cultural attractions, and small businesses would enhance the community both for residents and visitors.

Agriculture is the single largest private industry in the state, generating roughly $462 million of direct and indirect economic impact for the City of Suffolk. (source) It can be the key to Suffolk’s future if we let it. “Agritourism” is a growing subset of tourism. People are looking for that authentic experience and the opportunity to connect with nature and the rural environment. One way we could invest in our agricultural community is with the construction of an agricultural complex that could serve as a venue to draw visitors and farmers from around the state and beyond. It could host everything from horse shows to dog shows, livestock events, chicken swaps, tractor pulls, and educational opportunities with organizations like 4-H and Future Farmers of America.

Our local agricultural community could be the backbone of a new public market that could be located downtown. Public markets can be a driving economic force in communities, as well as a public space for increasing social integration and providing opportunities for social mobility. (source) They provide access to the marketplace for small local businesses, serve as a supply of fresh produce in food deserts, offer a venue for local artists and musicians, and have the ability to draw people from throughout the city and surrounding areas as a tourist destination. A public market could link the rural areas of Suffolk to our downtown, revitalizing it with new economic opportunities and bringing people together.

A passenger rail stop downtown could generate even more tourism. Amtrak reported record ridership to Newport News, Norfolk, and Richmond with over 92,610 riders in March 2024, up 24% from the previous March. (source) According to Michigan State University, tourism has become one of the largest and fastest-growing economic sectors and can be a “key economic driver of socio-economic progress through the creation of jobs, new business, export revenues and infrastructure development.” (source)

Instead of building suburban sprawl outside the downtown area that will incur more heavy long-term infrastructure costs, we can focus on infill towards our city center. A thousand more tightly-packed single-family homes built on farmland and priced at $400,000 will not help with the affordable housing crisis in our city. We don’t have to build houses for everyone to move to Suffolk–instead, let’s make it a priority to build affordable housing for our citizens already living in Suffolk.

Warehouses may bring some economic benefit to a city, but it is accompanied by heavy truck traffic, air and noise pollution. They are unsightly and do not instill public pride or contribute to the social and cultural experiences of a city. By contrast, agriculture, tourism and a public market can enhance a community on many levels, contributing to economic development while preserving natural resources. These things can become a source of pride for our city.

A commitment to stop paving over our farmland could bring about a future for Suffolk that ties us together. Things like a passenger rail stop, a public market, and an agricultural complex, along with increased interconnectivity of our parks, trails, waterways, historic sites and villages, could provide us a thriving downtown and preserve our agricultural lands for generations to come.

This vision is in line with the public feedback the City received – serving as the warehouse capital of Virginia is not. Let’s focus on what makes Suffolk special. Let’s say no to the vision in the 2045 Comprehensive Plan and ask the City to envision a better future for Suffolk.

This is just one alternative vision for Suffolk. It’s not perfect, but I think it is a great improvement over warehouses and suburban sprawl. What are your ideas and thoughts about what we can do to create a better future for our city? Please comment below or email us at care4suffolk@gmail.com to share your ideas.

How do the competing visions of Agriculture & Tourism v. Warehouses
compare with Public Input? See for yourself in the charts below:

Please sign our petition to urge City Council to vote ‘NO’ to the new 2045 Comprehensive Plan.

The Loss of Farmlands: A Loss for All of Us

Care4Suffolk — Wed, 21 Feb 2024 17:59:04 +0000

We recently wrote about the City of Suffolk’s plan to increase its Growth Area by 24%. Now we want to explain why this is a short-sighted plan on the part of City Planners and why it is critical for our community to stop what will be a massive hit to our agricultural community and have negative impacts on our citizens for generations to come.

The City of Suffolk is 429 square miles, but 72 square miles of that is the Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge (Source: City of Suffolk). While the refuge is an ecological and historical treasure for our state and the nation, none of the 72 square miles can be developed. That leaves 357 square miles of already developed and potentially developable land in the City of Suffolk. The current growth area is 74.5 square miles (about 21% of the non-swamp land in Suffolk). The Planning Department is recommending expanding the growth area by 18 square miles (a 24% increase to its current size) which would bring it to 92.5 square miles. That will create a total growth area that is equal to 26% of all non-swamp land in Suffolk.

Only 17% of all land in America is ideal for farming. (Source: Modern Farmer) As a country we have lost 11 million acres of farmland and ranchland between 2001-2016 due to development. (Source: American Farmland Trust) Further, 62% of all development has happened on agricultural land. (Source: Modern Farmer) As the world population grows, the natural resource of farmable land becomes increasingly valuable. The world’s population is expected to increase by 35% by 2050 and “nearly all new food production in the next 25 years will have to come from existing agricultural land.” (Source: National Geographic Magazine)

Those are just some quick facts to show that this problem is not localized to just Suffolk, which has lost 17% of its farmland in the last 20 years. (Source: Suffolk Agricultural Advisory Committee) This is a problem throughout the country. According to the 2022 Census of Agriculture, the number of farms in Virginia decreased from 43,225 in 2017 to 38,995 farms in 2022, losing about 500,000 acres of farmland. (Source: 2022 Census of Agriculture (Reported by On the Farm Radio)) That’s a 6.4% in just 5 years. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, in response to the 2022 Census of Agriculture stated, “This survey is a wake up call…Are we okay with losing that many farms? Are we okay with losing that much farmland? Or is there a better way.” (Source: AgWire)

“This survey is a wake up call…Are we okay with losing that many farms? Are we okay with losing that much farmland? Or is there a better way.”

Here is why you should care about this loss of farmland:

Farmland keeps property taxes lower. In Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, they broke down the impact of the cost of services for agriculture, residential and commercial properties. For each $1 collected in property taxes for each type of land, the city has an associated cost of services. The results may surprise you. (Source: Lehigh County, Pennsylvania)

$1 of agricultural tax revenue = $0.36 spent in public service

$1 of commercial tax revenue = $0.99 spent in public service

$1 of residential tax revenue = $1.30 spent in public services

Turning farmland into commercial and residential land actually costs the city (or the taxpayers) more money. Cities lose money on residential properties because they require schools, improved roads, and other additional services such as water, sewers, police, fire, and medical. The city actually makes significantly more money on agricultural land than it pays in services. If citizens (and responsible city planners) want to save money, they should stop rezoning agricultural land to build houses and warehouses.

Other benefits of preserving our farmland (Source: Lehigh County, Pennsylvania):

It provides locally grown foods that are more nutritious and less expensive than food that has to be transported over long distances.
It improves water quality by filtering runoff water through topsoil versus going directly from paved surfaces into drainage. This is particularly important in Suffolk, home to many of the reservoirs that provide drinking water for so many people in Hampton Roads.
It benefits the environment by protecting against soil erosion, offsets greenhouse gas emissions, and provides habitat to many wildlife species.
Open farmland is more visually attractive and creates a higher quality of life for citizens.
Additionally, Agriculture is big business. Agriculture generates roughly $462 million of direct and indirect economic impact for Suffolk. (Source: Suffolk Agricultural Advisory Committee)

It is nearsighted planning that will destroy the valuable natural resource of Suffolk’s nutrient-rich farmland to build houses and warehouses. The huge expansion of the Growth Area in the upcoming Comprehensive Plan will facilitate this loss of farmland. Its destruction will be permanent and will be a loss to our city, our community, and future generations.

Let City Council know what you think about this new growth area: council@suffolkva.us

Michael D. Duman, Mayor

mayor@suffolkva.us

Phone: 757-514-4009

Lue R. Ward, Jr., Vice Mayor

(Nansemond Borough)

nansemond@suffolkva.us

Phone: 757-377-6929

Shelley Butler Barlow,

Council Member

(Chuckatuck Borough)

chuckatuck@suffolkva.us

Phone: 757-346-8355

Leroy Bennett, Council Member
(Cypress Borough)
cypress@suffolkva.us
Phone: 757-407-3750

Timothy J. Johnson, Council Member
(Holy Neck Borough)
holyneck@suffolkva.us
Phone: 757-407-0556

Roger W. Fawcett, Council Member
(Sleepy Hole Borough)
sleepyhole@suffolkva.us
Phone: 757-377-8641

John Rector, Council Member
(Suffolk Borough)
suffolk@suffolkva.us
Phone: 757-407-1953

LeOtis Williams, Council Member

(Whaleyville Borough)

whaleyville@suffolkva.us

Phone: 757-402-7100

Port or People: What is the City’s Focus?

Care4Suffolk — Tue, 06 Feb 2024 01:11:05 +0000

The Comprehensive Plan provides the framework that guides the development of the City of Suffolk for the next several years. Over the last year, the city has been actively seeking community input to help guide what this new plan will look like.

Above is a photo from the June 15, 2023 Open House that Suffolk hosted to interact with the public about the proposed plans and obtain feedback. In this snapshot, you can see that the green dot stickers (given to the public to express their opinion) are placed on the ‘thumbs down’ side to show their disapproval of more warehouses in Suffolk.

Fast forward to the January 17, 2024 City Council Work Session: Suffolk’s 2045 Comprehensive Plan Lead Planner, Keith Cannady, gave a presentation about the new Comprehensive Plan draft that included Planning Staff’s recommendations for Growth Area expansion. He touted the opportunities that the Port of Virginia provides. He stated that the Port of Virginia is “changing the dynamic for the state and the region in terms of economic development opportunities” and that this is a “major driver of what’s happening here in Hampton Roads.” He claimed that Suffolk is considering “opportunities that the Port provides as we consider Growth Area boundaries.”

Below are some of the Growth Area slides presented at this City Council Work Session. The corresponding written descriptions reflect what was explained verbally by Mr. Cannady while discussing the slide.

(We apologize for the poor quality; these were screenshot captures from the online work session which were not high resolution to begin with.)

Northern Growth Area Option Slide

The current growth area is within the dark blue border. The only option (Option A) presented for Northern Growth Area expansion is the area within the greenish border. This is the Nansemond Parkway area and would connect the Northern and Central Growth Areas. According to Planning it is “logical” to combine the two and use the railroad as the boundary.

(There is an “Opportunity Area” along I664 that will be discussed at City Council on Feb 7th.)

Central Growth Area Options Slide

There are 5 options being considered for expansion of the Central Growth Area. The current Central Growth Area is within the dark purple borders.

Option B: within the yellow border; expands the current growth area all the way to the city/county line along Rt. 460. The other boundaries would be the Western Branch Reservoir and “a wetland area that forms a logical boundary” to the south.

Option C: within the blue border; expands from the yellow border south to the railroad line and includes the Lake Cohoon area.

Option D: within the green border; expands west on 58 from the Centerpoint & Westport Commerce Parks down to Chapel Road.

Option E: within the red border; extends down 58 to Buckhorn Road.

Option F: within the orange border; extends north up Rt. 10/32, including Sack Point Road and up to Kingsdale Road.

Recommendation Slide:
The Planning Department is recommending that Suffolk incorporate Options A, B, D, and F into the 2045 Comprehensive Plan.

Breakdown of Future Land Use within Growth and Opportunity Areas:

Future Land Use Slide
The City is considering changing/adding new land use categories, listed in the map key on the left side and signified by the solid-colored rectangle. Currently, there are only six or seven land use categories.

Central Growth Area Future Land Use Slide
Within the borders of Option A (within the lighter green border at the top right), Planning is recommending land use categories for residential development.
For the Central Growth Area, Planning is recommending these land use categories:
Option B: residential development to the north of Rt. 460 and “employment center” to the south all the way to the city/county line.
Option D: “employment center” to the north of Rt. 58 and residential to the south up to Chapel Road.
Option F: residential on both sides of Rt. 10/32 all the way to Kingsdale Road.

While making it clear that Suffolk is prioritizing the Port of Virginia, Mr. Cannady provided only vague comments as to the opportunities that justify expanding the Growth Areas to such a great extent. Some of his reasonings were:

Rt. 460 and 58 corridors offer “what we believe are significant economic development opportunities in that area.”
Coming south (of Rt. 460) “to a wetland area that forms a logical boundary for that corridor and would allow us to capitalize on some of the options that are out there.”
Option D “looks to take advantage of some of the opportunities going west out of Rt. 58.”

The recommended Growth Area expansion will total almost 17 sq mi, increasing the current Growth Area (from the 2035 Comprehensive Plan) from about 74.5 sq mi to a total of about 91.5 sq mi. That is an increase of about 23%. That is a lot of growth!

While we expect a certain amount of Growth Area expansion, it hasn’t been made clear how enlarging them to such a great extent specifically benefits the City of Suffolk and its citizens. How much economic benefit will Suffolk see with port expansion growth? This question is not answered.

Adding huge swathes of land (light purple on the Future Land Use map) designated as Employment Centers (warehouses), doesn’t happen in a vacuum. We all want Suffolk to have a vibrant economy, but all those warehouses come at a cost to citizens. They bring truck traffic, higher road maintenance costs, and pollution, as well as destroy forever fertile soil that makes up our agricultural economy, which is itself an economic powerhouse generating $462 million of direct and indirect economic impact for the City of Suffolk. In no uncertain terms, development of warehouses is to the detriment of agriculture in Suffolk. This may be what the Port of Virginia wants, and what the Planning Commission wants, but is it what the people of Suffolk want?

These recommendations go counter to public feedback during the Community Engagement Sessions and Open Houses. Was the city genuine in its efforts to include its citizens in this process? From this presentation, it doesn’t seem like it.

The State of Agriculture in Suffolk

Care4Suffolk — Fri, 26 Jan 2024 20:57:30 +0000

The Agricultural Advisory Committee Chair, David Bosselman, spoke before the City Council at the Work Session on December 20, 2023 [Link to video], presenting the State of Agriculture in Suffolk. The Agricultural Advisory Committee consists of nine members from the agricultural community in Suffolk who are nominated by City Council members. The committee is all volunteers who give their time to provide feedback and input to the city regarding agricultural issues.

The City of Suffolk does not track its own statistics related to agriculture, but the Agricultural Advisory Committee was able to obtain data from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS). Even Governor Younkin has recently made note of the following facts:

Virginia Agriculture creates more than $100 billion of annual economic impact
Virginia Agriculture employs about 500,000 people
97% Virginia farms are family-owned
Agriculture is Virginia’s #1 private industry
There are 7.7 million acres of cropland in Virginia
An acre of agricultural land in Virginia generates an average of $11,000 of economic impact annually

There are nearly 47,000 acres of Suffolk cropland. Based on the figures from the state, that generates roughly $462 million of direct and indirect economic impact for the City of Suffolk. It is clear that agriculture plays a major role in Suffolk’s economy.

According to Mr. Bosselman, the City of Suffolk does not have an Agricultural Department, despite it being specifically mentioned in the 1974 City Charter. It is unclear why this department was never created considering agriculture is such a huge part of Suffolk’s industry. Chesapeake and Virginia Beach both have Agricultural Departments, despite having less farmland. How can the city make informed decisions regarding agriculture and agricultural land if it doesn’t even have a department to track information and collect data?

As part of the State of Agriculture presentation to the City Council, the Agricultural Advisory Committee recommended that the City of Suffolk establish an Agricultural Department. Mr. Bosselman stated the need and benefits of having this department:

It could bridge the gap between “growing” Suffolk and agricultural Suffolk
It could serve in conjunction with the Virginia Cooperative Extension in Suffolk
It could oversee the implementation of the many public and private preservation and conservation programs available to farmers.
It could contribute to the formation of the agricultural aspects of the Comprehensive Plan
It could manage the Suffolk Farmers Market with the goal of funding itself via this revenue (as is done in Virginia Beach)

Mr. Bossleman also discussed the loss of cropland in Suffolk. He stated there has been a loss of about 17% over the last 20 years. As Mr. Bosselman said in his parting words to City Council, “I find it quite ironic that we are here today, and I am trying to convince not only the city council, but all people, that are here to listen to me today, to preserve land that is growing food for us to eat, fiber for all of us to have clothes, and plants that clean carbon dioxide and impurities out of our air and provide oxygen for us to breathe.”

Mr. Bosselman should NOT have to plead the case for protecting agriculture in Suffolk. It is a major industry in the city and a way of life for many of its citizens. We all benefit from its continued existence in our city and everything our farmers produce. It is well past time for the City of Suffolk to create an Agricultural Department that can advocate for this essential industry and protect agriculture here for generations to come.

Relevant Links:

Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services

The Economic Impact of the Agriculture and Forest Industries in Virginia

Governor announces that agriculture and forestry are still Virginia’s most robust industries, despite pandemic setbacksVirginia Farm Bureau publication:

Virginia Farm Bureau publication: New report shows number of Virginia farms, farm acreage remained steady last year

Legislative Agenda

Care4Suffolk — Fri, 29 Sep 2023 17:36:17 +0000

Next week at the October 4, 2023 City Council meeting, there will be a public hearing on a resolution for the City to adopt a 2024 Legislative Agenda. According to the resolution, adoption of the legislative agenda is “necessary as we prepare to meet with our state legislators prior to the start of the General Assembly Session, to discuss matters of importance to the City of Suffolk.” (The General Assembly convenes on January 10, 2024).

If you’re like me and are new to attending council meetings and engaging in the civic process, you may find this interesting. These slides are the draft agenda that was presented at the September 20, 2023 City Council meeting by Suffolk’s Legislative Liaisons from Access Point Public Affairs. The topics are: Public Safety, Community Development/Planning, Human Services, Transportation, Environmental/Utilities, Education and Workforce Development, and Finance/Regulation.

There was nothing included pertaining to Agriculture, but Council Member Butler Barlow made three recommendations. Her first two recommendations are supported by Suffolk’s Agricultural Advisory Committee and pertain to agriculture preservation programs and Purchase of Development Rights as well as limiting use of Prime Farmlands for utility-scale solar. The third recommendation comes from Virginia Farm Bureau and is in support of Virginia’s Forest Sustainability Fund for Local Governments.

Looking at the upcoming City Council meeting packet, it appears that the first and third of Council Member Butler Barlow’s requests are included in the “Utilities/Environmental” section. Hopefully, in the future, agriculture will not be an afterthought! Whether you agree or disagree with this agenda, it is apparent that there is a lot going on and many things to consider when prioritizing the city’s “legislative requests, policy positions, and funding requests.”

Lake Kilby Rezoning Update

Care4Suffolk — Tue, 31 Jan 2023 02:10:50 +0000

Lake Kilby rezoning request (RZN2021-00018) is set to be heard at the Tuesday, March 21, 2023 Planning Commission meeting at 2:00pm at City Hall. We will be mounting an opposition to this rezoning request. Please plan to attend to show your support for CARE4Suffolk and wear your blue CARE4Suffolk shirt (or any blue shirt). If you would like to help in other ways, please email care4suffolk@gmail.com.