S-5169-119
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Hearings held.
Sponsored by James Justice (R-WV)
What it does
This bill would expand the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District to include Rockbridge County, Virginia and Berkeley, Jefferson, and Morgan Counties in West Virginia, in addition to its current Virginia footprint. It would authorize $1,250,000 annually (ongoing) for management operations and site upkeep, plus $2,500,000 annually for fiscal years 2027-2033 for grants, technical assistance, and land acquisition from willing sellers, and it exempts the District from standard National Heritage Area funding formulas while directing the Interior Department to report on replicating this partnership model elsewhere.
Who benefits
Residents and local governments in the newly added Virginia and West Virginia counties, who gain access to federal heritage-area funding and technical assistance; the existing management entity, which receives a funding floor and expanded jurisdiction; historic preservation and tourism organizations in the region; landowners who choose to sell land or easements to the District under the acquisition program.
Who is hurt
No group is meaningfully harmed; the acquisition provisions apply only to willing sellers, so no property owner is compelled to participate. Taxpayers nationally bear a modest, specific cost (roughly $3.75 million per year through 2033, then $1.25 million annually thereafter), and other National Heritage Areas competing for the same discretionary federal preservation funding pool may see relatively less available if overall appropriations are not increased.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue the expansion corrects an artificial state-line boundary that excludes historically connected Civil War sites in West Virginia counties that share the same battlefield landscape and interpretive story as the existing Virginia district. They contend the District's partnership model — leveraging local, state, and private resources alongside federal funds — has proven cost-effective, justifying both the modest funding increase and the report exploring its replication elsewhere in the National Park System.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that exempting this District from the standard National Heritage Area funding formulas and administrative rules under the Dingell Act sets an inconsistent precedent that could invite other heritage areas to seek similar carve-outs, undermining uniform federal management standards. They contend that guaranteeing funding "not less than" prior-year levels regardless of performance reduces budgetary flexibility and oversight incentives compared to areas that must justify funding through the standard formula each cycle.
Constitutional context
This bill involves Congress's Article IV, Section 3 power over federal property and its Article I spending power to fund heritage-area partnerships; because land acquisition is limited to willing sellers, no Takings Clause issue under Cedar Point Nursery arises.
Checks and balances
Congress authorizes appropriations and sets District boundaries by statute; the Interior Department administers funding eligibility and reports back to Congress, with no new independent agency rulemaking authority created.
Historical precedent
The original Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District and Commission Act of 1996 established the District, and Congress has periodically expanded or reauthorized similar National Heritage Areas through comparable amendment bills.