Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and committee members: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB 16 and thank you, Delegate Fowler, for your work updating our state’s Safe Haven law. We, Virginia is for Children (an advocacy group for the lives of vulnerable children in our state), are following the Safe Haven law efforts and are fully supportive of the extension to thirty days of age for infant relinquishment. This is a reasonable, standard amount of time for a mom/parent to conclude that they cannot parent their baby OR, change their mind and decide they can parent their baby. Such a significant, life-altering decision does not need to be rushed or hurried. We know that moms who have just given birth, especially those who are alone, need time to recover physically and emotionally. Moms can experience postpartum depression after the birth of child, this typically occurs within the first 1-3 weeks after birth, parents can be in desperate situations- experiencing homelessness, abuse, addiction and need time to get help. Twenty-one states are now at thirty days for age of relinquishment. Utah just extended their law to thirty days in February, 2020 and approved funding for safe haven law awareness. Extending this law can potentially save more infants from abuse, neglect, and abandonment and give parents the time they need to make important decisions. We hope the committee will approve the extension and consider providing state funding for safe haven law awareness and promotion of safe haven locations or “safe baby sites”. Not enough parents are informed about the law’s existence and the process involved. Our group is especially interested in a state funded, DSS promoted, 24-hour confidential, crisis hotline that would provide intervention and support for women in crisis pregnancies and struggling parents, so that they can get the help they need to parent their baby. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and committee members for your time and for the opportunity to voice our support of this bill. Sincerely, Leah Kipley VA is for Children

I am the chairman of the Boyd-Graves study committee on the subject to which the proposed legislation relates. I wanted to be present to explain the purpose of the proposed amendment and answer any question the Subcommittee may have.

Discussion of intended purpose of legislation as proposed by the Boyd-Graves Conference.

Available to answer any legal questions.

ChamberRVA opposes this bill. The language of the bill is unclear, but appears to permit one plaintiff to file actions on behalf of multiple other people and then to join those actions together. The bill therefore seems to permit class action lawsuits, which have not been permitted in Virginia. We believe that authorizing class action lawsuits would greatly incentivize filing of lawsuits, and deemphasize the case-specific factual situations that are so critical to the fair administration of justice.

The Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce opposes HB 505 and thanks the subcommittee for its consideration.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and committee members: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB 16 and thank you, Delegate Fowler, for your work updating our state’s Safe Haven law. We, Virginia is for Children (an advocacy group for the lives of vulnerable children in our state), are following the Safe Haven law efforts and are fully supportive of the extension to thirty days of age for infant relinquishment. This is a reasonable, standard amount of time for a mom/parent to conclude that they cannot parent their baby OR, change their mind and decide they can parent their baby. Such a significant, life-altering decision does not need to be rushed or hurried. We know that moms who have just given birth, especially those who are alone, need time to recover physically and emotionally. Moms can experience postpartum depression after the birth of child, this typically occurs within the first 1-3 weeks after birth, parents can be in desperate situations- experiencing homelessness, abuse, addiction and need time to get help. Twenty-one states are now at thirty days for age of relinquishment. Utah just extended their law to thirty days in February, 2020 and approved funding for safe haven law awareness. Extending this law can potentially save more infants from abuse, neglect, and abandonment and give parents the time they need to make important decisions. We hope the committee will approve the extension and consider providing state funding for safe haven law awareness and promotion of safe haven locations or “safe baby sites”. Not enough parents are informed about the law’s existence and the process involved. Our group is especially interested in a state funded, DSS promoted, 24-hour confidential, crisis hotline that would provide intervention and support for women in crisis pregnancies and struggling parents, so that they can get the help they need to parent their baby. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and committee members for your time and for the opportunity to voice our support of this bill. Sincerely, Leah Kipley VA is for Children

VCDL STRONGLY SUPPORTS HB 515.

As the courts should not be used as a way to punish people for protecting themselves, this bill is very much needed.

HB609 - People can then sue for 2nd amendment rights violations for not being able to bring firearms where they could before. People could sue because the city didn't fix a pothole or missed one (simply on accident) and they drove over it and the car needed to be realigned. Way too broad and the working public has to pay for it. Egregious items I can see, but this goes way too far, especially given who decides what is a "right" or "privilege". HB515 - Very much needed. When one acts in self defense and gun rights people work to go after those defending themselves, rather than being stopped from wasting the taxpayers' funds and the drama created in the papers and the ruination of peoples' lives, its time to stop folks using their offices to prosecute their political ideologues enemies.

I do not support any bills that criminalize folks

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and committee members: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB 16 and thank you, Delegate Fowler, for your work updating our state’s Safe Haven law. We, Virginia is for Children (an advocacy group for the lives of vulnerable children in our state), are following the Safe Haven law efforts and are fully supportive of the extension to thirty days of age for infant relinquishment. This is a reasonable, standard amount of time for a mom/parent to conclude that they cannot parent their baby OR, change their mind and decide they can parent their baby. Such a significant, life-altering decision does not need to be rushed or hurried. We know that moms who have just given birth, especially those who are alone, need time to recover physically and emotionally. Moms can experience postpartum depression after the birth of child, this typically occurs within the first 1-3 weeks after birth, parents can be in desperate situations- experiencing homelessness, abuse, addiction and need time to get help. Twenty-one states are now at thirty days for age of relinquishment. Utah just extended their law to thirty days in February, 2020 and approved funding for safe haven law awareness. Extending this law can potentially save more infants from abuse, neglect, and abandonment and give parents the time they need to make important decisions. We hope the committee will approve the extension and consider providing state funding for safe haven law awareness and promotion of safe haven locations or “safe baby sites”. Not enough parents are informed about the law’s existence and the process involved. Our group is especially interested in a state funded, DSS promoted, 24-hour confidential, crisis hotline that would provide intervention and support for women in crisis pregnancies and struggling parents, so that they can get the help they need to parent their baby. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and committee members for your time and for the opportunity to voice our support of this bill. Sincerely, Leah Kipley VA is for Children

Virginia Hospital & Healthcare Association is opposed to this legislation. VHHA previously joined other provider groups and the Virginia Trial Lawyers Association to request the issuance of an executive order to address liability protections for “health care providers” as set forth in Virginia Code Sections 8.01-225.01 and 8.01-225.02. The applicability of the immunities in these statutes are limited to “health care providers” as defined in the Medical Malpractice Act (8.01-581.1), which does not expressly include hospices, home care organizations, private providers, assisted living facilities, and adult day care centers. Then in the 2020 Special Session I, VHHA supported HB5059 and SB5082 creating § 8.01-225.03. We believe that these provisions are necessary and appropriate to provide limited immunity protection for these additional provider types assisting in the COVID-19 response that is equivalent to that afforded to other health care providers. This is especially true in the midst of this most recent surge of hospitalizations and infections that has reached levels not seen in previous surges.

The Virginia Association for Home Care and Hospice Opposes House Bill 569. This bill places licensed home care and hospice organizations at great risk. Home care and Hospice organizations have worked diligently through what has been an overwhelming public health care crisis. Many of our patients that were discharged to Home Care and Hospice organizations by Hospitals and Nursing Facilities were COVID positive. In Home Care our role was to rehabilitate. In Hospice, it was End-of-Life care. Our staff worked diligently when many other members of the community stayed at home. Again, this bill is harmful to Home Care and Hospice organizations and serves no public good. On behalf of the Home Care and Hospice industry we respectfully as you to vote no!

Comments Document

Dear Members of the Committee, Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. As a Virginia resident and former police chief, I am writing to express my support for HB 609. This bill enables citizens to bring lawsuits when their constitutional rights are violated by employees who are not cut out for the job. During my 25 years of service in law enforcement, in addition to being a chief, I served as a patrol officer and as a security forces supervisor with the United States Air Force. I learned that police accountability plays a vital role in building community trust and safety. When there is a lack of police accountability, we lose legitimacy in the eyes of those we serve, making community members less likely to cooperate with us. To restore this trust and strengthen relationships with the communities we serve, we need to prioritize governmental accountability. To prevent and solve a crime, police need community members to cooperate and provide information about what they have witnessed. Folks will only cooperate if they trust us. Trust-building is not an optional, feel-good extracurricular activity for police, it is a core responsibility with a direct link to public safety. The doctrine of sovereign immunity is derived from the federal doctrine of qualified immunity. Qualified immunity holds the state and its agencies harmless unless the officer’s action has already been clearly established as a constitutional violation in that court’s jurisdiction. For example, in Jessop v City of Fresno, police officers stole money, and the victims sued. The Ninth Circuit dismissed the lawsuit on qualified immunity grounds because no previous Ninth Circuit case specifically said that police stealing from plaintiffs is a violation of the Fourth Amendment. When such cases are dismissed, the media firestorm has a devastating impact on public trust in the justice system. Qualified immunity is deeply unpopular. Two-thirds of Americans say that civilians need to have the power to sue police officers in order to hold them accountable for misconduct and excessive use of force, even if that makes police work more difficult. In fact, we believe it will make police work easier by helping us rebuild community trust. Virginia cannot fix a federal issue, but state legislators have proposed legislation that would protect Virginia residents’ constitutional rights through state court. House Bill 609 would prevent the government from escaping responsibility by invoking sovereign immunity. The bill gives Virginians the right to sue the state or local government for harms caused by negligent hiring, supervision, training, or retention. The bottom line is that House Bill 609 would not bring open season upon law enforcement. It would simply allow judges to hear the facts of the most egregious cases, which are currently causing the public perception that police are above the law. By doing so, it would strengthen the ties between police and the people we swore an oath to protect and serve. Thank you for considering this important issue. Chief Rob Reyes (Fmr.) U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Police Department Erie, PA Resident of Westmoreland County, VA

The Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police oppose HB 609. Public officials deserve the right to be protected in the performance of their duties, when they are acting reasonably and within law. This is especially important in the case of law enforcement, who are continually asked to make split second decisions that can have life altering impacts. There already exists avenues for civil and criminal recourse when public officials act outside of these guidelines. Passing of this bill will create a liability for jurisdictions that they cannot afford. Professional policing is already quite expensive. This bill will make it impossible for jurisdictions to maintain those standards. The passing of this bill will allow a continuous flow of frivolous lawsuits that will not only impact the courts, but have a chilling effect on the law enforcement profession and its ability to effectively do its job. The profession remains in crisis due to the number of officers who have chosen to leave the profession due to the targeted attacks and negative portrayal throughout the media. Applicant pools have virtually dried up throughout the state, leaving agencies fiercely competing with each other for certified officers. These staffing shortages are greatly impacting service delivery as well as an agencies ability to conduct proactive policing and protect their communities. The damage caused over the past two years will take a decade to correct. Should this bill pass, the profession may never rebound to effective levels. Specific legislation was passed over the past several sessions intended to hold law enforcement more accountable for it actions. The VACP has championed several of these bills, recognizing the need for more professional standards and accountability. This legislation needs time to work to make a difference. Removing immunity for our profession will simply make it impossible to do the job we were hired to do and result in officers hesitating to engage and be proactive, and fearful to act. It will create safety issues and cost lives. It will also be the difference between our ability to attract true servants to the profession over those who don't meet the standards our communities expect. We respectfully ask that you reject this bill in its entirety. Chief Maggie A. DeBoard Herndon Police Department Immediate Past President and Legislative Chair of the VACP

Comments Document

The attached file contains one page of written testimony describing my background and support for HB609 and two excerpts from a recent report issued by the Institute for Justice entitled "50 Shades of Government Immunity" that discuss existing Virginia law.

HB609 - People can then sue for 2nd amendment rights violations for not being able to bring firearms where they could before. People could sue because the city didn't fix a pothole or missed one (simply on accident) and they drove over it and the car needed to be realigned. Way too broad and the working public has to pay for it. Egregious items I can see, but this goes way too far, especially given who decides what is a "right" or "privilege". HB515 - Very much needed. When one acts in self defense and gun rights people work to go after those defending themselves, rather than being stopped from wasting the taxpayers' funds and the drama created in the papers and the ruination of peoples' lives, its time to stop folks using their offices to prosecute their political ideologues enemies.

Indigent persons should have the ability to appeal cases regardless of whether the landlord reports that back rent has not been paid in full. In all other cases, indigent persons may appeal without paying a fee; and the current situation for renters is a denial of their basic right to have the facts of the case looked at. At present, justice is denied to the tenant only on the basis of the landlord's word, which may itself reflect inaccurate or incomplete information. Especially during the pandemic, when the affordable housing market is extremely tight, it is not in the interest of the community for persons to be evicted, particularly without the ability to appeal the case and to present the facts. This bill corrects basic inequity in the current law affecting low-income renters, and encourages community stability.

On behalf of the Virginia Coalition of Latino Organizations, I write in support of HB614/SB474. This bill rectifies the long-overlooked denial of due process and denial of a right to a jury trial by extending the indigency waiver to all civil litigants, regardless of the type of case. With this bill, low income-tenants who wish to appeal their eviction case can ask the court to waive the appeal bond, thereby granting them full access to review of their case in Circuit Court. Thank you very much for your consideration.

This bill alleviates what is already a burdensome financial situation for many tenants. n civil cases, indigent litigants can have the money bond required to appeal their case waived unless they are appealing an eviction based on nonpayment of rent. These tenants are thus effectively denied their right to seek de novo review of their unlawful detainer case, they do not get access to the more robust pre-trial discovery available only in circuit court, and they are denied their right to a jury trial enshrined in Virginia’s Constitution. The rare tenants who can scrape together the money to pay the appeal bond must also pay ongoing rent into the court on or before the fifth day of the month or their case is summarily dismissed. If the tenant does not pay the full rent into court, upon written motion from the landlord the court must, without a hearing, enter a judgment and an order of possession against the tenant. The court must also release the appeal bond funds to the landlord without further hearing or proceeding of the court unless the tenant files a motion to retain some or all of the funds. Regardless of the merits of the tenant’s claim, the court must enter an order of possession in favor of the landlord. HB614 rectifies the long-overlooked denial of due process and denial of a right to a jury trial by extending the indigency waiver to all civil litigants, regardless of the type of case. With this bill, low income-tenants who wish to appeal their eviction case can ask the court to waive the appeal bond, thereby granting them full access to review of their case in Circuit Court. The Virginia Coalition for Immigrant Rights supports this bill.

The VA State Conference NAACP support this bill.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and committee members: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB 16 and thank you, Delegate Fowler, for your work updating our state’s Safe Haven law. We, Virginia is for Children (an advocacy group for the lives of vulnerable children in our state), are following the Safe Haven law efforts and are fully supportive of the extension to thirty days of age for infant relinquishment. This is a reasonable, standard amount of time for a mom/parent to conclude that they cannot parent their baby OR, change their mind and decide they can parent their baby. Such a significant, life-altering decision does not need to be rushed or hurried. We know that moms who have just given birth, especially those who are alone, need time to recover physically and emotionally. Moms can experience postpartum depression after the birth of child, this typically occurs within the first 1-3 weeks after birth, parents can be in desperate situations- experiencing homelessness, abuse, addiction and need time to get help. Twenty-one states are now at thirty days for age of relinquishment. Utah just extended their law to thirty days in February, 2020 and approved funding for safe haven law awareness. Extending this law can potentially save more infants from abuse, neglect, and abandonment and give parents the time they need to make important decisions. We hope the committee will approve the extension and consider providing state funding for safe haven law awareness and promotion of safe haven locations or “safe baby sites”. Not enough parents are informed about the law’s existence and the process involved. Our group is especially interested in a state funded, DSS promoted, 24-hour confidential, crisis hotline that would provide intervention and support for women in crisis pregnancies and struggling parents, so that they can get the help they need to parent their baby. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and committee members for your time and for the opportunity to voice our support of this bill. Sincerely, Leah Kipley VA is for Children

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and committee members: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB 16 and thank you, Delegate Fowler, for your work updating our state’s Safe Haven law. We, Virginia is for Children (an advocacy group for the lives of vulnerable children in our state), are following the Safe Haven law efforts and are fully supportive of the extension to thirty days of age for infant relinquishment. This is a reasonable, standard amount of time for a mom/parent to conclude that they cannot parent their baby OR, change their mind and decide they can parent their baby. Such a significant, life-altering decision does not need to be rushed or hurried. We know that moms who have just given birth, especially those who are alone, need time to recover physically and emotionally. Moms can experience postpartum depression after the birth of child, this typically occurs within the first 1-3 weeks after birth, parents can be in desperate situations- experiencing homelessness, abuse, addiction and need time to get help. Twenty-one states are now at thirty days for age of relinquishment. Utah just extended their law to thirty days in February, 2020 and approved funding for safe haven law awareness. Extending this law can potentially save more infants from abuse, neglect, and abandonment and give parents the time they need to make important decisions. We hope the committee will approve the extension and consider providing state funding for safe haven law awareness and promotion of safe haven locations or “safe baby sites”. Not enough parents are informed about the law’s existence and the process involved. Our group is especially interested in a state funded, DSS promoted, 24-hour confidential, crisis hotline that would provide intervention and support for women in crisis pregnancies and struggling parents, so that they can get the help they need to parent their baby. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and committee members for your time and for the opportunity to voice our support of this bill. Sincerely, Leah Kipley VA is for Children