Voters have plentiful options for IDs in Virginia and adding, "(vi) any valid identification card containing a photograph of the voter and issued by any private entity that is licensed or certified, in whole or in part, by the Department of Health, Department of Social Services, Department of Medical Assistance Services, or Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services; " adds to the likelihood that non-citizens will vote. This dilutes out votes and is not acceptable. Please vote NO.

Oppose bill in "accepting forms of identification" Must be an American Citizen to vote

Good afternoon, and thank you for allowing me to testify on behalf of HB26. I am Robert Moses I have been an election worker and election officer for over 20 years and have been on the Loudoun board of elections for 6 years. This bill will fill a critical void in acceptable forms of voter ID for Seniors who may lost their driver’s license due to medical or age issues. Reason 1: We currently accept this form of ID for GOVERNMENT run senior facilities only. This precludes facilities owned by churches, non-profits or private companies. Reason 2: This ID would meet the Virginia high security standards including verified information and picture ID. Every facility resident goes through that process. Reason 3: This would be more secure than some methods used today. Like acceptable utility bills or some work IDs. Please don’t disenfranchise this small but vital community of seniors. Thank you for your time and consideration.

The League of Women Voters supports HB 26. This bill adopts an additional form of photo ID that voters can use to verify their identity when they vote in-person. Specifically, this bill recognizes that many voters have photo IDs issued by a private entity that is licensed or certified by one of four Virginia agencies listed in the bill. Like our Department of Motor Vehicles’ IDs, photo IDs from these private entities, by being licensed or certified by Virginia agencies, can provide the same assurance that the voter is registered.

The Virginia Civic Engagement Table is a nonpartisan voting rights and civic engagement 501(c)(3) organization based in Richmond, VA. It anchors the Virginia Election Protection Coalition, the Commonwealth’s largest nonpartisan pro-voter coalition that works year-round to advance the freedom to vote. The Virginia Civic Engagement Table is proud to support this bill that updates the voter identification code to better reflect the full diversity of our Commonwealth and the needs of Virginia voters.

No attachment

The League of Women Voters of Virginia supports the fundamental right to vote and supports measures that seek to enhance voter access and voter participation. Curbside voting is one of the ways that Virginia localities ensure that having a disability is not a barrier to voter participation. The current law focuses on physical disabilities, but those are not the only disabilities that can be barriers to voting inside a polling place. HB1222 would add developmental disabilities which is a step in the direction of increasing voter access. HB43 and HB441 are more inclusive and would cover mental and emotional health which can fluctuate unpredictably. The League of Women Voters of Virginia supports the greatest degree of inclusion for persons with disabilities. Additionally, HB441 provides for training of Officers of Elections on how to provide assistance to voters outside the polling place. Therefore, the League of Women Voters of Virginia supports HB441 as providing the most help to the largest number of voters with disabilities.

The Virginia Civic Engagement Table is a nonpartisan voting rights and civic engagement 501(c)(3) organization based in Richmond, VA. It anchors the Virginia Election Protection Coalition, the Commonwealth’s largest nonpartisan pro-voter coalition that works year-round to advance the freedom to vote. The Virginia Civic Engagement Table strongly supports measures that make our Commonwealth’s elections more safe and accessible for Virginia voters. HB43 fully recognizes the diversity of needed accommodations for voters and would ensure that all Virginians could fully access the freedom to vote.

VCOG supports HB69 and thanks Delegate Bulova for working on this bill on our suggestion. While the process for selecting someone to fill a board vacancy is transparent in some localities, the final decision is often sprung on the public without any prior knowledge in others. Citizens voted for the person who has stepped down, so they should know in advance who might be filling the vacancy since that person will be representing them and voting as their representative.

I support HB69 and any additional legislation that allows for requiring more transparency in our local Town government. In Smithfield there were recently 2 vacancies on our 7 member Town Council. The Mayor chose two individuals to form the vetting committee and interviews were held in private. The individuals selected - from a bank of 21 interested - were preselected prior to the vote of this council. Citizens and our local newspaper requested transparency in the process for these critical appointments The Mayor and vetting committee refused and continued to note there was nothing illegal in making these selections behind close doors. We need our state representatives to ensure light is shed on these processes at all levels of government in Virginia. More guardrails are needed - at least at our local level - to ensure our local elected officials aren’t serving their own , or others, special interests . Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Leah

The LWV-VA supports HB 69. While we agree that seats on an elected local governing body or an elected school board should not remain unfilled, citizens should have an opportunity to participate in a hearing where they receive information on each candidate under consideration for such an interim appointment. Thank you for considering this important bill.

In the past 2 years Isle of Wight County has had 4 appointed members 2 to IWC School Board and 2 to Smithfield Town Council with no citizen in-put. The 2 school board members where literally appointed by 2 other members and documents later destroyed. Today, the one member is currently in court proceedings and has cost the citizens thousands of dollars within the court system. Because of the way the School Board appointed member Michael Vines, way omitted information on his economic financial has upset citizens and the way he then treated parents and citizens at meetings says a lot on why citizens should be involved in the decision making of those who then represent them. This bill requiring governing bodies to have a public meeting prior to making an appointment and require them to make available to the public materials being used to make the selection, such as resumes and applications would prevent also what took place when school board member Denise Tynes was able to make a false statement during a school board meeting regarding Michael Vines and why she appointed him. A citizen who spoke that evening and had also interviewed for the appointment could not verify her remarks due to them destroying the records, applications, and resumes, along with the submitted letters. The citizen did state he did put on his letter and state on his application exactly what School Member Denise Tynes stated only Micahel Vines had answered and that is why she choose him. Again all unverified, due to destruction. Smithfield Town Council just last month appointed 2 members behind closed doors, conducting their interviews. Pulling FOIA of the applicants, the 2 appointees had 2 of the worse applications. On top of that one of the Town Councilmen openly stated that they did not wish to question the applicants, as they feared they would not get an honest answer. To what questions or answers would be asked or answered that the public could not, or should not hear? That statement there, is exactly why this process should and needs to be more transparent. This bill is a good step in the right direction. I beleive it could go further. But believe it is a great step in the right direction and commend the Delegate for not allowing it to no move from last year. Thank you, Heidi Swartz

Over the past 3 years, Isle of Wight and Smithfield have had a total of four appointments made to fill vacated elected positions. In each case, the governing bodies have gone out of their way to avoid transparency and hidden behind the “personnel exemption” in VA FOIA as though they were hiring an employee instead of selecting a representative of the people. Also each selection has led to controversy and further eroded trust of local governance. HB 69 will not fix everything in the appointment process, but it certainly is a much needed step in the right direction.

I oppose HB 176. Please leave our local and constitutional offices as non-partisan. Constitutional duties should not be a partisan endeavor. These offices should remain independent of partisan affiliation.

The offices of sheriff, commonwealth's attorney, commissioner of the revenue and treasurer were set out in the state constitution to create checks and balances of transparency and responsiveness to We the People. They were not created to be beholden to a political party, or any other group or organization that may endorse them. Voters have a duty to elect these officers based on qualifications, not party affiliation. There is already too much partisanship in government today. HB176 only encourages more partisanship. Please vote NO on passing HB176.

Please oppose HB176 for the following reasons: • Of the 645 elected constitutional officers the MAJORITY DO NOT avail themselves of the party process and are non-partisan. • In the MAJORITY of Virginia localities the local governing body, school board and constitutional officers are ALL NON-PARTISAN offices. • This bill will only serve to increase partisanship in offices which should remain non-partisan. Presently, the majority of constitutional officers, in all five offices, run non-partisan. • Partisanship among ALL constitutional offices is unnecessary as we do not caucus with anyone. We come together, in a non-partisan manner, when issues impact us. • Adding CO’s to partisan politics could result in more primaries. Localities bear the full cost of primary elections. • This bill was NOT requested by any known constitutional officer or constitutional officer group. • “Local elections are best served by addressing local issues, not party issues…In our local elections we are not party connected, we are neighbors serving neighbors.” – VML 2012 Thank you for your time and consideration. Robin Coles Goard Commissioner of the Revenue Pittsylvania County

Please do not make local or constitutional offices partisan. Similar bills have failed to move forward in previous sessions. Sheriff's, commissioner of revenues, treasurers etc should focus on their duties, not be beholden to political parties. These bills, if passed, may exclude military involved or federal employees from running for office, due to the Hatch Act. Local and constitutional offices should be nonpartisan.

Each of these bills, HB 176, 413, and 429 would require party affiliation to be included on the ballot of constitutional officers. At a time of deadly political polarization, we should be moving to REDUCE the influence and impact of parties on our government. These bills go in the opposite direction. There is no Republican, Democratic or Independent way to be a treasurer or a court clerk. These are nonpartisan offices for a reason - we don't WANT partisanship in the basic administration of local government. Please don't make the mistake of supporting these measures and making partisan politics are even greater distraction to good governance. Thank you.

This bill is a bad idea, period. It was bad when it was proposed in past general sessions, and it's bad now. Party labels will undoubtedly shift the focus of these elections from individual qualifications to who has the support of various partisan institutions. Furthermore, constitutional officers have day-to-day duties that have nothing to do with their personal political persuasion. I want my sheriff to do his or her duty based on rule of law, not party alliances. The same goes for all the constitutional offices because the proper role of local governance is to serve the community, not the agendas of party leaders. We're already living in a time of considerable social unrest and polarization. Let's not make things worse. I ask that this committee vote to keep constitutional offices nonpartisan by rejecting and tabling HB176. Thank you for your time and attention.

Veterans for All Voters opposes HB 176 My name is Mike Cantwell. I am the Virginia Task Force Lead for Veterans for All voters. I am a retired Naval Officer, a retired Federal Government Employee, and a 30 resident of the Commonwealth of Virginia. HB 176 would make election for constitutional offices partisan, effectively prohibiting separating or retiring active duty military members and federal government employees from running for local or constitutional offices. Under current state and federal law, separating or retiring active duty military members and federal government employees are permitted to run for constitutional offices. If HB 176 becomes law, these patriotic Americans would risk violating federal law (the Hatch Act) if they campaign for office in a “partisan election” even if they run as an Independent. They would also be prohibited from participating in "partisan political activities" such as gathering petition signatures or hosting a fundraiser for a friend or neighbor. Do we really want to put a party label on Sheriffs, Commissioners of the Revenue, Treasurers, Commonwealth's Attorneys, and Clerks of the Circuit Court? Most voters say no. Voters want honest, competent local elected officials who swear an oath to serve and protect their local communities. I respectfully ask you to keep the status quo and allow separating or retiring active duty military members and federal government employees to run for constitutional offices. Please vote to lay HB 176 on the table. Mike Cantwell Virginia Task Force Lead - Veterans for All Voters 703-786-3922

Please do not make local or constitutional offices partisan. Similar bills have failed to move forward in previous sessions. Sheriff's, commissioner of revenues, treasurers etc should focus on their duties, not be beholden to political parties. These bills, if passed, may exclude military involved or federal employees from running for office, due to the Hatch Act. Local and constitutional offices should be nonpartisan.

Each of these bills, HB 176, 413, and 429 would require party affiliation to be included on the ballot of constitutional officers. At a time of deadly political polarization, we should be moving to REDUCE the influence and impact of parties on our government. These bills go in the opposite direction. There is no Republican, Democratic or Independent way to be a treasurer or a court clerk. These are nonpartisan offices for a reason - we don't WANT partisanship in the basic administration of local government. Please don't make the mistake of supporting these measures and making partisan politics are even greater distraction to good governance. Thank you.

Veterans for All Voters opposes HB 413 My name is Mike Cantwell. I am the Virginia Task Force Lead for Veterans for All voters. I am a retired Naval Officer, a retired Federal Government Employee, and a 30 resident of the Commonwealth of Virginia. HB 413 would make election for constitutional offices partisan, effectively prohibiting separating or retiring active duty military members and federal government employees from running for local or constitutional offices. Under current state and federal law, separating or retiring active duty military members and federal government employees are permitted to run for local or constitutional offices. If HB 413 becomes law, these patriotic Americans would risk violating federal law (the Hatch Act) if they campaign for office in a “partisan election” even if they run as an Independent. They would also be prohibited from participating in "partisan political activities" such as gathering petition signatures or hosting a fundraiser for a friend or neighbor. Do we really want to put a party label on Sheriffs, Commissioners of the Revenue, Treasurers, Commonwealth's Attorneys, and Clerks of the Circuit Court? Most voters say no. Voters want honest, competent local elected officials who swear an oath to serve and protect their local communities. I respectfully ask you to keep the status quo and allow separating or retiring active duty military members and federal government employees to run for local and constitutional offices. Please vote to lay HB 413 on the table.

Please do not make local or constitutional offices partisan. Similar bills have failed to move forward in previous sessions. Sheriff's, commissioner of revenues, treasurers etc should focus on their duties, not be beholden to political parties. These bills, if passed, may exclude military involved or federal employees from running for office, due to the Hatch Act. Local and constitutional offices should be nonpartisan.

Each of these bills, HB 176, 413, and 429 would require party affiliation to be included on the ballot of constitutional officers. At a time of deadly political polarization, we should be moving to REDUCE the influence and impact of parties on our government. These bills go in the opposite direction. There is no Republican, Democratic or Independent way to be a treasurer or a court clerk. These are nonpartisan offices for a reason - we don't WANT partisanship in the basic administration of local government. Please don't make the mistake of supporting these measures and making partisan politics are even greater distraction to good governance. Thank you.

Veterans for All Voters opposes HB 429 My name is Mike Cantwell. I am the Virginia Task Force Lead for Veterans for All voters. I am a retired Naval Officer, a retired Federal Government Employee, and a 30 resident of the Commonwealth of Virginia. HB 426 would make election for constitutional offices partisan, effectively prohibiting separating or retiring active duty military members and federal government employees from running for local or constitutional offices. Under current state and federal law, separating or retiring active duty military members and federal government employees are permitted to run for local or constitutional offices. If HB 429 becomes law, these patriotic Americans would risk violating federal law (the Hatch Act) if they campaign for office in a “partisan election” even if they run as an Independent. They would also be prohibited from participating in "partisan political activities" such as gathering petition signatures or hosting a fundraiser for a friend or neighbor. Do we really want to put a party label on Sheriffs, Commissioners of the Revenue, Treasurers, Commonwealth's Attorneys, and Clerks of the Circuit Court? Most voters say no. Voters want honest, competent local elected officials who swear an oath to serve and protect their local communities. I respectfully ask you to keep the status quo and allow separating or retiring active duty military members and federal government employees to run for local and constitutional offices. Please vote to lay HB 429 on the table.

VA NAACP HB 1003,1177,943,43,1172,942,1408,441,565 WE do not support HB463,hb932,

No attachment

The League of Women Voters of Virginia supports the fundamental right to vote and supports measures that seek to enhance voter access and voter participation. Curbside voting is one of the ways that Virginia localities ensure that having a disability is not a barrier to voter participation. The current law focuses on physical disabilities, but those are not the only disabilities that can be barriers to voting inside a polling place. HB1222 would add developmental disabilities which is a step in the direction of increasing voter access. HB43 and HB441 are more inclusive and would cover mental and emotional health which can fluctuate unpredictably. The League of Women Voters of Virginia supports the greatest degree of inclusion for persons with disabilities. Additionally, HB441 provides for training of Officers of Elections on how to provide assistance to voters outside the polling place. Therefore, the League of Women Voters of Virginia supports HB441 as providing the most help to the largest number of voters with disabilities.

So proud of my delegate. Not all disabilities are visible. If you think of it as voter fraud, don’t you dare call yourself an autism advocate. Ever!

My name is Liz White, and I am the Executive Director of UpVote Virginia – a nonpartisan democracy reform organization. I am writing today to express our support for HB 463. This seems to be a commonsense measure that is simply an extension of rules that have been in place for a long time at polling places. Thank you for considering my thoughts. Liz White UpVote Virginia

No attachment

The League of Women Voters supports HB 463. Many League Members work at their local Registrar’s office or at satellite sites during the Early Voting period before an election. The risks to our voters and election officials at these locations are exactly the same as on Election Day. This bill simply recognizes this unfortunate fact. We endorse extending the prohibition to all voting locations during Early Voting in addition to Election Day.

The League of Women Voters supports HB 904, a bill that will improve Virginia’s voter list maintenance activities and show the public many steps that are taken to ensure accuracy and security. This bill’s provisions will go a long way toward preventing incorrect voter purges, which approximately 3,400 voters experienced last year. Qualified voters should not be disenfranchised for nonexistent felony convictions nor for technical violations after their rights have been restored. Virginia should not be subject to other states’ errors either. Record matching will be more precise, helping to protect eligible citizens from disenfranchisement and prevent those who are no longer eligible from voting in Virginia. The bill also strengthens record keeping requirements so that a mistakenly disenfranchised voter can find out what happened. The bill codifies in detail security and list maintenance procedures that are already in place throughout the Commonwealth. Every locality has a security plan in place, subject to annual reconsideration. The Department of Elections’ IT team can assist any locality that needs help in reaching minimum standards. Change of address procedures are already in place but the bill spells out the standards. This bill accomplishes two things, better list maintenance so that only qualified voters can vote, and rebuilding public confidence in elections.

The League of Women Voters supports HB 904, a bill that will improve Virginia’s voter list maintenance activities and show the public many steps that are taken to ensure accuracy and security. This bill’s provisions will go a long way toward preventing incorrect voter purges, which approximately 3,400 voters experienced last year. Qualified voters should not be disenfranchised for nonexistent felony convictions nor for technical violations after their rights have been restored. Virginia should not be subject to other states’ errors either. Record matching will be more precise, helping to protect eligible citizens from disenfranchisement and prevent those who are no longer eligible from voting in Virginia. The bill also strengthens record keeping requirements so that a mistakenly disenfranchised voter can find out what happened. The bill codifies in detail security and list maintenance procedures that are already in place throughout the Commonwealth. Every locality has a security plan in place, subject to annual reconsideration. The Department of Elections’ IT team can assist any locality that needs help in reaching minimum standards. Change of address procedures are already in place but the bill spells out the standards. This bill accomplishes two things, better list maintenance so that only qualified voters can vote and rebuilding public confidence in elections.

No attachment

(Additional comments from the LWV-VA in support of HB 904) The bill codifies in detail security and list maintenance procedures that are already in place throughout the Commonwealth. Every locality has a security plan in place, subject to annual reconsideration. The Department of Elections’ IT team can assist any locality that needs help in reaching minimum standards. Change of address procedures are already in place but the bill spells out standards. This bill accomplishes two things, better list maintenance so that qualified voters can vote and people who should not vote here cannot, and it rebuilds public confidence in elections.

The League of Women Voters supports HB 904, a bill that will improve Virginia’s voter list maintenance activities and show the public many steps that are taken to ensure accuracy and security. This bill’s provisions will go a long way toward preventing incorrect voter purges, which approximately 3,400 voters experienced last year. Qualified voters should not be disenfranchised for nonexistent felony convictions nor for technical violations after their rights have been restored. Virginia should not be subject to other states’ errors either. Record matching will be more precise, helping to protect eligible citizens from disenfranchisement and prevent those who are no longer eligible from voting in Virginia. The bill also strengthens record keeping requirements so that a mistakenly disenfranchised voter can find out what happened.

We are in support of having space between guns and polling places in order to keep our community safe.

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change. We support having space between guns and the places where Virginians vote and determine the results of elections.

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change. We support having space between guns and the places where Virginians vote and determine the results of elections.

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change. We support having space between guns and the places where Virginians vote and determine the results of elections

“I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change. We support having space between guns and the places where Virginians vote and determine the results of elections.”

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change. We support having space between guns and the places where Virginians vote and determine the results of elections.

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change. We support having space between guns and the places where Virginians vote and determine the results of elections.

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change. We support having space between guns and the places where Virginians vote and determine the results of elections.

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change. We support having space between guns and the places where Virginians vote and determine the results of elections.

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change. We support having space between guns and the places where Virginians vote and determine the results of elections.

Guns are very threatening. Having space between guns and polling places is a good idea.

No attachment

The League of Women Voters supports HB 939 and HB 1023. Certain activities or conduct, such as electioneering or carrying a firearm within 40 feet of a polling place are currently prohibited because they can intimidate or harass voters and/or officers of election. The same prohibitions should apply wherever voters may cast their ballots in person or drop off their completed ballots. The combined bill would provide the necessary extension of existing law to locations in which ballots are processed and counted. We urge you to report the bill.

My spouse has worked as an election volunteer for many years. I am a former Navy combat fighter pilot and now a senior airline captain who has been involved in aviation safety for over 20 years. I am an expert in safety management systems, investigations, and am a Fellow of the Royal Aeronautical Society. I am also a Federal Flight Deck officer, credentialed to carry a weapon myself. HB 939 is essential for mitigating the risk of death or serious injury to both election workers and the voters that visit the polling stations. Security in elections should be no different than at airports. There is no need for anyone besides clearly identifiable and credentialed local, state, or Federal law enforcement officers to be in possession of a firearm, period. As the horrific trend in firearm deaths continues to climb in this country, we simply must act to mitigate this danger. In every professional field, creating rules and legislation that create barriers where preconditions for unsafe acts exist is considered an industry best practice. To not do so is considered reckless. The mere visible presence of a gun intimates its use as a threat of deadly force. Far too many people consider this to be an acceptable use of intimidation and have little regard for the consequences it brings, neither for themselves nor for other people. Seeing mad, angry white men cosplaying the military while brandishing weapons provides a clear indication that a mass shooting can be only seconds away. Let me be clear, this is not professional, responsible, or in any way masculine or patriotic, it is childish, immature, and selfish. It is with all my experience as a Federal Officer, combat fighter pilot, and experienced airline captain that I give my highest possible support for the passage of this bill to expand the gun free zone around our public polling stations. To not support this measure would be reckless in any professional measure of safety. Thank you.

I support this important bill. Voters must traverse the parking lot, curb, surrounding lawn, and sidewalk before gaining entrance to the polling place, then cross the same space when leaving. Voters should not have to encounter a stranger with a gun and unknown intentions and background on their way in to vote, or out to get back to their car. This is intimidating and designed to instill fear, discouraging voting and the use of the polling site for other legitimate purposes. In November, we had a mentally ill man with a gun outside the Registrar’s office for several weeks during the early voting period. He shouted and harassed voters, arguing and standing in their way as they tried to enter and leave. He later moved to a library used as an early voting satellite site, exhibiting the same disruptive, harassing, intimidating behavior. Although they received daily complaints from voters about his behavior, the Chief and election officials at the site refused to require the mentally ill man with a gun to leave, because he was outside the 40 foot limit set out in current law. (The man did periodically teasingly step over the 40 foot line with one foot, while keeping the gun on his other hip just outside the line.) Extending the line where firearms are prohibited to 100 feet would alleviate this problem to some extent, giving election officials a clear standard by which to enforce the limit. This would keep voters, their families, the elderly, and children more safe from those who inexplicably choose to bring a firearm into this safe, protected space. It would encourage voting, teach the young about the importance of voting, and allow the use of the library and other public spaces for safe activities by the general public. Please pass HB 939. Thank you.

I'm a volunteer with Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, and I support this bill.

Comments Document

Hello Honorable Delegates: I am a strong supporter of HB939. I would be in support even if I hadn’t had this experience. I volunteered in early voting for 3 weeks. A candidate running in my district every day was wearing a gun. For 3 weeks he harassed me by approaching me and picking on my appearance, clothes, etc. I was the first to report this to the Director of Elections and they said he’s legal, and n one else complained. After that day, many voters called Elections to complain about the man with the gun. No matter that he stood 6 feet from the absentee ballot box. I also called the police and told them he was shouting at every person “I’m the only Independent in Virginia Beach…” and more. I thought he had mental problems. I am a Psychologist. The police told me he was ok. The following weeks I was at Kempsville Library, and so was he. I kept telling him to stay away from me and stop talking to me. He said he could talk to anyone he wanted. He got in a shouting match with 2 voters and my colleague asked the Head Librarian to call police. After the voters left, this candidate told my colleague that if they had touched him, he would have shot them! Obviously his gun was loaded. After that, deputies came every day for support, and my colleagues were very helpful snd supportive. His behavior triggered an old trauma that had me reeling and anxious, but I persevered. Very unpleasant. One deputy told me he was trying to intimidate voters. Please vote YES on HB 939. Thank you.

No attachment

The League of Women Voters supports HB 940 and HB 1003. Many League Members have extensive experience serving as election officers, including experience where the location of a polling place is changed. We know how important it is to voters to be given timely notice on a new polling location, as well as information on the new polling location if they unknowingly go to the location that they last used for their polling place. Voting should not seem like a puzzle for Virginia voters.

VA NAACP HB 1003,1177,943,43,1172,942,1408,441,565 WE do not support HB463,hb932,

No attachment

The League of Women Voters’ mission is to Empower Voters/Defend Democracy. The LWV of Virginia supports and welcomes no-excuse early voting to empower voters to participate in the voting process. We recognize that in-person early voting has been implemented in many different ways in different localities and that it is time to provide standards to ensure that all voters are equitably enabled to cast a ballot during the early in-person voting period. The question of number and locations for satellite voting is complex and varies based on a county or city’s geographic size, population distribution, public transportation options, general registrars’ office location within the locality, voting patterns, and underserved communities. Chapter 18 of the GREB (General Registrar and Electoral Board) Handbook provides guidance for operation of satellite locations but only states that localities “may” establish them. No standards or Code exist to require or provide guidance for the number or placement of satellite locations. Three bills before this committee HB942, HB1172, HB1408, offer opportunities to set standards to broaden the access of voters to early voting at satellite locations. HB1408 requires a standard developed by the Department of Elections. Standards exist for many aspects of elections and the number and distribution of satellite voting locations should be no exception. Standards can be very detailed descriptions of various scenarios and how the number and location of satellites should be determined in each. The League supports passage of this bill. HB1172 sets a minimum of one satellite (operating in addition to the Registrar’s office) during the early voting period for any county or city with a population over 50,000. The League supports this attempt to set a minimum number of satellite locations but has concerns that it might not be adequate for all localities based on geographic size, population distribution, and underrepresented or underserved communities. HB942 addresses several satellite location concerns. The League supports language requiring consideration of proximity to public transportation, parking, proximity to historically underrepresented or underserved communities, population distribution, and the needs of tribal organizations. The League recommends that the bill be amended to establish guidance on the number of satellite locations. Additionally, the League supports the bill’s rules limiting the use of police or sheriff offices for all voting locations including satellites and requiring tribal voting locations. Thank you for considering our input in support of Virginia’s voters.

No attachment

The League of Women Voters staunchly supports HB943. Although elections in the Commonwealth are secure, transparent, and accurate, trust in elections has deteriorated both here and nationwide. Fortunately, Virginia’s election officials have thus far not experienced some of the trauma wreaked on officials in other states. Nevertheless, it is prudent to offer the identified election officials the option to withhold their residential addresses from the public voter list. These protections could be extended to cover statewide election officials, but this bill is a necessary start.

The League of Women Voters supports both HB 998 and HB1238, which extend local electoral board certification of elections until either seven calendar days after absentee ballots are returned by mail or ten calendar days after the election. Sorting mail ballots by precinct is burdensome. Registrars also need time to verify same day registrants and count their provisional ballots. Compounding the workload is that no mail is delivered on Friday when it is a federal holiday, as it was in both 2022 and 2023. Tackling these tasks right after the election means tired administrators can make mistakes. The largest localities barely finished in time last year. Remember this: extending the certification deadline at the local level by three days does not affect the timing of the final certification by the State Board of Elections.

HB1003 is a no brainer; I can't believe this notice of polling place changes isn't standard procedure already. Support HB1045 looks great as well, would be a huge step towards making elections more about who has the most popular ideas rather than who can raise the most money. Support HB375 is the main reason I'm commenting; the electoral college is outdated and provides voters in some states with much more power than others. Until the electoral college can be abolished by constitutional amendment, this compact is a great way of ensuring that ALL the people of this country choose its president, not just those in a few swing states. It saddens me to see how many people in the comments on this bill are against this common sense change. Major support SB270 is another no brainer; allowing voters to express their preferences beyond a winner take all system would be a huge win for democracy in the state of Virginia. Support

Please vote in support. It's a common sense measure to ensure voter clarity.

VA NAACP HB 1003,1177,943,43,1172,942,1408,441,565 WE do not support HB463,hb932,

No attachment

The League of Women Voters supports HB 940 and HB 1003. Many League Members have extensive experience serving as election officers, including experience where the location of a polling place is changed. We know how important it is to voters to be given timely notice on a new polling location, as well as information on the new polling location if they unknowingly go to the location that they last used for their polling place. Voting should not seem like a puzzle for Virginia voters.

The League of Women Voters supports HB 939 and HB 1023. Certain activities or conduct, such as electioneering or carrying a firearm within 40 feet of a polling place are currently prohibited because they can intimidate or harass voters and/or officers of election. The same prohibitions should apply wherever voters may cast their ballots in person or drop off their completed ballots. The combined bill would provide the necessary extension of existing law to locations in which ballots are processed and counted. We urge you to report the bill.

HB 1149 (Cordoza) Removal of elected and certain appointed local officers by courts; Governor. Allows the Governor to petition the circuit court to remove from office any local elected officer. The process for removal of local elected officers already exists in Virginia Code. Allowing the Governor to petition the circuit court circumvents the “petition by registered voters” process already in place and potentially politicizes the process.

No attachment

The League of Women Voters’ mission is to Empower Voters/Defend Democracy. The LWV of Virginia supports and welcomes no-excuse early voting to empower voters to participate in the voting process. We recognize that in-person early voting has been implemented in many different ways in different localities and that it is time to provide standards to ensure that all voters are equitably enabled to cast a ballot during the early in-person voting period. The question of number and locations for satellite voting is complex and varies based on a county or city’s geographic size, population distribution, public transportation options, general registrars’ office location within the locality, voting patterns, and underserved communities. Chapter 18 of the GREB (General Registrar and Electoral Board) Handbook provides guidance for operation of satellite locations but only states that localities “may” establish them. No standards or Code exist to require or provide guidance for the number or placement of satellite locations. Three bills before this committee HB942, HB1172, HB1408, offer opportunities to set standards to broaden the access of voters to early voting at satellite locations. HB1408 requires a standard developed by the Department of Elections. Standards exist for many aspects of elections and the number and distribution of satellite voting locations should be no exception. Standards can be very detailed descriptions of various scenarios and how the number and location of satellites should be determined in each. The League supports passage of this bill. HB1172 sets a minimum of one satellite (operating in addition to the Registrar’s office) during the early voting period for any county or city with a population over 50,000. The League supports this attempt to set a minimum number of satellite locations but has concerns that it might not be adequate for all localities based on geographic size, population distribution, and underrepresented or underserved communities. HB942 addresses several satellite location concerns. The League supports language requiring consideration of proximity to public transportation, parking, proximity to historically underrepresented or underserved communities, population distribution, and the needs of tribal organizations. The League recommends that the bill be amended to establish guidance on the number of satellite locations. Additionally, the League supports the bill’s rules limiting the use of police or sheriff offices for all voting locations including satellites and requiring tribal voting locations. Thank you for considering our input in support of Virginia’s voters.

Hi there, I'm Natalie from Social Busy Bee, your partner in the exciting world of Instagram growth. I've discovered something phenomenal for skyrocketing your Instagram popularity and I'm thrilled to share it with you! Social Growth Engine introduces a groundbreaking service that takes your Instagram engagement to new heights. It's effortless: - Zero in on producing unforgettable content. - Extremely budget-friendly at a mere $36/month. - Completely safe (no password needed), incredibly powerful, and Instagram's best friend. I've experienced remarkable results firsthand, and I'm sure you will too! Amplify your Instagram presence right now: http://get.socialbuzzzy.com/instagram_booster Best wishes, Natalie at Social Busy Bee"

Hi I am writing to you on behalf of The Well Connection UK, a media and publishing company. We could easily get virginia.gov featured in various publications such as magazines, online blogs and news sites. This would undoubtedly help virginia.gov with publicity, reputation, domain authority and organic search engine rankings. We have a wide range of options including completely free collaborations, sponsored posts, guest posts and banner ads. If this sounds of interest, please reach out to the senior business development manager, Anita at info@thewellconnection.co.uk and whatsapp +447395206515 (GMT) Kind regards Clifton Junior Outreach Assistant

The ERIC system FAILED to remove registrants as stated, and this is documented by ELECT & by voter roll analysis. WE DO NOT NEED ERIC AND IT WILL ERODE OUR ELECTIONS. ELECT & Virginians have no idea how ERIC/CEIR transferred or stored the Commonwealth’s PII data (provided from 2012 through 2023), what algorithms were used to identify EBUs or whether only certain EBUs were targeted, which individuals or entities were granted access to the data, what types of other analytics were performed on the data, or if the myriad potential unofficial uses (or misuses) of the data. Such legitimate concerns (over data privacy, ERIC’s obvious partisan ties, lack of transparency, and focus on costly voter registration efforts versus actual voter maintenance) are the reason VA and eight other states (LA, FL, MO, WV, AL, OH, IA, TX) opted to withdraw from ERIC since January 2023. To be clear, if ERIC had been concerned with voter roll maintenance, how is it that ERIC failed to detect the nearly 19,000 deceased voters on Virginia’s rolls (from 1960 to 2023) recently identified & removed by ELECT? And similar issues have been found in many other ERIC member states. In fact, it appears that by signing the ERIC contract in 2012, ELECT unilaterally, willfully, & negligently granted itself authority not permitted by federal or state statute, and committed the Department to: Perform regular, ongoing, costly, taxpayer-funded, mass voter registration and GOTV efforts, Release the Commonwealth’s sensitive data to a partisan hack organization (& other unknown entities) by which said groups utilized undisclosed methods, algorithms, and datasets without any oversight. Virginia Law explicitly requires the Commissioner of Elections to serve as state coordinator for the administration of the NVRA & for the continuing operation and maintenance of the Virginia voter registration system for all voters registered in the Commonwealth. Virginia Code (§ 24.2-404.4. Exchange of registered voter lists with other states.) already requires ELECT to exchange voter registration information & lists with bordering states to identify duplicate registrations, voters who no longer reside in the Commonwealth, and other persons who are no longer entitled to be registered in order to maintain the overall accuracy of the voter registration system. Given modern technology and the numerous available government (federal, state, and local) and easily accessible commercial databases, Virginia can and should utilize such resources to garner, compare, and exchange information and records (Social Security, voter registration, DMV, deaths, address changes, felons, property tax, and citizenship status) to maintain accurate voter rolls. Ultimately, Virginia must follow the law, use taxpayer money wisely, and protect both the rights and privacy of: each legally-registered voter in Virginia, each citizen who opts not to register to vote, each minor citizen under the age of 18, and the privacy of each noncitizen residing in the Commonwealth. The integrity of Virginia’s voter rolls is a fundamental component of the protection of voter rights, and accurate and up-to-date voter rolls are essential to prevent the dilution of each legal vote cast. Allowing partisan organizations unfettered access to and control over our state’s voter rolls infringes on voter rights, eradicates legitimacy of our voter rolls, and allows for the dilution of each legal vote cast.

Neither Bill will help election integrity. Voting with paper ballots on election day with hardship exceptions is the only way to insure that there was no electronic interference with the vote!

No attachment

The League of Women Voters strongly supports HB 1177 and appreciates Delegate Sickles’ extensive efforts to convince ELECT to rejoin ERIC. Our voter rolls must be accurate. ERIC provided Virginia residents the assurance that our voter rolls did not include voters who moved away from our Commonwealth. This bill would require ELECT to regain efficient access to that important data.

Comments Document

January 26, 2024 RE: HB 1177 Opposition Chair Marcia S. Price & the Committee on Privileges and Elections Dear Committee on Privileges and Elections, America needs to restore integrity in the election process; Virginia needs election laws that citizens can support and instill confidence in. We need nonpartisan laws that both sides can support. Unfortunately, the repeal of the Electronic Registration Information Center, better known as E.R.I.C., is flawed with problems. Large states like Florida, North Carolina, Texas, and Ohio have pulled out, while California and New York have never been part of the program. Why would Virginia join a program that has not met these states' needs? The Voter Reference Foundation, a 501(c)(4), is dedicated to ensuring transparent, accurate, and fair elections in the United States of America. We have a national scorecard for every state in the nation. Virginia’s transparency score is only 65, while North Carolina has a score of 97, and West Virginia has a score of 83. Two other partisan states have similar scores: New York's 84 and Ohio's 92. Virginia's previous departure from ERIC was necessary to restore the public’s trust. There has been no real reform nor justification to go back. The legislature's last actions were bipartisan and correct. We urge the committee to oppose HB 1177, and support continued transparency. Respectively, Gina Swoboda Executive Director The Voter Reference Foundation

I oppose HB 1177. The bill requires VA to re-enter into an agreement with ERIC. ERIC’s standard agreement prohibits the disclosure to the public of ERIC data or reports without a court order. ERIC data includes state provided information reformulated by ERIC and sent back to Elect in the form of monthly reports. The National Voter Registration Act requires the disclosure of data to the public if that data is used for voter list programs or maintenance. It appears that this provision of the ERIC agreement is legally flawed. The legislature is not empowered to require the executive branch to enter into a legally flawed agreement.

The League of Women Voters of Virginia supports the fundamental right to vote and supports measures that seek to enhance voter access and voter participation. Curbside voting is one of the ways that Virginia localities ensure that having a disability is not a barrier to voter participation. The current law focuses on physical disabilities, but those are not the only disabilities that can be barriers to voting inside a polling place. HB1222 would add developmental disabilities which is a step in the direction of increasing voter access. HB43 and HB441 are more inclusive and would cover mental and emotional health which can fluctuate unpredictably. The League of Women Voters of Virginia supports the greatest degree of inclusion for persons with disabilities. Additionally, HB441 provides for training of Officers of Elections on how to provide assistance to voters outside the polling place. Therefore, the League of Women Voters of Virginia supports HB441 as providing the most help to the largest number of voters with disabilities.

The League of Women Voters supports both HB 998 and HB1238, which extend local electoral board certification of elections until either seven calendar days after absentee ballots are returned by mail or ten calendar days after the election. Sorting mail ballots by precinct is burdensome. Registrars also need time to verify same day registrants and count their provisional ballots. Compounding the workload is that no mail is delivered on Friday when it is a federal holiday, as it was in both 2022 and 2023. Tackling these tasks right after the election means tired administrators can make mistakes. The largest localities barely finished in time last year. Remember this: extending the certification deadline at the local level by three days does not affect the timing of the final certification by the State Board of Elections.

This bill would extend the period for final count and certification of the vote from 7 days to 10 days after an election. Currently, large localities do not have adequate time to finish the vote count, provisional ballot decisions, canvass, and certification, to ensure the accuracy and integrity of each election. This is particularly a problem when there are multiple races on the ballot and high turnout, as there will be in the November 2024 general election. Early voting in person and by mail are significant improvements to the accessibility of voting and a real convenience for voters. However, these important innovations come at a cost to the Registrar’s staff and election officials, who must work long hours with sometimes inadequate staffing to count each and every one of these votes, double check, prepare voluminous documentation, and certify the totals for each precinct and each race. In the last election, the state Board of Elections and state Department of Elections had to extend the state agency’s deadline to certify the vote statewide, an accumulation of all local results. With this precedent, the obsolete 7 day deadline should be extended to 10 days so that the timeline is more realistic. The Electoral Board Association reportedly endorses this legislation, which has been introduced previously.. With upcoming races in November 2024 for School Board, City Council/Board of Supervisors, Mayor, House of Representatives, Senate, and President/Vice President, turnout will be very high, and all eyes will be on the process and results. In 2024, this measure is more important than ever. This needed and overdue legislation will not affect the timeliness of unofficial results, as staff and election officials will continue to work tirelessly to provide those as quickly as possible on election night or shortly thereafter. HB 1238 will simply give officials in large jurisdictions the time they need to complete their job and ensure accuracy in the final, certified vote totals. Please pass this bill without delay.

VA NAACP HB 1003,1177,943,43,1172,942,1408,441,565 WE do not support HB463,hb932,

No attachment

The League of Women Voters’ mission is to Empower Voters/Defend Democracy. The LWV of Virginia supports and welcomes no-excuse early voting to empower voters to participate in the voting process. We recognize that in-person early voting has been implemented in many different ways in different localities and that it is time to provide standards to ensure that all voters are equitably enabled to cast a ballot during the early in-person voting period. The question of number and locations for satellite voting is complex and varies based on a county or city’s geographic size, population distribution, public transportation options, general registrars’ office location within the locality, voting patterns, and underserved communities. Chapter 18 of the GREB (General Registrar and Electoral Board) Handbook provides guidance for operation of satellite locations but only states that localities “may” establish them. No standards or Code exist to require or provide guidance for the number or placement of satellite locations. Three bills before this committee HB942, HB1172, HB1408, offer opportunities to set standards to broaden the access of voters to early voting at satellite locations. HB1408 requires a standard developed by the Department of Elections. Standards exist for many aspects of elections and the number and distribution of satellite voting locations should be no exception. Standards can be very detailed descriptions of various scenarios and how the number and location of satellites should be determined in each. The League supports passage of this bill. HB1172 sets a minimum of one satellite (operating in addition to the Registrar’s office) during the early voting period for any county or city with a population over 50,000. The League supports this attempt to set a minimum number of satellite locations but has concerns that it might not be adequate for all localities based on geographic size, population distribution, and underrepresented or underserved communities. HB942 addresses several satellite location concerns. The League supports language requiring consideration of proximity to public transportation, parking, proximity to historically underrepresented or underserved communities, population distribution, and the needs of tribal organizations. The League recommends that the bill be amended to establish guidance on the number of satellite locations. Additionally, the League supports the bill’s rules limiting the use of police or sheriff offices for all voting locations including satellites and requiring tribal voting locations. Thank you for considering our input in support of Virginia’s voters.