Comments Document

Good Afternoon My name is Debbie Jennings, Director of Highway Safety Programs for the Chesapeake Region Safety Council. Our organization is a 101-year-old chapter of the National Safety Council (CRSC). We conduct additional advocacy and efforts for safety – on the roads, in the community and the workplace throughout Virginia and surrounding states, independent of our responsibilities and programs as the assigned National Safety Council chapter for the state. This written testimony is being submitted in favor of Virginia House Bill 1549 – which addresses a motor vehicle’s operation by an unlicensed minor. It is well documented that motor vehicle crashes are one of the leading causes of unintentional injury and death for teens and young adults in the United States. Becoming a safe driver through Virginia’s Graduated Licensing process is the proven way to ensure that a young driver has the training, supervised experience and knowledge to tackle challenging situations on the road. Young unlicensed drivers that circumvent the established licensing process pose a serious and much increased threat to themselves and other roadway users. Owners of motor vehicles that knowingly offer use of their vehicle, either to an unlicensed and therefore either uneducated or a documented high-risk young driver that has had their license revoked, should be held accountable for their decision to enable the vehicle’s operation. Chesapeake Region Safety Council supports HB 1549. The changes listed in this bill are a step in the right direction, providing additional countermeasures to reduce the prevalence of Virginia’s most dangerous drivers. Contact: Debbie Jennings, Director of Highway Safety Programs and Special Projects Chesapeake Region Safety Council 443.532.5847

Comments Document

Good Afternoon My name is Debbie Jennings, Director of Highway Safety Programs for the Chesapeake Region Safety Council. Our organization is a 101-year-old chapter of the National Safety Council (CRSC). We conduct additional advocacy and efforts for safety – on the roads, in the community and the workplace throughout Virginia and surrounding states, independent of our responsibilities and programs as the assigned National Safety Council chapter for the state. This written testimony is being submitted in favor of Virginia House Bill 1549 – which addresses a motor vehicle’s operation by an unlicensed minor. It is well documented that motor vehicle crashes are one of the leading causes of unintentional injury and death for teens and young adults in the United States. Becoming a safe driver through Virginia’s Graduated Licensing process is the proven way to ensure that a young driver has the training, supervised experience and knowledge to tackle challenging situations on the road. Young unlicensed drivers that circumvent the established licensing process pose a serious and much increased threat to themselves and other roadway users. Owners of motor vehicles that knowingly offer use of their vehicle, either to an unlicensed and therefore either uneducated or a documented high-risk young driver that has had their license revoked, should be held accountable for their decision to enable the vehicle’s operation. Chesapeake Region Safety Council supports HB 1549. The changes listed in this bill are a step in the right direction, providing additional countermeasures to reduce the prevalence of Virginia’s most dangerous drivers. Contact: Debbie Jennings, Director of Highway Safety Programs and Special Projects Chesapeake Region Safety Council 443.532.5847

I support all of the bills above.

We strongly support measures to allow all jurisdictions to implement more electronic traffic law enforcement. Highway safety is our community's number one public safety issue. Speed and red light cameras, in particular, are strongly supported.

I 100% support HB 1664 "Photo speed monitoring devices; placement and operation by certain localities". The speed ticket camera bill topic is over due to pass into law for use past the existing Photo Enforcement Speed Ticket Cameras allowed in school zones since 2020 RGA voting session, of which Virginia did NOT see these devices in place in the public in school zones until late 2023 and then 2024 years. In just the 1 year or slightly longer time period of this advanced technology being put in school zones to assist police forces to get the speeding under control has been a dramatic SUCCESS from what I have witnessed in my county of Fauquier, and what I have read in numerous online posted news articles. It has been my experience of witnessing many times of driving on Rte 17 in front of Liberty High School in Bealton Virginia where speed ticket cameras were put in place WITHOUT BEING IN A FULL OPERATION "ON" MODE to issue a citation that the POSTED speed limit was being strictly obeyed simply because the signs in advance of the camera stated "Photo Enforcement" to warn the drivers of these devices. That alone is the same as having a paid police officer sitting in their patrol car, however when the patrol car leaves the area the speeding will resume within 20-30 min where speed ticket cameras are NOT present from 24 years of me witnessing that also on Rte 17 as a long term homeowner and citizen of Fauquier County. This TOPIC is all about properly ADDRESSING the overdue vehicle speeding problem in Virginia that Secretary of Transportation Sheppard Miller stated on recorded RGA video in 2023 and 2024 to the Senate and HOD Transportation Committee's and Public Safety Committee's is a serious ongoing rising death rate problem. Mr Miller said something needs to be done about this and Transportation 1st priority is all about SAFETY, yet nothing serious is being done about it. Lots of talk, but no real action except a ongoing constant majority vote to either "Table" or "Vote NO" for these Speed Ticket Camera Bills. Again in 2024 road deaths rose in Virginia past 2023 data, and in Fauquier County it also increased. This is clear proof that police force alone are unable to address this problem to the level it REQUIRES. Crashes create DELAY congestion and Virginia is ranked in the top 3 worst traffic congestions states in the USA. This causes delays in business deliveries, family plans, getting to the job on time, school schedules, etc. It also can greatly impacts public health depending on the cargo involved of a speeding tractor trailer crashing as has been a known occurrence to happen on Rte 17 in Fauquier County that is a major trade route for truckers to speed thru. In my STRONGEST opinion of engaging in this topic since 2004 that many politicians at RGA yearly gatherings vote "NO" or "TABLE" these type of bills to allow Tractor Trailer drivers to speed on our VA roads to support the success of the Ports of Virginia to deliver cargo as FAST as possible to the ONLY Inland Marine Port in Front Royal Virginia off of I-66 which uses Rte 17, I-81 and I-95 to reach it. The expansion of the ports of Virginia has been a LONG term planning expansion that is nearly complete soon, but already making MILLIONS per Sheppard Miller. I support the Ports of Virginia Economic growth but NOT the neglect on citizens lives to allow speeding to take place to the ongoing problem it has become and blocking speed ticket camera technology.

I am lucky enough to live close enough to my work and kid's schools to be able to bike us to and from most days. I love being able to bike - I can connect to the city and my kids, integrate movement into the day, and its fun! However, biking in so many parts of the city is dangerous - even along routes with a dedicated bike - because of speeding cars. It is important that we reduce vehicular speed for our community - and it sends a message that cars are not the default priority. We must prioritize safety and also integrate all methods of travel - bike, bus, walking, etc - for the health of our communities. I ask that you support this legislation.

Delegates Jones and Laufer, thank you for sponsoring HB1664 and HB1666, regarding photo speed monitoring. My name is Steve Paradiso on W 28th in Woodland Heights, just a few houses off Semmes Ave. I’ve lived in Richmond just two-plus years, and am absolutely amazed at the number of drivers encountered every day that have absolutely no regard for posted speed limits on city streets. As you may know, Semmes Ave, with a posted speed of 30 mph, is treated as a speedway. In my time as a resident, I have witnessed the aftermath of many accidents on Semmes, undoubtedly due to excessive speed. It is evident in the shear destruction of vehicles involved. Any there have also been lives lost due to the same. I personally due everything I can to avoid traveling Semmes for fear of being in an accident. Unfortunately, I do have to travel the Lee Bridge to and from work, where the speed of many is double the posted speed, if not more. I personally feel those speeding on the Lee Bridge, then make their way onto Semmes, continue the high rate of travel. It is beyond time that speed monitoring cameras be allowed in our city. It is beyond time that offenders are held accountable for their actions. I hope the Transportation Committee will do the right thing and move this legislation forward. Thank you. Regards - Steve Paradiso

I support all of the bills above.

I support HB 1664, HB 1666, HB 1673, and HB 2041. As a Richmond resident who lives on a busy street, I am shocked at the disregard of many drivers for speed limits, traffic safety, and human life. We need to control speed limits, but police departments have other demands on their time that, understandably, make traffic enforcement a lower priority. Please help make our streets safer by supporting these bills.

Comments Document

Fairfax Alliance for Better Bicycling supports all efforts to improve the safety of vulnerable road users by slower down vehicular traffic. Automated Speed Enforcement/Speed safety cameras are the optimal method of enforcement because they provide a durable, low-cost method of reducing vehicular speed without placing additional stress on local police agencies. These cameras have already been implemented in Fairfax County and other areas in the state to successfully reduce speeding in School Zones and highway work zones. These bills provide an opportunity to use proven technology and operations to reduce speeding in other areas where pedestrians, bicyclists, and other vulnerable road users are at increased risk. The attached file show how Fairfax County reduced speeding in school zones during its pilot program. These results can be implemented in additional location s across the state to improve safety for all road users, especially vulnerable road users.

I support HB 1664, HB 1666, HB 1673, and HB 2041, which address different aspects of the implementation of speed safety and general photo enforcement of traffic in Virginia. These tools provide essential speed control without the cost of police officers’ valuable time. These proposed solutions are the most efficient way to consistently addresses illegal behavior. As a resident of The Plains, VA, with property bordering on Rt. 17, I witness daily the excessive speeds of cars and trucks on Rt 17. The current level of police enforcement is intermittent, expensive, and ineffective.

I am writing to urge you to vote in favor of installing speed cameras at the intersection of Route 17 and Old Tavern/Enon Church Road. As someone who uses this intersection regularly, I can attest to its growing danger due to increased traffic volume and rampant speeding by vehicles, including large trucks. This intersection has become a life-threatening hazard, and immediate action is needed to prevent further injuries and fatalities. For those unfamiliar with this area, let me describe the situation: entering or exiting Enon Church Road onto Route 17 from any angle requires split-second decision-making. Last year, some improvement was achieved by cutting back part of a blocking hillside, giving drivers an additional five seconds to determine whether it was safe to proceed. While this was helpful, it was not enough. The installation of blinking lights was intended to alert drivers to the danger, but they have proven to be completely ineffective against the sheer volume and speed of vehicles passing through. The reality is that most drivers on this stretch of Route 17 speed simply because they can. Cars and massive trucks travel at excessive speeds, leaving no room for error. This is not just a matter of inconvenience—it is a deadly combination that threatens everyone trying to navigate this intersection. Allow me to share a personal experience that highlights the danger. Just yesterday, while heading to the hospital, I carefully looked in all directions before attempting to enter Route 17. A large truck in the right lane was approaching so quickly that it was impossible to merge. A car in the left lane, driving abreast with the truck, further blocked my way. Finally, I found a small window of opportunity to proceed. As I reached the middle of Route 17, another vehicle from the south attempted to turn and skidded to a stop just two feet from my car. This is not an isolated incident—it is a recurring nightmare for anyone who uses this intersection. The installation of speed cameras is a straightforward and effective solution to this problem. These cameras can enforce speed limits, deter reckless driving, and save lives. Studies have shown that speed cameras significantly reduce speeding-related accidents, particularly in high-risk areas like this one. The cost of implementation is far outweighed by the value of the lives that will be saved. I implore you to prioritize the safety of your constituents by voting in favor of speed cameras at this intersection. If you ever visit this area, I urge you to experience it firsthand—but with caution. Turn off any distractions, focus intently, and you will see the peril that residents face daily. Thank you for considering this urgent matter. I trust that you will make the right decision to protect our community and prevent future tragedies. Sincerely, Mary Forte 8080 Enon Church Rd, The Plains, VA

Bicycling is a hazard these days, no matter where we ride. Anthing the legislature can do to help make the roads safer to share, is a great benefit to the citizens would help. Please do not delay and act today!

In order to make the road safer for pedestrians and cyclists, please pass these bills. Thank you very much. Jorge Forgues 703.627.0889

I am against this bill which expands the use of photo speed monitoring devices in Virginia. Here's why: Privacy Invasion: The broader application of photo speed monitoring devices across various highways increases the surveillance of citizens, potentially infringing on privacy rights, akin to the privacy concerns raised in Katz v. United States (1967). Selective Enforcement: Allowing local governments to decide where to place these devices based on DOT data might lead to selective enforcement, where certain areas or demographics could be disproportionately targeted, similar to enforcement issues in Whren v. United States (1996). Over-Policing: This expansion could result in over-policing, where the presence of cameras might be more about revenue generation than safety, echoing the critique of government overreach in Lochner v. New York (1905). Public Notification: While the bill increases the requirement for signage from one to two within 1,000 feet, this might still be insufficient to alert drivers, especially on high-speed roads, leading to unintentional violations, reflecting notice issues as in Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. (1950). Financial Burden: The potential for increased fines due to more widespread use of these devices could disproportionately affect lower-income drivers, creating an economic disparity, similar to concerns in San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973). Lack of Human Judgment: Automated enforcement removes the human element, where context or extenuating circumstances might be considered, potentially leading to unfair ticketing, a concern akin to due process issues in Goldberg v. Kelly (1970). Administrative Overload: Expanding the use of these devices will increase the administrative workload for local law enforcement in managing violations, appeals, and public inquiries, potentially diverting resources from other critical functions, as seen in administrative burden concerns in Massachusetts v. EPA (2007). Potential for Abuse: With local control over placement, there's a risk of misuse for political or financial gain, where cameras might be placed in areas not necessarily for safety but for revenue, touching on the principles of fairness and public trust discussed in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission (1987). I oppose this legislation due to concerns over privacy invasion, selective enforcement, over-policing, inadequate public notification, financial burdens on citizens, the lack of human judgment in enforcement, administrative overload, and the potential for abuse, advocating for a more balanced approach that prioritizes safety while respecting privacy, fairness, and due process.

I SUPPORT THE USE OF SPEED TICKET CAMERAS ALONG VARIOUS PARTS OF ROUTE 17 AND ESPECIALLY GOING FROM WARRENTON TO MARSHALL DURING THE RUSH HOUR PERIODS AT INTERSECTIONS LIKE OLD TAVERN AND ENON CHURCH RD, AND BELVIOUR RD. NOT MANY DRIVERS ADHEAR TO THE SPEEED LIMITS AND MOST DON'T EVEN SLOW DOWN AT SPEED LIMIT REDUCTIONS OF 45 AND 35 WHEN APPROACHING MARSHALL. THERE ARE NUMEROUS TIMES IT IS SIMPLY DIFFICULT TO CROSS RT 17 FROM ENON CHURCH TO GO TO MARSHALL FORCING ME TO MAKE A RIGHT AND THEN TRY MAKING A LEFT AT THE NEXT INTERSECTION OR FROM THE OLD TAVERN SIDE TRYING TO CROSS RT 17 TO MAKE A LEFT TOWARD MARSHALL. RT 17 IS NOT RT 66

I am writing to support HB 1664, HB 1666, HB 1673, and HB 2041, which address different aspects of the implementation of speed safety and general photo enforcement of traffic in Virginia. These tools provide valuable low-impact enforcement in a manner that optimizes law enforcement capacity and more consistently addresses illegal behavior. As a resident of Richmond, VA and a daily pedestrian in a busy part of the city, I very much want actual enforcement of traffic laws, as opposed to the very intermittent enforcement possible without speed and traffic safety cameras.

Please hold off on wasting more money when there are so many people jaywalking instead of using the new crosswalks installed in the city and counties. Where is the money coming from? Taxpayers How about first fixing the water system, then help with the homeless problem, crime problem, and support the police, fire and rescue departments, and public schools. Basically, everyone needs food, water, and shelter and the rule of law to live in a civil society. Government control is the answer to freedom. Stop punishing the law abiding citizens and punish the criminals. It is the same thing with having metal detectors in elementary schools and children forced to use transparent backpacks. How heartbreaking is that for our children now! Schools and communities are supposed to be safe from drugs, cannabis stores, gambling clubs, and human trafficking, abortion clinics, but the government increased the risk for us all in the last four years. Some politicians bend over backwards to protect the criminals instead of protecting the innocent citizens.

Traffic safety is our number one public safety concern. We strongly support measures to increase our authority to implement automated enforcement including speed cameras. Thank you.

Please support HB1664 and HB1666. These bills provide important safety enhancements that will benefit all citizens, includingthose of us living near Route 17, which has become very busy.

Thank you for this opportunity. I live on Enon Church Road, at the intersection of Rte 17 and Old Tavern Rd, across from Great Meadow Event Center. I and my family strongly support the speed camera legislation because there are some roads that are simply so dangerous, that lives depend on taking concrete action to reduce speeds. (I say this as someone who had lived in DC for many years and detests the speed cameras in zones with artificially low speeds that seem designed only to generate revenue) Route 17 can only be described as treacherous. My husband and I live in fear for our 3 children, 2 daughters-in-law, neighbors and ourselves who must enter and exit Rte 17 daily, as well as unsuspecting travelers who may not understand the uniquely dangerous nature of Rte 17. Our fears are based in real life experience. Since we moved to The Plains in 2016, I'm aware of five deaths at our intersection. One of those deaths was my father. My father was in perfect health when he attempted to drive across Rte 17 to visit us, and was T-boned by a speeding car. He was airlifted to INOVA Fairfax, and suffered for a week in the trauma intensive care unit before passing away. We have heard crashes at our intersection from our house a mile away. After hearing one crash, I drove to the intersection to find a red Suburban carrying a family that had been T-boned. The helicopter had just arrived, there was a baby seat by the side of the road, and an ambulance crew was slowly wheeling a gurney with a draped body to an ambulance. That was just one of the accidents I witnessed that was caused by high speeds on Rte 17. Rte 17 between Marshall & Warrenton is uniquely dangerous because of its dual nature. This is the other side of Rte 17's dual nature as both a local road and a super highway.It presents as a scenic country road, lined with driveways from which residents must slowly emerge, and numerous intersections with small country roads from which lower speed drivers enter and exit. School buses stop and start, and large trailers carting livestock lumber onto and off of 17. Despite its function as a local road, Rte 17 also functions as a major high speed highway and commuter route - picture 495 or 95 with heavy, high speed traffic. Cars, trucks, and tractor trailers fly through at speeds well over the limit that would not allow them to slow down in time to avoid a car entering or exiting 17 at a lower speed. It appears that many of these drivers are using Rte 17 as if it were an interstate highway in order to avoid Rte 81, and this use will only increase as traffic at the inland port increases. In addition, commuters leaving Rte 66 use Rte 17 (via Old Tavern Road) to avoid the slow traffic on Rte 29. I've observed that they are typically in a hurry and pay little attention to speed limits. The combination of these high speed drivers, mixed with lower speed drivers who are entering and exiting Rte 17 at its many driveways, intersection, and school bus stops. It has resulted in numerous deaths and injuries. There are many other roads that share these characteristics with my local section of Rte 17. When a road is used by both local travelers, who are typically traveling at lower speeds, and longer distance travelers, who are typically traveling at higher speeds, the danger is acute. It is essential to control speed, and I and my family believe that speed cameras would be an effective tool to do so.

I support HB 1666 and HB 1664 to allow Photo Enforcement Speed Ticket Cameras to be allowed on Virginia Roads to reduce the crashes, deaths and injuries. Police need this help to get it under serious control where it is worst. It's about public safety, and NOT about making money.

I support HB 1664 and 1666 to pass into law. These devices represent technology that works very well to assist police to keep the speeding much lower and speed limit obeyed. Its clearly showing that they work in school zones from huge reduction in speeding per what I hear from our police forces. If our toll roads can issue me a fine in the mail using photo camera technology than why NOT for speed ticket cameras on roads that have known bad speeding problems that police get under control. My horse trailer is slow moving, and when I use Rte 17 in Fauquier County to take my daughter to riding events, it is very dangerous for us and our horse due to speeding cars and tractor trailers. Virginia also has so many crashes that cause LONG delays I can only think it would reduce those types of ongoing delays also so truckers deliver their cargo on time and people get to work more on time. They work, proven to work now very well in school zone, and now time to expand them for use on more dangerous roads. Thank you and I hope you all see the value of this technology that we did NOT have access to just 15 years ago.

I fully support SB 1664 and 1666 to pass into law so citizens have technology to assist our police forces to address the over 20 years of out of control speeding on Rte 17 in Fauquier County. I lived here for 24 years, and the number of times I have almost been hit by either me swerving out of the way or the speeder behind me swerving from my vehicle in just inches happens so much its beyond counting anymore. It truly is that bad. Some of you I am sure could care less who vote on these types of bills because its all about protecting the tractor trailer drivers who deliver the cargo as FAST as POSSIBLE for the Ports of Virginia to the inland marine port in Front Royal Virginia in relation to the millions of dollars invested in the ports. I have watched the recorded RGA statements from 2023 and 2024 made by Secretary of Transportation Sheppard Miller to the Senate and HOD Transportation and Public Safety Committees how he says public safety is there #1 priority, death rates on Virginia highways continue to rise every year and it needs serious attention. Mr Miller also stated how the ports of Virginia are booming in business and making Millions of dollars which is good, but we need these Speed Ticket Cameras in place to help our police get it under serious control. A fellow supporter in our group had to speak Governor Youngkin directly to ask him to help us out with the millions of drivers speeding on Rte 17 Marshall to Warrenton which is a major tractor trailer "Trade Route" now. The police were NOT really listening to us for all these years complaining and all we heard from them is its "To much speeding and not enough police to go around with so many other problems also". Rte 17 is used heavily by school buses, who look like they are standing still when doing 55mph compared to all the speeders. The school bus routes are a EXTENSION OF THE SCHOOL ZONE per what my citizen group has been saying for last few years, and I agree. If it requires having the speed cameras turned OFF for certain parts of the day to get them in place, then let it be done but having them out there alone forces drivers to obey the speed limit whether ON or OFF. This is coming from both State Police and Sheriff Dept, and the data I was shown proves it. I have driven on Rte 17 at least 30 times where speed ticket cameras are in place at Liberty High School and the vast majority of drivers are obeying the speed limit strictly there all 30 times. The signs that say "Photo Enforcement" is like having a police officer present all the time, and thats what we need up on our section of Rte 17 where we have NO traffic lights and the speeding is heavy and fast. Tractor trailer drivers are like speeding tanks and hauling all forms of cargo that could explode. In 2017 we had a propane tanker flip over from speeding, and many others have in the past. Neighbors I know have been injured and some of their family members KILLED on Rte 17. This is NOT about making money, but all about INCREASING PUBLIC SAFETY THRU REDUCING THE SPEEDING. The camera systems I have reviewed how they work and its FAIR. Blocking speed ticket cameras from being allowed to help police is control the speeding, and increase public safety has gone on far to long, and clearly a link meant to allow truckers to speed to make the ports LOTS of MONEY. Further blocking these bills is going to warrant a full scale investigation citizens are saying. I vote to allow them. Thank you

I support these bills to pass into law. This will help improve our public safety on speeding roads. My family has lived on Rt 17 since 1974 and my step father, S Prentiss Porter was almost killed pulling out onto that road. I visit my 100-year-old mother who lives on Wildcat Mt, almost every day, and find that pulling out into 17 is like entering a shooting gallery. And turning in is not much better as the trucks steam around the bend behind me and basically ignore my turn signal. Thank you for your consideration. Feroline Higginson

Comments Document

I fully 100% support HB bills 1666 and HB 1664 to pass to allow for use on dangerous roads and highways with supporting data indicating speeding is excessively occurring, deaths, injuries and/or road design variables that indicate a need to have a 24 hour a day 365 day surveillance to assist both State Police and local police forces to keep the problem under more strict control of obeying the set speed limits. Myself and hundreds of Fauquier Citizens have called in, emailed and spoken up to our police forces to address it, but all we hear is too much speeding and not enough man power to go around from both State Police and Sheriff Dept since 2004. It took me to have a direct conversation with Governor Glenn Youngkin in 2023 and 2024 to address the speeding of which it did get addressed much more strictly for 4-6 months, but then again returned to being a problem and required another in person request with Governor Youngkin to help us out again. It SHOULD NOT require a citizen to go to the Governor of Virginia in order to get police to put very serious attention on the speeding problem. Even when they do, they are still allowing an average of 19mph over the set speed limit of 55mph before a citation is issued per both State Police and Sheriff police. Reckless driving by law is 20mph over the set speed limit. The police simply NEED HELP, and this Technology is the Answer. Extending the speed ticket camera onto highways like Rte 17 where school buses must STOP by law in the right hand lane to pick up and drop off children would be a "EXTENSION OF THE SCHOOL ZONE". Speed ticket camera technology is about PUBLIC SAFETY and NOT about making money. Any statistics indicating increased revenue from Speed Cameras is TESTIMONY of itself that the road area has a SERIOUS SPEEDING PROBLEM that police are unable to keep under control. It is simple as that, because speed ticket cameras allow by law 10mph over the speed limit, and ONLY issue a citation when it is 11mph over the speed limit. Citizens can decide to go to court to fight the citation if they choose just like if a police officer wrote the citation. A Police officer always Reviews all citation photo evidence prior to it being sent in the mail to the owner of the vehicle. Police force man power is still down below standards from the COVID pandemic, other society factors and an increase of police officer retirements being reached per State Police records. Photo Enforcement Speed Ticket Technology Cameras are proven to reduce the speeding and related deaths and injuries occurring in Virginia School zones since being implemented in the last 2 years. On Rte 17 in Fauquier County Virginia near Liberty High School and Cedar Lee Middle School are multiple speed ticket cameras in place and improving public safety dramatically by reducing the speeding. These devices NOW need to be expanded for use onto the many other dangerous roads that police are unable to keep under long term serious control.

Hamkae Center organizes Asian Americans in Virginia for social, racial, and economic justice. We oppose HB1836 this bill for the following reasons: HB 1836 introduces burdensome requirements that could force many small businesses to close, reduce access to driver education, and create unnecessary barriers to entrepreneurship, particularly in underserved communities. 1) Overly Burdensome Regulatory Compliance HB 1836 requires all student and business records to be stored on-site, forcing schools to lease non-residential office space. o This creates unsustainable financial strain for small business owners who rely on low overhead costs. o It disproportionately impacts rural and home-based schools, reducing accessibility to driver education. o Requiring tax returns to be submitted to the DMV raises serious privacy and data security concerns. o The administrative burden of compliance will deter new entrants and increase costs for existing schools. 2) Excessive Financial Strain on Small Businesses • Requiring leased office space and additional compliance measures will impose steep financial burdens, threatening the survival of small operators. o At least 30% of Virginia's driving schools could close by 2027 if this bill is enacted. 3) Reduced Accessibility to Driver Education • School closures will disproportionately affect rural and low-income communities, where larger providers are unlikely to operate. • This reduces access to affordable driver education and creates barriers to licensure, particularly in underserved areas. 4) Unintended Consequences for Public Safety • With fewer training options, more untrained drivers may take to the roads, undermining the bill’s public safety goals We propose constructive alternatives to mitigate the impact of HB 1836: 1. Support Small Businesses: o Provide tax credits or grants to help schools meet compliance requirements. 2. Maintain Flexibility for Home-Based Businesses: o Allow residential offices to retain records, especially in rural and underserved areas. 3. Reduce Operational Burdens: o Permit instructors the opportunity to conduct exams for their own students, with safeguards for impartiality. 4. Ensure Accessibility: o Form a task force to evaluate the bill’s impact on rural and low-income communities and recommend equitable solutions. Suja S. Mathew, Advocacy Manager

I don't like this law is bad for our business and cost touch to open new office

Hello. We are Thomas & Karen Federice, owners of 360 Driving School. We would like to urge you and your colleagues to oppose HB 1836, titled Driver Training Schools; Operation and Licensure. The patron of this bill is Delegate Bill Wiley. Details: HB 1836 introduces significant financial and operational burdens on driver training schools across Virginia. As small business owners in this industry, we believe this bill will disproportionately harm small, community-focused, and home-based schools while creating barriers to affordable and accessible driver education. Key reasons for opposition to this bill relate to its overly burdensome regulatory compliance including on-site record keeping requirements and restrictions on residential operations. Leasing/Renting space as proposed in this bill will require (a) increase in cost to students to cover expenses for renting space, thus making driver training unaffordable for many families in the commonwealth, or (b) become too expensive for driver training schools to conduct business, thus eliminating them from serving the people of the commonwealth. Requiring students to take their final road test with another instructor other than the one they took the course with places an unnecessary mental/emotional burden on the student. Students have established relationships with their instructor. Putting a 16-17 year old in a car to take an exam with a stranger will create anxiety leading to an inauthentic drive by the student. Parents rely on kids to get their license to assist the family by having another licensed driver in the family. Trying to negotiate to find a time to take the final exam will delay the relief these new drivers can provide their families. The financial strain this bill creates on Driver Training Schools will result in driver training schools to close. Consequences to a reduced number of driver training schools include but are not limited to (a) more students waiting until they are 18 to get a license through DMV, thus, not being trained by a professional resulting in more crashes, injuries and death. Students trained by professionals understand risks, risk avoidance, laws related to driving and better driving practices than the untrained driver. (b) fewer options for home-school and private school students to obtain driver training since they cannot participate in Public School Driver Education. Lack of driver training for these students will have consequences mentioned above. This bill will place an unnecessary strain on public safety departments as well as public safety in general with fewer professional trained drivers on the road. Please reconsider the effectiveness of this bill to address the concerns of delegate Bill Wiley and its consequences on small business driver training schools, public safety, student safety and parental concerns of sending their young driver onto the roads of the commonwealth without professional training. Finally, why was this bill introduced? What is the purpose of this bill? What problems is this bill addressing? Why weren't stakeholders involved in conversations with Delegate Wiley to help develop solutions to the problem the Delegate is trying to solve with this bill? Please oppose this bill. We will be happy to discuss solutions. Thank you. Tom & Karen Federice Owners 360 Driving School 804-836-5419

I taught in the public schools for 17 years ( drivers ed, physical education and health, sped) and opened up a driving school called Buckle up butter cup in Toano, VA. Buckle up Butter Cup driver training school is the only driver training school in our small town. I have been open for 2 years and financially speaking, this bill would shut my school down. I am unable to hire someone or afford the cost now. I do this driving school because I care about the safety of teenagers and adults who I teach and help obtain their drivers license. As a small business this bill would hurt me and I would not be able to keep the driving school open. Please reconsider, sincerely , Monica Eader Owner of Buckle up Butter cup, LLC.

Start of Talking Points My name is Valorie B Bennett, owner of The 804 Driving School LLC. I would like to urge you and your colleagues to oppose HB 1836, titled Driver Training Schools; Operation and Licensure. The patron of this bill is Delegate Bill Wiley. As a small business owner in this industry, I believe this bill will disproportionately harm small, community-focused, and home-based schools while creating barriers to affordable and accessible driver education. Below are key reasons for my opposition: 1. Overly Burdensome Regulatory Compliance On-Site Recordkeeping Requirements: The bill mandates all student and business records be stored on-site at a licensed business location. For home-based schools, this means leasing office space solely for recordkeeping, imposing unnecessary operational costs. Restrictions on Residential Operations: This requirement disproportionately impacts small, home-based businesses, many of which serve rural and underserved communities. Key Concern: For many small operators, the low-cost startup model of home-based schools makes entrepreneurship viable. Leasing non-residential office space, complying with zoning codes, and making costly upgrades will force many of these schools to close. 2. Disruption to Business Operations Conflict of Interest Prohibition: The bill prevents instructors from administering behind-the-wheel exams to their own students, creating logistical challenges and increasing labor costs for small schools with limited staff. Key Concern: Building trust and rapport with students is central to effective driver education. Forcing students to test with an external entity undermines this relationship and adds unnecessary complexity to the process. Advance Notification Requirements: The bill requires schools to notify the Department 48 hours before conducting behind-the-wheel exams, reducing flexibility in scheduling and increasing administrative burdens. 3. Financial Strain on Small Businesses Increased Costs for Compliance: HB 1836 requires substantial investments in: 1. Leasing non-residential office space. 2. Upgrading facilities to meet new federal, state, and local codes. 3. Implementing secure electronic recordkeeping systems. 4. Reduced Accessibility to Driver Education Impact on Rural and Low-Income Areas: The closure of small, home-based schools will disproportionately harm rural and underserved communities, where large commercial operators are unlikely to fill the gap. Key Impact: Reduced access to driver education will create barriers for individuals in these areas, especially young drivers and working families, leading to long-term disparities in licensure and mobility. 5. Unintended Consequences for Public Safety Reduced Training Availability: If smaller schools close, fewer students will have access to affordable driver education, resulting in more untrained or undertrained drivers on Virginia’s roads. Key Concern: The bill’s impact on small operators directly undermines public safety by reducing the availability of well-trained drivers. 6. Competitive Disadvantage for Small Operators Expanded Licensing Categories: HB 1836 introduces Class A (commercial) and Class B (non-commercial) licenses. While larger operators may adapt by diversifying, small schools will struggle to compete or specialize under these new requirements.

Hello, my name is A BUTT owner of AB DRIVING SCHOOL. I would like to urge you and your colleagues to oppose HB 1836, titled Driver Training Schools; Operation and Licensure. The patron of this bill is Delegate Bill Wiley, representing the 32nd District, which encompasses the City of Winchester and parts of Frederick County. Details: HB 1836 introduces significant financial and operational burdens on driver training schools across Virginia. As a small business owner in this industry, I believe this bill will disproportionately harm small, community-focused, and home-based schools while creating barriers to affordable and accessible driver education. Below are key reasons for my opposition: 1. Overly Burdensome Regulatory Compliance On-Site Recordkeeping Requirements: The bill mandates all student and business records be stored on-site at a licensed business location. For home-based schools, this means leasing office space solely for recordkeeping, imposing unnecessary operational costs. Restrictions on Residential Operations: HB 1836 prohibits schools from operating in residential dwellings for new applications after July 1, 2025, and renewals after January 1, 2026. This requirement disproportionately impacts small, home-based businesses, many of which serve rural and underserved communities. Key Concern: For many small operators, the low-cost startup model of home-based schools makes entrepreneurship viable. Leasing non-residential office space, complying with zoning codes, and making costly upgrades will force many of these schools to close. 2. Disruption to Business Operations Conflict of Interest Prohibition: The bill prevents instructors from administering behind-the-wheel exams to their own students, creating logistical challenges and increasing labor costs for small schools with limited staff. Key Concern: Building trust and rapport with students is central to effective driver education. Forcing students to test with an external entity undermines this relationship and adds unnecessary complexity to the process. Advance Notification Requirements: The bill requires schools to notify the Department 48 hours before conducting behind-the-wheel exams, reducing flexibility in scheduling and increasing administrative burdens. 3. Financial Strain on Small Businesses Increased Costs for Compliance: HB 1836 requires substantial investments in: Leasing non-residential office space. Upgrading facilities to meet new federal, state, and local codes. Implementing secure electronic recordkeeping systems. Key Impact: These costs are unsustainable for many small operators and could result in widespread closures. 4. Reduced Accessibility to Driver Education Impact on Rural and Low-Income Areas: The closure of small, home-based schools will disproportionately harm rural and underserved communities, where large commercial operators are unlikely to fill the gap. 5.Competitive Disadvantage for Small Operators Expanded Licensing Categories: HB 1836 introduces Class A (commercial) and Class B (non-commercial) licenses. While larger operators may adapt by diversifying, small schools will struggle to compete or specialize under these new requirements. I urge you and your colleagues to oppose HB 1836 or amend it to include financial support, operational flexibility, and proportional penalties to ensure the survival of driver training schools in Virginia. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Hello, my name is Aysar Alkhatib , owner of VA DRIVING SCHOOLS INC. I would like to urge you and your colleagues to oppose HB 1836, titled Driver Training Schools; Operation and Licensure.The patron of this bill is Delegate Bill Wiley, representing the 32nd District, which encompasses the City of Winchester and parts of Frederick County. Details: HB 1836 introduces significant financial and operational burdens on driver training schools across Virginia. As a small business owner in this industry, I believe this bill will disproportionately harm small, community-focused, and home-based schools while creating barriers to affordable and accessible driver education. Below are key reasons for my opposition: 1. Disruption to Business Operations Conflict of Interest Prohibition: The bill prevents instructors from administering behind-the-wheel exams to their own students, creating logistical challenges and increasing labor costs for small schools with limited staff. Key Concern: Building trust and rapport with students is central to effective driver education. Forcing students to test with an external entity undermines this relationship and adds unnecessary complexity to the process. Advance Notification Requirements: The bill requires schools to notify the Department 48 hours before conducting behind-the-wheel exams, reducing flexibility in scheduling and increasing administrative burdens. 3. Financial Strain on Small Businesses Increased Costs for Compliance: HB 1836 requires substantial investments in: Leasing non-residential office space. Upgrading facilities to meet new federal, state, and local codes. Implementing secure electronic recordkeeping systems. Key Impact: These costs are unsustainable for many small operators and could result in widespread closures. 4. Reduced Accessibility to Driver Education Impact on Rural and Low-Income Areas: The closure of small, home-based schools will disproportionately harm rural and underserved communities, where large commercial operators are unlikely to fill the gap. Key Impact: Reduced access to driver education will create barriers for individuals in these areas, especially young drivers and working families, leading to long-term disparities in licensure and mobility. 5. Unintended Consequences for Public Safety Reduced Training Availability: If smaller schools close, fewer students will have access to affordable driver education, resulting in more untrained or undertrained drivers on Virginia’s roads. Key Concern: The bill’s impact on small operators directly undermines public safety by reducing the availability of well-trained drivers. Just google DMV worker conducting driving test killed in crash Date: Jul. 16, 2011 6. Competitive Disadvantage for Small Operators Expanded Licensing Categories: HB 1836 introduces Class A (commercial) and Class B (non-commercial) licenses. While larger operators may adapt by diversifying, small schools will struggle to compete or specialize under these new requirements. I urge you and your colleagues to oppose HB 1836 Thank you for your time and consideration.

The City of Portmouth, VA strongly opposes this bill due to the fact that any fines paid by the private vendor should be provided to the locality that has invested in this technology, not the Commonwealth Transportation Board.

I am lucky enough to live close enough to my work and kid's schools to be able to bike us to and from most days. I love being able to bike - I can connect to the city and my kids, integrate movement into the day, and its fun! However, biking in so many parts of the city is dangerous - even along routes with a dedicated bike - because of speeding cars. It is important that we reduce vehicular speed for our community - and it sends a message that cars are not the default priority. We must prioritize safety and also integrate all methods of travel - bike, bus, walking, etc - for the health of our communities. I ask that you support this legislation.

Having the ability to expand the cameras gives law enforcement in our city more tools for deterring speeding. Norfolk's pedestrian deaths are among the highest in the state, and thoughtful use of expanded tools can be a true help with speeding which is nearly always present in a pedestrian death. The thoughtful expansion would be best done in an equitable, transparent, and strategic manner. Certainly Bike Norfolk could assist with conversations about good placements should the bill become law.

We strongly SUPPORT the ability of local law enforcement agencies to operate speed safety cameras along high-traffic-crash corridors. At present, the motoring public widely disregards posted speed limits with impunity, while speed safety cameras are a proven, cost-effective, equitable, and completely safe measure to increase speed-limit compliance, save lives, and reduce life-long debilitating injuries, especially among vulnerable road users. Importantly, SB2041 was crafted to include common-sense safeguards against the possibility that some localities might abuse these devices as a local revenue source. Finally, the automated technology in both personal electronic devices and newer motor vehicles now make it easy to avoid any speeding citations.

Comments Document

Fairfax Alliance for Better Bicycling supports all efforts to improve the safety of vulnerable road users by slower down vehicular traffic. Automated Speed Enforcement/Speed safety cameras are the optimal method of enforcement because they provide a durable, low-cost method of reducing vehicular speed without placing additional stress on local police agencies. These cameras have already been implemented in Fairfax County and other areas in the state to successfully reduce speeding in School Zones and highway work zones. These bills provide an opportunity to use proven technology and operations to reduce speeding in other areas where pedestrians, bicyclists, and other vulnerable road users are at increased risk. The attached file show how Fairfax County reduced speeding in school zones during its pilot program. These results can be implemented in additional location s across the state to improve safety for all road users, especially vulnerable road users.

Madame Chair and Members of the Committee: My name is Kristin Pettway and I’m Executive Director of DRIVE SMART Virginia, a traffic safety nonprofit. According to Virginia DMV crash data, there have been 2,150 deaths and almost 65,000 injuries from 122,881 speeding related crashes over the past 5 years on Virgina roads. Speed cameras have proven to be an equitable and cost-effective option to deter speeding in Virginia communities. For example, New Kent Sheriff’s Office saw a 95% reduction of drivers speeding in school zones that implemented this technology. Before the speeding cameras were implemented, they found that almost 40% of vehicles were speeding 11+mph in the school zones during the enforcement period. These cameras work to make the most vulnerable road users in our communities safer, especially when they are implemented in data-driven locations along with public awareness campaigns. We support Delegate Siebold’s bill. Thank you.

I support HB 1664, HB 1666, HB 1673, and HB 2041, which address different aspects of the implementation of speed safety and general photo enforcement of traffic in Virginia. These tools provide essential speed control without the cost of police officers’ valuable time. These proposed solutions are the most efficient way to consistently addresses illegal behavior. As a resident of The Plains, VA, with property bordering on Rt. 17, I witness daily the excessive speeds of cars and trucks on Rt 17. The current level of police enforcement is intermittent, expensive, and ineffective.

Fit4Kids supports HB 2041, as it would help protect children and families in high-injury and high-speed areas, by seeking to reduce speeding near schools, parks, and other community spaces where children and families go to and from. This bill promotes community input and transparency in its process, ensuring that the placement of cameras are based on crash data and work to address the needs of communities disproportionately impacted by unsafe driving. Establishing a community advisory board ensures that community concerns will be addressed and taken into account. Finally, redirecting the revenue from citations to improve transportation and road safety projects means that we can continue making improvements to create safer streets for everyone, including children walking, biking, and rolling to and from their schools. Thank you for your support.

Comments Document

See attached.

I am writing to urge you to vote in favor of installing speed cameras at the intersection of Route 17 and Old Tavern/Enon Church Road. As someone who uses this intersection regularly, I can attest to its growing danger due to increased traffic volume and rampant speeding by vehicles, including large trucks. This intersection has become a life-threatening hazard, and immediate action is needed to prevent further injuries and fatalities. For those unfamiliar with this area, let me describe the situation: entering or exiting Enon Church Road onto Route 17 from any angle requires split-second decision-making. Last year, some improvement was achieved by cutting back part of a blocking hillside, giving drivers an additional five seconds to determine whether it was safe to proceed. While this was helpful, it was not enough. The installation of blinking lights was intended to alert drivers to the danger, but they have proven to be completely ineffective against the sheer volume and speed of vehicles passing through. The reality is that most drivers on this stretch of Route 17 speed simply because they can. Cars and massive trucks travel at excessive speeds, leaving no room for error. This is not just a matter of inconvenience—it is a deadly combination that threatens everyone trying to navigate this intersection. Allow me to share a personal experience that highlights the danger. Just yesterday, while heading to the hospital, I carefully looked in all directions before attempting to enter Route 17. A large truck in the right lane was approaching so quickly that it was impossible to merge. A car in the left lane, driving abreast with the truck, further blocked my way. Finally, I found a small window of opportunity to proceed. As I reached the middle of Route 17, another vehicle from the south attempted to turn and skidded to a stop just two feet from my car. This is not an isolated incident—it is a recurring nightmare for anyone who uses this intersection. The installation of speed cameras is a straightforward and effective solution to this problem. These cameras can enforce speed limits, deter reckless driving, and save lives. Studies have shown that speed cameras significantly reduce speeding-related accidents, particularly in high-risk areas like this one. The cost of implementation is far outweighed by the value of the lives that will be saved. I implore you to prioritize the safety of your constituents by voting in favor of speed cameras at this intersection. If you ever visit this area, I urge you to experience it firsthand—but with caution. Turn off any distractions, focus intently, and you will see the peril that residents face daily. Thank you for considering this urgent matter. I trust that you will make the right decision to protect our community and prevent future tragedies. Sincerely, Mary Forte 8080 Enon Church Rd, The Plains, VA

Bicycling is a hazard these days, no matter where we ride. Anthing the legislature can do to help make the roads safer to share, is a great benefit to the citizens would help. Please do not delay and act today!

In order to make the road safer for pedestrians and cyclists, please pass these bills. Thank you very much. Jorge Forgues 703.627.0889

I am against this bill which changes terminology and expands the use of speed safety cameras in Virginia. Here are my reasons: Privacy Concerns: The increased use of speed safety cameras, now termed "speed safety cameras," raises significant privacy issues, as these devices capture images of drivers and vehicles, potentially leading to surveillance overreach, similar to privacy concerns in Katz v. United States (1967). Potential for Over-Policing: By allowing localities to place speed safety cameras in "high-risk speed corridors," this could lead to over-policing in certain areas, disproportionately affecting communities or drivers, echoing concerns about selective enforcement seen in Whren v. United States (1996). Financial Burden on Citizens: While the bill offers a 30-day warning period, after this, drivers could face civil penalties which might unfairly burden those who cannot afford fines, particularly in lower-income areas, reflecting economic disparity issues similar to those in San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973). Administrative Overhead: The creation of an advisory group and the requirements for periodic reviews and public information provision add administrative burdens on local governments, potentially diverting resources from other public services, akin to the administrative efficiency concerns in Massachusetts v. EPA (2007). Public Notification: Although the bill mandates signage, the effectiveness of such notifications might be limited, especially in high-speed areas where drivers might not notice or heed the signs, leading to unintentional violations, similar to notice issues in Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. (1950). Erosion of Due Process: The shift from summons to a warning by mail for initial violations could be seen as diminishing due process, where individuals might not receive the same level of legal notification or opportunity to contest before penalties are applied, raising concerns akin to those in Goldberg v. Kelly (1970). Revenue Generation Over Safety: There's a risk that the implementation of speed safety cameras might be more about generating revenue for localities than genuinely improving road safety, which could conflict with the public interest standard discussed in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission (1987). Public Resistance: The requirement for publicizing new camera locations might lead to public resistance or avoidance behaviors, potentially undermining the effectiveness of the cameras in promoting safety, reflecting community response issues similar to those in Kelo v. City of New London (2005). I oppose this legislation due to concerns over privacy, potential over-policing, financial burdens on citizens, increased administrative overhead, inadequate public notification, erosion of due process, the risk of prioritizing revenue over safety, and potential public resistance, advocating for a more balanced approach that considers these issues while aiming to enhance road safety.

I support HB 2041 for Photo Enforcement Speed Ticket Camera technology to be expanded past currently VERY affective school zones as witnessed by me many times driving on Rte 17 (4 lane highway) in Bealton Virginia where Liberty High School is located (Fauquier County), and on Zulla Road (2 lane road) where Coleman Elementary School is located. Both these locations had ongoing years of speeding and crashes, and once speed ticket cameras put in place with the appropriate pre-warning signs also that say "PHOTO ENFORCEMENT" it works great to ENFORCE drivers to obey the speed limit for overall road public safety. Now that it is PROVEN that this technology works in school zones, its time to SHARE its life saving positive capabilities for safer roads in area's that have the dangerous variables and crash data to support there use. Speed Ticket Cameras DO NOT need wide enough shoulders like police officers do to safely pull over speeders to write a citation. On Rte 17 we are highly devoid of safe shoulder widths even for a small automobile. I and many citizens have asked our local VDOT in Warrenton Virginia office and our Board of Supervisors thru our Fauquier Transportation Committee since 2004 to widen just x4 small sections of the shoulders along Rte 17 from Warrenton to Marshall (8.5 miles) so police can do their jobs safely. VDOT ignored the endless requests and even a in depth presentation provided to them by citizens, plus support from our past Sheriff stating it would help. It was NOT until 2022-2023 that VDOT widened only x2 of the shoulders properly to be able to enforce the speed limit on speeding tractor trailers that were flipping over that require wide enough shoulders per many police I have spoken with. x4 more shoulder widening locations are needed, but our local Warrenton VDOT Engineer Daniel (Mark) Nesbit continues to ignore the request despite ongoing requests by me and citizens. Our Police forces are always telling citizens they are over whelmed with too many speeding locations in Fauquier, and not enough man power to handle it all plus VDOT not supplying the proper safe shoulder widths so police can actually do the job more affectively then FURTHER supports the need to Photo Enforcement Speed Ticket Technology. The data gathered from VDOT and Police further proves this that is in the attachment collected from the year 2000 to 2023. It is NOT about making MONEY with this technology, but having a KNOWN affect to deter speeding thru citations. If they generate a lot of citations then it means speeding exists a lot. Police officers are still involved in reviewing EACH citation before it is sent to the registered owner of the vehicle. The owner of the Vehicle can then dispute it in court if they desire. Secretary of Transportation Sheppard Miller stated on video recorded Richmond General Assembly 2023 and 2024 to Senate and House Transportation Committee/Public Safety Committee that Virginia road deaths are too high and continue to increase each year, and something needs to be done about it. Police are NOT the 100% solution as in the past, and require Assistance thru Technology. As I post this message I just finished watching how President Trump announced tonight on 1.21.2025 a $500 Billion project to expand and use AI (artificial Intelligence) technology. Every year RGA tables or votes NO to these devices, its another year of MORE PEOPLE dying or seriously injured on or roads due to speeding.

Please pass this bill regarding distracted drivers making them responsible for accident or injury of other users of the road.

I SUPPORT THE USE OF SPEED TICKET CAMERAS ALONG VARIOUS PARTS OF ROUTE 17 AND ESPECIALLY GOING FROM WARRENTON TO MARSHALL DURING THE RUSH HOUR PERIODS AT INTERSECTIONS LIKE OLD TAVERN AND ENON CHURCH RD, AND BELVIOUR RD. NOT MANY DRIVERS ADHEAR TO THE SPEEED LIMITS AND MOST DON'T EVEN SLOW DOWN AT SPEED LIMIT REDUCTIONS OF 45 AND 35 WHEN APPROACHING MARSHALL. THERE ARE NUMEROUS TIMES IT IS SIMPLY DIFFICULT TO CROSS RT 17 FROM ENON CHURCH TO GO TO MARSHALL FORCING ME TO MAKE A RIGHT AND THEN TRY MAKING A LEFT AT THE NEXT INTERSECTION OR FROM THE OLD TAVERN SIDE TRYING TO CROSS RT 17 TO MAKE A LEFT TOWARD MARSHALL. RT 17 IS NOT RT 66

I am writing to support HB 1664, HB 1666, HB 1673, and HB 2041, which address different aspects of the implementation of speed safety and general photo enforcement of traffic in Virginia. These tools provide valuable low-impact enforcement in a manner that optimizes law enforcement capacity and more consistently addresses illegal behavior. As a resident of Richmond, VA and a daily pedestrian in a busy part of the city, I very much want actual enforcement of traffic laws, as opposed to the very intermittent enforcement possible without speed and traffic safety cameras.

Norfolk’s streets are treacherous for pedestrians, dog walkers, cyclists, scooter and wheelchair users, as well as automobile drivers. Aggressive drivers have gotten away with breaking the laws for so many years that they have become comfortable behaving aggressively. In addition to driving 60 mph on 30 mph residential streets, they run red lights and stop signs, and turn right on red traffic lights from left lanes. They harass pedestrians and cyclists they perceive as having no right to use the streets. Approximately 11 percent of Norfolk households do not have cars. They walk, ride a bike, are on motorized wheelchairs to bus stops, work places, and schools. They often have to travel early and late in the day, in the dark, further exposing them to the risk of being hit by a driver of an oversized automobile. Two months ago, a man and his two dogs were hit and killed on Colley Avenue, a pedestrian corridor. It is time to use technology to enforce the law and make our streets and roads safe for all users.

I'm concerned with the proposal to raise damage thresholds that trigger a police crash report. Virginia has plenty of dangerous infrastructure, wither because it was dangerous when it was built, or the context of the area surrounding it has changed since it was built. Crash data is one of the more effective data sources we have on tracking where this danger is manifesting so that local communities and the state can take action to provide a safer environment for Virginia citizens. Increasing the damage threshold to a level that is above what a significant number of auto vehicles and most micromobility devices are valued at has significant potential to reduce the efficacy of this data source, encouraging uninformed and inefficient infrastructure investments and perpetuating of unsafe environments, particularly in less affluent areas where the value of property that could be damaged is lower and therefore disproportionately likely to be affected by this bill. It's not clear to me why it is so necessary for the state to raise the threshold to an order of magnitude greater than the 2008 threshold, well above the rate of inflation by any comparison, when weighed against that tradeoff. I would encourage the legislature to consider thoroughly the real possibility that this bill kills Virginians by suppressing data on dangerous situations that could be fixed until someone is killed or severely injured in a vehicle collision. For what benefit are you going to spill that blood?

Written comments will be provided.

Comments Document

The National Insurancr Crime Bureau offers written testimony in support of HB 2423.

No to HB2466. Citizens should not pay higher taxes due to the poor planning and prioritization of regional entities. We should not have to pay for the disruptive effects of the expansion of the Port of Virginia. If regional and local decision makers are not willing to change the way they do business and only continue to exacerbate the problems they created, there is no justification to further burden taxpayers.

support HB 2466

Oppose. The city of Newport News does not support this bill in large part because we cannot recommend a tax increase at a time when many families are struggling to make ends meet.

We are in support of this bill as any efforts to reduce the impacts of flooding and climate change are greatly needed in the Hampton Roads region.

Comments Document

My son, Christopher, was killed in a car crash shortly after graduating high school. It was the one time he didn't buckle up in the back of a convertible that took his life. By supporting this bill, it will add all seats to be required under our current law instead of just the front seats. The law was written in the 80s and needs serious improvements as Virginia is currently the worst state in the country for seat belt usage at only 73%. The national usage average is 92%. We have a long way to go to improve our rates and this is a good start. Please support HB2475 and join us in saving lives. Sincerely, Christy King, Christopher's mom Attaching stats

Members of the Committee: Virginia has the lowest observed seatbelt use rate in the contiguous United States. We need to make a clear stance to Virginians that seatbelts are essential to their safety. Consider the facts on rear seatbelt usage: • Unrestrained occupants are a danger to others in the vehicle. They can become a projectile and increase the risk of hurting or killing others by 40%. (NHTSA) • Studies show that rear seat belts can reduce fatalities by at least 60% in passenger vehicles and up to 70% in SUVs and light trucks. (NHTSA) • In frontal crashes with an unbelted passenger sitting behind the driver, the unbelted rear seat passengers increase the risk of fatality among belted drivers by 137% compared with belted rear seat passengers. (Injury Prevention, 10(6):363-7, 2004) Please support this bill. Thank you! Kristin Pettway Executive Director, DRIVE SMART Virginia

Comments Document

Good Afternoon My name is Debbie Jennings, Director of Highway Safety Programs for the Chesapeake Region Safety Council, I am a Virginia resident. Our organization is a 101-year-old chapter of the National Safety Council (CRSC). We conduct additional advocacy and efforts for safety – on the roads, in the community and the workplace throughout Virginia and surrounding states, independent of our responsibilities and programs as the assigned National Safety Council chapter for the state. This written testimony is being submitted in favor of Senate Bill 2475 – which will change the current seat belt law to include required use by rear seat passengers. In 2023, only 73.2% of Virginians buckled up, the lowest use rate in the country – compared to the national average of 91.9%. This low use rate results in a higher number of injuries and fatalities – and the associated costs of lost income and hospital/long term care. NHTSA has estimated that rear seat passengers are 3 times more likely to be fatally injured in a crash if they are unbuckled, and that rear seat belt use increases from an average of 73% to 82% if a rear seat belt use law is in place – which prevents injuries and saves lives. The costs to society following a severe crash can be greatly reduced when safety measures are taken advantage of. The Chesapeake Region Safety Council urges this Subcommittee to take action to save lives by advancing HB 2475. Contact: Debbie Jennings, Director of Highway Safety Programs and Special Projects Chesapeake Region Safety Council 443.532.5847

29 January, 2025 HB 2475. Dear Committee & Interested Parties, From what I understand, someone lost a child who was not wearing a seat belt when the vehicle they were riding in was involved in an accident. The death of this child apparently prompted a family member to press for a new law requiring that rear seat occupants wear seatbelts at all times.    The family's grief is certainly understandable. The question is whether grief ought to become the basis for a new law.  It’s a tough situation to be a representative in the same room with the petitioner of the bill who has lost a loved one and have to explain that, as hurtful as the loss is, freedom must endure. On a practical, day to day level, law enforcement officers don’t need another rule to enforce and the court system doesn’t need more traffic ‘violations’ to deal with. This is our chance as freedom lovers (and the political climate is currently ripe) for finally ridding ourselves of the default response of making more laws in response to a personal tragedy. Short of judging motivation, it is most certainly a characteristic of human nature to seek closure from such tragedies by defining a culprit (in this case the lack of a back seat, belt law) so that there is something to blame besides personal decisions.  The nature of human emotions often needs an outlet, a culprit upon which to vent and pour those depressing emotions out.   That may sound a bit rough but it is as objective of an analysis as I can muster and it cannot be denied. If the motivation isn’t closure but rather, a sincere crusade to save others from such tragedy, then bless you for the motivation but frankly, no one has a right to ‘save’ others based on their perceptions of what will ‘save’ others via law enforcement.  I would ask the committee and even the victim(s) to take a step back and a measured look at the implications of more government power. Thank you, Joe Bowman Check, VA

Please Vote Yes for HB2501. This is a nice dovetail program with the law enforcement training program that was enacted last year. As law enforcement officers are trained in how to interact with someone with autism or a developmental disability then having a visual like the Blue Envelope to signal that some accommodations for the interaction should be made. A driver with autism may have physical movements or verbal responses during a traffic stop that are beyond their control. Letting the officer know this in advance can keep misunderstandings to a minimum. the officer can still proceed with their investigation, but they will understand more about the interactions they are having with the individual. Please Vote yes for HB2501

Upon my experience in interacting with persons with disabilities over the past 26 years I have often found communication to be a barrier. This was true even during my 33 years as a law enforcement officer in Virginia. I feel this bill would allow for a better understanding and communication between law enforcement and those persons when such interaction is necessary. A better understanding by the law enforcement personnel will negate many negative situations with bad outcomes. Thank you.

Unnecessary, intentionally aggravated vehicle noise is a significant quality of life issue. Interrupted sleep is the most significant effect from very early morning work commuting vehicles that start, idle and drive through residential communities. Evenings and night hours are rife with racing and speeding vehicles on main roads, which can be heard for miles. These particular nuisances become most deleterious at times when nice temperatures are conducive to having open windows for fresh airflow. The next health concern is simply the stress-inducing element of noise, especially that which is preventable, and is nothing less than intentional and aggressive. My last comment is one to point out, anecdotally, that the most egregious violators are vehicles that are registered and tagged out-of-state, often do not meet VA safety and inspection standards, and consistently violate other safe driving laws like speeding, wrong way driving, failure to stop. In my 32 years as a homeowner in Fairfax, the intentional vehicle noise issue has never been so prominent as it has been of late. I'm very glad that this is receiving legal/legislative attention and hope it's within this body's willingness and capability to SOLVE this problem. Thank you.

I live in a neighborhood in Fair Oaks VA, at a major intersection. It's a relatively new (2019) townhome community, and we are tormented by incredibly loud cars, day and night. Montgomery County, MD is piloting noise cameras to finally put an end to this antisocial trend. The acoustic camera technology is now very mature, and is in use in places like NYC, Canada, UK, etc. Recreationally loud vehicles serve no useful social function, and create lasting detrimental health impacts for tax paying citizens. These vehicles traumatize pets, autistic children and adults, sleeping infants, veterans with PTSD, and others. Since at least 2013, the hobby of driving "warzone-level loud cars" has become such a epidemic in Fairfax and elsewhere, it seems like the acoustic equivalent of "Red Light Camera" enforcement is now the right solution at the right time. Quality of life here would drastically improve if Fairfax County were allowed to establish noise cameras at our intersection. I have spoken with the police, and they simply cannot keep up with this problem, due to the volume, and the operational requirements of ad hoc manual enforcement. Noise cameras can bring residents peace, and they make the county a good deal of money, while also significantly reducing the administrative call load for the FCPD. We all have the same rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness--and we cannot freely pursue our own peace and happiness if a small minority of our antisocial neighbors are allowed to continue intermittently making 110dB airplane and race car sounds outside our houses, whenever they like. All major real estate sites now include "noise maps" which buyers factor into their buying decisions. Drivers with loud cars raise the average noise level of an area, and so they also can effectively lower the property values of areas where this practice is tolerated. This bill is a win/win for peaceful residents, and for VA municipalities. At least 95% of those I have interacted with online, despise these drivers, and despise this insane and selfish hobby. Opposing it, and supporting this bill--or any bill designed to enforce basic environmental noise norms for these captive residents of overpriced residential areas--would be a very a politically advantageous, and very bipartisan and wise choice.

I support "HB 2550 Noise abatement monitoring systems; counties in Planning District of (No. Va.) to place, etc." This bill is very much required to help address the abuse of vehicle Exhaust System Purposeful Violations such as from automobiles, motor cycles, tractor trailers and dump trucks with the intent to create a harassing and abusive powerful loud affects on people in outdoor environments, inside their homes, schools, businesses, other drivers in vehicles obeying the speed limit and/or general intent to intimidate. The modification of exhaust engine stacks on Tractor Trailers and dump trucks by privately owned rigs and even some companies that allow this is turning the vehicle into a "WEAPON OF ACOUSTICAL HARASSMENT" intentionally . From my meeting with highly experienced State Police officers on the Mobile Inspection Team of Virginia that inspect tractor trailers for violations, and from speaking with retired tractor trailer drivers this exhaust stack modification is done so that when the tractor trailer ENGINE BRAKE (also known as a JAKE BRAKE) is applied it creates a VERY loud blast wave of sound that is both vibrationally felt as well as heard by humans and animals. It is a sudden jarring experience that can add to another driver loosing control of their vehicle, or purposely done to intimidate people in their homes along roads and highways like Rte 17 who have used our political system to address the speeding on Rte 17 to get under more serious control, where truckers make MORE money when they speed to deliver cargo. It has been my experience of having this done to me on Rte 17 in Fauquier County many times when a tractor trailer driver gets within just feet of my vehicle bumper because I am obeying the posted 55mph speed limit and then applies its ENGINE-JAKE BRAKES in conjunction with the exhaust system modification that creates the BOOMING sound and vibrational attack on me and millions of other people EACH year. Engine Brakes are NOT illegal to use, but were designed for emergency steep downhill mountain roads to prevent their regular quiet brakes from burning out with a heavy load. The engine brake is used as a standard braking system also because it DOES NOT wear out as fast a a quiet standard brake does on a tractor trailer. From tractor trailer models 2005 to 2025 the Engine Brake has been upgraded so as NOT to add to this problem of being as loud, however all previous years back to the 1960s still have the original design. The crux of this problem is the illegal modification, and this bill will increase the fine from its very low $25 to $100 fine to help stop it. Tractor trailers also have a law that protects them from harassment, however they are being allowed to harass everyone else in this way and that is where this bill is needed to defend everyone else from the truckers who do abuse us. Not all tractor trailers do this but many do. With the increase huge growth construction expansion of the ports of Virginia now able to handle the largest cargo ships on the Eastern Seaboard, this is bringing a influx of even more tractor trailers to deliver the cargo with trucker models from 1960s to 2025. Automobile exhaust systems are also modified to sound like GUN SHOTs and this is disrupting schools to go into emergency action mode thinking it is another school shooting taking place. I have this happen along our roads and it sounds like rapid gun fire and not just a single exhaust back fire. Its is BAD.

Comments Document

The Autonomous Vehicle Industry Association (“AVIA”) writes to express our opposition to HB 2627 as currently written. We encourage the Committee to vote against HB 2627 and to instead study autonomous vehicles (“AVs”) in advance of the 2026 regular session to develop a framework that supports the safe and swift deployment of AVs. By way of background, AVIA has members in Virginia and is comprised of the world’s leading technology, ridesharing, trucking, and automotive companies. Our mission is to realize the benefits of AVs (i.e., SAE Levels 4- and 5-capable vehicles equipped with automated driving systems that are capable of driving the vehicle without human intervention) and support the safe and expeditious deployment of these technologies. With its broad array of technical expertise and experience in the technology, automobile, and transportation network sectors, AVIA welcomes this opportunity to engage with the Subcommittee and promote the safe deployment of AVs on Virginia roads. It is our view that if Virginia chooses to take legislative action with respect to AVs, such action should be premised on (i) establishing a comprehensive AV program that allows for deployment of such vehicles through legislation, rather than regulation, (ii) removing impediments to the safe testing or deployment of such vehicles, and (iii) creating a pro-competitive and level playing field that allows all companies an equal opportunity to bring their technology to Virginia roads. AVs have the potential to usher in a new era of mobility, with incredible potential to make Virginia’s transportation system safer, more efficient, and more accessible. We strongly believe Virginia should support policies that increase access to safety-enhancing vehicle features like automated driving systems, and it is important that policies do not inadvertently foreclose a future with AVs. However, as we do not believe HB 2627 as written would support AV operations in the state, we respectfully oppose the bill. We instead encourage the General Assembly to study AVs and develop legislation in advance of the 2026 session. Studying AVs would enable the Commonwealth to develop a thoughtful framework for AV deployment that reflects stakeholder input and enables the benefits of AVs to be brought to Virginia. A letter with further detail is attached.

Comments Document

TechNet's written comments on HB 2627 are attached.

SNEAKY BILL (Please Read)_I DO NOT Support " HB 2718 Photo speed monitoring devices; school crossing zones" While the TITLE of this bill seems to be a Positive to stop speeding in school zones, it essentially is NOT. It is my opinion that the TITLE and WORDING used in HB 2718 is to undermine the overall good work that speed ticket cameras in school zones have been proving very well in the year 2024 of keeping the speeding greatly reduced. Delegate James Leftwich Jr. submitted this bill on the DEAD LINE date of 1.17.2025 to Modify the existing code of Virginia for Speed Ticket Camera use in School zones to FORCE SIGNs designed to pre-warn a driver of the Photo Enforcement Camera to have a Blinking Light indicating that the Camera is in an ACTIVE "ON" citation mode. What HB 2718 is geared towards in my opinion is to UNDERMINE the goal why all Speed Ticket Camera Devices are in place which is to DETER and STOP speeding over the posted speed limit whether they are in ACTIVE MODE to issue a citation, or NOT in active mode. A speed ticker Camera is like having a police officer present 24 hours a day to help deter speeding whether it is in active mode or NOT, just like a police officer who sits in their patrol car Deters speeding simply by being present. Adding a blinking light to a photo enforcement sign or directly to the Speed Ticket Camera in relation to it being in a "Active Citation Mode" will Clearly alert drivers of the following: (1) When it is NOT safe to drive a vehicle over the set posted speed limit and receive a $ Citation fine at 11mph over the set speed limit by the speed ticket camera. (2) When it is an available opportunity to break the law and speed above the posted speed limit and contribute to an ongoing data driven yearly growing trend of vehicle crashes, death, injury, destruction of property . In my opinion Delegate James Leftwich Jr. is in FAVOR OF SPEEDING thru this bill, which then is linked to Death, Destruction of Property and Injury which Secretary of Transportation Sheppard Miller in 2023 & 2024 recorded RGA statements said speeding on Virginia highways and increased yearly deaths continues to rise. I reviewed Delegate James Leftwich Jr. voting history on Speed Ticket Camera bills in 2020 and he voted "NO" three times against the passing of the speed ticket cameras that ended up being allowed for use in Virginia School Zones to protect children's, parents and school bus drivers lives. I also noticed that Delegate Leftwich District is at the Ports of Virginia which is under a ongoing huge economic growth making millions of dollars per Sheppard Miller in 2024 RGA video recorded statements. While I am VERY much in support of the Virginia Ports economic growth, I DO NOT like the TREND of speed ticket camera bills over many years submitted to RGA that a ongoing undermining to stop speed ticket camera technology from being implemented on roads where tractor trailers speed to move cargo more quickly all for the growth of the ports of Virginia in my opinion. Truckers making MONEY thru SPEEDING over the set speed limits is putting people at risk to be killed on our roads, and the yearly stats show it rising each year per Mr Sheppard Miller. I am listing here the LINK for anyone interested to review the History of all Senators and Delegates who voted on HB 1442 in 2020 for Speed Ticket Camera use in school zones. https://legacylis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?ses=201&typ=bil&val=HB1442

I live in Virginia and frequently use rideshare apps like Uber and Lyft. Gig workers in Virginia deserve fair pay and transparency regarding their earnings. As a rideshare user, I’ve noticed that my fares have increased, but it’s unclear whether most of what I pay goes to the driver or to companies like Uber and Lyft. From what I’ve heard from drivers and seen in the news, many Virginian drivers are earning less and are not receiving the majority of the fare. I believe they should be paid fairly and have a clear understanding of their compensation. Without these drivers, Uber and Lyft wouldn’t operate, and my transportation needs wouldn’t be met. As a Virginia resident and taxpayer, I support HB 2609 and. 2756.

I am a gig driver in Virginia and I strongly support both bills; the algorithm controls our lives and we deserve a living wage, as we provide vital logistics support for the local economy. Thank you

I encourage members of this committee to vote yes on HB2609 which sets a needed pay standard for Uber and Lyft drivers in Virginia. I would also encourage the committee to vote yes on HB2756 which will help drivers know how much they are being compensated from Uber/Lyft. Many gig drivers need to be paid fairly and treated well by companies like Uber and Lyft because without these drivers, Uber and Lyft would not be able to operate in Virginia. Please vote yes on HB2756 and HB 2609.

I want to voice my support this two bill HB2600 and HB2756

I want to voice my support Boths bill

Please support our bills Thank you

I would like to speak to voice my support for the HB 2609 and HB 2756.

Comments Document

TechNet's remarks on HB 2756 are attached.