Public Comments for 02/13/2026 Appropriations
HB193 - Parole; exception to limitation on the application of parole statutes.
Good morning, Ladies and Gentlemen, I stand before you in strong support of Bill HB193, because fairness and truth must guide every decision made in our courtrooms. Let me share with you the story of someone who had made mistakes, but who transformed himself through education, mentorship, and hard work. When he stood before a jury, those jurors had no idea whether parole was even possible. Out of fear and uncertainty, they handed down a sentence far harsher than anyone expected. Not because they were unfair — but because they were uninformed. This bill addresses that gap in knowledge. By ensuring jurors are fully informed about parole eligibility, we empower them to make decisions rooted in facts rather than assumptions. It gives them clarity instead of confusion. Fairness instead of fear. Justice instead of guesswork. HB193 restores transparency, honors the dignity of every person in the courtroom, and strengthens trust in our justice system. People can grow. People can change. And jurors deserve accurate information when deciding a person’s future. I urge you to support HB193 — for the families, for the jurors, and for every person whose life depends on a fair and honest process. Thank you. Leonie May
I, Willie X Brown, strongly support HB193 as it is a fair and justice Amendmemt for individuals to receive Judge compliance and notifications that parole had been abolished in Virginia. Please support this HB193 that all who are eligible receive Fairness and Justice. Thank you, Honorable Lawmakers.
Members of the General Assembly,, I respectfully submit this comment in strong support of HB193 and to recommend a complementary oversight mechanism to address instances of judicial noncompliance with Virginia sentencing law. HB193 is a necessary and measured response to a documented breakdown in compliance following Fishback v. Commonwealth (2000), which required juries to be instructed that parole had been abolished. When legally mandated procedures are not followed, the legitimacy of the resulting sentence is compromised. HB193 does not provide automatic release; it simply allows parole consideration in cases where the sentencing process itself was flawed. That approach reflects fundamental fairness and respect for the rule of law. In addition to supporting HB193, I urge the General Assembly to consider establishing an independent review and notification mechanism for cases in which judges sentence outside Virginia’s sentencing guidelines without articulated reasons, or where patterns of noncompliance are later identified. By way of example, in the case of Sterling Graham, an Alford plea was accepted for an 18-year sentence, after which the presiding judge imposed additional life sentences without documented justification for the departure from the guidelines. That judge was later removed from the bench. However, the individual directly affected by the sentencing irregularity was never notified or provided a mechanism for review. Regardless of the ultimate merits of any single case, this illustrates a serious systemic failure: when judicial misconduct or noncompliance is identified, there is no structured process to review impacted cases or notify affected individuals. Sentencing guidelines exist to promote consistency, proportionality, and public confidence. When those guidelines are disregarded without explanation—and when subsequent findings raise concerns about a judge’s conduct—justice requires more than silent correction at the institutional level. It requires transparency and a pathway for those harmed by such failures to be informed and, where appropriate, seek review. A limited oversight committee or review body would not undermine judicial independence. Instead, it would: Identify patterns of unexplained guideline departures Refer cases for appropriate review where systemic issues are found Ensure affected individuals are notified when judicial noncompliance may have impacted their sentence HB193 reflects the principle that legality in sentencing matters. A complementary oversight and notification mechanism would reinforce that principle and help ensure that when the system fails, those failures are acknowledged and addressed—not buried. For these reasons, I urge the General Assembly to support HB193 and to consider additional safeguards that promote accountability, transparency, and fairness in Virginia’s sentencing system. Respectfully submitted, Tonya Wright Wisdom’s Embrace 757-309-1733
I submit this testimony in support of HB193 to address a sentencing failure that continues to harm individuals sentenced during Virginia’s parole transition period. Mr. Howard’s case illustrates this failure clearly. Mr. Howard was sentenced in 2011 by a jury after parole had been abolished in Virginia. At trial, the jury explicitly asked the judge for guidance about parole eligibility. They wanted to understand how much time Mr. Howard would actually serve. They were not told. Under Virginia law at the time, juries were prohibited from being informed that parole no longer existed. As a result, the jury sentenced Mr. Howard without knowing that he would be required to serve at least 85 percent of his sentence. The outcome matters. Mr. Howard received a sentence that was double the recommended sentencing guidelines, with 85 percent mandatory time served. That is not a theoretical concern. That is decades of real time. Juries do not sentence in a vacuum. They sentence based on perceived severity, proportionality, and outcome. When jurors believe parole exists, they often impose longer sentences under the assumption that release mechanisms will later balance the punishment. In Mr. Howard’s case, the jury was denied the ability to weigh punishment accurately. Had the jury known that parole was unavailable - and that Mr. Howard would serve nearly the entire sentence imposed - it is reasonable to believe the sentence would have been different. Shorter. Closer to the guidelines. More proportionate. HB193 restores balance by allowing individuals like Mr. Howard to be considered for parole under the principles established in Fishback v. Commonwealth. This is not retroactive punishment relief. It is corrective justice. Fishback recognizes that juries should understand the real consequences of their decisions. When that understanding was legally blocked, the system - not the individual - failed. Allowing parole eligibility for those sentenced during this transition period does not undermine accountability. Mr. Howard remains incarcerated. He must still earn parole through demonstrated rehabilitation, conduct, and review. HB193 simply restores what the jury believed already existed. Justice is not only about the sentence imposed. It is about whether the process that produced it was fair. HB193 acknowledges that fairness was compromised. It gives the Commonwealth a lawful, measured way to correct it. For these reasons, I urge support for HB193.
I submit this testimony in support of HB193 to address a sentencing failure that continues to harm individuals sentenced during Virginia’s parole transition period. Mr. Howard’s case illustrates this failure clearly. Mr. Howard was sentenced in 2011 by a jury after parole had been abolished in Virginia. At trial, the jury explicitly asked the judge for guidance about parole eligibility. They wanted to understand how much time Mr. Howard would actually serve. They were not told. Under Virginia law at the time, juries were prohibited from being informed that parole no longer existed. As a result, the jury sentenced Mr. Howard without knowing that he would be required to serve at least 85 percent of his sentence. The outcome matters. Mr. Howard received a sentence that was double the recommended sentencing guidelines, with 85 percent mandatory time served. That is not a theoretical concern. That is decades of real time. Juries do not sentence in a vacuum. They sentence based on perceived severity, proportionality, and outcome. When jurors believe parole exists, they often impose longer sentences under the assumption that release mechanisms will later balance the punishment. In Mr. Howard’s case, the jury was denied the ability to weigh punishment accurately. Had the jury known that parole was unavailable - and that Mr. Howard would serve nearly the entire sentence imposed - it is reasonable to believe the sentence would have been different. Shorter. Closer to the guidelines. More proportionate. HB193 restores balance by allowing individuals like Mr. Howard to be considered for parole under the principles established in Fishback v. Commonwealth. This is not retroactive punishment relief. It is corrective justice. Fishback recognizes that juries should understand the real consequences of their decisions. When that understanding was legally blocked, the system - not the individual - failed. Allowing parole eligibility for those sentenced during this transition period does not undermine accountability. Mr. Howard remains incarcerated. He must still earn parole through demonstrated rehabilitation, conduct, and review. HB193 simply restores what the jury believed already existed. Justice is not only about the sentence imposed. It is about whether the process that produced it was fair. HB193 acknowledges that fairness was compromised. It gives the Commonwealth a lawful, measured way to correct it. For these reasons, I urge support for HB193.
My name is Marilyn Jackson, and I am writing in support of HB193. This bill is important because it provides an opportunity for parole consideration to individuals who were sentenced by a jury after the Supreme Court of Virginia’s decision in Fishback v. Commonwealth (2000). During that time, juries were instructed that parole had been abolished, which directly influenced sentencing decisions. As a result, many individuals received significantly longer sentences under the belief that there would be no possibility of early release. HB193 does not guarantee freedom for anyone. It simply allows eligible individuals to be reviewed by the Virginia Parole Board. That review process includes evaluating institutional behavior, rehabilitation efforts, program participation, and overall readiness to safely reenter society. Public safety remains the top priority. For individuals who have demonstrated growth, accountability, and rehabilitation, parole consideration offers hope and incentive to continue positive change. It also allows the Parole Board to make case-by-case decisions based on current risk assessments rather than decades-old assumptions. HB193 represents fairness, accountability, and smart public policy. It recognizes that people can change, that rehabilitation matters, and that careful review by the Parole Board strengthens—not weakens—public safety. I respectfully urge support of HB193.
I ask for you to vote YES for HB193 as it addresses fairness of the process for those who are held under Truth in Sentencing and juries were not informed of the details of the abolishment of parole. I support this bill and wish to see it reported, passed, and signed into Law.
I respectfully submit this testimony in support of HB193 and in recognition of the unfair sentencing exhibited in Mr. Howard’s case. Mr. Howard was sentenced in 2011, after Virginia had abolished parole. During deliberations, the jury asked the judge about parole eligibility because they sought to understand the true bearing of the sentence they were contemplating. They were not informed that parole had been abolished. At that time, the law barred juries from being told that the accused would be required to serve at least 85 percent of their sentence. Without that essential information, the jury imposed a sentence that was double the recommended guidelines, a decision that translated into years of mandatory prison time. The jurors were left to sentence under a faulty belief that some form of release mechanism remained in place. HB193 addresses this precise problem. It provides a narrow, lawful solution for individuals like Mr. Howard, who were punished during this transition phase without juries being fully informed. This bill does not ensure release, nor does it erase accountability. It simply allows for parole consideration, a structured, earned process based on rehabilitation and behavior. Justice demands transparency in sentencing. When juries were prevented from understanding the real effects of their decisions, fairness was compromised. HB193 offers a balanced approach to correcting that failure while maintaining public safety and accountability. For these reasons, I urge support for HB193. Thank you
I am writing to state that I support HB193. Please feel to contact me , 503 889-889-6606
Letter of Support for HB 193 (Virginia) From a Justice Advocate Dear Members of the Virginia General Assembly, I write in firm and unequivocal support of House Bill 193. This legislation is not about excusing crime or reopening questions of guilt. It is about correcting a well-documented and deeply consequential flaw in Virginia’s sentencing history—particularly in jury-sentenced cases where jurors were denied essential information about parole and the real-life consequences of the sentences they imposed. As a justice advocate, I have reviewed transcripts, case records, and sentencing outcomes that make one truth unmistakably clear: many juries imposed extreme sentences without understanding that parole was abolished or severely limited. In some cases, jurors explicitly asked whether parole existed. The response they received—often that parole was “none of their concern”—left them to deliberate in the dark. That matters profoundly. Jurors are ordinary citizens entrusted with extraordinary power. They are asked to weigh punishment, accountability, and fairness—yet they were deprived of information that would have fundamentally altered how they understood the meaning of a “life” or multi-decade sentence. In the specific matter we are advocating around, the trial transcript reflects that the jury directly asked about parole eligibility. Rather than receiving clarity, they were instructed that the question was irrelevant. The jury then proceeded to sentence an individual to what became, in practice, a life sentence without any realistic opportunity for release. This was not an isolated occurrence. It was a feature of an era. HB 193 recognizes what Virginia now acknowledges openly: the sentencing framework of the past produced outcomes that are inconsistent with today’s standards of proportionality, rehabilitation, and justice. The bill does not undermine jury verdicts. It does not erase accountability. Instead, it offers a narrow, carefully structured opportunity for review. Many individuals eligible under HB 193 have served decades, demonstrated rehabilitation, and pose little public safety risk. Denying review under these circumstances elevates procedure over justice. I urge you to support HB 193 and allow Virginia to continue correcting the lasting harm created by outdated sentencing practices. Respectfully, Felecia Blackston-Johnson Justice Advocate Midlothian, Virginia
Letter of Support for HB 193 (Virginia) From a Justice Advocate Dear Members of the Virginia General Assembly, I write in firm and unequivocal support of House Bill 193. This legislation is not about excusing crime or reopening questions of guilt. It is about correcting a well-documented and deeply consequential flaw in Virginia’s sentencing history—particularly in jury-sentenced cases where jurors were denied essential information about parole and the real-life consequences of the sentences they imposed. As a justice advocate, I have reviewed transcripts, case records, and sentencing outcomes that make one truth unmistakably clear: many juries imposed extreme sentences without understanding that parole was abolished or severely limited. In some cases, jurors explicitly asked whether parole existed. The response they received—often that parole was “none of their concern”—left them to deliberate in the dark. That matters profoundly. Jurors are ordinary citizens entrusted with extraordinary power. They are asked to weigh punishment, accountability, and fairness—yet they were deprived of information that would have fundamentally altered how they understood the meaning of a “life” or multi-decade sentence. In the specific matter we are advocating around, the trial transcript reflects that the jury directly asked about parole eligibility. Rather than receiving clarity, they were instructed that the question was irrelevant. The jury then proceeded to sentence an individual to what became, in practice, a life sentence without any realistic opportunity for release. This was not an isolated occurrence. It was a feature of an era. HB 193 recognizes what Virginia now acknowledges openly: the sentencing framework of the past produced outcomes that are inconsistent with today’s standards of proportionality, rehabilitation, and justice. The bill does not undermine jury verdicts. It does not erase accountability. Instead, it offers a narrow, carefully structured opportunity for review. Many individuals eligible under HB 193 have served decades, demonstrated rehabilitation, and pose little public safety risk. Denying review under these circumstances elevates procedure over justice. I urge you to support HB 193 and allow Virginia to continue correcting the lasting harm created by outdated sentencing practices. Respectfully, Felecia Blackston-Johnson Justice Advocate Midlothian, Virginia
I submit this testimony in support of HB193 to address a sentencing failure that continues to harm individuals sentenced during Virginia’s parole transition period. Mr. Howard’s case illustrates this failure clearly. Mr. Howard was sentenced in 2011 by a jury after parole had been abolished in Virginia. At trial, the jury explicitly asked the judge for guidance about parole eligibility. They wanted to understand how much time Mr. Howard would actually serve. They were not told. Under Virginia law at the time, juries were prohibited from being informed that parole no longer existed. As a result, the jury sentenced Mr. Howard without knowing that he would be required to serve at least 85 percent of his sentence. The outcome matters. Mr. Howard received a sentence that was double the recommended sentencing guidelines, with 85 percent mandatory time served. That is not a theoretical concern. That is decades of real time. Juries do not sentence in a vacuum. They sentence based on perceived severity, proportionality, and outcome. When jurors believe parole exists, they often impose longer sentences under the assumption that release mechanisms will later balance the punishment. In Mr. Howard’s case, the jury was denied the ability to weigh punishment accurately. Had the jury known that parole was unavailable - and that Mr. Howard would serve nearly the entire sentence imposed - it is reasonable to believe the sentence would have been different. Shorter. Closer to the guidelines. More proportionate. HB193 restores balance by allowing individuals like Mr. Howard to be considered for parole under the principles established in Fishback v. Commonwealth. This is not retroactive punishment relief. It is corrective justice. Fishback recognizes that juries should understand the real consequences of their decisions. When that understanding was legally blocked, the system - not the individual - failed. Allowing parole eligibility for those sentenced during this transition period does not undermine accountability. Mr. Howard remains incarcerated. He must still earn parole through demonstrated rehabilitation, conduct, and review. HB193 simply restores what the jury believed already existed. Justice is not only about the sentence imposed. It is about whether the process that produced it was fair. HB193 acknowledges that fairness was compromised. It gives the Commonwealth a lawful, measured way to correct it. For these reasons, I urge support for HB193.
Statement in Support of HB 193 I am here today in strong support of HB 193 because this bill corrects a quiet but serious injustice that has affected thousands of Virginians for more than two decades. In 2000, the Supreme Court of Virginia made it clear in Fishback v. Commonwealth that juries must be told that parole had been abolished for felony offenses committed after January 1, 1995. That information matters. It goes directly to how a jury understands the real-life consequences of the sentence they impose. Yet for years after that ruling, many individuals were sentenced by juries that were never given this instruction. HB 193 does not undo convictions. It does not guarantee release. What it does is far more measured and responsible: it allows a narrow group of people—those who can prove that their jury was not properly instructed—to be considered for parole after decades of incarceration. This bill applies only to people who have already served long sentences, who remain incarcerated as of July 1, 2026, and who are not convicted of Class 1 felonies or offenses involving minor victims. These exclusions matter. They reflect careful attention to public safety and the seriousness of harm caused by certain crimes. At its core, HB 193 is about fairness and accuracy in sentencing. A jury that believes parole exists may impose a harsher sentence under the assumption that someone could be released early. When parole had already been abolished, that assumption was false. HB 193 simply acknowledges that reality and provides a lawful, structured review process through the Parole Board. The bill also respects public safety. Every eligible individual must still go through a full parole review. The Parole Board retains complete discretion to deny release if someone poses a risk. Nothing in this bill weakens that safeguard. What HB 193 does strengthen is confidence in our justice system. It tells the public that Virginia is willing to confront past procedural failures, even when it is uncomfortable, and that we believe accountability includes the system itself. Many of the people affected by this bill have spent decades incarcerated. They have aged, changed, taken responsibility, completed programs, and built records of stability. Allowing them to be heard—just once—through a parole interview is not leniency. It is justice done carefully and thoughtfully. I urge you to support HB 193, not as an act of sympathy, but as an act of integrity. A system that values truth, fairness, and public safety must be willing to correct its own errors. HB 193 does exactly that. Thank you for your time and consideration. Marilyn Jackson Advocate
Please support HB 193. Expanding parole eligibility only makes sense! The juries involved were not informed that Virginia did not have parole. These many deserve the opportunity (not even a guarantee) to demonstrate that they are rehabilitated and deserve a second chance! Please move this through in the interest of fairness and justice! Thank you!
James Jones is my name. And I support HB193 strongly and request that this HB193 be amended and pass for complete compliance in fairness and justice. Thank you. With sincere regards, James Jones
My name is James Ford. I strongly support HB193, and humbly request that the Lawmakers constitutionally do the same with this Amendment. Thank you. With respect, James Ford
Dear Law Makers, Please pass this amendment for constitutional compliance of HB193. Thank you with a bless and safe week. Sincerely, Larry G. Johnson
Dear LEGISLATORS! Please endorse, support, and pass HB193. Thank you for your LEGISLATIVE Courage. Have a safe and blessed day. Sincerely, Byron Arrington
I, Kevin Jones, hereby strongly support HB193. Please pass this amendment in all do fairness constitutionally. Thank you for your just support and passage of HB193. Sincerely, Mr.K Jones
I support house bill 193 for fair sentencing
On behalf of the Virginia Justice Alliance, I support HB193 because people were sentenced by juries who were never told parole had been abolished. That lack of transparency changed outcomes and continues to keep people incarcerated far beyond what many jurors intended. HB193 does not guarantee release. It allows a fair and limited review for those who meet clear criteria after decades served. Virginia should not defend sentences rooted in misinformation. Justice requires the courage to correct past harm.
I am writing in support of HB193. I feel this particular legislation would provide relief for inmates who were disadvantaged by the unfair parole stipulation.
I SUPPORT HB193 FOR FAIR SENTENCING. THANK YOU.
I, Elizabeth Charity, strongly support HB193, the Fishback vs. Commonwealth of Virginia amendment for court's to come into compliance with the law. Thank you for your just endorsement. Sincerely, Elizabeth Charity
I, Antonie Battle, strongly support HB193! Can you please support and endorse this Bill for Amendment and compliance for justice and fairness. Thank you for supporting this HB193.
I, Keshia Bernette, of Rich Mindz Community org. support HB193 because it is already constitutionally law and should be in compliance to that just Fishback Law. Thank you for supporting this HB193. Sincerely submitted, Keisha Barnette
I support HB193 because it addresses a gap in fairness by allowing parole consideration for individuals whose juries were not properly informed about the abolition of parole at the time of sentencing. This bill does not guarantee release, but it ensures that sentencing outcomes are reviewed in a way that reflects transparency, due process, and justice.
Members of the General Assembly, I respectfully submit this comment in strong support of HB193 and to recommend a complementary oversight mechanism to address instances of judicial noncompliance with Virginia sentencing law. HB193 is a necessary and measured response to a documented breakdown in compliance following Fishback v. Commonwealth (2000), which required juries to be instructed that parole had been abolished. When legally mandated procedures are not followed, the legitimacy of the resulting sentence is compromised. HB193 does not provide automatic release; it simply allows parole consideration in cases where the sentencing process itself was flawed. That approach reflects fundamental fairness and respect for the rule of law. In addition to supporting HB193, I urge the General Assembly to consider establishing an independent review and notification mechanism for cases in which judges sentence outside Virginia’s sentencing guidelines without articulated reasons, or where patterns of noncompliance are later identified. By way of example, in the case of Sterling Graham, an Alford plea was accepted for an 18-year sentence, after which the presiding judge imposed additional life sentences without documented justification for the departure from the guidelines. That judge was later removed from the bench. However, the individual directly affected by the sentencing irregularity was never notified or provided a mechanism for review. Regardless of the ultimate merits of any single case, this illustrates a serious systemic failure: when judicial misconduct or noncompliance is identified, there is no structured process to review impacted cases or notify affected individuals. Sentencing guidelines exist to promote consistency, proportionality, and public confidence. When those guidelines are disregarded without explanation—and when subsequent findings raise concerns about a judge’s conduct—justice requires more than silent correction at the institutional level. It requires transparency and a pathway for those harmed by such failures to be informed and, where appropriate, seek review. A limited oversight committee or review body would not undermine judicial independence. Instead, it would: * Identify patterns of unexplained guideline departures * Refer cases for appropriate review where systemic issues are found * Ensure affected individuals are notified when judicial noncompliance may have impacted their sentence HB193 reflects the principle that legality in sentencing matters. A complementary oversight and notification mechanism would reinforce that principle and help ensure that when the system fails, those failures are acknowledged and addressed—not buried. For these reasons, I urge the General Assembly to support HB193 and to consider additional safeguards that promote accountability, transparency, and fairness in Virginia’s sentencing system. Respectfully submitted, Tonya Wright Wisdom’s Embrace 757-309-1733
I support this bill,H.B. 193. Please vote yes to this important and necessary bill, parole eligibility.
We support this extension of Fishback. It is only fair. Several advocacy clients we know who have done everything possible to rehabilitate themselves would greatly benefit by this law being passed. Juries after 2000 still did not know that parole did not exist. People who were 20 or younger deserve a second chance. This bill doesn't even guarantee that; but it offers them a CHANCE, a path forward. We support HB193.
Hello, I'm a Virginian who was incarcerated for a nonviolent felony offense from 1998 to 2000. I'm now in a professional position serving my local community. At the time of my offense, the abolition of parole was relatively new. I was sentenced under the Youthful Offender Act, which placed me as one of only 50 inmates in Virginia who could still be sentenced with the possibility of parole. I'm living proof that someone can turn their life around after a felony conviction. But this bill is a matter of fairness. HB193 will correct the injustice done not just to the defendants but also to the members of the jury, who were uninformed that parole was no longer a possibility when they made their decisions. Had they known, they might have recommended a different sentence. Given the 26 years that has elapsed, it's time for the Parole Board to have the opportunity to determine if it would be appropriate for these individuals to be considered for early release.
Something’s should have been looked into before and changed way before now.
Supporting HB 193 is essential to uphold justice and ensure that individuals affected by the Fishback parole eligibility law receive fair treatment. Extending this legislation addresses the issues stemming from judicial noncompliance, allowing those who qualify for parole to access the opportunities they deserve. HB 193 reinforces the importance of accountability in the judicial process, ultimately benefiting both individuals and society as a whole.
Please pass the HB193. I support it.
I support the HB193 bill. Please pass the bill.
Prisoners Rights Clinic is in full support of moving this bill forward .
Please support this important Bill HB#193 That would right a wrong and bring justice and a chance for many incarcerated people
Please pass the bill for HP193 Gerald A Anderson Jr
Justice cannot be served when a jury’s decision is based on a lack of information or a fundamental lie. This bill corrects a historical unfairness by granting parole eligibility to those whose juries were never told that parole had been abolished in Virginia. S4JR advocates for HB193 to ensure the integrity of our legal system and to provide a fair hearing for those currently serving sentences that were built on a foundation of misinformation.
I support the HB193 bill
Please pass HB 193. I support this bill
Please pass the HB193 bill . Idella King Anderson
I support the HB193 bill. Please pass it.
I support extending the Fishback parole eligibility law as outlined in this bill.
I support Bill HB 193 parole eligibility. It is a fair sentencing bill
I support Bill HB 193 parole eligibility. It is a fair sentencing bill
I support Bill HB 193 parole eligibility. It is a fair sentencing bill
I support both of the selected Bills HB193 HB194
I support Bill HB 193 parole eligibility. It is a fair sentencing bill
I support Bill HB 193 parole eligibility .it is a fair sentencing bill
I support both of the selected Bills
I support Bill HB 193 parole eligibility.it is a fair sentencing bill
I, Lucretia Brown, support and sponsor HB193. By passing this Bill is in upholding the constitutionality of justice and fairness for those that are under the Fishback vs. Commonwealth of Virginia law. Please pass this Bill. Thank you. HB193 Status: In Committee Parole; exception to limitation on the application of parole statutes. Patrons All PatronsMore info Introduced by: Delores L. McQuinn (Chief Patron) Summary As Introduced Parole; exception to limitation on the application of parole statutes. Provides that a person is eligible to be considered for parole if such person (i) was sentenced by a jury after the date of the Supreme Court of Virginia decision in Fishback v. Commonwealth, 260 Va. 104 (2000), in which the Supreme Court held that a jury should be instructed on the fact that parole has been abolished, for a felony committed on or after the abolition of parole going into effect on January 1, 1995; (ii) can prove by the preponderance of the evidence that the jury in his case was not instructed on the fact that parole has been abolished; and (iii) remained incarcerated for the offense on July 1, 2026, and the offense was not one of the following: (a) a Class 1 felony; (b) if the victim was a minor, rape, forcible sodomy, object sexual penetration, or aggravated sexual battery or an attempt to commit any such act; or (c) carnal knowledge. The bill also requires the Parole Board to establish procedures for consideration of parole of persons entitled to it and also provides that any person who is eligible for parole as of July 1, 2026, shall be scheduled for a parole interview no later than July 1, 2027, allowing for extension of time for reasonable cause.
I, Marty Haerd, support and ask that HB193 be upheld and passed for all currently incarcerated Fishback applicants eligible for parole hearing. In the name of justice and fairness, thank you.
I, Karim Muhammad, support HB193 and Patroned by Delores L. McQuinn to uphold the constitutional ruling in Fishback vs. Commonwealth of Virginia. In the name of justice and fairness please pass this Bill. Thank you. HB193 Status: In Committee Parole; exception to limitation on the application of parole statutes. Patrons All PatronsMore info Introduced by: Delores L. McQuinn (Chief Patron) Summary As Introduced Parole; exception to limitation on the application of parole statutes. Provides that a person is eligible to be considered for parole if such person (i) was sentenced by a jury after the date of the Supreme Court of Virginia decision in Fishback v. Commonwealth, 260 Va. 104 (2000), in which the Supreme Court held that a jury should be instructed on the fact that parole has been abolished, for a felony committed on or after the abolition of parole going into effect on January 1, 1995; (ii) can prove by the preponderance of the evidence that the jury in his case was not instructed on the fact that parole has been abolished; and (iii) remained incarcerated for the offense on July 1, 2026, and the offense was not one of the following: (a) a Class 1 felony; (b) if the victim was a minor, rape, forcible sodomy, object sexual penetration, or aggravated sexual battery or an attempt to commit any such act; or (c) carnal knowledge. The bill also requires the Parole Board to establish procedures for consideration of parole of persons entitled to it and also provides that any person who is eligible for parole as of July 1, 2026, shall be scheduled for a parole interview no later than July 1, 2027, allowing for extension of time for reasonable cause.
I, Alexander Campbell, firmly support HB193! Thank you for passing this just and fair Bill of the constitutional law passed for Fishback v Commonwealth of Virginia. Thank you. With Best Regards, HB193 Status: In Committee Parole; exception to limitation on the application of parole statutes. Patrons All PatronsMore info Introduced by: Delores L. McQuinn (Chief Patron) Summary As Introduced Parole; exception to limitation on the application of parole statutes. Provides that a person is eligible to be considered for parole if such person (i) was sentenced by a jury after the date of the Supreme Court of Virginia decision in Fishback v. Commonwealth, 260 Va. 104 (2000), in which the Supreme Court held that a jury should be instructed on the fact that parole has been abolished, for a felony committed on or after the abolition of parole going into effect on January 1, 1995; (ii) can prove by the preponderance of the evidence that the jury in his case was not instructed on the fact that parole has been abolished; and (iii) remained incarcerated for the offense on July 1, 2026, and the offense was not one of the following: (a) a Class 1 felony; (b) if the victim was a minor, rape, forcible sodomy, object sexual penetration, or aggravated sexual battery or an attempt to commit any such act; or (c) carnal knowledge. The bill also requires the Parole Board to establish procedures for consideration of parole of persons entitled to it and also provides that any person who is eligible for parole as of July 1, 2026, shall be scheduled for a parole interview no later than July 1, 2027, allowing for extension of time for reasonable cause.
I, Artina Taylor, seriously support HB193! I am supporter of Resource Information Help for Disadvantage and Disenfranchised (RIHD). Thank you for passing this Bill. Status: In Committee Parole; exception to limitation on the application of parole statutes. Patrons All PatronsMore info Introduced by: Delores L. McQuinn (Chief Patron) Summary As Introduced Parole; exception to limitation on the application of parole statutes. Provides that a person is eligible to be considered for parole if such person (i) was sentenced by a jury after the date of the Supreme Court of Virginia decision in Fishback v. Commonwealth, 260 Va. 104 (2000), in which the Supreme Court held that a jury should be instructed on the fact that parole has been abolished, for a felony committed on or after the abolition of parole going into effect on January 1, 1995; (ii) can prove by the preponderance of the evidence that the jury in his case was not instructed on the fact that parole has been abolished; and (iii) remained incarcerated for the offense on July 1, 2026, and the offense was not one of the following: (a) a Class 1 felony; (b) if the victim was a minor, rape, forcible sodomy, object sexual penetration, or aggravated sexual battery or an attempt to commit any such act; or (c) carnal knowledge. The bill also requires the Parole Board to establish procedures for consideration of parole of persons entitled to it and also provides that any person who is eligible for parole as of July 1, 2026, shall be scheduled for a parole interview no later than July 1, 2027, allowing for extension of time for reasonable cause.
I
I, Willie X Brown, fervently support HB 193 in upholding justice, fairness, and law compliance that those who are Fishback will receive the benefit of the constitution enacted law. "An injustice anywhere is an injustice Everywhere." --Dr.Martin King
HB 193 (Extending parole eligible/ post fishback/ sentence after June 9, 2000. In these turbulent times, it is crucial that you as Virginia lawmakers make things right. By doing so you will be correcting many wrongs to individuals who have made a mistake and find themselves behind bars which could be anyone of us. I am writing to ask you to Vote Yes for HB 193. Lay people are sometimes not aware of changes, but our judges are informed about any changes in criminal justice and they already know what they have to do, be transparent when giving instructions to the jury about the life of an accused individual. Everyone that is committed to prison is not bad people but just need to be reminded they are human beings and they have a responsibility to society. Once they have shown for years they have come back into their real self and demonstrate fundamental change by having the same routine day in and day out. This request is in accordance with the Fishback v. Commonwealth, 260 Va. 104 (2000) in which the Supreme Court held that a jury should be instructed on the fact that parole has been abolished for a felony committed after January 1995, and can prove the preponderance of the evidence that a jury was not instructed on the fact that parole has been abolished, there are individuals that remain behind bars for the same offense on July 2025. Their annual evaluation says a lot about how an individual has changed or not. Thank you. Lorrene Crowell
I support HB193 it's a fair sentencing bill and it's a remedy for injustice that retores public trust.
Discovery discrepancies are rampant throughout several cases that I know of. Please pass this bill to allow for more transparency. Both sides should be able to see and request all evidence both before and after trial so that they can accurately represent their case!
I Jacqueline Graham Support This Bill HB193
HB193 is your opportunity to restore faith in our courts and to demonstrate that Virginia’s leaders will not turn away from those who have suffered under an uneven system. By supporting this legislation, you are standing up for families, for the integrity of our legal process, and for the core values that define our Commonwealth. A VOTE 'YES for HB193 is a vote for justice, compassion, and the promise that no Virginian will be forgotten or left behind. I urge you to lead with courage and empathy, Thank you.
HB193 is necessary for Incarcerated Veterans Inmates with Military PTSD. My son was unjustly sentenced in 2022, and proven InChoate by a Virginia Post Sentencing Attorney. My loved one remains in a Virginia Prison. Please pass this bill for my son and others.
I support Bill HB 193 Parole eligibility. It is a fair sentencing bill
I am writing in support of HB193 | McQuinn | Parole; exception to limitation on the application of parole statutes. In order for sentencing to be fair and promote equity, all laws, specifically in reference to parole, must be known to jurors as sentences may have been decided upon under the assumption that parole was a later option. The lack of information has dissolved offenders ability to prove rehabilitation and successful re-entry to their communities, which in most cases, is the ultimate goal. I ask that this bill be passed, to restore this opportunity to those who have put forth the efforts needed to be productive citizens upon release. Thank you.
It is time to enact ong overdue reform in our prisons, jails, and courts.
Hello, my name is Ursula Ward. Im writing in support of HB 193. It would mean a great deal to my family and our loved one if this bill were to pass. Our loved on has been incarcerated for many years and this bill will assist / help our loved one to be able to to re-enter into society and be an asset to our future. Thank you in advance, Ursula Ward
Support Bill HB 193 parole eligibility. It is a fair sentencing bill
I support Bill HB 193 parole eligibility. It is a fair sentencing bill
I support Bill HB 193 parole eligibility. It is a fair sentencing bill
I support Bill HB 193 parole eligibility. It is a fair sentencing bill
I support Bill HB 193 Parole eligibility. It is a fair sentencing bill
I support Bill HB 193 parole eligibility.It is a fair sentencing bill
I support Bill HB193 Parole eligibility. It is a fair sentencing
I support Bill HB 193 Parole eligibility it is a fair sentencing bill
I support Bill HB193 Parole eligibility .It's is a fair sentencing bill
I support Bill H B193 Parole eligibility .It's a fair sentencing bill .
I support billHB193 parole eligibility it's a fair sentencing bill
HB193 will ensure fairness in the Virginia sentencing process and address judicial noncompliances of the law to which persons who received a jury trial per Fishback vs Commonwealth (269 Va 104, June 9, 2000) were NOT sentenced until after the 2020 SB793 law deadline (June 9, 2000) due to judicial noncompliance. Thank you.
My family and I support HB 193 because it will remedy sentencing error of the past that remain uncorrected and Thank You
HB193 will ensure fairness in the Virginia sentencing process and address judicial noncompliances of the law to which persons who received a jury trial per Fishback vs Commonwealth (269 Va 104, June 9, 2000) were NOT sentenced until after June 9, 2000. I, McKenna Holloman, support HB193, and I hope you vote “yes” when HB193 comes before your office.
Hello Senator McQuin,, My name is Ursula Ward. Im writing to inform you that I support HB 193. This bill affects my loved one and it would mean a great deal to our family for the possible passage of this bill. Thank you in advance for your consideration, Ursula Ward
As a concerned citizen I support HB193 for it will ensure fairness in the Virginia sentencing process and address judicial noncompliances of the law to which persons who received a jury trial per Fishback vs Commonwealth (269 Va 104, June 9, 2000) were not sentenced until after June 9, 2000.
HB200 - Transit Entities, certain; funding and administration.
I strongly support HB 200, because it would advance transit access for Virginians and boost economic opportunity for our working class, while simultaneously addressing environmental costs (air quality impacts) and social injustices (high expense of car ownership).
HB271 - Gaming Commission; established, penalties, report.
Please do not vote to bring a casino to Tyson’s, there is already a high amount of congestion in the area. Those of us that are residents nearby want a healthy community and bringing in a casino, also attracts individuals susceptible to addiction, which statistically pulls the community into a host of personal problems that no government bandaid can fix. Those of us that are seeking a livable community forsee this having a significant detrimental impact on a live and work community. I implore you to please vote no on bringing a casino to Fairfax/Tysons. If you think the tax revenue will help, I ask you to visit the surrounding neighborhoods outside of MGM, parts of PG county have police permanent stationed there due to high crime. So, we will only be inviting more problems.
Object to all said bills and any casios developments.
Protect the integrity of the state and residents from the fiscal and civic dangers if gaming it every damaging iteration. The negatives far out way any gains., especially fir this state abd especially for Fairfax county, a county which has provided the state with vital progressive leadership.
I think the so called affordable housing I see in McLean is Neither appropriate NOR attractive. Gaming should not me placed in Tyson’s or near McLean.
The Greater Tysons Citizens Coalition (GTCC) is pleased to support HB 271, Delegate Paul Krizek’ bill to establish a Virginia Gaming Commission. The GTCC was established in 2008 as focal point for citizen participation in Fairfax County’s planned urbanization of Tysons. We monitor and advocate for a vibrant, livable and walkable Tysons where residents may work, live and play and where the County’s public infrastructure supports both Tysons and the surrounding communities. We have been closely following proposals both for a Tysons casino and for a Virginia Gaming Commission. In an October 23, 2025 letter to the Joint Subcommittee to Consider the Feasibility of Establishing a Virginia Gaming Commission, we conveyed our support for establishing a Virginia Gaming Commission. We also supported increasing funding for gambling addiction treatment and research as well as pausing consideration of additional gambling options, including brick-and-mortar casinos such as the one proposed for Tysons, until such a Commission is established, staffed and able to effectively regulate gambling in the Commonwealth. HB 271 will establish mechanisms that will allow the Commonwealth to more effectively regulate and control gaming and address the highly negative impacts that gaming already is having on our residents. For these reasons, we urge this subcommittee to report HB 271 out favorably. Thank you.
HB298 - Public elementary or secondary school students; evidence-based restorative disciplinary practices.
I am writing to voice my strong support for HB 298 as a social worker in Richmond, VA, who works with at-risk and challenged youth. I have seen firsthand how exclusionary and punitive discipline, such as suspension and expulsion, can unintentionally exacerbate the very challenges schools are trying to mitigate. Removing students from the school setting often disconnects them from supportive relationships, interrupts academic progress, and often reinforces maladaptive behavioral patterns. Further, punitive policies disproportionately impact students from marginalized, underresourced communities. Traditional exclusionary practices may solve the problem in the short term (ie, stopping the behavior and/or its impact on others), but they often contribute to long-term negative outcomes, such as academic and social disengagement as well as increased contact with the juvenile legal system. HB298 represents a meaningful shift toward a relational, trauma-informed model that focuses on repairing harm, building trust and strengthening school communities. Evidence-based restorative approaches create structured opportunities for students to take accountability, understand the impact of their behavior, and make amends. Many students who struggle with problem behaviors and are at risk of traditional exclusionary practices bring adverse childhood experiences, chronic stress and unmet mental/physical health needs into the classroom. Punitive responses can exacerbate these stressors, while restorative approaches provide space for communication, problem-solving and skill-building. When implemented with fidelity and adequate training/resources, restorative practices can reduce repeat disciplinary incidents and foster a stronger, more cohesive school climate. Please support HB298 and help ensure that Virginia's school disciplinary policies reflect what a multitude of research and practice consistently show -- students thrive when they are held accountable within supportive, relationship-centered systems.
I oppose HB 298. As a school board member, I believe strongly that local decisions provide the best outcomes for our students. I've seen dedicated administrators and educators work to provide the support that students need to be successful and remain in the classroom, but when a line is crossed, there needs to be safety and accountability so that the learning environment of the entire class is not negatively impacted. The data does not support that these practices are successful in reducing inappropriate student behavior, in fact, there is much evidence to the contrary. We already have multiple tiers of response to behaviors in place, and these always include collaboration with families and many layers of support staff. Many of our educators say that lack of discipline is one of the reasons they choose to leave the profession. Our teachers need to know that they have our support and that we will keep them safe. Students need to have high expectations. Restorative practices may work beautifully in some situations, and they can be part of the toolbox as appropriate, but they do not work for all. Local divisions need the authority in their professional capacity to make those decisions. I'm sure extra training will be mandated for staff if this bill is passed, adding yet another layer of responsibility to teachers and staff who are already at capacity. It may well be another unfunded mandate too. Our school budgets cannot continue to fund all of these additional requirements. It is not necessary to address this at the level of state legislation. Allow our capable and trained school administrators the freedom to provide the best response based upon each unique child and situation. This is necessary to keep a safe and supportive learning environment for our classroom teachers and students. Please vote no on HB 298
School systems that excuse student’s poor behaviors are a disgrace. Teachers are not supposed to teach their students manners and standards. The home is responsible for these things. Teachers should never take the place of the parents, guardians, or foster parents. Again, the breakdown of civilization is excusing the foundation of the home! The public school systems has enabled students more than ever before. Metal detectors, cell phones , laptops, iPads, and restorative practices are useless. These are temporary bandaids that don’t work and allow the same effect to keep occurring. Low expectations and little consequences are major factors behind these policies. Code of Conduct handbooks are not followed consistently and are for show. Many of the liberal policies exacerbate the problems. Fact! The students crave constant structure and need limitations.
Hello, I am student of Charlottesville high school. my name is Nargis Haidary. I support the HB 836 student. Every student should feel safe at school and I want to support my classmates. I think we should support each other because we protect human rights, prevent the separation of families, and maintain the safety and stability of communities.
My name is Carissa Henry, and I’m commenting on behalf of the Transformative Changes Black Youth Mental Health Collaborative. Through the Safe & Restorative Schools Learning Tour, legislators, youth, and community partners didn’t just hear about restorative practices — they experienced them through collaboration that acknowledged harm and focused on repair instead of punishment. Young people shared what happens when schools don’t have consistent tools: a student who reported bullying was nearly pulled into a fight instead of being heard; a fourteen-year-old made a mistake and was treated like a criminal rather than a child; another student shut down emotionally and was moved from office to office instead of being met with care. When schools respond with exclusion, silence, or criminalization, the harm deepens. When they respond with care, accountability, and support, students stay connected and can repair harm.That’s why the current “consider” language is not strong enough. When restorative practices are optional, implementation becomes inconsistent — and inconsistency is exactly how racial, disability, and discipline disparities persist from one school division to the next. House Bill 298 was meant to create a baseline of evidence-based practice with safety protections and state support. This bill doesn’t remove discipline; it improves it. And students across Virginia deserve more than optional care. I urge you to strengthen and support HB 298.
Helpful in comparing what is happening around the country. see pg. 2 Recommended Citation Schreiber, A., Miller, B., Dressler, K. (2022). An Introduction to Restorative Practices. National Center for School Safety. https://www.nc2s.org/resource/an-introduction-to-restorative-practices
VASSP has some concerns regarding HB298. While we appreciate the feedback we have received from Delegate McQuinn's office, the concerns still linger. These are listed below. -Is there any data to support the assumption that these practices are successful in reducing the instances of student behavior that require disciplinary action? -How do you define "connection to the community", as listed in the bill? -How is section v (determines responses through a collaborative process that involves students, families, educators and community members) going to be supervised? How will there be enough time to involve all these stakeholders on a regular basis? This could take hours each week, depending on the school and the situation. -the training that will be required to implement this type of practice is going to be extensive, which adds another responsibility to teachers and staff. -we are still concerned that this bill will limit the ability of school administrators to provide a safe learning environment.
I strongly support HB 298 because I believe Virginia’s schools need discipline systems that truly help students learn, grow, and feel safe. For too long, school discipline has relied on exclusionary practices like suspension and removal from the classroom. These approaches may seem effective in the moment, but they often fail to address the real causes of student behavior. Instead of creating change, they push students out of learning environments and leave underlying issues unresolved. Restorative approaches offer a proven alternative that promotes accountability, repairs harm, and strengthens safety and belonging without removing students from the classroom. I know from personal experience that exclusionary discipline does not lead to positive outcomes. As a student, I was removed from the classroom multiple times as a form of discipline. While I was sent away, nothing was done to help me understand or resolve the challenges I was facing. When I returned to class, the same problems were still there. Within a week or two, I would be removed again for the same exact behavior. This created a recurring cycle that disrupted my education without providing any real support or solution. HB 298 establishes a clear framework for the statewide use of evidence-based restorative disciplinary practices. This bill shifts school discipline away from exclusionary punishment and toward approaches that keep students engaged in learning while addressing harm at its root. Restorative practices focus on responsibility, reflection, and repairing relationships, which leads to lasting improvement rather than repeated punishment. By moving away from exclusionary discipline and toward restorative, evidence-based approaches, HB 298 helps break harmful cycles like the ones I and many other students in Virginia have experienced. It represents a necessary step toward a more equitable, effective, and supportive school discipline system for students across Virginia.
Personal Statement — CEO, Kids On First Foundation In Support of Restorative Discipline and HB 298 As the CEO of Kids On First Foundation, my work centers on one simple belief: every young person deserves to be seen, supported, and given a fair opportunity to grow—both in the classroom and in life. Through our programs, we work with students from diverse communities across Virginia, many of whom have faced systemic barriers that extend far beyond school walls. Too often, I have witnessed how exclusionary discipline removes students from learning environments at the very moment they need connection, structure, and support the most. Virginia’s current discipline system continues to rely heavily on practices that isolate students rather than address the root causes of behavior. These policies do not impact all students equally. Black students and students with disabilities are disproportionately disciplined for subjective, non-violent behaviors, resulting in lost instructional time and strained relationships between families and schools. When students feel pushed out instead of guided forward, trust erodes—and the opportunity to build resilience, accountability, and belonging is lost. At Kids On First, we believe discipline should be rooted in growth, restoration, and community—not exclusion. Young people thrive when they are given space to reflect, repair harm, and remain engaged in meaningful learning experiences. Restorative practices align directly with what we see working in youth development and mentorship programs every day: students respond positively when they feel heard, respected, and connected. HB 298 represents a meaningful step toward a more equitable and effective approach to school discipline across Virginia. By establishing a clear statutory framework for evidence-based restorative practices, this legislation promotes accountability while prioritizing safety, belonging, and long-term student success. Instead of pushing students further away from opportunity, restorative approaches strengthen school climate, reduce conflict, and keep students connected to the learning environments that help them grow. As a youth advocate and organizational leader committed to empowering the next generation, I strongly support efforts that keep students engaged, valued, and supported. Our schools should be places where young people learn not only academics, but also responsibility, empathy, and resilience. HB 298 moves Virginia closer to that vision—one where discipline becomes a pathway to growth rather than a barrier to opportunity. Sincerely, Sherron Cerny CEO, Kids On First Foundation
VOTE YES: I’m in support of HB298 because suspensions are not just ineffective—they are harmful. I’ve seen this with young children who are still learning emotional regulation, and with older students who may be carrying stress, disabilities, or trauma. When these students are sent home instead of supported, it doesn’t teach the skills they were missing. It teaches them that school is a place where they can be removed when they’re overwhelmed. This is exactly what Dr. Ross Greene’s work shows: kids do well if they can, and challenging behavior is a sign of lagging skills, not a reason for exclusion. When we respond with support and collaborative problem‑solving, students learn the skills they need to do better. When we respond with suspension, they don’t. HB298 takes a balanced, research‑based approach by requiring at least one evidence‑based restorative practice before excluding a student. This keeps kids connected, helps repair harm, and builds real skills. All students—from early elementary through high school—deserve support, not punishment that causes lasting harm. I urge you to support HB298.
Public Comment in Support of HB298- VOTE YES I’m writing in strong support of HB298 because suspensions in early elementary school are not just ineffective—they are traumatic. Young children who are still learning how to regulate their emotions and communicate their needs are being removed from school instead of being supported. I’ve seen how this harms kids, especially our most vulnerable students, including those with disabilities, those experiencing stress at home, and those who already struggle to feel safe and connected at school. Suspending a five‑, six‑, or seven‑year‑old doesn’t teach them the skills they were missing. It teaches them that school is a place where they can be sent away when they’re overwhelmed. Many children come back more anxious, more dysregulated, and less trusting of the adults who are supposed to help them. That is not a path toward better behavior or better learning. HB298 takes a reasonable, research‑based approach by requiring schools to try at least one evidence‑based restorative practice before excluding a child, except in the most serious situations. Restorative practices help children repair harm, understand what went wrong, and build the skills they need to do better next time—without pushing them out of the classroom. Our youngest learners deserve support, not punishment that leaves lasting emotional scars. HB298 is a necessary step toward safer, more compassionate, and more effective school environments. I urge you to support this bill.
It is time to break the School to Prison Pipeline. Too often police are called to schools over minor issues that could be handled in better ways. Very often when students act out there are other issues occurring and the behavior is triggered by someone else's act. An arrest and prison sentence ruins a child's life - not just in preventing them from achieving future goals, but in the destruction of self worth. Where restorative behavioral practices have been implemented, research has shown a sharp decrease in future behavior problems. This leads to students finishing their education and becoming active, positive members of society, instead of ending up in jail for increasingly severe issues.
I strongly support HB298, a bill that takes a necessary and evidence-based step toward dismantling the school-to-prison pipeline by centering restoration, accountability, and child development instead of exclusion and punishment. As a former special education teacher, I saw firsthand how traditional disciplinary systems fail children, especially students with disabilities, trauma histories, learning differences, and unmet behavioral health needs. Too often, suspension and expulsion were used not because they were effective, but because they were familiar. Those exclusions did not address harm, build skills, or promote safety. They removed children from learning environments and set them on trajectories toward system involvement. HB298 recognizes what educators, families, and researchers have long known: children’s behavior is communication, and accountability must be paired with understanding, support, and repair. By requiring schools to first implement evidence-based restorative disciplinary practices, this bill keeps students connected to school while still addressing harm responsibly. I am especially encouraged that HB298: *Grounds discipline in the science of children’s social, emotional, and cognitive development *Emphasizes healing, relationship repair, and community involvement *Requires data collection and public reporting, ensuring accountability and continuous improvement *Supports educators through guidance, professional development, and technical assistance From a survivor-led justice perspective, we know punishment does not create safety, connection does. HB298 does not eliminate accountability; it strengthens it by making discipline child centered, trauma-informed, and humane. This bill affirms a simple but powerful truth: children should not be pushed out of school for struggling to survive systems that were never designed for them. I urge the Committee to support HB298 and invest in schools that interrupt harm rather than reproduce it.
Restorative discipline approaches are more effective in helping students stay in the learning environment in a way that allows all students to learn, when compared with traditional punitive measures such as suspension or expulsion. This is especially important for students who are neurodivergent or have other cognitive differences, as well as for students of color who are disproportionately likely to be disciplined more severely than white students. This is a good step in the direction of making our educational system more just and beneficial.
1229 while hard to understand the context got a thumbs up from fellow autistics. That’s good enough for me. And 298 I’ve been getting voters’ attention about for weeks. I wish we had both these bills when I was a student.
HB 298 would force schools to use restorative discipline before they can suspend or expel students in most cases. That sounds reasonable until you look at the evidence. This approach has already been tried in major school districts across the country, and it has not worked. Districts like Oakland and New York City saw suspensions go down, but classroom disruption, teacher frustration, and safety concerns go up. A RAND Corporation study found no meaningful improvement in school climate and, in some cases, worse academic outcomes. Lower discipline numbers looked good on paper, but behavior did not improve. HB 298 repeats the same mistake by mandating a process instead of trusting school leaders to use judgment. It delays consequences, weakens authority, and sends the message that serious misbehavior is negotiable. Virginia should learn from failed experiments elsewhere, not lock them into law.
I support this legislation. As a former school board member and Alternative Dispute Resolution practitioner I see how Restorative Justice improves accountability and helps to restore relationships.
HB 298 strengthens school discipline statewide by: Standardizing restorative discipline practices through codifying the Virginia Department of Education’s Model Guidance for Positive, Preventative Codes of Student Conduct and Alternatives to Suspension Requiring schools to use restorative practices first—before suspension, expulsion, or exclusion—except in cases involving serious offenses or defined aggravating circumstances Improving accountability and transparency by directing VDOE to collect and publicly report data on restorative practice use and add restorative indicators to the Student Behavioral Administrative and Response Survey Ensuring consistent and equitable implementation through statewide guidelines, professional development, and technical assistance Reducing exclusionary discipline by repairing harm, strengthening relationships, and maintaining accountability through evidence-based restorative interventions
For HB298, I'd like to express strong support for this. As a former teacher, I know the value of a restorative approach to harm in schools. As a nonprofit leader now, I know the importance of building into systems, particularly schools, approaches to harm that move individuals toward repair and not retribution.
Greetings Chair and Members of the Committee, On behalf of Transformative Changes, I write in strong support of House Bill 298, patroned by Delegate McQuinn. Transformative Changes’ mission is rooted in advancing healing-centered, community-led solutions that create safe, supportive, and equitable systems for young people, and our advocacy for restorative discipline is grounded in both lived experience and data. Through our Safe and Restorative Schools Learning Tour and our work with the Black Youth Mental Health Collaborative, we engage directly with students, families, educators, and practitioners across Virginia who are experiencing the harms of exclusionary discipline. We consistently hear that suspensions and expulsions, particularly for Black students and students with disabilities, remove students from learning without addressing the root causes of behavior or making schools safer. Statewide data make clear why a different approach is needed. According to statewide data, across many Virginia school divisions, Black students and students with disabilities are punished far more often than their peers for similar behavior: - In Lancaster County, students with disabilities are suspended more than twice as often as other students, and Black students are suspended about twice as often as non-Black students. - In Richmond City, students with disabilities are suspended well over twice as often as students without disabilities, and Black students are suspended nearly twice as often as their peers. - In Chesapeake City, students with disabilities are suspended roughly twice as often as students without disabilities. - In Franklin City, Black students are suspended more than twice as often as non-Black students. - Similar patterns appear in Newport News, Hopewell, Petersburg, Norfolk, Portsmouth, and Sussex County, where Black students and/or students with disabilities are one-and-a-half to two times more likely to be suspended than other students in the same schools. These disparities are not simply about student behavior; they reflect how schools respond to behavior. Exclusion removes students, but it does not repair harm, build accountability, or prevent future incidents. House Bill 298 offers a proven, evidence-based solution. By prioritizing restorative discipline practices, the bill shifts the focus from punishment to accountability, responsibility, and repair. Restorative practices require students to understand the impact of their actions, take responsibility, and actively work to repair harm while keeping them connected to their school community. This approach improves school climate, reduces repeat incidents, and addresses the very disparities reflected in the data. The bill also ensures accountability at the system level by requiring the Department of Education to track outcomes, report publicly on effectiveness, and provide training and technical assistance so restorative practices are implemented with support, consistency, and integrity. House Bill 298 reflects what communities, research, and lived experience all affirm: safe schools are built when accountability and healing go hand in hand. We respectfully urge your support for this bill as a meaningful step toward safer, more equitable learning environments for students across the Commonwealth. Thank you for your leadership and consideration. In care and solidarity, Carissa Henry Co-Executive Director Transformative Changes
HB308 - Va. ABC Authority; permitting of retail tobacco product retailers, etc.
Object to all said bills and any casios developments.
My name is Susan Cave. I am also the mother of William Cave, who died at just 32 years old from consuming raw leaf not 70h. William was a healthy young man who worked hard. He had no history of addiction or drug use or abuse. He was a loving father of one daughter and a devoted husband… On April 20 2024, my son did not come home. His toxicology confirmed mitragynine was his killer. My William died from a toxic mixture of his prescribed antidepressants and RawLeafKratrom (RLK) In the beginning, Will and I were told that RLK was safe, natural, and a benign supplement to help with anxiety/ depression. After consuming RLK for less than one year, Will realized he had become dependent when he tried to stop and could not because the withdrawals and cravings were so overpowering. Will took raw leaf for 4 years before it took his life and the last 3 yrs was spend trying to withdraw and stop kratom…each time failing. Parents like me are left to bury our children while the AKA and the kratom industry continue to deny responsibility., deny deaths, call medical examiners incompetent, and call grieving parents liars. If RLK bans had existed earlier, my son might still be here today. After his death I joined a national non-profit organization called Kratom Danger Awareness founded by Wendy Chamberlain. Now I advocate not only for my son but for 1000s of other families who have been devastated by RLK. In 2025, the Drug Enforcement Administration formally accepted our citizen petition requesting the scheduling of mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine. That acceptance means is enough scientific and medical concern to warrant a full review under the Controlled Substances Act. The FDA has been clear that products containing kratom are adulterated and unlawfully marketed under food and drug law. They are not approved drugs, not lawful dietary supplements, and not compliant consumer products. Yet HB 308 establishes inspection, seizure, and enforcement authority for nicotine and hemp while leaving these adulterated, opioid-active products entirely outside the framework. That gap is now known. Parents have asked that it be addressed. The enforcement structure already exists on these very pages. I respectfully urge the Committee to amend HB 308 to include kratom, so that products the FDA has already identified as adulterated are subject to the same permitting, inspection, and seizure authority as every other high-risk retail product regulated by this bill. Please listen to the families. Please support Bills that ban or schedule RLK.
HB 308 is premised on the idea that products marketed as legal, natural, or reduced-harm still require oversight when they present public-health risks. That principle is sound — but the bill fails its own logic by excluding kratom. Kratom is a psychoactive substance sold in gas stations, vape shops, and tobacco retailers; it is available in high-potency extracts and concentrates; and it is associated with documented dependence, withdrawal syndromes, poison-center calls, and fatalities. Leaving kratom unregulated while regulating nicotine pouches and tobacco alternatives creates a regulatory contradiction and a clear loophole that undermines the purpose of HB 308. Kratom should be explicitly included under the same regulatory framework, or addressed through immediate companion legislation. Anything less is a failure of responsible governance.
HB 308 regulates tobacco and nicotine products in the name of public safety — yet completely ignores kratom, a psychoactive substance sold in the same gas stations and vape shops, marketed as “safe,” and available in high-potency extracts. This omission is not theoretical to me. On December 6, 2023, my son Austin died alone in his room. His toxicology was negative for fentanyl, heroin, and other illicit street opioids. The cause of death was ruled intoxication by mitragynine, the primary alkaloid in kratom. I was the one who found him, and that is a trauma I will live with forever. If Virginia believes public safety justifies regulating nicotine pouches and tobacco alternatives, there is no defensible reason to leave kratom completely unregulated. Treating kratom more leniently than tobacco is illogical and dangerous. A bill that claims to protect public health while ignoring a substance that has already killed Virginians is not reform — it is willful neglect.
My daughter Kielee died March 1st 2025 of mitragynine overdose. She was only 23 years old. Because she was so young they did an investigation. After an autopsy and a toxicology screen was preformed mitragynine overdose was determined to be the factor of death. Kielee trusted the word natural. She used natural kratom off. She believed it was safe to use for pain because that's how it is marketed. If HB 308 is about public safety and enforcement, then leaving kratom out guts the bill. Kratom is a gas-station opioid sold in convenience stores and smoke shops, taken for opioid-like effects, and concentrated into shots and extracts with no permit, no inspection, and no seizure authority. This bill proves the General Assembly knows how to regulate dangerous retail products. The structure is here. The enforcement power is here. The precedent is written line by line. And yet kratom alone is spared. That choice guarantees circumvention. When tobacco and nicotine are regulated, retailers will pivot to the one opioid-active product the law does not touch. Enforcement will tighten everywhere except where the risk is greatest. I urge the Committee not to advance a bill that closes every door while leaving the opioid on the counter untouched.
My name is Wendy Chamberlain. I am a mother, and I am here because my son, Joseph, is dead. Joseph did not struggle with illegal drugs. He did not overdose on fentanyl or heroin. He used kratom—Whole leaf natural powder , specifically its primary alkaloids, mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine—products that are sold openly, marketed as safe, and completely unregulated. My son died from mitragynine toxicity. A product he used for energy. He was my only child , business owner and a dad to 3 amazing boys.. He simply sat down one evening to watch tv and fell asleep and never to wake up again. This changed our lives forever.. He was so full of life and love.. And taken away at 38 yrs old on 8/30/2020. After his death, I did what grieving parents do when the system fails them—I started asking questions. I learned that kratom products vary wildly in potency, that newer extracts are far stronger than what users believe they’re taking, and that there is no federal oversight, no dosing standards, and no warning labels that reflect real risk. I now serve as the founder and chair of Kratom Danger Awareness, nonprofit and I represent thousands of families across this country—parents who have buried children, spouses who have lost partners, and families living through addiction that began with a product sold as “natural” and “safe.” This is not speculation. This is not anecdote. In 2025, the Drug Enforcement Administration formally accepted our citizen petition requesting the scheduling of mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine. That acceptance means the federal government determined there is enough scientific and medical concern to warrant a full review under the Controlled Substances Act. That matters. Because it confirms what families like mine have been saying for years: these substances are not harmless supplements. They are psychoactive compounds with real risks—risks that communities like yours are now being forced to manage on the ground. Local action matters when federal action lags. Virginia has the opportunity to put public health first, to protect families, and to prevent more parents from standing where I stand today. I am not here because I want to be. I am here because my son cannot be. If HB 308 is intended to promote public safety and retail accountability through enforceable standards, then excluding kratom undermines the very framework the bill so carefully builds. The General Assembly has already done the difficult work. The definitions are written. The enforcement mechanisms are in place. The authority is clearly asserted—within this bill itself. What remains unexplained is why kratom alone is left outside that system. I urge the Committee not to advance a bill that strengthens oversight for every high-risk retail product while leaving the most obvious enforcement gap intact. Please act—before more families join ours. Thank you. Wendy Chamberlain
If HB 308 is intended to protect public safety and ensure meaningful retail accountability, then excluding kratom defeats the bill’s purpose. Kratom is a gas-station opioid sold next to nicotine and hemp, marketed as harmless, and consumed for opioid-like effects, yet it remains entirely outside the enforcement framework this bill creates. The General Assembly has already done the hard work. The permitting structure exists. Inspection and seizure authority exist. The precedent is written clearly in this legislation. What remains unexplained is why this one product—opioid-active, unregulated, and routinely sold in the same high-risk retail environments—is left exempt. I urge the Committee not to advance a bill that modernizes enforcement everywhere except where the danger is most obvious and the incentive to evade regulation is greatest.
Members of the Committee, HB 308 is one of the most expansive retail-control bills this body has considered in years. It creates a permitting regime. It authorizes inspections. It allows seizure of contraband. It establishes nuisance standards. It revokes licenses. It imposes escalating penalties. In short, HB 308 demonstrates that the General Assembly knows exactly how to regulate dangerous retail products when it chooses to do so. That is why the bill’s most important feature is not what it contains but what it leaves out. Kratom is not mentioned anywhere in HB 308. Not by name. Not by alkaloid. Not by botanical classification. Not by functional effect. This omission has a very real consequence: Under HB 308, a retailer can lose its tobacco permit for repeated violations and still lawfully sell kratom powders, capsules, concentrated extracts, and liquid shots the next morning, from the same counter, to the same customers. ABC agents may inspect, seize, and shut down nicotine and hemp products. They may not inspect, seize, or shut down kratom. That is not a hypothetical loophole. That is an enforcement gap created by this bill. HB 308’s precision makes this gap impossible to dismiss as oversight. The bill carefully defines products, delineates authority, and assigns penalties across more than twenty pages. The exclusion of kratom is therefore a policy decision—intentional or not—with predictable consequences. Those consequences will not be theoretical. They will be operational. Retailers will adapt immediately. Products subject to permits and seizures will be replaced with products that are not. Enforcement will migrate away from regulated items and toward the one psychoactive product left untouched. If the purpose of HB 308 is public safety, retail accountability, and meaningful enforcement, then leaving kratom outside this framework defeats the bill’s core intent. The General Assembly has already done the hard work. The structure exists. The enforcement authority exists. The precedent exists—on these very pages. What remains unanswered is why kratom alone is exempt. I respectfully urge the Committee not to advance a bill that modernizes enforcement for every high-risk retail product except the one most likely to exploit the gap.
I STRONGLY OPPOSE Patrick HOPE why do you have to always attack the vape industry. Did you get hurt by it? Does your children disobey your parental skills and do what they want? Why don't you go after the alcohol industry? DID you know that vaping nicotine doesn't create problems for the State Police or Local Police in paperwork for DWI and DUIs? Think about that. Your law is saying its ok to have prefilled pods but not nicotine in a traditional format that has less nicotine then the pre-filled pods? DID you know that the prefilled pods have the HIGHEST nicotine level on the market? DO you go after the alcohol industry and control their alcohol proof? DO you tell them you can't add fruity, desert or bakery flavors to their product? DO you tax them on the ingredients in their products like you tax the ingredients in vape e-liquid? DO you tax the beauty, food, and drug industry for their use of Propylene Glycol and Vegetable Glycerine? Let adults that are 21+ make the choice to do what THEY want with their BODY and MINDS. If you are serious about keeping this out of the "kids" hands, then make every single SMOKE SHACK, TOBACCO HUT and the gas stations owned by NON-CITIZENS use a software like "INTELLICHECK" to scan and verify REAL IDs. Underage individuals are NOT trying to purchase traditional juice (lowest nicotine); they are buying the PRE_FILLED pods which has the HIGHEST nicotine levels. Even when the undersage individuals get the products they are getting it from those who are of age and most likely IRRESPONIBLE parents are NOT PARENTING. If you are so serious about banning and SUPPORTING THE MONOPOLY OF BIG TOBACCO, then take away the following food products from the shelf: -Potatoes -Bell Peppers -Eggplants -Chili Peppers -Tea -Cauliflower -Chocolate -Toothpaste ALSO take away all the products in the health industry like patches, OTC nicotine gum and lozenges. Those products are most likely lining your pockets with donations by the lobbyists. Find a better way to keep these products out of the hands of underage individuals; 21+ adults don't want to use BIG TOBACCOs nasty ass products!!!
Hello, "No person shall sell retail tobacco products from a vending machine." should be removed from "§ 4.1-359. Persons to whom retail tobacco products may not be sold; proof of legal age; civil penalty." or just the whole bill entirely. What good does it do ban those products from vending machines that are placed in 21+ venues? Virginia is the only state in this area of the United States that has completely banned those products from vending machines, even when the machines have ID verification and facial recognition software. I believe it should be removed from the bill entirely and allow those in Virginia to have the same opportunities as those in the surrounding states have.
In HB308, "§ 4.1-359. Persons to whom retail tobacco products may not be sold; proof of legal age; civil penalty. A. No person shall sell to any person younger than 21 years of age, knowing or having reason to believe that such person is younger than 21 years of age, any retail tobacco products. No person shall sell retail tobacco products from a vending machine." "No person shall sell retail tobacco products from a vending machine" should be removed completely unless the definition of "retail tobacco products" is changed, or should be changed to exclude "aerosolized or vaporized by such device, whether or not the substance contains nicotine" or changed to only include aerosolized or vaporized when the product contains nicotine. Including vaporized or aerosolized products that do not contain nicotine, or hemp does not make sense when applied in the term "retail tobacco products" The definition makes it so that vending machine operators cannot offer products like HealthVape, Ripple+, MONQ, and VitaStik which are aromatherapy diffusers and vitamin vaporizers, which would be far better alternatives to nicotine vapes. Removing "aerosolized or vaporized by such device, whether or not the substance contains nicotine" from the definition of "Retail tobacco products" would allow people to have the opportunity to purchase healthier alternatives to nicotine vapes from vending machines, instead of purchasing nicotine vapes from convenience stores and gas stations, provided the vending machines have ID verification and facial recognition. I still believe that those products should not be sold to those who are under the age of 21, using ID verification as well as facial recognition on vending machines would make it so those who are under the age of 21 could not purchase any aerosolized or vaporized products. My hope is that the definition of "retail tobacco products" is changed to remove those products that do not contain nicotine or hemp. I understand why the state would not want to allow people to purchase nicotine or hemp products from vending machines, but why include the products that do not contain nicotine? Thank you
HB360 - Virginia Consumer Protection Act; prohibited practices, kratom products.
Object to all said bills and any casios developments.
Kratom being marketed as an “herbal supplement” should concern all of us — especially when it’s reaching adolescents and young adults who often assume that natural means safe. Right now it’s being sold in smoke shops, gas stations, and convenience stores with little to no real oversight or consistent regulation. That accessibility creates a dangerous false sense of security. What many people don’t see until it’s too late is how habit-forming it can become. I’m seeing more and more individuals struggle to stop — not because they lack willpower, but because their brain and body have adapted to it. When something has the potential to create dependency, education and reasonable guardrails matter. As a peer recovery specialist and life coach working closely with families and young adults, I’m seeing this trend firsthand — and we need to stop hiding behind the word “supplement” and start talking about responsible awareness and regulation.
The mere fact that Kratom is so accessible and affordable for people to purchase with the intent of not being addictive. We see patients from all over the world who use Kratom to help with other substance abuse, then they realize they experience withdrawals when they try to stop on their own. These withdrawal symptoms are the same as patients detoxing from heroin and fentanyl. This substance needs to be banned immediately.
Banning Kratom is crucial in today’s world. It’s easily accessible with hardly any education on the dangers of it.
The use of Kratom should be regulated if not banned in totality! Kratos is highly addictive as it lies on the opioid receptors. In higher doses it creates euphoria and sedation. There are no known standardized dosages which is both scary and dangerous. There is a correlation of polysubstance use which also is dangerous.
As an addiction medicine provider, I care for patients with kratom dependency on a weekly basis. Some were aware what Kratom was, but many others were not aware they could become addicted to something they could just purchase at the local gas station or smoke shop. These patients suffer with withdrawals very similar to those who use substances such as fentanyl or heroin. They also have some of the worst post acute withdrawal symptoms to include mood changes, trouble sleeping, anxiety, and body aches and pains for weeks after their detox with us. Kratom is an unsafe substance and should not be readily available for use. There is not enough education about the addictive properties of this substance and, most that start using it, are going in blind.
I would like to express my support on Banning or regulating the drug Kratom. I work for The Coleman Institute in Richmond. We are an out patient medical detox facility. We see first hand the damage this drug does to unsuspecting people. They assume because it is sold at gas stations and vape stores it is a safe alternative to help with a multitude of bodily issues. It is marketed by most shop owners as safe and non addictive. This could not be further from the truth. It is as addictive as heroin. It is even referred to by those that fall to this trap of use as, gas station heroin. We have seen a major uptick in the amount of patients seeking our help to detox. Sadly this is from all forms of Kratom including the naturally derived form of Kratom. One thing they all say to us is they didn’t know it was so addictive and how it has absolutely destroyed their lives. Because of the lack of regulations and education, it is affecting all ages and financial demographics. It is becoming more common to see people detoxing off of Kratom than fentanyl and that is scary. Please pass a bill to ban and regulate this dangerous drug.
Kratom and all its synthetic variations (e.g. 7-OH) are substances that must be banned or, at minimum, heavily regulated. As CEO of The Coleman Institute for Addiction Medicine, I have witnessed patient intake calls shift from primarily heroin, fentanyl and other opioids to roughly 70-75% as some form of Kratom. This data speaks volumes. The physical withdrawal from Kratom is very similar to and sometimes worse than fentanyl, making it nearly impossible to simply just stop. People have lost their jobs and had relationships destroyed due to their Kratom addiction. Most patients become addicted with no knowledge or understanding of how it activates the mu-opioid brain receptors. As someone who has had direct experience with providing Kratom detox services since 2018, please take this into serious consideration before more lives are negatively impacted.
Kratom and all its synthetic variations (e.g. 7-OH) are substances that must be banned or, at minimum, heavily regulated. As CEO of The Coleman Institute for Addiction Medicine, I have witnessed patient intake calls shift from primarily heroin, fentanyl and other opioids to roughly 70-75% as some form of Kratom. This data speaks volumes. The physical withdrawal from Kratom is very similar to and sometimes worse than fentanyl, making it nearly impossible to simply just stop. People have lost their jobs and had relationships destroyed due to their Kratom addiction. Most patients become addicted with no knowledge or understanding of how it activates the mu-opioid brain receptors. As someone who has had direct experience with providing Kratom detox services since 2018, please take this into serious consideration before more lives are negatively impacted.
I personally know the effects of Kratom and the opiates it mimics. Kratom dependency is real and the withdrawals are severe. Get this substance out of our gas stations and smoke shops.
Hello Delegates, I am writing in opposition of HB1396. This bill had been brought fourth by landowners groups that falsely claim to represent and maximize property owners rights when in fact they are property owners that want to end the tradition of hound hunting. This is proven by these groups comments on their own social media pages. These groups have made claim that only 8 states allow the use of hounds to hunt, a stat quoted by delegates in the subcommittee, that is simply a false statement, currently only 9 states allow hounds to be used to hunt deer but nearly every state allows the utilization of dogs to hunt other game species many not requiring an special license to do so. I ask the delegates to understand that the vast majority of the members of the hound hunting organizations are land owners as well in addition to all of the landowners who lease or allow hound hunting on their land support the tradition of hound hunting. This bill creates a permit allowing the DWR create and issue permits on a may issue criteria with visual permit requirements for hounds and vehicles. If Additional funding is needed to police game laws the bill should be amended to a license just like an archery or muzzleloading license that is a shall issue. Additionally the cost for said license should be reduced and required for all that utilize or partcipate in any type of hunting that utilizes a dog. Dogs are already required to have owner contact info on their collar and their vehicles have state issued license plates therefore marking is not necessary. Lastly the only ones who should be exempt from license purchase are those that utilize dogs to hunt on their own land. This simplifies the requirements and makes it fair for all parties. Basically if big game is harvested and checked in and the use of dogs is checked as a part of big game license registering process they should be required to have a dog hunting license or be exempt as a land owner. I hope that you find this as a reasonable comprise. Additionally there needs to be some sort of recourse for false complaints or accusations. If this bill continues as is it will create more tensions between those who utilize dogs to hunt and those who don't like the use of hunting dogs. False complaints will continue to increase cause additional hunter harassment and tension between hunters and those that oppose it. Thank you for your time. V/R, B. C. Bunch
To who ever may read this message My name is jacob austin and me and my family live thur out Amherst Nelson and big island. We have hunted coon hounds for 4 generations starting with my great grand father (van staton)to my grandmother (Betty austin) to my father (Ernest donold austin j)r to me and my brother (Matthew austin) this is a tradition that we have cherished since we were lil kids see are dad go out every night after working long hours him telling us stories about papa van with was amazed by the places he want things he got to see walking thru the nights to get to his dogs. By time we was old enough he let us go with him he grab his 4 year old male walker hounds aka storm man he was one hell of a hound but that but im getting of track but as I got older my life changed drastically mom and father got divorced and I just went into a deep state of depression thinking it was my fault and I was just ready to just leave this earth to go to a better place but no I just hooked my trailer up to my four-wheeler and loaded my dog box and hound aka Rosco p coal train a freeing walker hound and being in the woods just help me forget everything that was happening hearing the sound of him freeing in the holler of those mountains is music for a hurting soul and mind walking to the tree being excited to see what's up there is just my way of therapy for me. I like for my kids, grandkids and everyone after me to still be able to carry on this family tradition turn to running hounds or being out in nature to enjoy what the good lord has created for us inside of turning to hard drugs to make that pain go away if someone has read this is really appreciate u taking u time to read it and have a blessed day
Please understand the difference between regular plain leaf kratom and 7oh. Kratom has been around for years and years bettering peoples lives every step of the way. It wasn't until 7oh was introduced to the public where this has became a problem. To ban Kratom would be to make your constituents felons. Law abiding citizens who previously may have not been and only because of Kratom they were able to become productive members of society. And be a contributing factor. A lot of the members of the Kratom community are addicts in recovery and deal with pain daily. To take Kratom away from them leaves them without options. Medication assisted treatment like methadone or Suboxone is just another ball and chain and makes these addicts in recovery forced to make a decision to come out of recovery to find relief. Bc Kratom won't be available to them anymore if you pass this bill. Please do not make the members of your county make these decisions. Please ban 7oh but leave natural plain leaf kratom for the souls who have found a light at the end of the tunnel.
I support this bill because the warning clearly states that “this product may cause dependence and opioid like withdrawal”, and the products are moved behind the counter or into a lock case causing consumers to pause.
Here’s the Testimonial message from a concerned kratom advocate and responsible whole leaf kratom user : I have a degenerative tissue disorder that effects my joints and muscles- causing me constant pain. There is no cure, and basically all I can do is manage the pain as best I can. I use kratom to manage this never ending pain. A chronic pain that has been with me for over two decades. A chronic pain that has, at many times, brought me close to the brink of suicide. I realize that a lot of people may not understand what it’s like living with so much pain that you’d rather end your life than to continue living one more day. This has been my life for 20 years. Constant pain preventing me from living a normal life. Constant pain that keeps me from being able to pay attention and engage with life. Constant pain preventing me from being able to sleep. Pain throughout the day. Pain throughout the night. Pain first thing in the morning (if I do manage to get some sleep and wake up). I would wake up every morning hoping to God that this would be my last day. Finding kratom was the only thing that gave me any hope for the future. --------- It’s important to note that kratom does not have the same kind of potential for abuse and addiction like prescription opioids. The reason is because kratom contains balancing alkaloids- partial opioid agonists, which do not activate the opioid receptor in the same way as a traditional opioids like oxy, morph, or fent. Kratom does not cause respiratory depression the way traditional opioids do. Kratom also has a natural ceiling of effectiveness. This is because kratom contains both partial agonists as well as antagonists- the presence of which means that a user will start getting unpleasant effects (the wobbles) if they take too much, or take it too often. There is no such safety mechanism with traditional painkillers, which can lead a person to keep taking more and more until the inevitable overdose. The reason why I feel kratom in its natural form is safe, is precisely because of this built in ceiling effect- where the more you take, the less it works. Taking too much kratom just leads to diminished returns or unfavorable effects like nausea and dizzyness - none of which is life threatening, but works well enough to deter the user from over-use. In other words, kratom has a built in safety mechanism that prevents abuse. Traditional opioids do not have any such safety mechanism. I know because I have experienced both. --------- Kratom has not only improved my life and helped me to manage my chronic pain in a safe and natural way- it’s also helped me to get clean from dangerous and highly addictive prescription pills which were literally destroying my body. Kratom has also helped me kick a decades long addiction to alcohol. Not only has kratom kept me sober from alcohol for years, it has completely eliminated my desire to drink. I think that alone is a miracle. ----- I have also struggled with depression my entire life, and every single anti-depressant the doctors gave me only made me worse. None of the pharmaceutical medication helped me in any way- in fact it did the opposite and made me much more depressed and downright suicidal. Today I take kratom to manage both my physical pain and depression. Kratom is a godsend for me. It has improved my life to a degree that no pharmaceutical could ever do. ---------------
Here’s the Testimonial message from a concerned kratom advocate and responsible whole leaf kratom user : I have a degenerative tissue disorder that effects my joints and muscles- causing me constant pain. There is no cure, and basically all I can do is manage the pain as best I can. I use kratom to manage this never ending pain. A chronic pain that has been with me for over two decades. A chronic pain that has, at many times, brought me close to the brink of suicide. I realize that a lot of people may not understand what it’s like living with so much pain that you’d rather end your life than to continue living one more day. This has been my life for 20 years. Constant pain preventing me from living a normal life. Constant pain that keeps me from being able to pay attention and engage with life. Constant pain preventing me from being able to sleep. Pain throughout the day. Pain throughout the night. Pain first thing in the morning (if I do manage to get some sleep and wake up). I would wake up every morning hoping to God that this would be my last day. Finding kratom was the only thing that gave me any hope for the future. --------- It’s important to note that kratom does not have the same kind of potential for abuse and addiction like prescription opioids. The reason is because kratom contains balancing alkaloids- partial opioid agonists, which do not activate the opioid receptor in the same way as a traditional opioids like oxy, morph, or fent. Kratom does not cause respiratory depression the way traditional opioids do. Kratom also has a natural ceiling of effectiveness. This is because kratom contains both partial agonists as well as antagonists- the presence of which means that a user will start getting unpleasant effects (the wobbles) if they take too much, or take it too often. There is no such safety mechanism with traditional painkillers, which can lead a person to keep taking more and more until the inevitable overdose. The reason why I feel kratom in its natural form is safe, is precisely because of this built in ceiling effect- where the more you take, the less it works. Taking too much kratom just leads to diminished returns or unfavorable effects like nausea and dizzyness - none of which is life threatening, but works well enough to deter the user from over-use. In other words, kratom has a built in safety mechanism that prevents abuse. Traditional opioids do not have any such safety mechanism. I know because I have experienced both. --------- Kratom has not only improved my life and helped me to manage my chronic pain in a safe and natural way- it’s also helped me to get clean from dangerous and highly addictive prescription pills which were literally destroying my body. Kratom has also helped me kick a decades long addiction to alcohol. Not only has kratom kept me sober from alcohol for years, it has completely eliminated my desire to drink. I think that alone is a miracle. ----- I have also struggled with depression my entire life, and every single anti-depressant the doctors gave me only made me worse. None of the pharmaceutical medication helped me in any way- in fact it did the opposite and made me much more depressed and downright suicidal. Today I take kratom to manage both my physical pain and depression. Kratom is a godsend for me. It has improved my life to a degree that no pharmaceutical could ever do. ---------------
Please Ban this supplement it will become the next public health crisis. I lost my son to Kratom in 2024. Please share!! My name is Karen Davenport. I am a wife, and a nurse practitioner at Memorial Hospital. I’m also a grieving mother who once gave birth to three children. But on March 18, 2024, my world was shattered when my son, Matthew—one of my twins—died suddenly in his sleep. The cause of death was a lethal interaction of doctor-prescribed medications and an unregulated substance sold OTC called “Kratom”. Until that fateful day, I had never heard of Kratom, even though I work in the medical field. Matthew was a sweet, kind, and thoughtful young man who struggled with anxiety for much of his life. Tragically, his life was cut short when Kratom—purchased as casually as breath mints at a nearby convenience store—played a fatal role in his death. Please see attached file!
My name is Ashley Davidson, I'm from Hull Massachusetts and I would like to oppose a ban Kratom. I just wanted to say this plant saved my life. I have severe agoraphobia, I'm disabled and for a long time could not even leave my house for Dr appointments or dental care. One of my medications causes severe dry mouth which in turn causes damage and rapid tooth decay, not being able to get to the dentist was horrific. Since I found Kratom I have been able to get to the dentist, they were able to save my teeth after lots of work and many trips which I never could have tolerated without Kratom. No medication has worked this well and they come with scary side effects, Kratom has been gentle and I have found it to be completely safe. It has a built in ceiling effect that prevents abuse and it doesn't cause breathing depression. I am completely functional while using it, I have a chance at life again, a chance to participate and contribute, I was able to visit my elderly father which is priceless to me, thinking the plant that saved me could be banned breaks my heart and scares me. This is reefer madness all over again, there is plenty of scientific evidence backing up the safety of Kratom in its natural form, Kratom is not what people pushing for a ban say it is. This ban would literally just pry the tea from the arthritic hands of the elderly. Please have mercy and don't take away the only thing that helps so many people from all walks of life. Thank you, Ashley Davidson
I am writing to share my experience with addiction to kratom and kratom/kava mixes. Over time, I developed a dependency that led to significant health issues. When I attempted to stop using these substances, I experienced severe withdrawal symptoms. These included an inability to eat or drink, leading to a rapid weight loss of 15 pounds within a week. During the worst of my withdrawal, I sought medical help at a hospital in Rocky Mount, VA. Unfortunately, the medical staff there were unfamiliar with kratom and its effects. The proposed treatment included the administration of fentanyl, which I found alarming given my condition and the lack of understanding about kratom withdrawal. This experience has been a challenging journey, and I hope that by sharing my story, I can raise awareness about the potential dangers of kratom and the importance of proper medical knowledge and treatment for those experiencing withdrawal. It’s unfortunate that something that can do so much harm to a person is sold at gas stations and advertised as an energy drink.
I am a parent who lost a child. I believe kratom should be banned. If that option were before you today, I would support it without hesitation. HB 360 is not a ban, but I support it because doing nothing is not acceptable. This bill requires an honest warning that kratom may cause opioid-like withdrawal and moves it out of casual retail access. That matters. Parents cannot protect their children from risks they are never told about. When products with opioid-like effects are sold as “natural” without disclosure, families do not recognize dependence or withdrawal until real harm has already occurred. HB 360 does not go as far as I believe it should, but it is a necessary step toward honesty, accountability, and harm reduction. If a ban is not politically achievable, then warning families and restricting access is the minimum duty owed to parents in Virginia. Support HB 360.
We support HB 360, particularly the provisions that regulate kratom products by prohibiting sales to individuals under the age of 21 and establishing additional labeling requirements. As an organization representing pharmacists, patient safety and public health are core pillars of our profession. As pharmacists, our priority every day is to ensure the safe and appropriate use of medications and substances that affect health. Kratom acts on opioid receptors and can have unpredictable effects, including dependence and opioid-like withdrawal. Unlike FDA-regulated medications, kratom products are not standardized for dose, purity, or safety, and they often lack consistent labeling. This poses a real patient-safety challenge when individuals, or parents of minors ask for guidance. Without statutory requirements for ingredients and warning labeling, many users are unaware of what they are ingesting, and pharmacists are left without reliable information to counsel patients. HB360 sensibly prohibits the sale of kratom products to anyone younger than 21 years of age. This age threshold is consistent with other substance safety laws because: • The adolescent and young adult brain is still developing, and exposure to psychoactive substances can increase the risk of dependency and have long-term effects. • Young persons often perceive “natural” or plant-based products as inherently safe, which is not always true and creates a false sense of security that can lead to experimentation or misuse. • Restricting retail access for minors helps reduce unintentional harm and decreases the likelihood that teens will use kratom recreationally or without understanding the risks. Pharmacists frequently encounter patients (or parents) who are surprised to learn that just because a substance is marketed as “herbal” that does not mean it is benign especially for adolescents.
Dear Members of the Committee, My name is Kelli McCann. I lost my oldest child and only son Benjamin to kratom 9/12/24. He was led to believe it was natural and safe alternative to prescription pain medication to manage his pain due to psoriatic arthritis. This believe cost him his life and caused tremendous heartbreak for those of us that love him. His absence is felt everyday. I am disappointed that this legislature is unwilling to ban kratom, but am writing in support of HB360. I support it because refusing to act would be worse. This product can cause opioid-like dependence and withdrawal. That is not a theory — it is lived reality for people nationwide. Yet it is sold openly, marketed as “natural,” and labeled in a way that hides risk instead of disclosing it. That is not consumer choice. That is failure of oversight. If banning is not something you are willing to consider, then at minimum the truth must disclosed about it. HB 360 requires an opioid-like withdrawal warning and moves kratom out of casual retail access. That is not extreme. It is the bare minimum any responsible legislature should accept. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Kelli McCann (Benjamin’s mom)
I am here today in support of HB 360, speaking from a place no parent should ever have to know. My daughter, Kielee, died at just 23 years old from a mitragynine overdose. Because of her age, her death was investigated. An autopsy and toxicology report confirmed that mitragynine—the primary active compound in kratom—was the cause of her death. Kielee trusted the word “natural.” She used natural kratom powder, believing it was safe. She believed the marketing. She believed the absence of warnings meant there was little risk. If there had been clear, honest warnings that kratom can be addictive, can cause opioid-like withdrawals, and can be dangerous—or if it had been placed behind the counter—she may have stopped and thought twice. That pause could have saved her life. My daughter turned to kratom as a “safe” alternative for pain relief. She did not want to take opioids. Ironically, the substance she believed was safer is what killed her. The warning label proposed in this bill is not excessive—it is necessary. It is the kind of warning that could have changed my daughter’s decision and altered our lives forever. Kratom is becoming increasingly popular and increasingly accessible. Parents often don’t know what it is. Young people assume it is safe because it is openly sold and marketed as natural. The reality does not match the marketing. Your decision on this bill will shape how many families in your communities are protected—or left vulnerable. I know this is not an easy decision. But I know what it is like to stand in my daughter’s empty bedroom and ask why there were not stronger warnings on such a dangerous substance. I live with that question every day. I am asking you to pass HB 360 so that no other family has to learn this lesson through the loss of a child, a spouse, or a friend. Thank you for taking the time to listen—and for choosing the safety of your residents. Sincerely, Tia Rustici Kielee’s mom
I operate a Recovery community organization in Henrico County. We are seeing more and more folks come in with Kratom addiction issues. It presents like an opiate withdrawal and an opiate high. It is just common sense that if you're not gonna outlaw this awful product, that at least put it behind the counter like you would cigarettes. We need to keep this away from the kids. Can't we all just try to live in the solution? This drug will take normal people and turn them into active drug addicts just like any other street drug.
I am submitting this comment as a chronic pain patient and disability advocate with lived experience of severe medical harm, disbelief by doctors, and abandonment by the healthcare system. Years ago, I was given FDA approved medications that caused serious damage to my body. Lupron was one of them. What followed were years of worsening pain, repeated surgeries, and doctors who did not believe my pain was real. I was misdiagnosed, dismissed, and labeled instead of helped. One surgery, a botched hysterectomy that cut me from hip to hip, lasted over three hours. At one point during my medical ordeal, I was bleeding internally and left without proper care. I truly believed I was going to die. These experiences permanently changed my life. After years of failed treatments and trauma, plain leaf kratom tea became the only thing that allowed me to function and manage pain without opioids. I did not turn to kratom casually. I turned to it because the medical system had exhausted and harmed me. During my major abdominal surgery, I stopped kratom completely before the operation. After surgery, I was on IV pain medication, but it was not helping. I was groggy, disconnected, and unable to function. After two days, once I was able to tolerate something by mouth, I stopped the IV medication and drank my kratom tea. The difference was immediate. I was more lucid, my pain was better controlled, and I was able to get up and walk. The nurses were shocked. They assumed I was not taking anything at all until I explained that I had resumed my kratom tea. That experience reinforced what I already knew. Kratom helps me function without sedation, confusion, or the risks I experienced with prescription drugs. It has never intoxicated me. It has never taken my life apart. It gave me clarity and stability when nothing else did. When lawmakers consider kratom-related legislation, I ask that patient outcomes and harm reduction remain central. Many adults rely on kratom not recreationally, but as a last-resort tool after years of medical trauma, failed prescriptions, and disbelief. I am concerned about policies that could unintentionally reduce access, overregulate responsible products, or push patients back toward opioids or other medications that have already caused significant harm. People do not stop needing pain relief because access is restricted. They suffer, or they are forced into worse options. While I do not live in Virginia, I have family, close friends, and fellow advocates who do. Decisions made here affect real people I care about and will influence kratom policy far beyond state lines. Please consider the lived experiences of patients like me when evaluating kratom-related legislation. Safety matters, but access and harm reduction matter too. Thank you for listening to voices that are too often ignored.
I am a clinical pharmacist, and I support HR 360 because it exposes a known public-health risk that needs to be addressed. HR 360 provides a warning that is grounded in fact which brings awareness to potential harm. Disregard of this acknowledgement would defy the vital role of public health to protect the public from risks of kratom and that is to ensure that food, human and veterinary drugs, medical devices, and cosmetics are safe, effective, and properly labeled. Cases have been reported related to use of kratom demonstrating physical dependence with signs and symptoms of withdrawal. Public disclosure of this risk is an essential and responsible public health function. Without notification of this risk associated with kratom use places consumers at risk. People do not recognize withdrawal when it occurs. They misinterpret symptoms. They escalate use. They delay seeking medical care. These are predictable outcomes when pharmacologic risk is hidden behind marketing terms like “natural” or “wellness.” HB 360 corrects that failure without resorting to prohibition. It gives Virginians information before dependence occurs, not after. It reduces harm without inflaming backlash. It brings a product sold outside the healthcare system closer to the ethical standards expected within it. As pharmacists, we are trained to prioritize patient safety, transparency, and informed consent. Supporting HB 360 is not a political statement, it is a professional one. The warning requirement is supported by evidence, aligned with clinical reality, and represents the most responsible public-health action available in Virginia at this time. I urge support for HB 360.
Dear Committee Members, I am a parent who lost a child. I believe kratom should be banned. If that option were before you today, I would support it without hesitation. HB 360 is not a ban, but I support it because doing nothing is not acceptable. This bill requires an honest warning that kratom may cause opioid-like withdrawal and moves it out of casual retail access. That matters. Parents cannot protect their children from risks they are never told about. When products with opioid-like effects are sold as “natural” without disclosure, families do not recognize dependence or withdrawal until real harm has already occurred. HB 360 does not go as far as I believe it should, but it is a necessary step toward honesty, accountability, and harm reduction. If a ban is not politically achievable, then warning families and restricting access is the minimum duty owed to parents in Virginia. Support HB 360. Thank you Wendy Chamberlain Joseph’s mom Forever 38 Lost from mitragynine toxicity.
Hello, My name is Hilary Tesluck and I have direct lived experience with both kratom and 7oh addiction. Today, I am clean, but I will never forget the true nightmare of withdrawing from kratom and 7oh. Both things I consider to be the most difficult things I have done in my life. It is NO DIFFERENT than prescription opioid withdrawal. In fact, I find it worse. Withdrawing from kratom leaf produced a lengthy post-acute withdrawal syndrome in which I experienced profound depression for 90 days. Withdrawing from 7oh was terrifying because I did it cold turkey on my own (I didn’t have access to resources like rehab) and it was so intense I ended up going to the ER because I thought I would pass out alone in my apartment. I couldn’t walk, couldn’t shower without the risk of fainting. I thrashed day and night for six days total. It is worse than heroin withdrawal because it’s so strong. Please consider protecting further individuals in your community by placing safeguards for the sale of kratom. I did not know what I was getting myself into years ago and if I knew I would’ve never done it.
Although some argue that the recent rise in kratom addiction is driven primarily by concentrated 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH) products, as an addiciton medicine physician, I have seen a broader increase in kratom dependence that cannot be explained by 7-OH alone. Traditional kratom preparations, which contain little to no isolated 7-OH, have been associated for years with tolerance, withdrawal, and compulsive use, demonstrating that the plant’s full alkoloid profile, especially mitragynine, has inherent addictive potential. As kratom use has expanded in availability, potency, and frequency, more users are consuming it daily, escalating doses, and experiencing opioid-like dependence regardless of whether 7-OH is present in high concentrations. While 7-OH products may accelerate or intensify addiction in some users, focusing exclusively on them obscures the larger public health reality: kratom itself, particularly when marketed as “safe” or “non-addictive,” is contributing to a growing population of individuals struggling with dependence, withdrawal, and functional impairment. As an addiction medicine physician treating hundreds of patients annually at the Virginia Beach Psychiatric Center, I have been seeing an ever increasing number of people who are struggling with their use of Kratom. I would like to emphasize the reason we like this bill is because the warning clearly states that the product may cause dependence and opioid-like withdrawal. By moving the product behind the counter or into a lock case, this will allow potential consumers to pause and reflect on the potential cause for harm for these products.
Kratom has played a meaningful role in improving the quality of life for someone I love deeply who lives with severe chronic pain, depression, and anxiety. Before discovering kratom, daily life was dominated by pain, exhaustion, and a sense of hopelessness that made even simple tasks feel overwhelming. With kratom, they found a level of relief that allowed them to feel more present in their own life. Their pain became more manageable, their mood more stable, and their anxiety less consuming. It didn’t erase their challenges, but it gave them something incredibly important back: the ability to function, to engage, and to feel moments of peace and motivation again. What stands out most is the dignity it helped restore. Instead of being defined solely by pain or mental health struggles, they were able to reconnect with their interests, relationships, and sense of self. Kratom has been one part of a broader, thoughtful approach to wellness, and for our family, its impact has been profound and life-affirming.
I strongly advise you to oppose SB1396. Thank you.
We oppose bills Sb471 Sb770 Hb1396 It is a virgina heritage I have been hunting with my dogs ever since I could walk, and I want my nephews and my kids to enjoy the thangs that brought me so much joy and gave me something to look forward to every year these dogs are not just hunting dogs they are our pets and a part of my family please oppose these bills so my kids and grandkids can enjoy what I have and so many others have for generations.
Kratom has helped me so much in my life. It has helped my mental health as well as helps me physically do everything I need to do each day. I am able to keep up with my grandkids. I am able to function at my job when prior I found it extremely difficult to stay employed. I’ve been the most stable I’ve ever been in my adult life thanks to Kratom.
I've used kratom for over a decade. Kratom has been a positive and life-changing part of my wellness journey. It’s a natural plant from the coffee family that helps me manage Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, Chronic Regional Pain Syndrome, Complex Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Severe Major Depression and Panic Disorder. I receive pain relief for the chronic pain some of these cause. Kratom allows me to avoid the harsh side effects that I've experienced from prescription drugs. I learned about kratom from my brother after it got him off of heroin. It has saved my sisters life, also. They both survived fentanyl poisonings in 2016. Kratom is the reason they reached sobriety and remain sober. It prevented me from getting addicted to pills. Addiction runs in my family- it could've been me. Research from Johns Hopkins University and the University of Florida shows that kratom’s natural compounds work differently from opioids — they can relieve pain and improve mood without the dangerous risk of respiratory failure. Studies in Drug and Alcohol Dependence also found that kratom has a low potential for abuse and can even help people reduce dependence on harmful substances. Data from the CDC and the National Institute on Drug Abuse confirm that deaths linked solely to kratom are extremely rare — most cases involve other drugs or contaminants. Another concern of mine is the fact that alcohol has remained easily accessible while being responsible for tens of millions of deaths globally. These deaths have been attributable to alcohol since 2010 (very likely more than 30 million) based on the annual scales involved. Alcohol withdrawal is deadly whereas discontinuing kratom use is not. Kratom, namely plain leaf kratom is not deadly. That’s why I believe regulation, not prohibition, is the responsible way. Requiring testing and labeling so products are safe and adults can make informed choices. For me, and for millions of others, kratom has meant a better, healthier quality of life. Please listen to the science, and to the people who use it responsibly every day. Thank you for your time and consideration.
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
Comment in Support of HB 360 I am submitting this comment as a pharmacist and Virginian in support of HB 360 because it does something government is obligated to do: it tells the truth and reduces preventable harm. Kratom has been sold in Virginia without honest warnings, no plain-language disclosure of dependence, no clear acknowledgment of opioid-like withdrawal, and no risk communication consistent with what is now documented about its effects. That silence is not neutral. When risks are known and not disclosed, confusion becomes policy, and families absorb the consequences. HB 360 does not ban kratom and does not criminalize consumers. It requires an explicit warning about opioid-like effects and withdrawal, and it moves sales behind the counter so adults are informed before purchase. That is not overreach. It is baseline consumer protection. It is also important to recognize where this issue is heading. Federal scrutiny is increasing, not decreasing, driven by FDA adverse event data, CDC mortality surveillance, and poison control reports, including a documented increase in pediatric exposures. The DEA is actively reviewing a citizen petition requesting Schedule I classification, and international retail markets have already begun closing in response to similar evidence. In that context, HB 360 functions as risk containment for Virginia. If federal action occurs after more Virginians unknowingly develop dependence, the public-health, treatment, and enforcement burden will fall on the Commonwealth. Acting now, through honest warnings and controlled access, reduces that exposure rather than magnifying it. For legislators and members of the public who want to review the underlying harm data directly, FDA adverse event reports, CDC references, and poison control trends are compiled for policymakers at www.mothersagainstherbalabuse.org. The record exists. The risks are documented. What remains is the decision. HB 360 offers Virginia a responsible path forward: transparency without prohibition, action without overreach, and protection before preventable harm becomes unavoidable. I urge its passage.
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries
HB392 - Sickle cell disease education and screening program; cancer risk.
HB393 - Firefighters Cancer Screening Grant Program and Fund; established.
HB398 - Safeguarding American Veteran Empowerment Act; created, prohibited practices, penalties.
I write in opposition to HB398 (the SAVE Act). A federal district court in Louisiana recently held that a law with the same provisions contained in HB398 violate the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause and First Amendment (decision attached for your review). HB398 will incur significant litigation risk and, if passed, will be detrimental to the interests of veterans. The SAVE Act is one of several legislative initiatives across state legislatures lobbied for by the unaccredited VA claims consultant industry (i.e. “claim sharks”). Federal law requires that any individual seeking to assist veterans with preparing benefits claims must receive “accreditation” from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Because this federal prohibition does not carry a criminal penalty, claim sharks have begun to operate without accreditation. The SAVE Act attempts to normalize this practice by authorizing unaccredited claim sharks practice under state law. However, as mentioned above and discussed below, virtually identical legislation in Louisiana has been invalidated by a federal court. (Louisiana’s legislation is known as the PLUS Act.) In the attached decision, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana held that the PLUS Act violated the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause and First Amendment on the following grounds: Violation of the Supremacy Clause: “The Court thus finds that the [PLUS] Act, by placing significant restrictions on the services offered by [VA accredited attorneys and agents] and others similarly situated, sufficiently obstructs Congress’s intent that veterans have access to authorized, qualified private representatives to assist them in pursuing claims for VA benefits . . . The [PLUS] Act is preempted by its conflict with federal law.” (p. 21-2). Violation of the First Amendment: The Court held that the PLUS Act compels commercial speech by properly accredited claims agents and attorneys that could discourage veterans from employing their services. By doing so, “the [PLUS] Act violates Plaintiffs’ rights under the First Amendment and is therefore unconstitutional as applied to Plaintiffs.” (p. 17-18). Because the SAVE Act is virtually identical to the PLUS Act, there is a significant likelihood that the SAVE Act before you is unconstitutional and incurs litigation risk. The next question is whether that litigation risk is worth serving the purpose of the bill. The answer is no. Joint investigative reporting by NPR and War Horse News has shown that unaccredited claim sharks engage in unscrupulous practices to extract profit from disabled veterans. For example, one organization uses veterans' social security numbers to obtain their claim information without their knowledge to determine if they have received additional benefits and demand payment if so. As noted by Virginia’s Joint Leadership Council of Veterans Service Organizations, the best alternative to this legislation is to simply prohibit unaccredited claims practice. Several states, including Utah, Illinois, and New York have taken this approach. Delegate Cheryl Laufer’s HB1268 would have done so but was regrettably continued until 2027. In short, the SAVE Act is likely to be invalidated by a federal court and would ultimately expose disabled veterans to proven predatory actors. HB398 should be defeated.
Statement in Opposition to HB 398
My name is Donyale Hall. I am a U.S. Air Force Gulf War–era disabled veteran, a military mother, and a Delaware councilwoman. I strongly support HB 398. My father grew up in rural Floyd County, Virginia, joined the Air Force at 18, and served this country for 26 years, retiring as a master sergeant. After his service, he spent years trying to secure the VA disability benefits he earned. He never succeeded. He passed away while still fighting the system. That experience is not unique. The VA claims process is complex and unforgiving. A single mistake can lead to denial, and appeals can take years. Veterans know this. That is why many seek professional help to get their claims right the first time. HB 398 protects veterans’ right to choose who helps them. Professional benefits consultants often provide critical assistance, especially for disabled, rural, and elderly veterans who cannot navigate the system alone. Many of these professionals are veterans themselves, trained to guide others through a high-stakes process. Eliminating these options does not protect veterans. It leaves them with fewer resources, longer delays, and higher denial rates. Volunteers and VSOs do important work, but they are often overburdened and not accessible to every veteran who needs help. HB 398 takes the right approach. It preserves access, respects veteran autonomy, and allows accountability without punishing veterans who simply want help securing the benefits they earned. Virginia should not make the VA claims process harder for veterans. HB 398 makes it fairer. I respectfully urge your support.
Donyale Hall is a businesswoman, mother and a Gulf War Era Veteran of the United States Air Force. She moved to Dover in 1973, when her father was assigned to Dover Air Force Base. Donyale is a 1987 graduate of Caesar Rodney High School and has raised her own family here. Of her ten children, five are CR graduates. Three are graduates of the Early College High School at Delaware State University. The youngest two are currently middle schoolers. Two sons proudly carry on the family legacy of military service as members of the United States Air Force and Navy. As a child, Donyale had dreams of becoming an architect. The idea of designing and building things has always had great appeal to her. Although her education and career path took Donyale in an entirely different direction, her creative and problem-solving approach to life served her well, “building” in other meaningful ways.
I am writing to discuss HB 398 the claim sharks bill. Many politicians in public proudly proclaim how much they love veterans, and how they would do anything for our beloved veterans. Your job as legislators is to protect those who are unable to protect themselves and look out for the best interest's of your constituents. This is a time for you to prove that your words are truly actionable and not just words. Claim sharks like their compadres in the ocean, are predators. They prey on the weak and the vulnerable. Many veterans do not have the ability to understand and navigate the complex VA disability system. It is confusing and some cases contradictory. That is why the state of Virginia and national veterans organizations have accredited claims professional who have the ability and training to navigate this system for the veteran and do not charge a fee for their services. To allow claim sharks to feast on veterans who believe they have no choice to pay absurd sums and surrender hard earned relief for injuries received in war, are not only cowardly, but a stain on our state for allowing it to happen. If you truly care about veterans and are not just posturing for votes, you will ban claim sharks in Virginia and do your duty to protect those who need protecting. Thank you for your time and consideration on this matter. LTC(R) Mark P. Maggio SR Vice Commander, Dept of Virginia Veterans of Foreign Wars.
I rise against HB 398. Passing this bill, will go against everything we represent as a Veteran Service Organization, who Look out for Veterans, and their Families. Virginia’s veterans have long relied on accredited Veterans Service Organizations (VSOs) to assist them in navigating the complex landscape of VA claims and benefits. These organizations, staffed by trained, accredited representatives, provide their services at no cost to the veteran. Their mission is rooted in advocacy, accuracy, and protection of veterans’ rights. HB-398 in the Commonwealth has raised serious concerns among veteran advocates, service organizations, and community leaders. The bill in question opens the door for unaccredited, for‑profit companies, often referred to as claim sharks, to operate more freely in Virginia. These companies charge veterans substantial fees to access services that are otherwise free and federally protected. Unaccredited Actors Undermine Federal Protections. Federal law explicitly limits who may legally assist veterans with filing, preparing, or managing VA claims. Accreditation exists to ensure veterans receive qualified, ethical, and regulated representation. Unaccredited entities bypass these safeguards, creating a system where veterans may unknowingly entrust their benefits to individuals or companies without oversight, accountability, or standards of care. Veterans Could Lose $7,500–$20,000 in Earned Benefits. VSOs provide representation at no cost. Claim sharks, by contrast, typically charge a percentage of a veteran’s past‑due benefits, often amounting to $7,500 to $20,000, money that rightfully belongs to the veteran. These fees can cause severe financial strain, especially for veterans with disabilities or those on fixed incomes. Misrepresentation Risks Are High. VSOs undergo rigorous training and are held to strict federal standards. Where in contrast for‑profit entities: Are not accredited, are not recognized by the VA, often use misleading marketing and frequently provide inaccurate or incomplete claims guidance. Virginia is home to one of the largest concentrations of veterans in the country, including tens of thousands in the Hampton Roads region. Any legislation that eases access for unregulated companies poses a disproportionate risk to a population that already faces unique bureaucratic and health‑related challenges. Local VSOs fear that the bill inadvertently legitimizes companies that exploit veterans financially, provide substandard guidance, and erode the integrity of the accredited claims process. Veteran leaders have voiced concern that many service members may not realize they are paying for something they can receive, legally and correctly, for free. Virginia’s veterans deserve legislation that strengthens, not weakens, the systems in place to safeguard their benefits. Policymakers, veterans, and community organizations should work together to: promote accredited VSOs and educate veterans about free resources, combat deceptive practices by for‑profit claims companies, ensure state laws do not contradict federal veteran protections, and advocate for strict standards to prevent exploitation. Protecting veterans means ensuring they are not financially preyed upon while seeking the benefits they earned through service to our country. Thank you Troy Wagers Commander Dept. Of Virginia Dist 2
HB406 - Workers' compensation; disability of law-enforcement office, spousal wage replacement, report.
Chairman Wesley G. Marshall, Virginia Workers' Compensation Commission. I am available as a resource on any questions. The VWC does not have a position on this Bill. It will not create any adverse administrative impact.
I am Commissioner Rapaport available remotely should there be any questions.
HB410 - School boards; participation in SAT School Day program required, student participation.
Dear Members of the Virginia Legislative Committee, I am writing to express my opposition to HB 410, which mandates that all school boards participate in the SAT School Day program and requires student participation. As a concerned citizen and parent of two high school students in Virginia, I believe this bill, while well-intentioned, imposes unnecessary burdens on families and schools, and I respectfully urge you to reconsider its passage. One significant concern with HB 410 is the lack of flexibility it offers to school boards and families. By mandating participation in the SAT School Day program, the bill disregards the diverse needs of students across the state. Not all students plan to attend college, and many may pursue vocational training or other paths where the SAT is irrelevant. Forcing every student to participate in this program could divert resources and time from other educational priorities tailored to their individual goals. Additionally, the mandatory nature of the bill overlooks the financial and logistical challenges some families face. For instance, while the program may cover testing fees for some, it does not account for indirect costs such as transportation or time away from work for parents who must support their children on testing day. These burdens could disproportionately affect low-income families, creating inequities rather than resolving them. From a personal perspective, as a parent, I worry about the added stress this mandate places on my children. My daughter, who is already navigating a rigorous academic schedule, feels overwhelmed by standardized testing and would benefit more from personalized college preparation or career counseling. My son, who is considering a trade career, sees little value in the SAT, yet under HB 410, he would be required to participate. This one-size-fits-all approach does not account for their unique aspirations and could detract from their ability to focus on relevant opportunities. I believe our schools should prioritize flexibility to support each student’s path, rather than enforcing a uniform testing requirement that may not serve all. In conclusion, I respectfully oppose HB 410 due to its lack of adaptability for diverse student needs and the potential financial and emotional strain it places on families like mine. I believe Virginia’s education system thrives when it empowers local school boards and parents to make decisions that best fit their communities and children. Thank you for considering my perspective and for your dedication to shaping policies that impact our students’ futures.
I am writing to express my opposition to HB 410, which mandates participation in the SAT School Day program for all school boards and requires student involvement in this initiative. As a concerned citizen and parent of school-aged children in Virginia, I believe this bill, while well-intentioned, imposes unnecessary burdens on our schools and students, and I respectfully urge you to reconsider its passage. First, HB 410 mandates participation without accounting for the diverse needs and resources of individual school districts. Many schools, particularly in rural or underfunded areas, may lack the infrastructure, staff, or funding to effectively implement such a program. This one-size-fits-all approach risks placing an undue strain on already stretched budgets and personnel, potentially diverting resources from other critical educational priorities such as teacher support or extracurricular programs. Schools should have the flexibility to determine whether such a program aligns with their unique circumstances and student needs. Second, requiring student participation raises significant concerns about equity and student well-being. Not all students are prepared for or interested in taking the SAT during a designated school day, and mandating their involvement could create unnecessary stress or anxiety, particularly for those who may not plan to attend a four-year college or who require accommodations. This compulsory aspect of HB 410 overlooks the importance of personalized educational pathways and could inadvertently disadvantage students who thrive in alternative assessments or career-focused programs. As a parent, I am deeply invested in ensuring that our education system supports every child’s individual potential. My own children attend a Virginia public school where resources are often limited, and I worry that the additional burden of implementing a mandatory SAT School Day program could detract from the tailored support they need to succeed. I want to see policies that empower local school boards to make decisions in the best interest of their communities, rather than imposing blanket requirements that may not fit every context. Furthermore, I am concerned about the added pressure this mandate could place on students like mine, who deserve the freedom to pursue their education without the stress of a one-size-fits-all testing requirement. In conclusion, I respectfully oppose HB 410 due to its lack of flexibility for school boards and its potential to burden students unfairly. I believe Virginia’s education system will better serve our communities by prioritizing local decision-making and student-centered policies. Thank you for considering my perspective on this important matter.
HB430 - New College Institute; membership and composition of board of directors.
Please pass this important bill
HB471 - Higher ed. institutions, public; financial aid for students with intellectual disabilities, etc.
HB490 - Health insurance; coverage for early refills prescription eye drops.
Dear Delegates, My name is Dr. John McAllister, and I am an ophthalmologist and president of the largest physician-owned ophthalmology practice in northern Virginia. We serve tens of thousands of Virginian eye patients. I also currently serve as the president of the Virginia Society of Eye Physicians and Surgeons and sit on the board of the Northern Virginia Academy of Ophthalmology. I am writing to express my full support for House Bill 490 (Hope), which is currently before Labor & Commerce Subcommittee #1. This is a frequent scenario we see regularly: a patient on a fixed income with glaucoma--a potentially blinding disease that requires twice daily administration of eyedrop medication in lower eye pressure. Their arthritis makes it difficult to get the drops in and they use more than one drop sometimes. After 23 days, they run out of this vision-saving medication. They go to get a refill, but it is denied by their insurance because they are requesting this medication too early. They have to wait another week and don't get their vision-saving medication during this time, or they call us. To prevent gaps in care, our staff and physicians almost always get involved, and we send a new prescription, resetting the time line. This wastes the patient's time, our time and resources, and threatens proper vision-saving care. Enter: HB 490. This bill addresses this practical and common problem in eye care: patients running out of prescribed eye drops before their refill date. When this happens, patients are often forced to choose between going without necessary medication or paying the full out‑of‑pocket cost for a replacement bottle. This issue disproportionately affects older adults and patients with conditions such as Parkinson’s disease, tremors, or a prior stroke. Many of these patients have insurance plans regulated by the Commonwealth. Even when used exactly as directed, it is common for drops to miss the eye or for more medication than intended to be dispensed. Bottle design — including size, rigidity, and flow‑control tips — can further contribute to unintentional overuse. HB 490 offers a reasonable, targeted solution that ensures continuity of care and reduces unnecessary administrative burden for both patients and physicians. It allows us to focus on delivering appropriate medical care rather than navigating avoidable coverage gaps. A budgetary projection was made, estimating an impact, but it does not take into account the reality that almost all of these prescriptions are being re-sent by the physicians already. There should be virtually no financial impact, because these bottles are being dispensed early, but only after a new prescription is written. This bill protects patients, it makes proper care more convenient for them, and it allows us as physicians and our staff to spend more time actually caring for patients, rather than jumping through arbitrary hoops to get our patients the proper care they need and deserve. I respectfully ask for your support of HB 490. Thank you for your time and consideration. I would be glad to serve as a resource if you have any questions. Sincerely, John T. McAllister, M.D. President, Northern Virginia Ophthalmology Associates 6565 Arlington Blvd #250 Falls Church, VA 22042 703-534-3900 (o) 703-536-3729 (f) www.nvoaeyes.com
HB560 - Administrative Process Act; appeals of case decisions regarding benefits sought, limitations.
Object to all said bills and any casios developments.
HB569 - Public works contracts; prevailing wage rate, definitions, civil penalty.
Respected Delegates, Thank you for your time today. I am submitting comment on HB 569 Public works contracts; localities to ensure bid specifications are prevailing wage rate. I am Director of Community Development for the City of Buena Vista, one of the state’s smallest cities. I routinely work with grants for construction and public works as defined in this bill. At a time when Buena Vista’s infrastructure is in desperate need of deferred maintenance and reconstruction, and construction costs have increased far faster than inflation, this proposal will significantly drive up costs for essential public works. It burdens construction projects with unrelated socio-economic policy goals, ballooning the cost to our taxpayers of actually getting things done. The requirements of the bill will do two things: increase costs and risks for contractors (employers), and increase the costs and risks for local governments. Costs and risks for contractors: • Direct administrative cost to contractors is added to bottom line of bid, as well as cost of liability risk for noncompliance • Some contractors do not have experience or capacity to handle prevailing wage compliance, resulting in fewer bidders for City projects • § 2.2-4321.3 paragraph H appears to require all subcontractors be registered with eVA, which adds to the complexity and cost for primes • § 2.2-4321.3 paragraph K requires that all employees working on a public contract have at least 4 years of work experience, or be part of a registered apprenticeship. How is this realistic? This penalizes employers and it penalizes young workers trying to enter the field who are not part of a registered apprenticeship. Costs and risks for localities: • Direct administrative cost of more complex procurement documents and process, including wage determinations, and auditing contracted employers. The City of Buena Vista does not currently have staff who are trained in Davis-Bacon wage rule compliance, nor do we have staff with time to perform this compliance work. • Fewer bidders for projects. Buena Vista has direct experience on several contracts within the last 5 years – Federal contracting provisions like Davis-Bacon have driven away contractors interested in performing work and measurably increased the cost of awarded contract. • The City bears some liability for improperly advertised or non-compliant projects I urge Committee members to reject this bill entirely. Thank you.
HB605 - Nursing facilities; Joint Commission on Health Care shall evaluate workforce.
These should be basic right standards. These cause less trauma, less injuries, deaths, and for a better society
HB613 - Teacher Recruitment and Retention Mentorship Pilot Program; established, report, sunset.
Please pass this important bill
HB674 - Department of Health; collection and publication of food insecurity information.
HB677 - Residential property owners; insurance policies, roofing services by contractors.
HB717 - Nursing homes; application to Commissioner of Health for change of operator license, civil penalty.
HB736 - Health insurance; required provisions regarding prior authorization for prescription drugs.
HB765 - Rental home marketplace guarantees; transactions involving advertisement, sale, etc., penalty.
HB830 - Pharmacy benefits managers; requirements, scope, report.
HB850 - VA Public Procurement Act; additional public works contract requirements, delayed effective date.
Object to all said bills and any casios developments.
HB884 - Electric utilities; Percentage of Income Payment Program, eligibility, delayed effective date.
HB884 - Electric utilities and licensed suppliers of electricity; transparency around votes and positions with regional transmission entities. I support this bill. There is most definitely a need for transparency around how our utilities are voting at the RTO. 3 years ago, my husband and I co-founded an organization to object to 5 data centers in our village of Catlett. I am completely disappointed that up until this point, we do not have transparency !
HB897 - Retail Sales and Use Tax; exemption for data centers, delayed effective date.
HB 1135, HB 1351, HB 188, HB 243, HB 334, HB 341, HB 378, hb 550, HB 557, HB 563, HB 720, HB 784, HB 897, HB 919, HB 946, HB 959, HB 961, HB 978, SB 400, SB 763. I oppose all of these bills.
Chair Hernandez, The Loudoun County Chamber of Commerce supports the following bills: HB1135 HB1133 HB946 HB504 The Loudoun County Chamber of Commerce opposes the following bill: - HB897 Thank you for your time. Kind Regards, Theo Stamatis Government Relations Manager Loudoun County Chamber of Commerce 703.314.3519 tstamatis@loudounchamber.org
I'm Nathan Soules, a founding member of Zero Carbon Virginia, and I live in Leesburg, VA. ZCV supports HB897, HB1132, and HB1133. The growing impact of data centers on our grid is too large to ignore. As the JLARC study on data centers found, it would be “very difficult” to build enough electric infrastructure to support unconstrained demand for data centers. HB897 leverages the tax exemption given to data centers to incentivize use of clean energy. Replacing diesel and gas generators with cleaner alternatives reduces greenhouse gas emissions and local impacts on noise and air quality. Requiring purchase of RECs helps Virginia stay on track with the goals of the VCEA’s RPS. Efficiency standards will help reduce electricity demand. Last year, many of the clean energy incentives from the Inflation Reduction Act were rolled back. HB1132 and HB1133 both help to mitigate the loss of those federal incentives. This helps Virginia continue to meet its VCEA targets and preserve jobs in the growing solar and energy storage industries. Investment in these low cost technologies will ultimately lower costs for rate payers. Residential solar and energy storage can reduce the need for additional electric transmission and generation, particularly if coordinated with a virtual power plant. Utility-scale solar and energy storage are critical for the transition away from fossil fuel generation.
My name is Gem Bingol, I live in Leesburg and I support HB641 and HB897 and ask for your support as well. Thank you.
Data centers have taken extensive advantage of the sales and use tax exemption. We can’t afford to keep subsidizing them as they use up our power and water. This bill requires the data centers to give something back and add to the grid to get the tax credit. There are multiple technologies available to these data centers, including energy storage and renewables, even storage of biofuels, which is not fossil carbon. This will help stop the tax giveaway and benefit all Virginia families
HB931 - Recovery residences; regulations.
Dear Delegate Simon, My name is Kayla McCue, and I am a Registered Peer Recovery Specialist (RPRS) working directly with individuals in substance use recovery in Henrico County. I am writing to respectfully urge your support for people in recovery who rely on medical cannabis as part of their treatment and stabilization, particularly those living in recovery housing. Recovery is not one-size-fits-all. There are multiple pathways to recovery and multiple forms of Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT), including methadone, buprenorphine, and medical cannabis. What works for one person may not work for another, and recovery outcomes improve when individuals are allowed to pursue the pathway that best supports their stability and health. Who are we, as policymakers or providers, to choose which legitimate, physician-guided treatment is acceptable for someone else’s recovery? Medical cannabis should be approached through the same evidence-based, harm-reduction lens as other MAT options. Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully, Kayla McCue Registered Peer Recovery Specialist (RPRS)
Please amend this bill to allow medical marijuana. This bill will force addicts into homelessness's or back on medication they are trying to stay away from
My name is Jeremy Tillem founder of GreenhouseRVA -A cannabis inclusive recovery organization located in Richmond. Im asking for a critical amendment to HB931 : To permit medical cannabis in certified recovery residences. Without it, this bill forces Virginians in recovery to choose between their doctor-prescribed medicine and stable housing- a choice that could derail lives and exacerbate our states addiction crisis. Imagine a place where recovery thrives not despite medical cannabis, but because of it. At GreenhouseRVA, we house 25 residents with a growing waiting list. Calls flood in daily from desperate individual's thrilled by our innovative model: A structured environment that integrates medical cannabis to manage chronic pain, anxiety, PTSD and more. We enforce random drug tests, strict curfews, mandatory meetings and weekly chores to foster accountability. Our residents all range from participating in Partial Hospitalization or Intensive Outpatient programs, others holding full-time jobs and rebuilding their futures. Astonishingly, 85% stay over 8 months, a threshold that dramatically boosts long term-term sobriety rates. Every resident holds a medical cannabis card, mostly using it as a safer alternative from more harmful pharmaceuticals. The science is undeniable. Medical cannabis reduces anxiety, depression, chronic pain and insomnia with fewer side effects than traditional pharmaceuticals. It slashes opioid use from 40-60% in chronic pain patients, curbing cravings, withdrawal symptoms, lower relapse rates and improves treatment-retention-acting as a harm reduction lifeline without the addiction potential of harder drugs. Studies even show medical cannabis users in treatment fair equal to or better than non-users in key outcomes like completion rates and reduced criminal involvement. 70% of our residents are involved with Henrico probation-not court ordered, but voluntarily choosing us because it works. Just last week, Clint, a greenhouse participant, completed his probation officially and has been working full time as a welder. Shout out to Clint! Yet probation officers threatened to bar residents here without HB931 certification, even when medical cannabis aligns with their conditions. This arbitrary hurdle punishes success and ignores Virginias own medical cannabis program. Without this amendment, HB931's blanket marijuana ban in certified homes would devastate programs like ours, potentially shutting the doors and leaving 25 people homeless- rippling to hundreds or thousands statewide. Why force Virginians into abstinence-only models that fail many, when inclusive approaches save lives? Even the National Alliance for recovery residences endorses policies allowing medical cannabis with safeguards for states like Pennsylvania and Ohio. Virginia can join them, aligning with our progressive cannabis laws to reduce opioid dependence and harm reduction recovery. On behalf of medical cannabis patients fighting addiction without resorting to deadly alternatives, I implore you: Amend HB931. Build an inclusive system that empowers, not excludes. The lives of countless Virginias depend on it. www.pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2848643 www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2019/07/16/cannabis-treatment-counters-addiction-first-study-of-its-kind.html www.recoveryreview.blog/2025/12/02/.research-article-review-medical-cannabis-for-addiction-treatment-in-a-residential-sud-setting
Please add an amendment to be inclusive of medical cannabis; it is the fastest-growing pathway to recovery in the U.S. I opened my first recovery house in 1985 and have opened or provided technical assistance to over 500 recovery houses in Virginia and nationwide. I am the co-founder of VARR and McShin, I established 4 Oxford homes in the late 80's and early 90's. I'm a past board member of SAARA. . I have a cannabis healthcare certification from Syracuse University. Also, over 43 years clean and sober. I am currently a national harm reduction advocate.I say these things to verify the depths of my institutional knowledge on this matter. The point is, medical cannabis recovery homes are real and work as well as most any other recovery residences. Harm reduction, including harm reduction recovery residences, is the future. Addiction still has a 97% reoccurance rate. Where do they go? I'm sure banning medical cannabis in this bill is an unintentional error. Please amend it. I only support this bill with the requested amendment. PS, how will we continue to get good data and participate in clinical and scientific studies if they are outlawed? It makes no sense why discrimination is in this bill.
I am writing in my comments today as a resident in Richmond City that has seen a vary large number of recovery homes enter our very small neighborhood footprint (16 homes within our three block boundary which includes a school zone). While this bill does have my support with regard to regulations and the sharing of data with the public, elements of concern remain unaddressed. For example, public access to a full listing of certified and conditionally certified residence addresses to be able to identify them accordingly within the neighborhood. Many of the recovery residences in my area are being operated out of properties that are owned by companies and are rented out to recovery management teams. This obscures the facilities and a list of those certified or conditionally certified would help with zoning enforcement of any residences that are operating outside of this framework. In addition, stipulating a length of time required for conditionally certified residences to reach certification or face rescinding of said conditional certification. Generally speaking, there is a lack of enforcement or penalty language for residences that do not comply with the regulations stipulated in the bill or fail re-certification. I ask that the committee consider these additional points either in this bill or a future bill. I reiterate my overall support for HB931 which will improve the safety of recovery residents, begin an oversight process, and close loopholes that have allowed for the exploitation of these residences for profit. Thank you.
HB934 - Alcoholic beverage control; distillers licensees as agents of Board, sale of alcoholic beverages.
HB938 - Publicly owned treatment works; monitoring of PFAS.
Hello Delegates, I am writing in opposition of HB1396. This bill had been brought fourth by landowners groups that falsely claim to represent and maximize property owners rights when in fact they are property owners that want to end the tradition of hound hunting. This is proven by these groups comments on their own social media pages. These groups have made claim that only 8 states allow the use of hounds to hunt, a stat quoted by delegates in the subcommittee, that is simply a false statement, currently only 9 states allow hounds to be used to hunt deer but nearly every state allows the utilization of dogs to hunt other game species many not requiring an special license to do so. I ask the delegates to understand that the vast majority of the members of the hound hunting organizations are land owners as well in addition to all of the landowners who lease or allow hound hunting on their land support the tradition of hound hunting. This bill creates a permit allowing the DWR create and issue permits on a may issue criteria with visual permit requirements for hounds and vehicles. If Additional funding is needed to police game laws the bill should be amended to a license just like an archery or muzzleloading license that is a shall issue. Additionally the cost for said license should be reduced and required for all that utilize or partcipate in any type of hunting that utilizes a dog. Dogs are already required to have owner contact info on their collar and their vehicles have state issued license plates therefore marking is not necessary. Lastly the only ones who should be exempt from license purchase are those that utilize dogs to hunt on their own land. This simplifies the requirements and makes it fair for all parties. Basically if big game is harvested and checked in and the use of dogs is checked as a part of big game license registering process they should be required to have a dog hunting license or be exempt as a land owner. I hope that you find this as a reasonable comprise. Additionally there needs to be some sort of recourse for false complaints or accusations. If this bill continues as is it will create more tensions between those who utilize dogs to hunt and those who don't like the use of hunting dogs. False complaints will continue to increase cause additional hunter harassment and tension between hunters and those that oppose it. Thank you for your time. V/R, B. C. Bunch
I strongly support these bills that will increase regulation and oversight for PFAS manufacturing facilities, use of biosolids and treated effluent on agricultural land, set limits for allowable concentrations of PFAS compounds in wastewater, and allow jurisdictions to impose limits and regulate practices relevant to PFAS contamination. These bills are needed to address the very serious issue of PFAS contamination, which is present even in rural areas of Virginia and is an enormous threat to our health and our water supplies.
Seven generations for the future
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries
Please vote YES on this.
HB1002 - Utilities, certain; notice procedures for nonpayment.
SUPPORT HB1002 ensures that vulnerable populations are not left without essential services during times of need and emergencies by prohibiting utility disconnections due to nonpayment . Requiring utilities to provide notices in multiple languages also enhances accessibility and ensures that all customers are properly informed of assistance and energy savings programs availability.
HB1046 - Virginia Public Procurement Act; additional public works contract requirements.
HB1085 - New Economy Workforce Credential Grant Program; eligible institutions.
HB1121 - Precious metals commodities and virtual currency; investment of public funds.
HB1182 - Health insurance; coverage for contraceptive drugs & devices, including over-the-counter.
The League of Women Voters of Virginia supports HB 1182. Contraception is an integral part of comprehensive health care, including - but going far beyond - pregnancy prevention. Accessible contraception is critical for a range of healthcare needs in addition to pregnancy prevention such as hormonal regulation, endometriosis, uterine fibroids and ovarian cysts to name just a few. We believe that contraceptives should be accessible to all. Eliminating burdensome co-pays, cost-sharing, reimbursement requirements and coverage delays would decrease barriers to utilization of contraceptives and increase reproductive health equity in Virginia. HB 1182 would enhance access to this essential care, and we urge you to support it.
HB1207 - Paid family & med. leave insurance program; definitions, notice requirements, civil action, report.
My name is Chrischa Ives, and I'm the incredibly proud mother of my daughter, Gabrielle Aldea, who was born with Hardikar Syndrome. Hardikar is so rare that very few doctors even know of its existence, but, in short, it's a syndrome that affects the entire midline of a person's body. Gabrielle had, among other things, malrotation of the intestines, a bladder the size of a thimble which necessitated the creation and care of a neobladder, hydronephrosis, liver issues so severe that she received a liver transplant at age 2, coarctation of the aorta, a bilateral cleft lip and palate, and an aneurysm in the base of her brain. After a courageous battle, Gabby passed away in 2020 at the age of 21. Parenting, in general, requires providing another human an extreme amount of time and care. Parenting a medically-fragile child means offering even more of those things while learning to handle the unexpected. When you're a single parent of a medically-fragile child, the caregiver for another adult, or trying to deal with a medical condition of your own, life gets unbelievably complicated. When Gabrielle was born, she was so sick that I was unable to return to work. When I felt able to return to work as Gabby’s condition stabilized I found that despite my skills and qualifications, I was denied employment when I told potential workplaces about my daughter and her medical needs. There were times when my schedule could be consistent, but there were also times I'd need to be off to take her to appointments or to stay with her when she was sick. Despite my qualifications and a proven commitment to go above and beyond what was asked of me from a job, no employer was willing or able to hire me because of the time off I'd need. If I had had guaranteed access to paid family and medical leave, employers would have had certainty of me as an employee, and I would have had the ability to earn a living while taking care of my daughter. My story is unfortunately not unique, too many families across the country and the Commonwealth have experienced similar struggles. The current system is pushing caregivers, particularly women, out of the workforce. Paid leave for all means care for all. It means caring for each other in our times of need. And it means the world to individuals and families who go without it every day in one of the wealthiest countries in the world. It's time to do better. I am calling on members of the General Assembly to support HB 1270 so no other parent has to make the sacrifices I made.
Chairman, members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony in support of House Bill 1207. I serve as Virginia Director for CASA, an immigrant rights organization working with Virginia's construction workers, restaurant employees, home health aides, and service workers. I witness daily the impossible choices families face without paid leave. Last year, Maria, a Northern Virginia housekeeper, faced a devastating choice when her mother suffered a stroke: care for her mother or keep working to pay rent. She chose her mother and lost her job within a week. By the time her mother stabilized, Maria was three months behind on rent and faced eviction. This is not isolated—this is reality for hundreds of thousands of Virginia families. Only 27% of workers in the lowest wage quartile have access to paid family leave, compared to 58% in the highest quartile. The families who can least afford to lose income have no safety net. For immigrant families, language barriers, immigration status concerns, and cultural caregiving expectations make this crisis even more severe. Without paid leave, construction workers return to physically demanding jobs before injuries heal, risking permanent disability. Parents managing chronic conditions delay medical care, leading to complications and higher healthcare costs. Domestic violence survivors cannot afford to miss work to seek safety. Thousands of parents return to work days after childbirth because they cannot afford to stay home longer. HB1207 addresses these crises while supporting employers. The fair contribution structure includes special provisions for small businesses. Studies show paid leave programs improve employee retention while reducing costly turnover. Twelve states and DC have enacted these programs successfully—they work. For working families, paid leave means a new mother can bond with her baby without fearing eviction. A son can care for his dying father without losing his job. A survivor can seek safety without choosing between protection and poverty. This is dignity. This is economic security. I urge this Committee to advance HB1207 and give all Virginia families the paid leave they need and deserve. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully submitted, Luis Aguilar Virginia Director, CASA
This written testimony is hereby submitted in favor/support of HB1207 to implement a paid family medical leave program in the Commonwealth.
Voices for Virginia strongly supports the establishment of a comprehensive paid family and medical leave program in the Commonwealth. Too many Virginians are forced to choose between caring for a new child, a seriously ill loved one, or their own health and maintaining a paycheck—an impossible choice that disproportionately harms women, low-wage workers, and caregivers. Paid family and medical leave improves health outcomes, strengthens workforce participation, and benefits employers by reducing turnover and increasing retention. A statewide program would promote economic stability, support small businesses through a shared system, and ensure workers can meet family and medical needs without financial hardship. Voices for Virginia urges policymakers to advance a strong, equitable paid family and medical leave program that supports workers, families, and Virginia’s economy.
Voices for Virginia strongly supports the establishment of a comprehensive paid family and medical leave program in the Commonwealth. Too many Virginians are forced to choose between caring for a new child, a seriously ill loved one, or their own health and maintaining a paycheck—an impossible choice that disproportionately harms women, low-wage workers, and caregivers. Paid family and medical leave improves health outcomes, strengthens workforce participation, and benefits employers by reducing turnover and increasing retention. A statewide program would promote economic stability, support small businesses through a shared system, and ensure workers can meet family and medical needs without financial hardship. Voices for Virginia urges policymakers to advance a strong, equitable paid family and medical leave program that supports workers, families, and Virginia’s economy.
The National Partnership for Women & Families appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony in support of HB 1207. This bill would help keep families from deciding between their paycheck or caring for themselves and their loved ones. We respectfully urge a favorable report on the bill.
(see attached)
HB1231 - Commonwealth Aviation Fund; changes allocation amounts.
On behalf of the Virginia Airport Operators Council (VAOC), which proudly represents the 66 public-use airports across the Commonwealth. Virginia’s airports are critical economic gateways, providing safe, secure, and efficient access to both our largest cities and our smallest communities. The VAOC is committed to ensuring that Virginia’s airport system remains commercially healthy and continues to safely serve the flying public. The VAOC strongly supports HB1231. This legislation makes permanent the improvements adopted in the last budget that significantly enhanced the administration of the Commonwealth Aviation Fund. The fund is vital to Virginia’s airport system, and its benefits to the Commonwealth have been substantial. As demonstrated in the Virginia Department of Aviation’s report, these changes have benefited airports statewide in a fair and equitable manner, while positioning the Commonwealth to remain responsive to the growing and evolving needs of its airports. We respectfully urge your favorable consideration and support of HB1231, and we look forward to its passage. Thank you for your time and consideration
HB1245 - Virginia Health Care Fund; additional funding and uses.
I am in full support of HB 1245 - a bill that ensures healthcare access for marginalized and Queer communities in Virginia stay protected. It should be goal of all governments to protect their people, and this bill diverts funding to do just that. Denying this bill is saying that the health of Virginians is not a priority for the House or GA as a whole. Especially with attacks and cuts at the federal level, state-level support and funding is needed now more than ever. I would not be alive today if community-based resources did not offer me the counseling and care I needed in high school! 1,000s of Virginians will die if their essential healthcare is cut by federal attacks while Virginia does nothing.
Virginia Student Power Network strongly supports HB1245. Urgent action is needed to stabilize existing providers, keeping clinics open and preventing patients from losing care mid-treatment. Virginia’s care networks dismantled by federal pressure must be rebuilt. Grants would expand access by supporting new clinics (brick-and-mortar, mobile, or innovative models), training and credentialing new clinicians, and supporting culturally competent, evidence-based care statewide. Virginia's youth, particularly gender expansive youth, must have pathways to care. This bill is a common sense measure to fill the gap left by the removal of federal funding for these critical services.
I don't have much faith in electoral politics, and I've never submitted a written comment before, but here goes. I've lived in Virginia all my life and I don't intend for that to change. However, as a trans woman, my survival is dependent on having access to gender affirming care. In 2020, After 25 years of suicidal ideation and severe depression, it became clear to me (and the mental health professionals in my life) that either I accept myself as the one thing I was always taught was the worst thing you could be, transgender, and pursue gender affirming care, or I wouldn't make it to my next birthday. When I say that gender affirming care saved my life, it's not hyperbole. Weeks before I started HRT I found myself in the middle of the road in front of my house, looking at an oncoming tractor trailer, thinking "what if I just didn't move?" If my dog hadn't started barking from my yard and snapped me out of it, I don't know if I'd be writing this today. I'm not going to throw numbers at you from studies you'll likely never read, because I'm sure you've heard them all by now. What I will leave you with is a phrase that has become very common within trans circles in the face of legislative and medical discrimination: "death before detransition." For so many of us, its not even a choice anymore. By allocating money for medical care for populations protected by the Virginia Human Rights Act, HB1245 will save lives. There's no question about that. If you think the lives of Virginians "protected" under the VHRA are worth saving, I urge you to support this bill. If not, I guess that's between you and God.
Please, protect health care for the most vulnerable. Let's lead here. -Rev. Sara Dorrien-Christians
Greetings, My name is Chlo'e Edwards, and I am the Policy Director at New Virginia Majority. We support HB 1245, which establishes a Virginia Health Care Stabilization and Expansion Fund to protect access to care for some of the Commonwealth’s most vulnerable residents. Virginia is facing an urgent health care crisis driven by federal actions that threaten to strip care from transgender people, immigrants, people with disabilities, veterans, and other communities already facing systemic barriers. Recent federal efforts have sought to cut off funding to providers delivering lifesaving, evidence-based care, forcing clinics and hospitals to choose between abandoning patients or risking the loss of critical federal dollars. These actions destabilize community health providers and put Virginians at risk of losing care mid-treatment. HB 1245 offers a timely and responsible solution. By appropriating $4.5 million to the Virginia Health Care Fund and leveraging public-private partnerships, this bill ensures that nonprofit and community-based providers serving populations protected under the Virginia Human Rights Act can remain open, rebuild care networks dismantled by federal pressure, and responsibly expand access statewide. The flexible grant structure recognizes the realities of both low-overhead community clinics and larger providers, ensuring resources reach patients efficiently and equitably. At New Virginia Majority, we believe health care is a cornerstone of a thriving democracy and a just economy. HB 1245 affirms Virginia’s commitment to protecting human dignity, safeguarding public health, and ensuring that no community is left behind due to political attacks beyond our control. We respectfully urge the committee to support HB 1245.
As the Federal government has cut off funding to critical medical services in Virginia, we've struggled to find providers delivering health care. Simply the threat of Federal intervention has closed clinics and led hospital to stop providing certain kinds of care. The few remaining providers struggle to deliver the services and medical care me and my neighbors need. Medical care decisions must be made between doctors and patients. The Federal government selectively canceling funding (and thus care) based on political ideology is harmful and wrong. These cuts are causing daily harm to Virginians and we must act to restore this critical, lifesaving care. Further, cutting regular care simply forces patients into more expensive emergency care, driving costs up for all Virginians, regardless of their medical care needs. I plead with you to deliver solutions to keep essential medical care in our communities. Please support HB1245 to provide a vital backfill to decreased Federal funding and allow smaller community-based providers deliver the care that larger institutions, for whatever reason, will not or cannot. Virginians are counting on you to bolster local services that deliver essential care to local communities every day.
HB1263 - Public employees; repeals existing prohibition on collective bargaining, etc.
I oppose HB 1263/SB 378. I am a member of the Orange County School Board and have watched closely as other divisions have voted to adopt collective bargaining. In every case, it has created additional costs, much adversity, more staffing demands, and legal expenses that a rural county like mine cannot absorb. The financial burden would overwhelm us. We do not have the resources to employ extra administrative staff, negotiators and labor relations specialists, or attorneys to handle the workload that will be required. I have seen other divisions forced to divert resources away from classrooms and students in order to create and fund these extra positions and the demands of bargaining. Board members also report increased strain on the relationships between staff and leadership. Additionally, it reduces the authority that the Virginia Constitution vests in local school boards. This bill will directly impede my ability to respond to the needs of my own community, the constituents who elected me, and the students who are counting on me to keep their academic outcomes front and center. As an elected board member, I took an oath to provide proper governance for Orange County Public Schools. Mandated collective bargaining diminishes that responsibility and transfers power to negotiators and arbitrators who are not directly accountable to voters. Please do not take away our ability to prioritize fiscal responsibility in our own district. Respect the fact that local decisions, closest to the particular needs of our individual students, staff, and community, will deliver the best outcomes. Please vote no on HB 1263/SB 378.
Dear Delegate I am a member of the Prince William County School Board, and I write to express my strong opposition to SB378/HB1263. Prince William County is one of the few jurisdictions that chose to move forward with collective bargaining. and we have now been managing the consequences for more than three years. Under current law, jurisdictions may voluntarily assume the additional costs, staffing demands, work hours, consultants, and legal expenses associated with collective bargaining. They may also choose to yield a portion of their decision-making authority to a formal management-union negotiation structure. That is a local decision. Mandating collective bargaining statewide is an entirely different matter. It would require divisions, many far less resourced than those in Northern Virginia, to engage in a costly, time-consuming, and often adversarial process. It would also reduce the authority of local school boards to direct the educational systems they are constitutionally charged with supervising. The financial burden alone will be significant for many divisions that lack robust central office staff, in-house counsel, experienced negotiators, and labor relations specialists. They will be forced to create and fund positions they do not currently have, diverting scarce resources away from classrooms and students. If the money is not there, mandating bargaining will not create it. In Prince William County, we have spent millions of dollars administering and supporting the collective bargaining process. I have seen no measurable improvement in student achievement attributable to these expenditures. Instead, the process has increased tension between division leadership and staff, strained the workplace environment, and placed additional pressure on our budget. From a governance perspective, SB378/HB1263 is fundamentally short-sighted. It reduces flexibility, limits a board’s ability to respond to changing fiscal conditions, increases costs for taxpayers, and risks locking in work rules and compensation structures that may become unsustainable or misaligned with community needs. It also shifts significant decision-making authority away from elected school boards and local communities into closed-door negotiations governed by rigid processes. As an elected board member, I have the responsibility to oversee the division. Mandated collective bargaining diminishes that responsibility and transfers power to negotiators and arbitrators who are not directly accountable to voters. Before adopting collective bargaining, our division operated under a “Meet and Confer” model that allowed employees to raise concerns and advocate for fair treatment without binding bargaining requirements. That system functioned effectively. I cannot identify any advantage we have gained by replacing our previous "Meet and Confer" system with collective bargaining. At a time when Virginians are focused on improving schools while facing rising costs and economic uncertainty, policymakers should prioritize fiscal responsibility, efficient government, and respect for local decision-making. Each division should retain the choice to determine what structure best serves its students, educators, and taxpayers. For these reasons, I respectfully oppose SB378 and HB1263. Sincerely, Jennifer T. Wall School Board Member, Gainesville District Prince William County Public Schools
OPPOSED to this bill!!!
Chairman, members of the subcommittee, my name is Jake Mikesell. I am the class president of the VCU School of Medicine Class of 2026, proud member of House district 78 (Carr) and senate district 14 (bagby), and a face of the next generation of emergency medicine physicians. I am here today in strong support of House Bill 1263 because the future of Virginia’s healthcare workforce depends on the protections this bill provides. Currently, Virginia exports more physicians than almost any other state. We train incredible talent at institutions like VCU, only to watch them leave for states that offer better labor protections and workplace standards. As a student looking at hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt, the financial and professional reality of residency is daunting. We need the Public Employee Relations Board and the bargaining rights in this bill to make Virginia a place where doctors don't just train, but stay. Residency is a unique form of labor. We are expected to learn to be attending physicians while simultaneously serving as the primary educators for the next generation of students. Yet, we are often given zero formal training on how to teach adult learners. Under the current system, we have no seat at the table to advocate for the resources and 'teaching-the-teacher' curriculum we need to ensure Virginia’s medical education remains world-class. We have seen the data from resident unions across the country. When residents have the power to bargain, burnout rates drop and patient safety improves. Unionized residents can negotiate for safer staffing ratios and fatigue-management protocols that directly prevent medical errors. By passing HB 1263, you aren't just helping doctors; you are protecting Virginia patients. If we want to stop the physician brain drain and ensure our hospitals are staffed by well-trained, focused, and protected physicians, we must allow them the right to bargain for their profession. I urge you to report HB 1263 so that Her excellency may sign it. Thank you, and I appreciate your commitment to the common wealth of Virginia.
The Virginia Police Benevolent Association (VAPBA) supports House Bill 1263 because it provides a structured and balanced framework that allows localities the option to implement collective bargaining while maintaining local control. Law enforcement agencies across the Commonwealth continue to face significant recruitment and retention challenges, and providing officers with a professional voice in workplace conditions, safety concerns, and compensation helps improve morale, stability, and operational effectiveness. HB 1263 promotes collaborative labor-management relationships that strengthen public safety by supporting the officers who serve our communities. For these reasons, VAPBA supports HB 1263.
My name is Tim Gibson, and I am the President of the Virginia Conference of the American Association of University Professors. On behalf of our members who teach and conduct research in public universities and colleges across the Commonwealth, I want to express our strong and enthusiastic support for collective bargaining rights and HB 1263. I’m here with a simple message. Extending collective bargaining rights to public employees is the single most important step you can take to advance the teaching and research missions of Virginia’s public colleges and universities. With collective bargaining rights, Virginia’s professors will have a stronger voice to advocate for better learning conditions for our students and better working conditions for our most vulnerable instructors. Collective bargaining also means that professors can work collectively to protect the values at the heart of the university, including academic freedom, open and free inquiry, and freedom from external political pressure. You’ve all read the stories. An Oklahoma professor is fired because a student complained that earning an “F” on a substandard essay violated her religious rights. Professors in Texas are told that teaching Plato violates new restrictions on teaching about gender and sexuality. Whole programs in Florida shut down simply because they grapple honestly and accurately with histories of racism, sexism, and homophobia in America. And indeed, in the last year in Virginia, we saw politicized and highly ideological boards of visitors stepping far outside their appointed roles to impose their partisan ideologies on the governance and curriculum of public universities like George Mason and the University of Virginia. But with collective bargaining, professors can better protect one another – and our students – from such clear violations of the bedrock values of academic freedom and open inquiry. In short, with collective bargaining, professors can work together to ensure that Virginia’s universities stay on mission and focus our time and resources on what matters most: providing students with a world-class education and advancing the frontiers of knowledge in the public interest.
See attached letter
Faculty collective bargaining is a means to protect academic freedom, institutions of faculty governance, fair procedures for resolving grievances, the economic well-being of faculty and other academic professionals, and the advancement of higher education as a public good. I strongly support the bill as a means to provide hard working educational employees the dignity and quality of life all Americans deserve. It is through their tireless work that our universities operate and provide the next generation the skills, knowledge, and opportunities to succeed. For all of their hard work and determination, it is fair they be provided equal rights as those of other sectors.
I support collective bargaining, speaking on behalf of myself. Faculty collective bargaining is a means to protect academic freedom, institutions of faculty governance, fair procedures for resolving grievances, the economic well-being of faculty and other academic professionals, and the advancement of higher education as a public good.
Like many people at the university where I work, my job entails doing the work of 2-3 people, but I am paid far less than what is considered a living wage for even one person. I love the work I do, but its quality suffers immensely under this constellation of poor pay and difficult working conditions. In fact, I have had to turn down career-defining research and consulting opportunities, which would have meaningfully bolstered my university's reputation and prestige, because I simply do not have the resources to handle more than the bare minimum needed to keep my job and take care of myself—even though, on paper, I supposedly don't work full-time. I support the passage of HB1263 because it would give me and my colleagues much-needed power to advocate for ourselves and the students about whom we care deeply. If you wish to unleash the full power of VA public universities to be public goods for the Commonwealth, the country, and the world, then pass this bill and give a voice to the people who are the very source of that power.
As Adjunct Faculty, holding a terminal degree in my field, my labor is exploited at a Virginia university. I have no health coverage, no dental coverage, no job security. With Collective Bargaining, I have the opportunity to, at minimum, have my basic needs fulfilled. It is difficult to work for an employer and provide their clients - students - with expertise and skill building that they need in their careers while knowing that I may not be able to purchase groceries for my family; while knowing that the students whom are investing in their careers will potentially land in the Virginia workforce under the same precarious job environment. I need Collective Bargaining. Future workers need Collective Bargaining.
The fundamental Constitutional rights of academic freedom and free speech on campus are under attack and must be defended. Faculty collective bargaining is a means to protect academic freedom. Collective bargaining can ensure that faculty are involved in governance of our higher education institutions, fair procedures for resolving grievances are followed, the economic well-being of faculty and other academic professionals is guaranteed, and higher education as a public good is assured. To defend these basic rights in Virginia, please support HB1263.
As a faculty member and advocate for better working conditions for all workers serving higher education institutions, I am writing in support of HB1263. We need this bill! Daily, I work with members of my community who face labor challenges, including stagnant wages, contracts that are offered, signed, and then withdrawn days before classes start, and administrators who are not upholding contracts and their commitments to workers. Faculty collective bargaining is a means to protect academic freedom, institutions of faculty governance, fair procedures for resolving grievances, the economic well-being of faculty and other academic professionals, and the advancement of higher education as a public good. Thank you for your work to advance worker rights in higher education!
Speaking for myself and not my institution:As a faculty member at a Virginia urban public university, I can see how faculty collective bargaining would help protect faculty members' academic freedom and institutions of faculty governance. It would insure fair and consistent (that is, the same across all institutions) procedures for resolving grievances, as well as the economic well-being of ALL faculty and other academic professionals who are Virginia state employees. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, it would promote the advancement of higher education as a public good: working together and with the legislature we faculty can help restore public faith in the role played by our institution in sustaining this Commonwealth as a premier place to live and work. But we can only do this if our institutions authentically and transparently enfranchise and work with us as full partners.
As an instructor for three decades at Virginia public colleges and universities, first as an adjunct and for the past 25 years as a full-time non-tenure-track faculty member (commenting here in my capacity as an individual citizen), I strongly support collective bargaining rights for faculty. As faculty striving to better our working conditions often point out, student learning conditions are shaped in large part by faculty working conditions. This is especially true at a time when the majority of faculty, especially faculty teaching introductory courses, are contingent: part-time and/or non tenure track. Our precarious employment status can make it difficult to advocate not only for ourselves, but also for our students. Collective bargaining would strengthen our ongoing effort to make sure that appropriate resources are invested in our institutions’ teaching mission. As a church member who often takes communion to elderly and disabled church members unable to travel to services, I also strongly support collective bargaining for individual home care providers. These dedicated workers provide essential services to some of our most vulnerable citizens, and they, too, need the ability to advocate for working conditions that will allow them to do their work as well as possible.
Collective bargaining by public employees strengthens not only the workforce but also the quality of public services. Collective bargaining gives essential workers such as teachers, firefighters, nurses, and other public servants a fair, structured way to negotiate wages, benefits, and working conditions, leading to more stable and professional workplaces. When employees have a meaningful voice, not only morale improves and turnover declines but also public institutions have a better ability to retain experienced workers who understand the needs of their communities. Hence, collective bargaining strengthens also public agencies as employers. Rather than reducing efficiency, collective bargaining promotes transparency and cooperation, and as a result helps public agencies attract skilled professionals, and deliver reliable, high-quality services to the public. Many states already recognize collective bargaining rights for public employees and have shown that these protections can coexist with effective government. States such as California, New York, Illinois, Ohio, Indiana, Missouri, Michigan, Nebraska, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Washington, Oregon, Minnesota, and Hawaii grant broad collective bargaining rights to public-sector workers, including teachers, nurses, and other state and local employees. These examples demonstrate that collective bargaining is a well-established practice across the country and can support stable public workforces while maintaining high-quality public services.
I currently work as a public school superintendent in Virginia after having previously served in the same role in West Virginia, where collective bargaining has been in place in some way, shape or form for decades. There are a number of reasons why public schools in Virginia perform significantly higher than those in West Virginia but one of the primary ones is that during the years when money wasn't available for the bargaining process , the schools there negotiated away administrative oversight and as a result created an entire system that was too rigid to allow for any meaningful change even when systems were failing on a massive scale. I realize that we have school divisions in Virginia that have already adopted collective bargaining policies and negotiated contracts and believe they are working well. However, the school funding model in Virginia already creates tense relationships between elected School Boards and Boards of Supervisors/City Councils. Forcing small rural school divisions, that are already strapped for cash, to have to engage with their local funding body in the collective bargaining process is not going to do anything to help improve the levels of trust and collegiality in our communities. Allowing collective bargaining to remain at the discretion of the locally elected boards would definley help those of us who work each day to keep public education politically neutral and make schooling a positive experience for our students and their families. Thank you.
Adjunct faculty at George Mason University earn as little as $3,477 for teaching a 3-credit course. Teaching such a course demands somewhere between 150 and 200 hours of labor, meaning that some college faculty are being paid less than $20 per hour. Across the Potomac, unionized adjuncts at George Washington University have negotiated a minimum of $4,509, nearly 30 percent more than their counterparts at Mason. (GW Hatchet, August 18, 2025) Collective bargaining could allow adjunct faculty at Mason and other public universities in Virginia to achieve parity with their colleagues at peer institutions and earn something closer to the amount due to them for educating the students of the Commonwealth.
As a graduate student and worker at a Virginia university, I support HB1263 as I believe that collective bargaining is a means to protect academic freedom, institutions of faculty governance, fair procedures for resolving grievances, the economic well-being of faculty and other academic professionals, and the advancement of higher education as a public good.
Please support Delegate Kathy Tran's public sector collective bargaining bill (HB 1263) https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB1263. I know that faculty collective bargaining is a means to protect academic freedom, protection of the curriculum, fair procedures for resolving grievances, the economic well-being of faculty and other academic professionals, and the advancement of higher education as a public good. Collective bargaining is a known and effective way to protect academic freedom which is essential to democracy. Faculty in Virginia are afraid to teach students the truth, facts, and how to think for themselves because they know bad faith actors are looking for ways to attack and try to get us fired for simply helping students understand data and ask critical questions. Also, we lose faculty to states that do have collective bargaining because scholars know their teaching and innovative scholarship will be protected. That leads to an expertise drain on Virginia.
Please support Delegate Kathy Tran's public sector collective bargaining bill (HB 1263) https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB1263. As an academic advisor in Virginia serving our students, I know that faculty collective bargaining is a means to protect academic freedom, protection of the curriculum, fair procedures for resolving grievances, the economic well-being of faculty and other academic professionals, and the advancement of higher education as a public good. Collective bargaining is a known and effective way to protect academic freedom which is essential to democracy. My faculty colleagues are afraid to teach students the truth, facts, and how to think for themselves because they know bad faith actors are looking for ways to attack and try to get us fired for simply helping students understand data and ask critical questions. Also, we lose faculty to states that do have collective bargaining because scholars know their teaching and innovative scholarship will be protected. That leads to an expertise drain on Virginia.
Please support Delegate Kathy Tran's public sector collective bargaining bill (HB 1263) https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB1263. As a faculty member in Virginia serving our students, I know that faculty collective bargaining is a means to protect academic freedom, protection of the curriculum, fair procedures for resolving grievances, the economic well-being of faculty and other academic professionals, and the advancement of higher education as a public good. Collective bargaining is a known and effective way to protect academic freedom which is essential to democracy. My faculty colleagues are afraid to teach students the truth, facts, and how to think for themselves because they know bad faith actors are looking for ways to attack and try to get us fired for simply helping students understand data and ask critical questions. Also, we lose faculty to states that do have collective bargaining because scholars know their teaching and innovative scholarship will be protected. That leads to an expertise drain on Virginia.
To: Members of the House Committee on Labor and Commerce Dear Members of the Committee, I am writing to express my strong support for HB 1263, legislation that would repeal the prohibition on collective bargaining for public employees and establish the Public Employee Relations Board. As an educator and higher-education leader committed to the long-term success of Virginia’s public institutions, I believe this bill represents a critical investment in student success and the strength of higher education as a public good. At the core of a high-quality educational system is a stable, supported, and professionally respected workforce. HB 1263 provides a clear and balanced framework that advances this goal while strengthening outcomes for students and the Commonwealth as a whole. Student Success: When faculty and staff are supported by fair procedures and workplace stability, they are better positioned to focus fully on teaching, mentoring, and student engagement. This stability directly contributes to consistent instruction, stronger academic support, and improved learning environments. Academic Freedom and Shared Governance: Collective bargaining plays a vital role in safeguarding academic freedom and reinforcing shared governance. It ensures educators can teach, research, and participate in institutional decision-making without fear of arbitrary retaliation, while giving those closest to the classroom a protected voice in shaping academic policy. Workforce Stability and Retention: Virginia’s ability to attract and retain highly qualified faculty and staff depends on offering competitive, transparent, and fair working conditions. By allowing the negotiation of wages, hours, and terms of employment, HB 1263 helps prevent workforce attrition and strengthens institutional continuity. Commitment to the Public Good: Public colleges and universities are foundational to Virginia’s economic vitality and civic life. Protecting the rights of those who serve within these institutions is not merely a matter of labor, it is a commitment to the quality, integrity, and sustainability of public services for all Virginians. Strong faculty and staff protections are inseparable from the value of the degrees our students earn. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the committee to support HB 1263 and help ensure that Virginia’s public institutions remain fair, effective, and focused on educational excellence. Sincerely, Dirk Burruss Professor, Reynolds Community College
Faculty collective bargaining is a means to protect academic freedom, institutions of faculty governance, fair procedures for resolving grievances, the economic well-being of faculty and other academic professionals, and the advancement of higher education as a public good.
Faculty collective bargaining is a means to protect academic freedom, institutions of faculty governance, fair procedures for resolving grievances, the economic well-being of faculty and other academic professionals, and the advancement of higher education as a public good.
Collective bargaining for our state university employees is a means to ensure Virginia continues to be a great place to work, protects academic freedom, strengthens institutions of faculty governance, helps to establish fair procedures for resolving grievances, and ensures the economic well-being of the staff and faculty at the Commonwealth's institutions of higher education.
Faculty collective bargaining is a means to protect academic freedom, institutions of faculty governance, fair procedures for resolving grievances, the economic well-being of faculty and other academic professionals, and the advancement of higher education as a public good. I support this bill and urge the members of the House to support it as well. Faculty voices, who carry institutions of higher education, need to be heard.
My name is Greg Mourad, and I am Vice President of the National Right to Work Committee. I am here to speak against House Bill 1263, which would force all Virginia public employees under union monopoly control. It’s just plain wrong for workers to be forced under union monopoly control as a condition of working in public service. Under exclusive representation, better termed monopoly bargaining, individual workers lose the ability to choose their own representation -- this is a right even a convicted criminal retains. But in addition to imposing union monopoly representation on public employees, this bill will also undercut the people’s elected representatives’ responsibility to set a budget, while closing out the public from the decision-making process. Indeed, that’s exactly what the U.S. District Court said in upholding North Carolina’s law banning public sector bargaining. The court ruled: “[T]o the extent that public employees gain power through recognition and collective bargaining, other interest groups with a right to a voice in the running of the government may be left out of vital political decisions.” And monopoly bargaining gives public employee union bosses a second bite at the apple that’s completely unique among all stakeholders. They not only can lobby and electioneer like anyone else, but under this bill union bosses can by law bind the government in contracts. Meanwhile, regardless of any legal prohibition, passing this bill opens the door to public employee strikes -- since 2023 we’ve seen illegal walkouts everywhere from Clark County, Nevada to Fresno, California to four school districts in Massachusetts. And the fact is, this legislation will be a disaster for Virginia taxpayers. Years ago, the Heritage Foundation found that public sector monopoly bargaining costs the average family of four as much as $3,000 in taxes per year in states that have passed it for all government workers. Meanwhile here in Virginia, Loudoun County schools had to hire thirteen new staff and increase spending by $3.3 million just to implement monopoly bargaining. This bill would repeat those costs in county after county, town after town, in places that have rejected bargaining due to the cost. Meanwhile, the people’s elected representatives will lose flexibility to make needed changes the next time there’s a recession. These are all big reasons why even many strong proponents of monopoly bargaining in the private sector have opposed public sector bargaining. For example, Franklin Roosevelt wrote in 1937 to the National Federation of Federal Employees, “all Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service.” It’s wrong for workers, wrong for taxpayers, and harmful to our representative form of government. I urge you to kill this bill or anything like it.
Dear Members of House Commerce and Labor, Subcommittee #2 As the lobbyist for Prince William County Schools, I am submitting the following comments in opposition to HB 1263, at least as it relates to public schools of the Commonwealth. More specifically, PWCS opposes the following provisions: [at line 673] § 40.1-57.12. Determination of appropriate bargaining unit At Section D.1., PWCS does not believe that principals and assistant principals should be represented as a bargaining unit. As such, these positions represent a high level of management just below the school board and superintendent and, thus, should not be part of the collective bargaining arrangement. 40.1-57.16. Negotiation and impasse procedures [at line 673] Section A.4. This provision requires the parties to submit to binding arbitration. PWCS submits that this provision, as it relates to public schools, is unconstitutional in that it requires the elected school board to delegate its responsibilities vested in it under Article VIII, Section 7 of the Virginia Constitution. Further, a school board has no power to levy taxes in Virginia and is therefore wholly dependent upon state and local funding over which it has very little control, if any. As a result, it may lack the ability to fund a binding award made by an arbitrator. [at line 680] Section A.5. This provision restricts the arbitrator’s finding to either the final offer of the employer or the employee organization, and nothing in between. Since at line 740, the terms of an agreement remain in effect until superseded by a new agreement, there is no incentive for the employee organization to submit a reasonable final offer. Thank you for your consideration. Jim Council 804.347.0503
Hi my name is Sean Cassar, I live in District 80. I am the labor co-chair for the Richmond chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America and appear before you today to read a letter from our members who are state employees: As state employees, we are excited about the collective bargaining rights proposed for public sector workers and greatly urge your support. This is a right that everyone deserves and that a majority of states provide. We want to thank the sponsors of this legislation, all those who worked to draft it and lobbied and organized for years to get to this moment. In anticipation of its success and in comparing this resolution to other states there are a few confusing sentences and unnecessary restrictions we’ve found. Before we start, we want to state plainly that we will support this bill in whichever form it appears but take this opportunity to voice our concerns. First we are concerned with the language in §40.1-57.12. C which mandates the rigidity of cross department and agency bargaining units and ask that you provide more flexibility in the language for the bargaining units of state employees. With over 100 executive branch agencies and subagencies that the provisions apply to, it will be challenging to exercise the collective bargaining rights provided. Additionally, the Governor is not required to make appointments to the Public Employee Relations Board until October of 2027. This means it will be well over a year after the bill is effective before public workers can exercise collective bargaining rights. The delay is concerning as it also would delay our understanding of how to proceed with organizing on the ground. Lastly, the retention of the strike policy is disappointing. The best way for workers to protect their rights is by withholding our labor. The best way to avoid a strike is to bargain in good faith and not retaliate or infringe on labor rights. Further, with no language outlining investigation processes, this provision can and will be weaponized by management as we’ve seen happen on multiple occasions in Richmond Public Schools. We hope you consider our suggestions as this bill will affect the rights afforded to us, and we have exact language changes we recommend which some of you may have received already and can provide if you are interested. Again, we will support this bill in whichever form it appears but urge tightening up of language and expansion of rights. Thank you for your time and consideration.
I am a graduate worker in Engineering asking you to vote YES on HB 1263 to allow public sector workers to collectively bargain. Last year, a friend in another lab had an advisor who had to leave the department because he was not able to secure funding. Through no fault of her own, his student had to graduate on an accelerated timeline and had less than 6 months to complete what takes most students about 1-2 years. She also had to balance this with teaching (which is atypical for a student in their final year but necessary for her to be funded her last semester) and job searching. She was exhausted as a result of having to work around the clock to manage these responsibilities. Unfortunately, graduate workers being overloaded with teaching and research responsibilities during their final year has happened in at least three different departments during my time here. There is no way a graduate student can provide the best possible teaching for undergrads while exhausted and overworked. Collective bargaining for graduate workers would allow us to negotiate a contract that guarantees funding for the duration of the PhD. This would ensure that grad workers do not need to overwork themselves to graduate on an accelerated timeline in circumstances like these, while improving quality of education for students at Virginia's public universities.
The Virginia Association for Home Care and Hospice opposes this bill. Medicaid sets the reimbursement rates for personal care services. According to the Guide House report these services should be increased 42% to allow proper compensation for all staff working in this setting. Collective bargaining will not solve the underpayment issues or staff salaries.
Please Oppose this bill those of us from states like NY are familiar with the power and pitfalls of public sector collective bargaining. In the 1970s in New York State alone, there were, on average, 20 teacher strikes a year, and who doesn't remember the trash piled high on city streets as sanitation workers walked out. Think that can't happen here because the law makes strikes illegal? Think again, didn't the teacher’s union keep schools closed for nearly 2 years refusing to go back to in-person learning and in our city workers not pick up our trash in protest for "Hazardous duty pay?” Same in Wisconsin when Governor Walker signed legislation into law to limit collective bargaining to just wages, thousands of teachers called in sick and showed up at the captial building in protest, Collective bargaining is not about workers rights, it's about control. Collective bargaining with public-employee unions would mean taking some of the decision-making authority over government functions away from the people's elected representatives and transferring them to union officials, with whom the public has vested no such authority During a downturn in the economy New York was bailed out by the federal government after Governor Cuomo was prevented from getting concessions from the union by an amendment inserted into law for union contracts. New York was bailed out by the federal government after Governor Cuomo was prevented from getting concessions by an amendment inserted into law for union contracts. In Miami the police union sued after the city made changes to their union contract saying the city failed to raise taxes, lay off non-union workers and put in speed cameras. Vallejo, California filed bankruptcy after trying for 3 years to negotiate with unions. Allowing unions the ability to collectively bargain for employees increases the cost of government. Every dollar spent on administering union contracts is a dollar NOT spent on educating a child or providing city services. Please vote NO!
HB1266 - Environmental Justice in Permitting Process Guidance Memo; DEQ to publish an updated version.
The Environmental Law and Community Engagement Clinic at the University of Virginia School of Law, on behalf of its client, the AMMD Pine Grove Project, appreciates this opportunity to submit comments in support of HB1266 (Tran). The AMMD Pine Grove Project is caretaker of the historic Pine Grove School in Cumberland County, Virginia, which opened in 1917. It was built as part of the Tuskegee-Rosenwald Schools initiative, a campaign spearheaded by philanthropist Julius Rosenwald and Tuskegee's Founding Principal, Booker T. Washington. There was an acute need to provide educational opportunities for African American children at a time when Jim Crow oppression barred them from attending most public schools throughout the American South. Thousands of Tuskegee-Rosenwald school buildings were constructed to help serve that need. Yet today, only a few of these buildings remain. Valiant efforts to preserve the historic Pine Grove School today are being led by the Agee, Miller, Mayo, and Dungy families, whose ancestral ties are deeply rooted in the historic Pine Grove School and the community that surrounds it. They founded the AMMD Pine Grove Project, an organization that now includes former Pine Grove students and current community members. As a result of the AMMD Pine Grove Project's efforts, the school has earned a place on the National Register of Historic Places and on the Virginia Landmarks Register. You can learn more about ongoing preservation efforts in the short documentary, "Pine Grove: More Than A School." Unfortunately, these efforts are now threatened by a proposed landfill on property adjacent to the school building on Pinegrove Road. Because of the proposed landfill, the Pine Grove School was included on the National Trust for Historic Preservation’s list of America's Most Endangered Places for 2021. Permitting processes for the landfill remain ongoing. The AMMD Pine Grove Project and neighbors continue to organize and advocate to preserve their history while opposing the landfill. HB1266 would provide an important framework for protecting valuable resources like the Pine Grove School. If this legislation passes, we would look forward to working with DEQ on the adoption of implementing regulations.
The Environmental Law and Community Engagement Clinic at the University of Virginia School of Law, on behalf of its client, the AMMD Pine Grove Project, appreciates this opportunity to submit the attached letter in support of HB1266 (Tran).
Hello Delegates, I am writing in opposition of HB1396. This bill had been brought fourth by landowners groups that falsely claim to represent and maximize property owners rights when in fact they are property owners that want to end the tradition of hound hunting. This is proven by these groups comments on their own social media pages. These groups have made claim that only 8 states allow the use of hounds to hunt, a stat quoted by delegates in the subcommittee, that is simply a false statement, currently only 9 states allow hounds to be used to hunt deer but nearly every state allows the utilization of dogs to hunt other game species many not requiring an special license to do so. I ask the delegates to understand that the vast majority of the members of the hound hunting organizations are land owners as well in addition to all of the landowners who lease or allow hound hunting on their land support the tradition of hound hunting. This bill creates a permit allowing the DWR create and issue permits on a may issue criteria with visual permit requirements for hounds and vehicles. If Additional funding is needed to police game laws the bill should be amended to a license just like an archery or muzzleloading license that is a shall issue. Additionally the cost for said license should be reduced and required for all that utilize or partcipate in any type of hunting that utilizes a dog. Dogs are already required to have owner contact info on their collar and their vehicles have state issued license plates therefore marking is not necessary. Lastly the only ones who should be exempt from license purchase are those that utilize dogs to hunt on their own land. This simplifies the requirements and makes it fair for all parties. Basically if big game is harvested and checked in and the use of dogs is checked as a part of big game license registering process they should be required to have a dog hunting license or be exempt as a land owner. I hope that you find this as a reasonable comprise. Additionally there needs to be some sort of recourse for false complaints or accusations. If this bill continues as is it will create more tensions between those who utilize dogs to hunt and those who don't like the use of hunting dogs. False complaints will continue to increase cause additional hunter harassment and tension between hunters and those that oppose it. Thank you for your time. V/R, B. C. Bunch
NAACP considers cumulative impacts as the aggregated long-term consequences of multiple environmental and economic stressors that disproportionately affect frontline communities. This bill is a vital instrument for addressing the historical overburden and systemic disinvestment in these communities, which have resulted in the deterioration of property values, quality of life, public health, and natural resources. By establishing a more comprehensive data-driven framework in the permitting process, this bill seeks to create a critical path to the restoration and revitalization of existing frontline communities while minimizing the potential for further damage. Therefore, we support this bill to consider cumulative impacts of pollution in the permitting process.
One helping of French fries probably won't hurt you, but a helping of French fries every day will have a cumulative impact. For too long, permits have been treated in isolation, as though nothing preceded this particular request and no further requests will be made. The reality is that the same communities suffer the cumulative impacts of many permitted activities that cumulate into a degraded environment. State agencies need to consider the cumulative impact before granting a permit. The public deserves an opportunity to weigh in on proposals. HB1266 provides for this and I urge you to pass this bill.
Dear Chair and Members of the Committee, On behalf of Lynnhaven River NOW, I write in strong support of HB 1266. This bill would require permitting decisions to reflect how pollution is experienced – accumulating across multiple sources and stressors – rather than evaluating each facility in isolation. For communities in Virginia Beach and across Hampton Roads, cumulative impacts are not theoretical. Residents can face overlapping burdens from air emissions, water pollution, contaminated sediments, heavy truck and roadway exposure, and flooding-driven runoff that moves pollutants through connected waterways – ultimately affecting the Lynnhaven River and the Chesapeake Bay. HB 1266 provides a practical, science-based way to ensure that communities already carrying disproportionate burdens are not asked to absorb still more. HB 1266 aligns Virginia’s permitting with the best available science. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine have emphasized that cumulative impact assessment helps account for the “totality of exposures” and supports more equitable, health-protective decision-making. Likewise, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has advanced guidance recognizing that permitting has too often failed to reflect the lived reality of overburdened communities facing multiple stressors at once. HB 1266 would move the Commonwealth toward that more realistic and protective approach. HB 1266 strengthens meaningful public participation. The bill requires early, accessible outreach – including multilingual notice within a defined radius, a public hearing, comment periods, and a documented response to community concerns – so engagement is not a box-checking exercise, but a genuine opportunity to shape decisions that affect health and quality of life. Research on cumulative-impact policies underscores that robust procedural protections and authentic engagement are essential to building trust and improving outcomes. HB 1266 supports responsible growth with clearer expectations. By setting a transparent framework – requiring additional mitigation when a project would cause or contribute to adverse cumulative impacts on an environmental justice community – HB 1266 encourages better siting, earlier problem-solving, and fewer downstream conflicts. For these reasons, we respectfully urge you to report HB 1266 and advance it. Sincerely, Lynnhaven River NOW
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries
Opposed to these bills
HB1272 - Electronic gaming devices; regulation, penalties, sunset.
No casino in Tyson's. Increase in crime. Increase in traffic. Increase in drug sales. Minors will be negatively affected.
I'm a small business owner (Bar/Restaurant). The Paceomatic (Queen) skill games have kept us along with many similar businesses throughout the years in business. We've paid our taxes to the city through our business license fee along with our monthly sales taxes on income. We have 2 Casinos within 7 miles of each other (Rivers in Portsmouth and the Norfolk temporary casino along with a gaming facilities in Hampton, New Kent etc. These skill games allow us to provide better working conditions and better pay for our employees along with a nicer facility and food options for our patrons. I just wanted to throw in my 2 cents because 2 of the 3 comments I read were from the NEGATIVE NELLIES who just don't like and have never liked any sort of skill game play. I have no problem with the proposed taxes, it's only far the state get their portion also. Thanks for reading this.
The Georgia based Paceomatic company who brought these machines to Virginia 12 years ago are desperately trying to get our lawmakers to legalize them so they can continue to use their devices to take advantage of our fellow Virginians, mostly from economically depressed areas around the state. To this end they and their other affiliated groups have donated over $2 million to our legislators to buy political influence and they have so far hired SIXTEEN LOBBYISTS to convince our general assembly members to get what they want. This begets the question, if these convenience store slot machines are such a good deal for Va, why the need to contribute over $2 million to our legislators and hire a record breaking 16 lobbyists to plead their case? The answer is clear, they aren’t. We need to eradicate these machines, not legalize them. The Paceomatic company and their army of lobbyists only seeks to enrich themselves at our expense. And shame on the lobbyists who are doing their dirty work who only care about the paychecks they are receiving.
Although I take no position on the bill, as an expert in electronic gaming devices—including so-called skill games—I have some recommendations to offer that will tighten the integrity of the games and better protect Virginians. Please see the attached report.
This bill would legalize predatory gas station slot machines. A company run by a millionaire political donor who continues to place these machines almost entirely in communities of color and low-income neighborhoods. I’m a constituent, and I’m urging you to oppose legalizing skill games. Instead of taxing regular people, legislators should look to closing loopholes for corporations and the ultra-wealthy. Thank you for standing up for our community.
HB1298 - Human trafficking; issuance of vacatur for victims.
After over a decade working in emergency services and frontline response, I now work with fellow survivors who have escaped their traffickers - only to find their freedom was only a state of mind, and a criminal record holds them captive. But this isn't just about one person's record - It’s about the 14 trillion dollar burden that trauma and trafficking leaves on our society while predators continue to profit. It's about the generational trauma that ripples through families and communities. This is about keeping our communities safe by breaking cycles, not perpetuating them. We have the power to start responding instead of reacting, and we owe it to each other to play smarter, think faster, and find justice… together. I'm not arguing that we don't each hold accountability for our actions. I'm arguing that in some cases, our freedom is stripped from us—and in those cases, accountability belongs to the one who stole it. The reality is that Human Trafficking is the second largest criminal empire, second only to the drug trade. Career criminals are smart, they have learned they can profit from trafficking drugs AND humans, and do it all while avoiding charges by requiring the trafficked individual to commit the crime of trafficking the drugs. Criminals receive all the profit and the victims alongside our communities, are taking the fall. This is only one example of the many crimes traffickers force their victims into commiting for the purpose of personal gain. When a parent can't pass a background check, they can't get stable employment. They can't secure safe housing. Their children grow up in poverty and instability—the same conditions that create vulnerability to trafficking in the first place. We know that 75% of children experience trauma transmission from parents with adverse childhood experiences. Criminal records tied to exploitation don't just punish survivors—they punish their children, and their children's children. Recent data shows 21 survivors presented over 100 different criminal code sections connected to their victimization. The list approach simply cannot capture the full scope of coerced criminality. HB1298 shifts to categorical eligibility with the intention to cover all misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies committed as a result of trafficking, while maintaining existing safeguards and accountability. Please support HB1298. Thank you.
House Bill 1298 is an important step toward ensuring justice for survivors of human trafficking in Virginia. Many human trafficking victims are forced to commit crimes as part of their exploitation and under current law, are unable to move forward in their healing because these criminal records. Their exploitation and trauma continue to follow them even after exiting trafficking, prohibiting them from truly moving forward into a place of healing and restoration. Criminal records create significant barriers to stable housing, employment, and educational opportunities—not only for survivors themselves, but for their children. These individual barriers compound into broader community impact through increased unemployment and generational cycles of reduced opportunity. Please advance HB 1298 to prevent re-traumatization, to ensure justice, and to promote healing for survivors of human trafficking in Virginia.
I write in strong support of House Bill 1298. As the Director of Virginia's only Human Trafficking Legal Clinic, our office has screened and represented trafficking survivors seeking vacatur relief since 2023. The current narrow scope of qualifying offenses leaves many victims without remedy, perpetuating the collateral consequences of crimes they were compelled to commit. 21 survivors we have screened collectively presented with over 100 criminal offense charges directly resulting from their exploitation—ranging from drug offenses to theft, trespass, and prostitution-related charges. The Rebuttable Presumption is Essential The proposed rebuttable presumption in § 19.2-327.18(F) addresses a critical gap in the current process. Despite presenting compelling evidence—including letters from Assistant United States Attorneys formally attesting to our clients' confirmed victim status—we have faced vigorous Commonwealth opposition to petitions in certain jurisdictions. Trafficking survivors should not face essentially varying evidentiary standards across different jurisdictions, or be required to relitigate their victim status when official documentation already confirms their victimization. The rebuttable presumption provides an appropriate safeguard: it recognizes the weight of official documentation while preserving the Commonwealth's ability to present contrary evidence in truly disputed cases. Without this provision, victims face re-traumatization through protracted litigation over facts already established by law enforcement and federal prosecutors. The rebuttable presumption balances justice for victims with prosecutorial discretion. I urge the subcommittee to advance this legislation.
Shared Hope International is a non-profit organization dedicated to preventing, restoring, and bringing justice to survivors of child and youth sex trafficking. HB 1298, if passed, expands the issuance of a writ of vacatur for victims of human trafficking to all non-violent offenses in Virginia — allowing survivors to vacate certain convictions and associated burdens when their criminal conduct was a direct result of being trafficked. Virginia’s current vacatur statute represents an important acknowledgment that survivors of human trafficking should not bear lifelong criminal consequences for acts committed as a direct result of their exploitation. However, in practice, the law remains too narrow and fails to account for the full range of criminalized conduct survivors are compelled to engage in under the control of traffickers. By limiting relief primarily to certain low-level or enumerated offenses, current law leaves many survivors without meaningful access to justice and healing. Traffickers often force survivors to commit acts such as fraud, financial crimes, drug possession and/or distribution, and other offenses as a means of control, profit, or punishment. These offenses are not committed independently or voluntarily; rather, they are survival behaviors driven by violence, threats, psychological manipulation, and the constant risk of retaliation. Yet under current law, survivors convicted of these nonviolent felonies are often categorically excluded from vacatur relief, regardless of the clear causal connection between the trafficking and the offense. This narrow framework creates arbitrary distinctions that undermine the purpose of vacatur statutes. A survivor may obtain relief for an enumerated offense directly connected to their trafficking, while another survivor—coerced into a non-enumerated offense through the same exploitation—remains permanently barred from relief. This inconsistency fails to reflect the realities of trafficking and places undue weight on offense type rather than the survivor’s victimization and lack of meaningful agency at the time of the conduct. The consequences of these exclusions are severe. Survivors with convictions face persistent barriers to housing, employment, education, professional licensure, and family stability. These barriers directly impede long-term recovery and increase vulnerability to re-exploitation. Moreover, overly restrictive eligibility standards deter survivors from even seeking relief. Survivors often carry deep mistrust of systems that previously failed to protect them. When statutes are narrowly drawn or require survivors to fit within rigid offense categories, they reinforce the perception that relief is inaccessible, burdensome, or not intended for people with complex criminal histories—despite those histories being a direct product of trafficking. HB1298 addresses these shortcomings by expanding vacatur eligibility to include all nonviolent offenses when a survivor can demonstrate that the offense was a direct result of being trafficked. By allowing courts to consider the full context of exploitation and coercion, the bill ensures that relief is available to survivors whose experiences do not fit neatly into narrow statutory boxes. We strongly urge this committee to vote favorably upon HB 1298 to protect victims who are compelled to commit crimes and treat them as the victims they are. Thank you for your consideration.
HB1301 - School boards; student diabetes care & management in schools, division wide plan required.
I am the parent of a Virginia student who managed Type 1 Diabetes throughout his school years. We encountered inconsistent emergency protocols, varying procedures between schools, and uncertainty about who was trained to respond in a crisis. Virginia’s diabetes-related school code is 27 years old and no longer aligns with current standards of care. SB122/HB 1301 provides clarity and safeguards that will protect students across the Commonwealth. I respectfully urge you to support this bill.
I believe the current law to be restrictive of school staff members' ability to monitor T1D students and/or help intervene in emergency situations. The current law should be updated to reflect the realities of the current technology and best practices to keep students safe.
This is an economic issue as well as a health, safety and human rights issue. If children’s diabetes isn’t managed properly at school, they can’t maximize their academic potential. If parents don’t have faith in the school’s ability to keep their child safe and healthy, they are not only emotionally distraught but distracted at work. I know this from personal experience and having to work part-time because my son’s elementary school could not fully accommodate his needs. Please pass this bill. Thank you.
This will help a little girl I love dearly very much at school. Being 10 is hard enough , having diabetes and being 10 is even harder. She needs as much support, backed up by information, to feel safe at school.
I support the bill as a teacher and a type 1 diabetic.
As a mother of a T1D in first grade, I ask that you support this bill. It is a constant struggle getting schools on board with the changing needs. Treatment has advanced and the laws supporting these students need to keep up. Thank you for your time and support. Megan Atkinson, Hanover County resident
I highly encourage you to pass bill HB1301 in support of Va’s children living with Type One Diabetes. The current Bill is far out of date and our children, including mine deserve to have the best care possible especially when attending school.
Please support this bill. We must support students’ medical care for those with diabetes in the educational setting. As a substitute teacher, I feel passionately about this. These students need the toolbox to do their “jobs” as well as possible. It is an absolute travesty that the United States has the tools available but has not yet provided them to children. With all of the bills that are passed, this one seems to be a no brainer. Please support our diabetic children!
In support of House Bill 1301 My name is Treina Owen and this my son Karson Owen, 14. We both live with type one diabetes. I was diagnosed 30 years ago and blind due to diabetic retinopathy and Karson, diagnosed 6 years ago next month. Our daughter, Kamryn is 24 and was diagnosed at 5 years old. I support this bill because there have been many changes within the past 27 years and the code should reflect those changes. Imagine Kamryn going to the nurse’s office to receive an insulin injection through a syringe as well as a finger prick to test her blood sugar for every snack and meal she ate at school and the nurse calling each time to discuss. Imagine a her not being able to go on a school field trip unless the school nurse or parent can attend. Now, the real emergency is when the school nurse is out of school for the day with no back up to the back up. Imagine Kamryn getting picked on saying she’s the nurse’s pet because she leaves class early for lunch and gets to cut the line to get her lunch first, all while missing instruction time. That is what we experienced starting 2006. Fast forward to 2020 when Karson was diagnosed. There was no one-week stay in the hospital like his sister, just a next day Dr visit. There was a short time on injections with an insulin pen while we waited for his insulin pump and continuous glucose monitor. These two life-saving technological advances, along with his cellphone and smart watch all work together via Bluetooth. Karson’s insulin pump can deliver basal units all day long and he can either manually bolus on his insulin pump or his cellphone insulin pump app. This means there is no need for insulin administration from a syringe through a school nurse. Thankfully, with all of this technology, anyone with the follow capabilities on remote devices can monitor, on multiple devices, multiple users simultaneously. If you could see my phone I’m personally following 4, to include myself on my phone, watch, and iPad. We are able to text our son about important blood sugar events throughout the day. These items are his life line. This same remote technology can be beneficial in our schools and on our school buses, where they are the closest to our children during school hours. Karson attends a speciality center and rides a regular school bus then a hub bus, to and from school which is a 1 1/2 ride. That is a long ride and he sometimes falls asleep. His bus drivers could monitor and be alerted of blood sugar emergencies to and from school in the event he isn’t just asleep. With remote devices in the school system and on school buses like iPads, cell phones, and other compatible devices with a follow app, an emergency can be detected, alerted, treated, and even prevented. Lives can be saved. Thank you for your time, effort, and consideration. Treina Owen and the rest of my family (to include 3 T1Ds and 1 T2D that uses remote follow technology)
In support of House Bill 1301 My name is Treina Owen and this my son Karson Owen, 14. We both live with type one diabetes. I was diagnosed 30 years ago and blind due to diabetic retinopathy and Karson, diagnosed 6 years ago next month. Our daughter, Kamryn is 24 and was diagnosed at 5 years old. I support this bill because there have been many changes within the past 27 years and the code should reflect those changes. Imagine Kamryn going to the nurse’s office to receive an insulin injection through a syringe as well as a finger prick to test her blood sugar for every snack and meal she ate at school and the nurse calling each time to discuss. Imagine a her not being able to go on a school field trip unless the school nurse or parent can attend. Now, the real emergency is when the school nurse is out of school for the day with no back up to the back up. Imagine Kamryn getting picked on saying she’s the nurse’s pet because she leaves class early for lunch and gets to cut the line to get her lunch first, all while missing instruction time. That is what we experienced starting 2006. Fast forward to 2020 when Karson was diagnosed. There was no one-week stay in the hospital like his sister, just a next day Dr visit. There was a short time on injections with an insulin pen while we waited for his insulin pump and continuous glucose monitor. These two life-saving technological advances, along with his cellphone and smart watch all work together via Bluetooth. Karson’s insulin pump can deliver basal units all day long and he can either manually bolus on his insulin pump or his cellphone insulin pump app. This means there is no need for insulin administration from a syringe through a school nurse. Thankfully, with all of this technology, anyone with the follow capabilities on remote devices can monitor, on multiple devices, multiple users simultaneously. If you could see my phone I’m personally following 4, to include myself on my phone, watch, and iPad. We are able to text our son about important blood sugar events throughout the day. These items are his life line. This same remote technology can be beneficial in our schools and on our school buses, where they are the closest to our children during school hours. Karson attends a speciality center and rides a regular school bus then a hub bus, to and from school which is a 1 1/2 ride. That is a long ride and he sometimes falls asleep. His bus drivers could monitor and be alerted of blood sugar emergencies to and from school in the event he isn’t just asleep. With remote devices in the school system and on school buses like iPads, cell phones, and other compatible devices with a follow app, an emergency can be detected, alerted, treated, and even prevented. Lives can be saved. Thank you for your time, effort, and consideration. Treina Owen and the rest of my family (to include 3 T1Ds and 1 T2D that uses remote follow technology)
Please support this bill! It will help my sister and many others like her to feel and be more safe in their schools
It is crucial that children with Type 1 Diabetes be provided the kind of support in public schools that HB 1301 requires.
I am a retired school health nurse. In my practice over more than 20 years I was closely involved in the planning, implementing, and training of school staff and school health aids for care of students with complex health care needs, including a number of students with T1D. I am also the great aunt of a current Fairfax county student with T1D. It is essential for allignment with current technology and safe diabetes management for HB1301 to pass- it is way past time to update the language in the Code of Virginia regarding diabetes care and assure the safety of our students. Please dont miss this chance to get it right and support students' success in school and in life.
I am writing to urgently request your support for HB1301. This bill is critical for the safety and equity of students with Type 1 Diabetes in Virginia schools. Our Deep Personal Connection ~ Type 1 Diabetes impacts my entire family: I have Type 1, and my daughter was diagnosed at just 3 years old. ~ Additionally, my sister and my niece also live with Type 1 Diabetes. ~ We understand intimately that this condition requires constant vigilance and immediate action. The Rising Need ~ The incidence rate of Type 1 Diabetes has been on the rise in recent years, meaning more Virginia students than ever require support during the school day. ~ Schools must be equipped to handle this growing population safely and effectively. The Medical Necessity ~ My daughter, like many students, relies on an insulin pump. When a pump fails, blood sugar starts to spike to dangerous levels almost immediately. ~ A failed pump must be replaced instantly to maintain safety. Relying on backup methods (like injections without precise calculation tools) is extremely risky and disruptive. ~ We are fortunate that my wife and I work from home and we live only 1/2 mile from school, allowing us to intervene. However, this is not possible for most working families. The Solution HB1301 Provides ~ Current regulations often prevent willing staff from assisting with device replacements, forcing parents to leave work or risk their child's health. This creates a barrier to the "Free Appropriate Public Education" guaranteed by IDEA and Section 504. ~ HB1301 simply makes it possible for school staff who are willing to change devices to do so. ~ My daughter is now in 6th grade, and there are staff members ready and eager to help be part of her care team. This bill would finally allow them to support her fully. Please vote yes on HB1301 to ensure our schools can legally support the staff willing to keep our children safe.
Please support HB1301
Type 1 Diabetes is a long term chronic illness and caring for my Type 1 son is an all consuming job. Updating and provided the school with better technology and management abilities is critical to all children with Type 1 diabetes. Without the ability for the school nurse to monitor my son's blood sugars via the Dexcom app, I was calling the school on average 1 time a day. Some days, I talked to the nurse 4 to 5 times a day. My son is in 6th grade now and was diagnosed at age 4 (before starting school). Many times the teacher were unaware of his low blood sugars. I remember calling the school when he as in kindergarten to check on him because his blood sugar were in the low 50s and the nurse did NOT know he was low, nor was she near him to help him and the teachers were also unaware because they did not hear his alarms going off. The amazing nurse literally ran to the playground with the medical supplies to find him and help him. That was the day that I knew I couldn't trust the traditional system the schools had in place (listening for his alarms to go off and then helping him). So much as IMPROVED in diabetes technology to help all diabetics manage their chronic illness and school should be using all technology out there. Our nurse has been allowed to follow my son's blood sugar reading for the last year and half and it has been amazing! The nurse has been able to see patterns in his blood sugars and help him treat his lows and highs before they become a problem and he can stay in class and learn. I now trust in the school systems ability to properly care for my son.
Please provide assistance to our children with type 1 diabetes. I have a 6 year old with type one diabetes and the need for assistance is critical. Fear schools can not properly manage my daughter’s diabetes when I am not with her is a real concern. Thank you for your time.
We need this on behalf of ALL TD1 parents and children.
I urge you to support HB 1301. This bill will update outdated language and include definitions to better suit the changing technology that most T1Ds use, allowing them to stay safer in schools. The bill simply allows willing and trained school staff to insert insulin pumps, which is as simple as attaching a sticker and following along with simple guide on a phone app. This is a much safer alternative to having to fall back on manual injections of insulin, which has no safeguards in place for over dosing amounts that could be lethal. I appreciate your consideration and support of this bill, which will allow Type 1 Diabetics a safer day at school, to allow less distractions and provide them a chance to focus on learning instead of worrying about their health.
As a father of a Type 1 diabetic in middle school, I greatly support HB1301 and the positive impact it will make on the many lives of children who struggle with this disease every day, in and out of school. We have seen firsthand how important dedicated care and support of type 1 children help them to grow and learn as every other child in school.
This bill is integral to our communities all over the Commonwealth. Please pass this bill into law and protect our children!
I’m writing about my son, Logan. He has Type 1 diabetes and uses a pump and CGM. Every day at school, his safety depends on staff paying attention—but they aren’t. They test him only when he’s already high, dismiss the results, and sometimes refuse to help him learn if his blood sugar is off. At one point, they even suggested homeschooling instead of providing proper support. Logan eats, plays, and learns like any other kid, but managing his diabetes is not optional. He needs: • Immediate access to his pump, CGM, snacks, and supplies. • Trained staff who can assist, including giving glucagon in emergencies. • A care plan that is actually followed, not just filed away. Right now, the law on paper—like HB624 and HB1301—says schools must protect kids with diabetes. The reality? Logan is left unsafe, unsupported, and struggling just to stay alive and learn. That gap between law and practice is dangerous. I’m asking you to make sure legislation doesn’t just exist on paper. Schools must be held accountable to follow diabetes care plans so that students like Logan can be safe, independent when able, and fully included in school life. Logan is capable, smart, and wants to learn. He shouldn’t have to fight for basic safety every single day. Your support can make sure no kid has to face this at school.
I am the parent of a 10 year old boy in 5th grade and I support this bill so that my son and other children with T1D are safe and healthy and school staff are trained in diabetic care. Without these trainings, our children are at risk of complications from high or low numbers which can be life-threatening.
Please support T1D care in schools.
I am a nurse and a Type 1 Diabetic mom of a 5 year old kindergartener. This bill is extremely important to ensure the safest options are used to manage Type 1 Diabetic children everyday at school. Insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors are life saving devices and they need to be replaced ASAP when they malfunction or fall off at school. If an insulin pump cannot be replaced, a child must then depend on manual injections that require an aide or RN to calculate a dose that must be 100% correct 100% of the time. This creates room for human error with this potentially lethal medication our children need to survive. Insulin pumps are by far the safest option because of the safeguards they have in place when it calculates and dispenses insulin into our children based on metrics discussed with their medical providers. Not replacing the continuous glucose monitors ASAP also creates room for medical emergencies and possible fatalities when signs and symptoms of low or high glucose are missed, especially in our most vulnerable children who are young and are dependent on adults for their care. My son cannot identify signs or symptoms yet of low or high glucose, and he doesn't show noticeable outward signs either. The continuous glucose monitor keeps him alive by relaying his glucose numbers in real time to the adults who take care of him. Finger pricking a few times a day at school if a continuous glucose monitor cannot be replaced, puts his life in jeopardy. Both devices are replaced every single day by caretakers at home, who are not licensed nurses or providers. Mature grade school children can replace them on their own. As a RN myself, alongside the fact that my son goes to a school that doesn't have a RN on site most days, I believe restricting these simple tasks to only RN's in school is not sensible and puts our children in danger if they cannot get these devices replaced ASAP. I am expressing my strong support for HB1301, which will strengthen protections for students with Type 1 Diabetes in Virginia schools. It is imperative that code written 27 years ago is updated to reflect the diabetes management students rely on today, restoring the intent of Virginia’s 1999 Safe at School Act, which was enacted to increase access to medically necessary diabetes care when a nurse is not present. This bill ensures clear guidance, safety, and collaboration so that students receive the care they need to stay safe and thrive in the classroom. On behalf of Virginia students with Type 1 Diabetes, thank you for voicing your support Sincerely, Lauren Hatcher 6113 Oakengate Way, Centreville, VA 20120, USA
Please support Hb1031 to support T1D care in schools. Thank you!
Our children deserve to be monitored at school in the event of an urgent low. Is exhausting sitting around while trying to work full-time monitor numbers all day and calling the school every time she is high our way.. medical accommodations in the school system is outdated and needs to be updated to reflect technology and the ability to help our children get taken out the classroom less for nurse visits and for parents to be confident that the school system is looking out for the best interest of these children.
Diabetes management through CGM while at school is crucial. A nurse or teacher should know when a student is going low in order to take proper action.
I am in support of HP 1301 I am in favor of changing diabetes care for children in our school I believe it important to keep up and change as technology improves the lives and health for the children Don’t get left behind while others are updating care at home and in other school systems Thank you D Thorpe
I am in support of HP 1301 I am in favor of changing diabetes care for children in our school I believe it important to keep up and change as technology improves the lives and health for the children Don’t get left behind while others are updating care at home and in other school systems Thank you D Thorpe
Please consider passing this bill. Children with diabetes need support in their school, available at any time during the day. There needs to be a plan in place to ensure any insulin needs are not being misconstrued as behavior issues. To also ensure that the medical condition is dealt with whenever necessary to ensure the child has a safe place in the school. Safety is the number one concern in schools end it is a responsibility of the teachers in administration in that school to keep each and every child safe, including children with diabetes
An update to accommodations for children with diabetes is vital! As medical treatments, medical devices and care have evolved, the law needs to reflect those changes and allow for proper accommodations!
Schools need a system that protects and empowers nurses to use modern diabetes tools and provide consistent support to children who depend on them. The technology is there. The data is there. What is missing are the clear rights, protections, and expectations that allow school nurses to safely monitor glucose data and intervene when a child needs help. HB1301 is a win-win for everyone.
I am writing to express my strong support for HB1301, introduced by Senator Jeremy McPike, which strengthens legal protections for students with Type 1 Diabetes (T1D) in Virginia schools. T1D is a chronic, life-threatening autoimmune disease with no cure that requires 24/7 glucose monitoring and insulin delivery to prevent dangerous blood sugar swings that can cause seizures, coma, or death. Schools are federally obligated to provide this care in the absence of the parent, ensuring students with T1D are safe and have equal access to education. HB1301 updates and consolidates already existing Virginia Codes into one designated section. It ensures that diabetes care decisions remain with medical professionals and parents—not schools. Schools may determine “how” to implement a student’s medical plan, but not “if” they will implement it. This bill prevents schools from ignoring legal obligations and ensures equal access to care by updating outdated policies that have caused confusion and inconsistency in diabetes management for decades. I urge you to support HB1301 to protect students with T1D, create clear guidelines for parents, providers, and schools to ensure all children receive the care they need to stay safe, in class, and learning in ALL Virginia schools. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Language directing school nurses to access prescribers directly for clarification and questions per the Nurse Practice Act.
It is imperative that this bill be passed for the health and welfare of students with T1D. Children spend much of their lives in school and as such the importance of the diabetes care that they receive while in school should be stressed. Two of my own children with T1D had different experiences due to the caregivers at the elementary school they attended. My first child’s experience was positive as there was an RN at the school everyday and she had taken care of many children with T1D. My second child’s experience was much different. The nurse retired and a”clinic attendant” with no health care experience was hired. I spent many hours in person and on the phone with her until she was comfortable with caring for my child.
I am a support of HB1301 It is of urgency that we need to make a change in how we support children with type one diabetes in our schools. We need to modernize the care at school. Let’s not get left behind. Our main goal is to help children have the best education possible with the support of the school system to have diabetes support so they can maintain their health as they are away from their home for the majority of the day. Cheryl Thomas
Please support HB 1301. My 12 year old son in Fairfax County carries and uses diabetes supplies, self-checks glucose levels, and uses smart devices for care management on school property and buses. His right to this self care should be passed into law. These are basic tools he uses to manage his glucose levels and stay healthy.
My grandson Jack was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes at the age of one. I vividly remember the first day he went to school and the anxiety his parents felt leaving him in the hands of the school to administer his insulin. Those first months were not easy, and it became apparent to my son and daughter-in-law that the management of Type 1 diabetes care for children in school was a little outdated. Knowing the stress that diabetes places on a family, I would urge you to pass Bill 1301 so that parents can feel more confident in the knowledge that their child’s diabetic needs will be adequately provided for with updated management care and guidelines. Thank you.
We are a little over three years into having an elementary-aged child with type one diabetes. For the well-being and safety of my son, and other children, who have no choice in having type one diabetes, please consider updating HB1301-Thomas to make diabetes management in public schools more accessible.
I am writing in support of this bill. Please vote yes on updating standards for diabetes care training in our public schools. Our child with type 1 diabetes was nearly killed twice due to lack of training and education. Insulin is so lethal that it requires two nurses to administer in a hospital environment. Modern training would enable self-care with improved safety as is common with automated insulin delivery (AID) systems on the market today. These systems have proven to improve health and lower blood glucose without increasing the risk of severe low or highs. The training is essential to enabling an equal opportunity for children with type 1 diabetes to attend our quality public schools and not face the impossible challenge between ensuring your child will be alive at the end of the day vs. enduring the financial devastation of private school tuition. Please vote yes to protect our children!!
I strongly support the improvements this bill supports if passed.
I am a parent of a child with type one diabetes. I support this bill because as a parent and former elementary school teacher, I have seen the challenges kids face when schools deny accommodations deemed necessary by their endocrinologist. One night I was awakened by a severe low blood sugar alert from my son's glucose monitor to my phone. I ran to his room and found him on the floor having a seizure. My husband called 911 while I frantically searched through my son's go-bag for his emergency glucagon. Thanks to his glucose monitor and phone app, we were able to respond quickly, and he recovered. You see, his monitor and his phone are life-saving devices. Having them with him at school is essential. They have alerted me more times than I can count. These kids have the same right to a quality education as anyone else, and they deserve the appropriate medical accommodations so they can be safe and successful in school.
As somebody who this bill may have allowed to stay enrolled in public education as a child, I am asking you to please vote yes on updating standards for diabetes care training in our public schools.
As a parent of a child with Type 1 Disbetes for the past 6 years, I do anything I can do to support initiatives to help those with this disease. I wholeheartedly support this bill and would love to see it passed!
As the parent of a middle school aged Type 1 Diabetic, I urge you to support HB 1301. This bill will update outdated language and include definitions to better suit the changing technology that most T1Ds use, allowing them to stay safer in schools. The bill simply allows willing and trained school staff to insert insulin pumps, which is as simple as attaching a sticker and following along with simple guide on a phone app. This is a much safer alternative to having to fall back on manual injections of insulin, which has no safeguards in place for over dosing amounts that could be lethal. When the school does not allow trained and willing staff to replace pumps, it requires parents to leave work to go to the school to apply something that takes less than 5 minutes. While my job can be flexible, often it is not and this is a major disruption when the school is 45 minutes away from my job. Imagine when a parent has less flexibility, and the impossible choice between losing a job by leaving to take care of their child or staying and risking their health. When a pump wearing type 1 diabetic’s pump fails, they have no baseline insulin on board which means they can reach critically high blood sugar levels in a few hours. I appreciate your consideration and support of this bill, which will allow Type 1 Diabetics a safer day at school, to allow less distractions and provide them a chance to focus on learning instead of worrying about their health.
My 10 yr old daughter was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes last year in April 2025. Laws and guidelines in schools for Type 1 diabetes desperately need updating since they were last updated almost 30 years ago. Thank you for considering this for the safety of my daughter and all Type 1 students in Virginia.
I am the parent of a Virginia public school student with Type 1 Diabetes (T1D). Please support this bill that will update the law to meet current standards of care so that Virginia children with T1D can remain safe and healthy in school. Technology continues to advance in diabetes care and our laws must keep up with the times so that these technologies can remain in place. Thank you for your consideration.
As the parent of a middle school aged Type 1 Diabetic, I urge you to support HB 1301. This bill will update outdated language and include definitions to better suit the changing technology that most T1Ds use, allowing them to stay safer in schools. The bill simply allows willing and trained school staff to insert insulin pumps, which is as simple as attaching a sticker and following along with simple guide on a phone app. This is a much safer alternative to having to fall back on manual injections of insulin, which has no safeguards in place for over dosing amounts that could be lethal. I appreciate your consideration and support of this bill, which will allow Type 1 Diabetics a safer day at school, to allow less distractions and provide them a chance to focus on learning instead of worrying about their health.
Hello, I still stand strongly with the bill- Students with Diabetes in Virginia Public Schools! It is so important to our children facing this disease. Having the school system be a part of it is even better with more eyes on their diabetes journey. I hope the Senate will unanimously will pass this piece of legislation for the sake of our children. Thank you for your time! Mary Benek
Thank you for your support of HB1301. Our 10-year-old granddaughter was diagnosed with type one diabetes last year and it has been a challenge for her and all of our family to adapt. We are thankful that her elementary school nurse is also type one diabetic and knows how to support her at school. The bill will ensure that our granddaughter will continue to have support at school for her diabetes while she continues her education in middle school next year and then later in high school.
This needed for all students to receive free and appointed public education.
I support HB1301 because we need to support all children and their various needs in public schools.
I fully support access to life saving medicine for ALL children and I encourage you to FUND and support speaking on behalf of ALL children.
Please vote and support of HB 1301 to keep our children who have insulin independent diabetes safe at school. At this point in time, better licensure and training is required in order to administer diabetes care to my animals than it is to my child. As a result, my child was given a life-threatening overdose of insulin during her second grade year at a public school. As a result, we had to move her to a private school for her safety. This bankrupted us. Please vote yes.
Please, do the Type 1 Families justice in passing this Bill. Our children rely on us, whom rely on you, to be our voices in Legislation.
HB1306 - Virginia Retirement System; return to work, break in service.
HB1313 - Law-enforcement officers and firefighters; exacerbation of certain disorders incurred.
I am writing in strong support of HB 1313. I have served for over 23 years as a firefighter and paramedic in Arlington County, and I currently reside in Springfield, Virginia (ZIP 22152). I am also a member of IAFF Local 2800 and am submitting this testimony in my personal capacity. In the fire service, mental injury is a line-of-duty injury. The trauma we experience is not usually the result of a single dramatic event, but the cumulative effect of repeated exposure to violence, death, and human suffering over many years. Pediatric calls, violent incidents where responders and patients are both at risk, and repeated medical calls involving death are routine parts of this profession. Over time, these experiences take a serious psychological toll, even on highly trained and resilient professionals. Under current workers’ compensation law, first responders frequently face claim denials based on arguments that mental health conditions are “pre-existing” or not connected to a specific physical injury. This standard does not reflect how psychological injury actually develops in emergency responders. Trauma accumulates gradually, and by the time symptoms become disabling, they are often rooted in years of job-related exposure. I have personally dealt with severe anxiety, mood instability, and depression stemming from repeated exposures in my career. I have also seen many colleagues struggle with similar issues, and a colleague from my recruit class recently died by suicide after nearly 23 years of service. While every case is different, it is clear that untreated occupational trauma can escalate into life-threatening crises if early treatment is not accessible. These injuries also affect families. Long hours, staffing shortages, and mandatory overtime already place strain on households. When untreated mental health injuries are added, spouses and children live with the emotional unpredictability that comes with cumulative trauma. Supporting mental health care for first responders supports family stability and helps retain experienced professionals in public safety roles. HB 1313 appropriately addresses this gap by clarifying that exacerbation of PTSD, anxiety, and depressive disorders from repeated occupational exposures can qualify as compensable injuries, allowing responders to access care earlier rather than being forced to deteriorate before qualifying for help. I respectfully urge the committee to report HB 1313 favorably and allow it to advance.
HB1366 - Local boards & departments; DSS to create corrective action plans & assumption of temporary control.
HB1372 - Solar energy facilities; prevailing wage &apprenticeship requirements, state & local tax exemption.
HB1373 - Regional special ed.; DOE to assess enhancements &strategies to maximize use of funds for students.
HB1378 - Community Colleges, powers, State Board for; acquisition and improvement of certain property.
HB1390 - Health insurance; pharmacies, freedom of choice, delivery of prescription drugs, penalties.
Dr. Rich Ingram, representing the Virginia Association of Hematologists and Oncologists. Good afternoon, my name is Rich Ingram, and I am a full-time medical oncologist and have been practicing in Winchester, Virginia for the past 23 years When treatment is delayed because of insurance mandated white bagging, it is not abstract concept or a talking point—it is a real patient sitting in front of me, waiting. This legislation restores common sense flexibility by allowing patients and physicians to decide how critical medications are delivered, without unnecessary barriers. I respectfully ask for your support of this bill and on behalf of the patients my team collectively serves I would like to thank Delegate Ward for bringing this important issue forward on their behalf Richard Ingram, MD, FASCO Shenandoah Oncology, PC 400 Campus Blvd., Ste. 100 Winchester, VA 22601 Phone: 540-662-1108 extension 214 Fax: 540-773-7788 Mobile: 540-974-7845 richard.ingram@usoncology.com
On behalf of the Association for Clinical Oncology (ASCO), I'm pleased to submit a letter in support of HB 1390. Please don't hesitate to reach out if you have questions about cancer care; we're happy to be a resource.
HB1393 - Electric utilities; pilot programs for energy assistance and weatherization for certain individuals.
SUPPORT HB1393 promotes energy equity in our most vulnerable communities by ensuring a continued financial commitment to energy assistance and weatherization programs. Extending the funding commitments for both Dominion Energy Virginia and Appalachian Power Company, the bill safeguards necessary resources while prioritizing customer affordability and grid reliability under the Commonwealth Clean Energy Policy.
HB1411 - Defendant; evidence of mental condition admissible.
Summary: Analysis supporting favorable passage of HB1411 with three proposed amendments. This includes: Explanation of the statutory gap in § 19.2-271.6 that HB1411 corrects Fiscal impact modeling showing $15M-$32M net annual savings through mental health diversion Equity data on racial disparities, rural access barriers, and disability unemployment Three recommended amendments:(1) judicial training requirement, (2) annual reporting to General Assembly, (3) authorization for caregiver testimony Implementation safeguards preserving judicial discretion Precedent from Maryland reforms and federal sentencing guidelines 22 supporting references to DOC data, DBHDS treatment costs, and peer-reviewed research Purpose: To provide the Courts of Justice Committee with evidence-based justification of HB1411 along with a fiscally-responsible grounding due to three key areas of improvement in the current statutory construction.
HB1446 - School nurses; sickle cell disease training.
HB1464 - Victims of crime; reimbursement for expenses, etc.
HB1465 - Blue catfish; marketing & production, Marine Prod. Board to establish full-time equivalent position.
Hello Delegates, I am writing in opposition of HB1396. This bill had been brought fourth by landowners groups that falsely claim to represent and maximize property owners rights when in fact they are property owners that want to end the tradition of hound hunting. This is proven by these groups comments on their own social media pages. These groups have made claim that only 8 states allow the use of hounds to hunt, a stat quoted by delegates in the subcommittee, that is simply a false statement, currently only 9 states allow hounds to be used to hunt deer but nearly every state allows the utilization of dogs to hunt other game species many not requiring an special license to do so. I ask the delegates to understand that the vast majority of the members of the hound hunting organizations are land owners as well in addition to all of the landowners who lease or allow hound hunting on their land support the tradition of hound hunting. This bill creates a permit allowing the DWR create and issue permits on a may issue criteria with visual permit requirements for hounds and vehicles. If Additional funding is needed to police game laws the bill should be amended to a license just like an archery or muzzleloading license that is a shall issue. Additionally the cost for said license should be reduced and required for all that utilize or partcipate in any type of hunting that utilizes a dog. Dogs are already required to have owner contact info on their collar and their vehicles have state issued license plates therefore marking is not necessary. Lastly the only ones who should be exempt from license purchase are those that utilize dogs to hunt on their own land. This simplifies the requirements and makes it fair for all parties. Basically if big game is harvested and checked in and the use of dogs is checked as a part of big game license registering process they should be required to have a dog hunting license or be exempt as a land owner. I hope that you find this as a reasonable comprise. Additionally there needs to be some sort of recourse for false complaints or accusations. If this bill continues as is it will create more tensions between those who utilize dogs to hunt and those who don't like the use of hunting dogs. False complaints will continue to increase cause additional hunter harassment and tension between hunters and those that oppose it. Thank you for your time. V/R, B. C. Bunch
To who ever may read this message My name is jacob austin and me and my family live thur out Amherst Nelson and big island. We have hunted coon hounds for 4 generations starting with my great grand father (van staton)to my grandmother (Betty austin) to my father (Ernest donold austin j)r to me and my brother (Matthew austin) this is a tradition that we have cherished since we were lil kids see are dad go out every night after working long hours him telling us stories about papa van with was amazed by the places he want things he got to see walking thru the nights to get to his dogs. By time we was old enough he let us go with him he grab his 4 year old male walker hounds aka storm man he was one hell of a hound but that but im getting of track but as I got older my life changed drastically mom and father got divorced and I just went into a deep state of depression thinking it was my fault and I was just ready to just leave this earth to go to a better place but no I just hooked my trailer up to my four-wheeler and loaded my dog box and hound aka Rosco p coal train a freeing walker hound and being in the woods just help me forget everything that was happening hearing the sound of him freeing in the holler of those mountains is music for a hurting soul and mind walking to the tree being excited to see what's up there is just my way of therapy for me. I like for my kids, grandkids and everyone after me to still be able to carry on this family tradition turn to running hounds or being out in nature to enjoy what the good lord has created for us inside of turning to hard drugs to make that pain go away if someone has read this is really appreciate u taking u time to read it and have a blessed day
James River Association Supports HB1465, and is appreciative of Delegate Simonds for bringing the legislation. This bill formalizes a recommendation from the catfish workgroup, which our organization was a participant in over the last year, and adds a staff member to the marine products board focused on marketing blue catfish. Blue catfish are an invasive species causing significant impacts to the James River ecosystem. This bill represents a useful step in helping to reduce the blue catfish population, which is sorely needed to protect Virginia’s native fish populations that are presently preyed upon and being displaced by invasive blue catfish.
I strongly advise you to oppose SB1396. Thank you.
We oppose bills Sb471 Sb770 Hb1396 It is a virgina heritage I have been hunting with my dogs ever since I could walk, and I want my nephews and my kids to enjoy the thangs that brought me so much joy and gave me something to look forward to every year these dogs are not just hunting dogs they are our pets and a part of my family please oppose these bills so my kids and grandkids can enjoy what I have and so many others have for generations.
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries
HB1475 - Virginia Fungi Task Force; established, report.
I am strongly in support of HB1475. Fungi are critically understudied and underrepresented within state conservation practices. Implementing a Fungi Task Force would establish avenues for essential research on fungal biodiversity, expand public education on fungi, and hopefully create opportunities for community engagement and employment. Fundamentally, ensuring the health and longevity of our fungal partners will directly impact the future well-being of our forests and the native plants and animals that depend on them! Please vote yes on this bill! Fungi are the present, past, and the future!
Hello Delegates, I am writing in opposition of HB1396. This bill had been brought fourth by landowners groups that falsely claim to represent and maximize property owners rights when in fact they are property owners that want to end the tradition of hound hunting. This is proven by these groups comments on their own social media pages. These groups have made claim that only 8 states allow the use of hounds to hunt, a stat quoted by delegates in the subcommittee, that is simply a false statement, currently only 9 states allow hounds to be used to hunt deer but nearly every state allows the utilization of dogs to hunt other game species many not requiring an special license to do so. I ask the delegates to understand that the vast majority of the members of the hound hunting organizations are land owners as well in addition to all of the landowners who lease or allow hound hunting on their land support the tradition of hound hunting. This bill creates a permit allowing the DWR create and issue permits on a may issue criteria with visual permit requirements for hounds and vehicles. If Additional funding is needed to police game laws the bill should be amended to a license just like an archery or muzzleloading license that is a shall issue. Additionally the cost for said license should be reduced and required for all that utilize or partcipate in any type of hunting that utilizes a dog. Dogs are already required to have owner contact info on their collar and their vehicles have state issued license plates therefore marking is not necessary. Lastly the only ones who should be exempt from license purchase are those that utilize dogs to hunt on their own land. This simplifies the requirements and makes it fair for all parties. Basically if big game is harvested and checked in and the use of dogs is checked as a part of big game license registering process they should be required to have a dog hunting license or be exempt as a land owner. I hope that you find this as a reasonable comprise. Additionally there needs to be some sort of recourse for false complaints or accusations. If this bill continues as is it will create more tensions between those who utilize dogs to hunt and those who don't like the use of hunting dogs. False complaints will continue to increase cause additional hunter harassment and tension between hunters and those that oppose it. Thank you for your time. V/R, B. C. Bunch
I support the passage of this House bill. There is still so much to learn from the fungi in our environment. This is just a very necessary first step to help improve many aspects of the surrounding communities. From academics, to native plant protection, and local fungus education this bill is very important. Please vote yes
I am in support of HB1475 and would like to see the creation of a Virginia Fungi Task Force.
Please pass HB1475. There are fungi that sell for $100/ounce. Who knows what treasures we may be ignoring in Virginia.
If you’re tired of the 9-to-5 grind or just want a way to put some extra cash in your pocket every week, I have something for you. Companies are currently looking for remote writers to handle: Article Writing Blog Posts Social Media Content Live Chat Support No experience is necessary and full training is provided. But before you apply, you need to see which role you’re best suited for. Go here to take the Writing Job Quiz. ---> http://PaidToWrite.Online/ Once you finish the quiz, you’ll get a breakdown of the best opportunities available for you right now. Visit -----> http://PaidToWrite.Online/
Invasives should be pulled or killed by herbicide and not be permitted to be sold in nurseries
HB1490 - Child abuse or neglect; establishes centralized intake system for reports or complaints.
Dear Legislator, I adamantly oppose these bills that will cause my family potential harm . It is a safety issue. We have spent a fortune on our dental care, We do not want uneducated , unlicensed staff taking X-rays or cleaning our teeth. We love our dental hygienist. We spend more time with her than the dentist or our PCP! She reviews our vitals , medications and looks for cancer as well as thoroughly cleaning our teeth and providing care tips. Proper cleanings prevent gum disease and heart disease which are both present in our family history. Please do not reduce our family’s care. I see this other healthcare professions are facing g the same elimination. One can only speculate to what the goal of your bills if safety is not the main issue ? I vote No.
Creating a centralized DSS intake for child abuse and neglect reports would effectively create a system of accountability. As it stands now, the miscommunications between localities and failed follow-ups creates a huge margin of error, resulting in countless families and cases enduring (what should have been) preventable harm. As a mandated reporter, it is alarming to witness the urgency of a neglected infant and child in a locality that is overwhelmed and overburdened. Centralizing intake also prevents diffusion of responsibility in cases of unhoused families between localities.
As a domestic violence survivor who fled to protect her children and has fallen through every crack in the system, I have seen the failures of the current model of state funded locally administered DSS. 99% of reports made on behalf of my children by professionals have been thrown out before intake due to bias (I was emotional when I fled to protect my children and therefore must have been the problem according to them). This is the norm when it comes to protective parents who are domestic violence survivors. By requiring all reports be entered into the system, patterns can be tracked. By having the state determine validity of reports, local bias can be reduced. This would help protect more children. I urge you to please support this bill and help other families not suffer like mine have. Thank you
HB161 - Virginia Lottery; internet gaming authorized, definitions, effective clause.
Object to all said bills and any casios developments.
Protect the integrity of the state and residents from the fiscal and civic dangers if gaming it every damaging iteration. The negatives far out way any gains., especially fir this state abd especially for Fairfax county, a county which has provided the state with vital progressive leadership.
It has come to my attention that the House- General Laws committee we'll hear public comments on House Bill 161 and its features to expand Virginia’s gaming to include Internet Gaming(I-Gaming). Please understand that it is my distinct pleasure to provide testimony representing the members and E-subscribers of Md. Washington Minority Companies Association (MWMCA). Since 2002, MWMCA operated as a trade, design, and material commodity trade association with hundreds of members and E- subscribers located in Virginia. Our weekly Enewsletter to small, minority and women owned businesses, is their guiding light and voice to that community. Our industry-renowned website www.mwmca.org is most sought after by major corporations and small businesses alike looking to connect with one another for mutual benefits. In essence we support and endorse total economic engineering inclusion, and we believe Virginia is ready from more. Now comes our “America’s Old Dominion” unfortunate attempt to expand its entrance into i-Gaming at a time when perhaps it's needed less. With all the years it took to achieve casino style gaming in Virginia, along with the billions of dollars it took to purchase land, seek permits, architectural/engineering design, purchase expensive power and AC equipment, construct world class facilities, train basic neophytes in gaming to serve in this industry, vendors seeking state licensing, expanded expense for security of the facilities and its patrons, and the state of Virginia building new roads to access the casinos; we are now looking to add a major burden to crush the relatively new industry. Why, when there is so much downside for perhaps making it easier to allow folks to gamble. Literally with this new legislation, one would be able to place betswhile they're in the restroom relieving themselves. We believe at MWMCA that the risk is not worth affecting the entire flourishing industry. With revenues at their all-time high and the state enjoying it and your residents are working; along with the current gaming and retail sales tax are contributing to the overall revenue of the state of Virginia. Why attempt to change that now? Therefore, we respectfully request a no vote on this ill-timely recommended legislation that will destroy the thriving casino gaming industry, as we know it now.
Dear Members of the House General Laws Committee, I respectfully urge you to support HB 161 (Virginia Lottery; Internet gaming authorized, penalties). This legislation thoughtfully brings online casino gaming — including online poker — into a regulated, transparent, and accountable framework under the oversight of the Virginia Lottery Board. Here’s why I believe HB 161 deserves your support: Protect Virginians by reducing illegal gaming. Today, many Virginians already access unregulated online gambling through offshore sites that operate outside state law, offer no age verification, and do not contribute to the Commonwealth’s funds or consumer protections. Legalizing and regulating internet gaming would bring this activity into a safer, monitored environment and help curb unlicensed operators. Generate meaningful revenue without raising taxes. A regulated online gaming market is projected to generate significant new taxable revenue — industry estimates suggest hundreds of millions of dollars over the first years of operation. These funds can support state priorities rather than being captured by illegal operators. Support problem gambling prevention and treatment. HB 161 dedicates part of its tax revenue to the Problem Gambling Treatment and Support Fund, ensuring that resources are available to help Virginians who struggle with gambling addiction. Enhance consumer protections. Legal online gaming would require strong safeguards — including age verification, self-exclusion tools, and regulatory oversight — that simply don’t exist in the current unregulated market. Keep Virginia competitive. Neighboring states already offer regulated online poker and casino gaming. If Virginia fails to act, we risk losing consumers and associated economic activity to other states. For these reasons, I respectfully ask you to advance HB 161 out of committee so the full House can consider its merits. Thank you for your time and service.