Comments Document

Chair Maldonado and Members of the Subcommittee: On behalf of the International Franchise Association (IFA), which represents over 12,000 franchisees, franchisors, and suppliers nationwide, including thousands of small business owners across the Commonwealth, we write to respectfully oppose House Bill 69 as written. Franchising is a cornerstone of Virginia’s economy and one of the most effective pathways to small business ownership. Today, Virginia is a top ten state for franchise growth, with more than 24,000 local franchise locations supporting approximately 256,000 jobs and generating roughly $26 billion in annual economic output. Franchise ownership has proven especially important for veterans, women, people of color, and first-time entrepreneurs seeking a proven model to achieve upward economic mobility. While we appreciate the patron’s intent to protect small business owners, HB 69 as written would have the unintended consequence of destabilizing the franchise model in Virginia. As drafted, the bill goes further than any other state by broadly prohibiting post-term non-compete provisions in franchise agreements and even restricting their use in settlement agreements, except where approved by a court. These provisions are not merely contractual formalities; they are essential tools that allow franchise systems to protect shared brand standards, training investments, and proprietary know-how that benefit all franchisees within a system. Eliminating reasonable post-term restrictions does not reduce conflict—it increases it. By limiting parties’ ability to resolve disputes through negotiated settlements, HB 69 would incentivize prolonged and costly litigation, draining resources from small business franchisees and delaying resolutions that could otherwise preserve local jobs and community-based businesses. This outcome is neither worker-friendly nor small business–friendly. Importantly, many franchisees themselves support narrowly tailored non-compete provisions to prevent former operators from using the franchise system’s confidential methods, marketing strategies, and customer relationships to unfairly compete in the same local market. National guidance from state securities regulators recognizes that post-term non-competes can be appropriate when they are reasonable in scope, duration, and geography. HB 69, however, adopts a blanket approach that would make Virginia an outlier and discourage responsible franchise investment in the Commonwealth. For these reasons, IFA respectfully requests that the subcommittee oppose HB 69 as written. That said, we want to be clear: we are committed to working constructively with the bill’s sponsor and members of the General Assembly to ensure that any legislation in this area “does no harm” to Virginia’s booming franchise sector. We believe Virginia can protect entrepreneurs and workers while preserving a balanced legal framework that supports franchising, innovation, and continued economic growth. We look forward to engaging with you to develop a more narrowly tailored approach that maintains Virginia’s position as one of the best states in the nation for franchise ownership and job creation. Respectfully, Matthew W. Kagel Senior Director, State & Local Government Relations International Franchise Association mkagel@franchise.org

My name is Leah Eidson, and in 2019 I was diagnosed with breast cancer after what I thought would be a routine mammogram. Like so many others, I never imagined I’d hear those words. Suddenly, my life was divided into “before” and “after.” I was treated at Bon Secours Saint Francis in Midlothian, Virginia, where I became their very first patient to use the Paxman Scalp Cooling system. I learned about scalp cooling through a friend who encouraged me to Google “cold caps.” My husband and I started researching, and at first what we found involved dry ice and complicated logistics. Then my surgeon mentioned that my treatment center was in the process of installing a system. Two weeks later, I walked in as their very first patient to use it. Like anyone about to begin chemotherapy, I was anxious. I practiced with the cooling cap at home, with my husband and sister helping me fit it properly. Still, the unknowns of chemotherapy loomed large. My worry was about whether I could tolerate the chemo, how my body would react, and what the journey ahead would bring. On that first day, I discovered that the hardest part of scalp cooling was the first 15 minutes. It was colder than I expected, but with my sister talking my ear off nonstop, I got through it. After that, the cold became manageable. I knew what I was working toward, and that gave me strength. Throughout treatment I lost about 45–50% of my hair, but the loss was spread pretty evenly. I didn’t experience bald spots or crown balding. To the outside world, I still looked like me. Strangers at the grocery store had no idea what I was going through. Even colleagues who knew I was in treatment said, “I thought you were going through chemotherapy? How come you still have your hair?” That privacy was priceless. It meant I didn’t have to explain myself to anyone unless I wanted to. It meant my four sons could still see their mom looking like herself. It meant that when I looked in the mirror, I still recognized the person staring back. Holding on to that part of my identity gave me strength to face the days when I didn’t feel 100%. My treatment was made possible through donations; I hope you will recommend reporting of HB90 so that other patients can have an experience like I did, regardless of fundraising outcomes but as a function of their health insurance. Thank you for your attention.

Comments Document

Please find attached our national letter of support for HB 216 from So Every BODY Can Move, submitted on behalf of Amputee Coalition representation.

Comments Document

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on House Bill 220 sponsored by Delegate Hope which prohibits insurance companies from using an individual’s tobacco use in setting premium rates. The American Lung Association strongly supports this bill as an integral way to support people who use tobacco who want to quit.

Comments Document

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on House Bill 220 sponsored by Delegate Hope which prohibits insurance companies from using an individual’s tobacco use in setting premium rates. The American Lung Association strongly supports this bill as an integral way to support people who use tobacco who want to quit.

Why should the non smoker subsidize the high bills for the risk they choose to take on?