I'm a formerly incarcerated juvenile lifer supporting HB 318

VACFSY IS IN SUPPORT OF THESE BILLS

Please see the attached testimony on behalf of the Campaign for the Fair Sentencing of Youth in support of HB318.

My son was sentenced to life with no parole at 17 and he has served 28 years and this bill is a more meaningful opportunity for him as well as the other juvenile lifers! I respectfully asked for your support on this bill.

I oppose House Bill 318. I agree with an earlier comment opposing the bill, which said, "This bill seems unnecessarily risky. Would this bill inadvertently result in inmates serving life sentences for murder being released even though there is no consensus on the parole board that they are rehabilitated? Va. Code § 53.1-134.1 says 'four or more' members of the parole board need to vote to grant parole in order to parole an inmate. That makes sense today, because there are 5 parole board members. But this bill would expand the board to 10 parole board members. So only 4 members of the board would have to think that an inmate is rehabilitated, to release an inmate, even if other parole board members reasonably believe the inmate is a threat to the public. Va. Code § 53.1-134.1 should be amended to say 'eight or more' rather than 'four or more' members of the parole board need to vote to release an inmate serving a life sentence. This bill may also unduly restrict the parole board's ability to consider relevant factors, by saying that it can't deny parole based on 'the nature of the offense' -- even though there are some cases, like a pattern of behavior (serial killers, serial rapists), where the nature of the offense may show a continuing danger to the public. The bill also says the board can't deny parole based on factors outside the inmate's 'demonstrated ability to change.' But what if the inmate is a threat for reasons he can't change, or there is no way to demonstrate he is able to change, even if he possibly could change with enough effort or willingness to undergo treatment? Unfortunately, such a dangerous inmate may still need to be kept incarcerated until the end of his sentence, to keep him from harming innocent people. That language about 'the nature of the offense' and 'demonstrated ability to change' needs to be revised or qualified to protect against threats to innocent people."

Good morning, Chair and members of the Committee, My name is Sarah Moore, and I live in Appomattox County. I am the Vice President and Co‑Founder of Bridges Beyond Bars, an organization that supports families and returning citizens across the Commonwealth. I also speak as a wife, a mother, and someone who has spent years walking alongside families who are trying to navigate a system that often feels impenetrable and inconsistent. I am here today in strong support of HB318, because this bill addresses three critical gaps that directly affect public trust, public safety, and the futures of people who have worked tirelessly to change their lives. First, HB318 strengthens the Virginia Parole Board by expanding its membership and requiring a balance of professional expertise, prosecution, defense, mental health, reentry, and victim services. This is not just structural reform; it is a commitment to informed, trauma‑aware, and community‑centered decision‑making. When the Board reflects the full spectrum of experience, its decisions become more credible, more consistent, and more just. Second, HB318 requires the Board to provide individuals with their full investigative file at least 30 days before deliberation. For the families I work with, this is transformative. Too often, people go before the Board without ever seeing the information being used to determine their future. Transparency is not a luxury; it is a constitutional value. When people understand what is in their file, they can correct inaccuracies, prepare meaningfully, and engage in a process that respects their humanity. Third, and most importantly to me, HB318 ensures a meaningful opportunity for release for people who entered the system as children. The bill outlines clear factors the Board must consider, including adolescent development, trauma, demonstrated growth, and the realities of who a person has become after years of rehabilitation. This is not leniency. It is alignment with science, with Supreme Court precedent, and with our shared belief that children are capable of profound change. In my work with families across Virginia, including my own, as my husband entered the system as a child, I have seen how the lack of transparency and the absence of juvenile‑specific considerations affect real people who have spent years working to change their lives. His story is not unique; it is one of many. And it is precisely why this legislation matters. HB318 recognizes that who a person was at 15 or 16 is not who they are at 35 or 40, and that our policies must reflect that truth. HB318 is not about guaranteeing release. It is about guaranteeing fairness. It is about ensuring that decisions are made with full information, professional expertise, and an understanding of human development. It is about honoring the dignity of every person while still respecting the experiences of victims and survivors. For these reasons, and on behalf of the families and returning citizens we serve, I respectfully urge you to support HB318. Thank you for your time and your commitment to justice in our Commonwealth. Warm Regards, Sarah Moore Vice President & Co-founder Bridges Beyond Bars Uplifting Justice-Impacted Individuals & Strengthening Communities

I am writing to oppose the current slate of firearm restriction bills before the General Assembly. While these proposals are framed as public safety measures, in practice they disproportionately harm marginalized Virginians — including racial minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals (especially trans people), immigrants, and low-income residents — who often face higher risks of targeted violence and slower or unequal police response. These bills add costs, delays, and bureaucratic hurdles to exercising a fundamental right. Increased fees, mandatory waiting periods, feature bans, and expanded disqualifications fall hardest on people with limited financial resources, unstable work schedules, or justified concerns about their personal safety. For many vulnerable individuals, the ability to lawfully and promptly acquire a firearm is not about ideology, but about self-defense. History shows that restrictive gun laws are most aggressively enforced in minority communities, amplifying disparities in arrests, prosecution, and legal exposure — even when no harm has occurred. Expanding civil liability, criminal penalties, and subjective risk standards increases that risk. Public safety should not come at the expense of civil rights or equal access to self-protection. Policies that price people out of their rights or delay lawful self-defense do not address the root causes of violence and instead leave the most vulnerable less safe. I respectfully urge you to oppose these bills and support approaches that protect both public safety and the rights of all Virginians, regardless of income, identity, or background. Thank you for your time and consideration.

I am writing to express my strong support for House Bill 318. Virginia’s parole system is in need of reform. The state’s parole approval rate is extremely low, leaving many individuals with little opportunity for second chances, even when they have demonstrated rehabilitation and personal growth. This system does not adequately recognize the potential for people to reintegrate successfully into society, and it can contribute to unnecessary incarceration and strain on the correctional system. HB 318 would increase transparency, fairness, and accountability in the parole process. By requiring clear criteria for parole decisions, published reporting on outcomes, and individualized explanations for denials, this bill ensures that decisions are based on rehabilitation, conduct, and readiness for reentry—not arbitrary or inconsistent factors. Importantly, HB 318 also addresses juvenile parole, mandating that the Parole Board meaningfully consider age, maturity, and evidence of rehabilitation. Young people who have committed offenses should have a fair opportunity to demonstrate growth and reintegrate safely, rather than being indefinitely denied based solely on the nature of their offense. This legislation represents a balanced, evidence-based approach that protects public safety while also providing individuals the opportunity to rebuild their lives. Supporting HB 318 is a step toward a more just, humane, and effective criminal justice system in Virginia. Please vote in favor of HB318.

None of this helps affordability or the regular consumer.

Start allowing people parole it's that simple we cannot have parole if no one is able to be parole out .

I have had many years of experience demonstrating the need for reform of our current parole system, including the steps outlined in Delegate Hope's bill. This has included appointment as a member of the Governor's Commission on Parole Review in 2015, work with Delegate Sickles and others on prior proposed legislative reforms, representation in parole hearings, and co-counsel to the class of parole-eligible inmates raising constitutional claims in Burnette v. Fahey, 687 F.3d 171 (4th Cir. 2012). Our Commission's 2015 report specifically recommended (at pp. 37-39) similar amendments "to increase the Parole Board's expertise, independence, and diversity." We included references to the work of the American Law Institute and others to support this reform. My experience has also confirmed the need to have strong protections against removal of Parole Board members by the Governor, in order to ensure that they make these difficult decisions based on an independent evaluation of the factors relevant to parole (including serious consideration of how the inmate may have demonstrated the capacity for change after many years of incarceration). In my experience, the current obstacles to the ability of Board members to do this because of the ability of the Governor to fire them have been bipartisan in nature. Finally, my experience demonstrates the need for the reforms in this bill to ensure "a meaningful opportunity for release," to require the Board to articulate contemporaneous reasons for denying parole and steps necessary for rehabilitation, and to put a stop to the rubber stamping of parole denials year after year based on nothing other than the "serious nature and circumstances of the crime" -- which was generally committed now 35 years ago or more (i.e., before the abolition of parole for offenses committed after 1994). In the Burnette case, we documented how these offenders were sentenced during a period of time in which (as later-Justice Scalia once noted) sentencing judges had imposed very long sentences with the expectation that many would later receive parole. Yet the parole grant rate declined from 42% in 1989 to from 2.1% to 3.7% between 2002 and 2008. The tragic effect of this de facto elimination of any meaningful opportunity for parole has been continued incarceration of many offenders for longer than they would have served for the same offense under the ostensibly "tough on crime" sentencing guidelines applicable under the no-parole law after 1995. In our report for the Governor's Parole Review Commission (at pp. 48-50), we described this last problem in greater detail.

This bill seems unnecessarily risky. Would this bill inadvertently result in inmates serving life sentences for murder being released even though there is no consensus on the parole board that they are rehabilitated? Va. Code § 53.1-134.1 says "four or more" members of the parole board need to vote to grant parole in order to parole an inmate. That makes sense today, because there are 5 parole board members. But this bill would expand the board to 10 parole board members. So only 4 members of the board would have to think that an inmate is rehabilitated, to release an inmate, even if other parole board members reasonably believe the inmate is a threat to the public. Va. Code § 53.1-134.1 should be amended to say "eight or more" rather than "four or more" members of the parole board need to vote to release an inmate serving a life sentence. This bill may also unduly restrict the parole board's ability to consider relevant factors, by saying that it can't deny parole based on "the nature of the offense" -- even though there are some cases, like a pattern of behavior (serial killers, serial rapists), where the nature of the offense may show a continuing danger to the public. The bill also says the board can't deny parole based on factors outside the inmate's "demonstrated ability to change." But what if the inmate is a threat for reasons he can't change, or there is no way to demonstrate he is able to change, even if he possibly could change with enough effort or willingness to undergo treatment? Unfortunately, such a dangerous inmate may still need to be kept incarcerated until the end of his sentence, to keep him from harming innocent people. That language about "the nature of the offense" and "demonstrated ability to change" needs to be revised or qualified to protect against threats to innocent people.

VACFSY IS IN SUPPORT OF THESE BILLS

My son was sentenced to life with no parole at 17 and he has served 28 years and this bill is a more meaningful opportunity for him as well as the other juvenile lifers! I respectfully asked for your support on this bill.

In 2021, my elderly stepmother shot through a closed door during an argument with my elderly father, striking him in the back and paralyzing him. My father has spent the past five years in extreme physical agony, unable to walk, paying caretakers out of pocket to hoist him in and out of bed, unable to care for himself. The lack of movement in his life has led to horrific bed sores, which become bone infections, which lead to extended hospital stays and a horrible quality of life. All this because my stepmother was allowed to have a gun. There are countless stories like this of the bullet's aftermath: of the lifelong physical and mental damage that comes from guns. It has been a horrific five years, full of physical pain and mental anguish for our entire family. I wouldn't wish this on anyone. The bills before you now will not only save lives, they will spare whole swaths of our neighborhoods from needing to deal with these horrors. One bullet, lodged in my father's spine, didn't kill him. Instead, it has shattered the life he had, his ability to work and care for himself, and his family. Each bullet we allow in our communities has the ability to do the same. His care has bankrupted him personally, and now he relies on state care and Medicaid, an avoidable burden on taxpayers. There are numerous reasons guns have no place in our society, and I hope my father's story is just one that helps make change. Please support all bills that make guns harder to access, harder to keep. Please do everything you can to keep guns out of the hands of our society. Thank you for the great work you are doing to keep Virginians safe.

I am writing to oppose the current slate of firearm restriction bills before the General Assembly. While these proposals are framed as public safety measures, in practice they disproportionately harm marginalized Virginians — including racial minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals (especially trans people), immigrants, and low-income residents — who often face higher risks of targeted violence and slower or unequal police response. These bills add costs, delays, and bureaucratic hurdles to exercising a fundamental right. Increased fees, mandatory waiting periods, feature bans, and expanded disqualifications fall hardest on people with limited financial resources, unstable work schedules, or justified concerns about their personal safety. For many vulnerable individuals, the ability to lawfully and promptly acquire a firearm is not about ideology, but about self-defense. History shows that restrictive gun laws are most aggressively enforced in minority communities, amplifying disparities in arrests, prosecution, and legal exposure — even when no harm has occurred. Expanding civil liability, criminal penalties, and subjective risk standards increases that risk. Public safety should not come at the expense of civil rights or equal access to self-protection. Policies that price people out of their rights or delay lawful self-defense do not address the root causes of violence and instead leave the most vulnerable less safe. I respectfully urge you to oppose these bills and support approaches that protect both public safety and the rights of all Virginians, regardless of income, identity, or background. Thank you for your time and consideration.

I am writing in support of Virginia House Bill 361. My perspective comes from personal experience. My loved one has been incarcerated within the Virginia Department of Corrections for 17 years. During that time, he has spent long periods confined under conditions and policies that offered no opportunity to earn sentence credits — despite consistent effort, good behavior, and personal growth. HB 361 is not about excusing past mistakes. It is about fairness. Time served is time lived, and individuals should not be denied earned sentence credits simply because of when their incarceration occurred or circumstances beyond their control. After 17 years, I have seen how denying earned credits deepens hopelessness while recognizing effort encourages accountability and rehabilitation. I respectfully urge you to support HB 361 and help ensure Virginia’s sentencing system reflects fairness, humanity, and modern justice principles.

Please also consider adding this requirement for soldiers of the Virginia Defense Force, which serves as the reserve component of the Virginia National Guard. This training is essential for state troops as well as those who can be federalized.

I am writing to oppose the current slate of firearm restriction bills before the General Assembly. While these proposals are framed as public safety measures, in practice they disproportionately harm marginalized Virginians — including racial minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals (especially trans people), immigrants, and low-income residents — who often face higher risks of targeted violence and slower or unequal police response. These bills add costs, delays, and bureaucratic hurdles to exercising a fundamental right. Increased fees, mandatory waiting periods, feature bans, and expanded disqualifications fall hardest on people with limited financial resources, unstable work schedules, or justified concerns about their personal safety. For many vulnerable individuals, the ability to lawfully and promptly acquire a firearm is not about ideology, but about self-defense. History shows that restrictive gun laws are most aggressively enforced in minority communities, amplifying disparities in arrests, prosecution, and legal exposure — even when no harm has occurred. Expanding civil liability, criminal penalties, and subjective risk standards increases that risk. Public safety should not come at the expense of civil rights or equal access to self-protection. Policies that price people out of their rights or delay lawful self-defense do not address the root causes of violence and instead leave the most vulnerable less safe. I respectfully urge you to oppose these bills and support approaches that protect both public safety and the rights of all Virginians, regardless of income, identity, or background. Thank you for your time and consideration.

In 2021, my elderly stepmother shot through a closed door during an argument with my elderly father, striking him in the back and paralyzing him. My father has spent the past five years in extreme physical agony, unable to walk, paying caretakers out of pocket to hoist him in and out of bed, unable to care for himself. The lack of movement in his life has led to horrific bed sores, which become bone infections, which lead to extended hospital stays and a horrible quality of life. All this because my stepmother was allowed to have a gun. There are countless stories like this of the bullet's aftermath: of the lifelong physical and mental damage that comes from guns. It has been a horrific five years, full of physical pain and mental anguish for our entire family. I wouldn't wish this on anyone. The bills before you now will not only save lives, they will spare whole swaths of our neighborhoods from needing to deal with these horrors. One bullet, lodged in my father's spine, didn't kill him. Instead, it has shattered the life he had, his ability to work and care for himself, and his family. Each bullet we allow in our communities has the ability to do the same. His care has bankrupted him personally, and now he relies on state care and Medicaid, an avoidable burden on taxpayers. There are numerous reasons guns have no place in our society, and I hope my father's story is just one that helps make change. Please support all bills that make guns harder to access, harder to keep. Please do everything you can to keep guns out of the hands of our society. Thank you for the great work you are doing to keep Virginians safe.

I am writing to oppose the current slate of firearm restriction bills before the General Assembly. While these proposals are framed as public safety measures, in practice they disproportionately harm marginalized Virginians — including racial minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals (especially trans people), immigrants, and low-income residents — who often face higher risks of targeted violence and slower or unequal police response. These bills add costs, delays, and bureaucratic hurdles to exercising a fundamental right. Increased fees, mandatory waiting periods, feature bans, and expanded disqualifications fall hardest on people with limited financial resources, unstable work schedules, or justified concerns about their personal safety. For many vulnerable individuals, the ability to lawfully and promptly acquire a firearm is not about ideology, but about self-defense. History shows that restrictive gun laws are most aggressively enforced in minority communities, amplifying disparities in arrests, prosecution, and legal exposure — even when no harm has occurred. Expanding civil liability, criminal penalties, and subjective risk standards increases that risk. Public safety should not come at the expense of civil rights or equal access to self-protection. Policies that price people out of their rights or delay lawful self-defense do not address the root causes of violence and instead leave the most vulnerable less safe. I respectfully urge you to oppose these bills and support approaches that protect both public safety and the rights of all Virginians, regardless of income, identity, or background. Thank you for your time and consideration.

As a pediatrician I have long been appalled that firearms are the number one cause of death of our children- and having lived thru both mass shootings in Pittsburgh and Buffalo, I immersed myself in the data to understand the problem- we know FIrearm licensing , and concealed carry licensing that incorporates safe storage training saves lives. We know that the access to assault weapons so easily , especially in people with prior threats or concerning obsessions is a reason for most of our mass shootings in America. We know that in domestic violence access to firearms , even in dating relationships , is why women continue to die even with protective orders in place. As a physician I strongly feel concealed carry , especially assault weapons has no place in hospitals , colleges , schools and public buildings. In Virginia we can have laws that really protect people without infringing on the right of sane citizens to own guns. Brief waiting periods, safe storage education for all gun owners, safe storage requirements for all gun owners and a strong emergency protective order system will save many lives and I urge you to support them.

I am writing to oppose the current slate of firearm restriction bills before the General Assembly. While these proposals are framed as public safety measures, in practice they disproportionately harm marginalized Virginians — including racial minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals (especially trans people), immigrants, and low-income residents — who often face higher risks of targeted violence and slower or unequal police response. These bills add costs, delays, and bureaucratic hurdles to exercising a fundamental right. Increased fees, mandatory waiting periods, feature bans, and expanded disqualifications fall hardest on people with limited financial resources, unstable work schedules, or justified concerns about their personal safety. For many vulnerable individuals, the ability to lawfully and promptly acquire a firearm is not about ideology, but about self-defense. History shows that restrictive gun laws are most aggressively enforced in minority communities, amplifying disparities in arrests, prosecution, and legal exposure — even when no harm has occurred. Expanding civil liability, criminal penalties, and subjective risk standards increases that risk. Public safety should not come at the expense of civil rights or equal access to self-protection. Policies that price people out of their rights or delay lawful self-defense do not address the root causes of violence and instead leave the most vulnerable less safe. I respectfully urge you to oppose these bills and support approaches that protect both public safety and the rights of all Virginians, regardless of income, identity, or background. Thank you for your time and consideration.

I support this bill and believe the hours of paid leave should be increased.

I support HB1142 because it gives people returning home from incarceration a real chance to rebuild their lives without being immediately crushed by court-imposed debt. In order to give individuals a fair opportunity to rehabilitate, we cannot weigh them down with fines, fees, taxes, or other costs the moment they reenter the community. Those first months are critical. People are trying to secure housing, find a job, reconnect with family, and care for their health. Immediate financial burdens push people into survival mode, making it nearly impossible to move forward. Too often, the system releases someone only to suffocate them in the free world with fines and fees, setting them up to fail and return to incarceration. By delaying immediate payments, this bill balances accountability with compassion. It recognizes that rehabilitation takes time and that breathing room is essential for lasting success. It creates space to regain independence and work toward compliance without feeling trapped by impossible demands. Families and communities benefit when people are supported rather than trapped in cycles of debt and punishment. Supporting this bill is about giving people a fair chance to stand on their own, take responsibility, and move forward with dignity.

I support this bill. My son owes court costs and is serving a long sentence. Once he is released it is going to take him time to find a place and a job (which will almost be near impossible because.of his offense). He will need time to get on his feet before he can even think about court costs. Thank you

I am Scott E. Peyton, Director of Government Affairs at Prison Fellowship, and I am writing to express Prison Fellowship’s support of HB 1142. With nearly 50 years of experience encountering Jesus with men and women behind bars, Prison Fellowship® is a leading national voice shaping the public debate on justice. Our guiding principles are rooted in the biblical call to seek justice, love mercy, and restore hope. In the early period after prison, the risks of recidivism, suicide, drug relapse, homelessness, and unemployment for men and women are particularly high. To aid this transition period, this legislation provides individuals returning from incarceration with a six-month grace period during which they are not required to make payments on court-assessed fines and fees related to their criminal case. This bill does not reduce the amount an individual owes to the court. Virginia has made great strides in supporting successful reentry. We respectfully urge this committee to continue that progress by voting YES on House Bill 1142.

I strongly support LEXIE'S LAW HB1326. Reform of the laws giving priority to criminals, especially perpetrators of violent crimes, is well overdue. PASS HB1326. PUT THE BURDEN OF THE CRIME ON THE OFFENDER, THE VIOLATOR of the LAW. Give the SURVIVORS time a resources with which to HEAL.

I don’t want to speak. I just want to listen to the meeting.

I support hb 1326

I support this bill because my wife is a victim of a serial rapist. He had sexually assaulted 4 women and was sentenced to life imprisonment. Because he turned 65 he is eligible for geriatric parole which is sickening to know. Please pass the bill without any changes.

I vote yes

I support this bill. Age is a number and does not reflect someone’s ability to commit crimes.

I support this bill.

Fully support this common sense bill.

February 4, 2026 Ashley Carpenter Waite Thank you to the House Committee Chair and the House Committee for reading my testimony. I represent those who are survivors of heinous crimes such as rape and sexual assault. On November 22, 2008, James Samuel Williams changed my life forever. After being left by a cab driver over a mile from my house in Alexandria, Williams deliberately tracked and harmed me. He hid in a bush with a mask covering his face, waiting for me to walk by, and attempted to rob me with a fake gun. He then abducted me in a choke hold from behind and dragged me to a parking garage, where he proceeded to forcibly sodomize and sexually assault me. Stranger attacks are not as common as some believe, and all four of his victims were strangers. He preyed on me late at night, a vulnerable time when nobody was around. He knew what he was doing and showed absolutely no remorse during and after the events that took place that evening. He lied in court multiple times to a Judge under Oath without a care for the law. Williams is currently serving his time at Sussex 1 State Prison-a maximum Level 4 security prison. He was convicted and charged with multiple life sentences including stalking, rape, sexual battery, abduction with intent to defile, forcible sodomy, attempted robbery, object sexual penetration, and rape of a minor from another trial. He was tried in the Commonwealth of Virginia in the city of Alexandria and county of Fairfax, as well as Washington, DC where he escalated to using a knife on his last victim. Williams committed my crime when he was 46 ½ years old in 2008. Under the current terms of Virginia’s Geriatric Conditional Release, Williams was eligible for a parole board review starting in 2021 when he was 59 ½ years old. That knowledge shook my world. The email from Victim Services just showed up in my inbox without warning. Can you imagine? A decade of therapy for PTSD, anxiety, panic attacks…a life where I am now married, raising children and now, I must relive the trauma to keep this man in prison. Just the thought of the possibility of parole brings up an entire slew of emotions; emotions I keep trying to put in the past. And now each year, I continue to advocate for myself and for his other victims. I write to the parole board, I anxiously await. What will the outcome be? Will he be released? The entire process takes months. So, I ask you? How is a convicted serial rapist with multiple life sentences eligible for parole? Why is age a factor for rehabilitation? The Virginia Parole Board is overexerted, and that is primarily driven by more than 12,000 individuals becoming eligible for geriatric parole. We need a change. Please vote for this change in Lexie’s Law and vote for Bill HB1326. Thank you.

Victims impact statement for Lexi‘s Law.

VACFSY IS IN SUPPORT OF THESE BILLS

I’m the sister of a murdered brother in 1994. Carl Griffey who killed my brother with sawed off shotgun recd 168 years in 1995 but since 2006 he’s been going up for parole yearly. Now he is approximately 68 and is Eligible for the “geriatric release” My Mother died from a broken heart and I promised her I will fight to keep him in a cage til I’m dead. My brother was trying to help Carl’s girlfriend from Carl’s anger but Carl was jealous and shot my brother from 10 feet away with sawed off shotgun. Blew my brothers chest AWAY. At the viewing my Mother touched my brother Harry’s chest and it was PLASTIC. I HAD TO LIE TO HER AND TELL HER THATS HOW PEOPLE ARE PREPARED FOR BURIAL. Now I’m the oldest and took care of all arrangements for my brother. I have 2 younger sisters! My brother never was able to meet my sister’ children nor grandchildren nor mine. He needs to stay on that cage til he DIES.

I oppose this bill as it gives localities the right to determine if a sound inducing structure is healthy for the community. Will they have the communities best interests in mind when making these determinations? We know that data centers are at the forefront of this bill and many citizens oppose data centers in their area.