Public Comments for 02/03/2026 Transportation - Department of Motor Vehicles
HB517 - Driver communication improvement program; expands program, drivers with autism spectrum disorder.
HB1097 - Driver communication improvement program; drivers diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, etc.
It's me Conner and my mom. We are requesting you vote yes for this bill, as it will help autistic people like me whether we drive or not. Educating law-enforcement officers and emergency medical services to be aware of the blue envelope which can help explain our communication styles is very important. Educating schools will let potential drivers who are autistic know about the program so they can get a blue envelope. If you do not drive the program is still good because if I am in a car with my mom and she gets in an accident and is not awake the blue envelope will help me as words will not come. This program is very needed and can helps lots of people and has the potential to help many more. Please vote yes.
HB1129 - Local motor vehicle license & registration; failure to pay certain taxes, fees, & parking citations.
HB1137 - Renewal of licenses; persons serving in the armed services on active duty outside the Commonwealth.
HB1143 - Registration decals; discontinued.
HB1145 - Motor vehicles; increases frequency of safety inspections.
HB1198 - Display of license plate; only rear plate required, exception.
HB1203 - DMV; requires any person submitting form to provide proof of current address.
HB1205 - Motor vehicles insurance; hwy. use fee; tangible personal property tax relief for certain vehicles.
HB1226 - Motor Vehicles, Department of; release of data to certain institutions of higher education, fees.
My attachment is in support of passage of HB1226, the License Plate Affinity Bill.
HB269 - Motorized mobility vehicles; established as a new class of vehicle, civil penalties.
Please amend this bill to have a DMV led work group study this issue and bring recommendations back to the General Assembly. Furthermore, please do not change the definition or treatment of bicycle and electric power-assisted bicycle in the code. Those definitions have been carefully crafted by subject matter experts and the bicycle industry. Any new two wheel device should be able to fit into the bicycle, electric power-assisted bicycle, moped, motorcycle continuum but will need carefully reviewed by a DMV workgroup.
Delegate Reid & Subcommittee members, Please consider amending Del. Reid’s HB269 to direct DMV to convene a stakeholder workgroup to address the targeted safety issues, rather than potentially penalizing people who ride legal e-bikes responsibly. - I agree that there are important and serious safety issues that HB269 is intended to address, primarily high-powered electric motorcycles, scooters and unicycles ridden irresponsibly, mostly by youth.. - I recommend that HB269 be amended as follows: (1) Direct that DMV convene a workgroup, like that proposed in Delegate JJ Singh’s HB1120 to better define the primary problems and then recommend options to address them. (2) Insert a statement to clarify that throttle-only e-bikes that are modified to use their motor to exceed 20 mph are illegal. Here is an example adapted from proposed legislation in Washington State, " “Electric power assisted bicycle" does not include: any vehicle capable of exceeding 20 mph on soley its electric motor; or any vehicle that is designed, manufactured, or intended by the manufacturer or seller to be easily configured to not meet the requirements of an Electric power assisted bicycle.” (3) Insert a statement to eliminate overlap of proposed new regulations with e-bikes as defined and regulated in Code of Virginia, “Motorized mobility vehicle" does not include any "electric power-assisted bicycle” as defined in this section. " Full disclosure: I own and ride an e-bike as do many of my septuagenarian peers. People who ride responsibly should not be included in this well-intended, generally well-crafted, but overly broad safety initiative. Thanks so much, Jim Durham
As a law abiding cyclist I too am concerned with the dangerous behavior I see from people riding electrified bicycles and moped like vehicles that are clearly not powered by pedals and can far exceed speeds of 30mph. However I do not believe this bill will address the issues that these new vehicles present for two reasons. First there is already wording in the Virginia code that defines electric bicycles as Class 1, 2 or 3. None of these classes can exceed 28 miles per hour without pedaling and the maximum speed of a Class 2 bicycle that can be powered by a throttle is 20mph. This bill would cause confusion and penalize law abiding people because it overlaps with the current legal definition of an electric bicycle. Secondly the bill doesn't really do anything about the sale and operation of these powerful e-moto/moped type devices by youth other than education. If you do want to pass this bill I suggest removing all existing classes of e-bikes (cannot exceed 20mp without pedaling) and create a DMV led study group as called for in HB 1120. Thank you for your consideration Steve Policastro
Please do not advance HB269. There are still so many things that need to be done to define an electric powered vehicle before trying to regulate them. The bill also has the potential to penalize people riding ebikes responsibly since some of the definition proposed overlaps into ebike defintions. I suggest a working group to hammer out definitions first before discussing how each (electic powered vehicle and ebike) will be regulated.