Any person who has mental health issues should not be held in jail or prison they should be evaluated if receiving ssi they already cannot afford to live on that amount of income . They should not be placed into prison or jail because they do not offer mental health services correctly when being prescribed medication when outside of prison they are not offered the same medication and are given whatever drugs that the jails have not what is actually needed which makes mental health worse on these individuals

LAJC supports HB 438. This bill allows the Court Services Unit (CSU) to divert a juvenile case from formal processing even if a previous case had been diverted. It also clarifies that courts can return a case to the CSU for diversion when appropriate. A second delinquent act by a child is not predictive of future criminality. Diversion programs such as restorative justice hold youth accountable without the costs of formal court processing. Research consistently shows that diversion reduces recidivism compared to formal court processing when holding all other relevant criteria constant. Limiting diversion to a single opportunity can compound existing inequities for youth of color and youth with disabilities, who are disproportionately referred to court.

Madam Chairwoman and Delegates, in past legislative sessions, it has often been the position of law enforcement and many Commonwealth Attorneys that the risk of fentanyl exposure should be a reason to oppose this bill. Sadly, due to rampant misinformation, they have been effective at preventing passage of those bills. Below are links to references from the DEA, several emergency medicine and first responder organizations, and research papers showing that the risk of contact with fentanyl is.1.) almost nonexistent; and 2,) highly unlikely to cause any harm in any real life situation if it did happen. DEA https://www.dea.gov/sites/default/files/Publications/Final%20STANDARD%20size%20of%20Fentanyl%20Safety%20Recommendations%20for%20First%20Respond....pdf American Council on Medical Toxicology https://www.acmt.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/PS_241101_ACMT-Statement-on-Fentanyl-Exposure-Laws.pdf State of MD Opioid Command Center https://stopoverdose.maryland.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/34/2023/10/OOCC-Fact-Check-%E2%80%93Accidental-Fentanyl-Exposure.pdf Medical journal articles https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7492952/ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0955395921002061 Thank you. Thomas A. (“Tom”) Jackson Co-lead organizer Virginia Recovery Advocacy Project

Na

Please pass this bill and take these toxic products off the shelves and out of our youths hands.

On our way home from the Delegate hearing last week my son and I drove out of Richmond on Hull Street Road. There are noticeably a high density of vape shops in dis-advantaged areas of Richmond. But as you continue toward the suburbs you still see them every 5 miles. Let’s not kid ourselves……this toxic gas is available on every corner! The chair woman asked why a broader bill this year that doesn’t just include minors? Because grown adults like my son quickly became addicted with serious health issues in a short time! Like 12 other states, this product needs to be pulled from retail and only sold through permitted outlets! There are at least 1400 vape shops per Alexa but going to intestate myself. That number seems low!

Please vote YES on HB648 It is important for the committee to see visual examples of devices that are used to distribute nitrous oxide, as a common comment that has been brought up through this process is that the bill would be limiting distribution of small devices that could inadvertently distribute poisonouse gas such as cans of whipped cream. This is NOT the case at all. These devices are very large and are made for direct consumption of nitrous. Attached is an example of a couple of visuals. The first visual shows how retailers like vape shops encourage regular use with frequent buyer cards as well as warning labels from the manufacturer which directly state this should not be inhaled. The second visual shows a couple of examples of what these cansisters look like with a side by side comparison to a can of paint to put it into perspective.

I strongly support HB648 - prohibition in the State of Virginia of nitrous oxide for distribution to any person, business or organization that is not explicitly for commercial food or medical use. Severe penalties and routine checks should be mandated and implemented for those excluded from this bill. Vape shops and other similar distributors or dispensaries should be closely monitored to ensure compliance. They falsely sell under the pretense of being available for restaurant usage when in fact they market and sell to individuals for recreational usage. Too many people, especially our youth and underprivileged people, are dying or becoming gravely ill as a result. I, and my friends and family, urge our legislators who represent us in Fairfax County, to act immediately to enact legislation that will ban these dangerous products.

I nearly lost my son 6 months ago to nitrous. His use quickly escalated to an ER visit, long term neuropathy, mental health issues and suicide threats! Vape stores are distributing at will! This needs to stop. Who knows where the gas comes from and who produces the tanks. Please stop this chaos.

I strongly support SB634, HB361, HB26, and HB853. These bills are critically important because they provide retroactive relief, offering meaningful opportunities for those who are newly convicted or recently incarcerated. By allowing past sentences to be reconsidered under updated, fairer standards, these bills promote justice, rehabilitation, and hope for individuals striving to rebuild their lives. Passing these measures will not only benefit those directly affected but also strengthen our communities by encouraging positive reintegration and reducing unnecessary long-term incarceration. I urge the General Assembly to pass these bills promptly. Thank you for considering this crucial step toward fairness and justice.

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.

VOTE NO on this bill The VSP currently works with vigilantes associated with Alicia's Project to entrap people. One of our members is currently under review for alleged violations of the sex offender re-registry requirements for having unauthorized social media account and for not reporting employment. Those are false, but not before a SWAT Team kicked in his door, detained him for 90 minutes without a warrant or explanation, took his devices, and, many months later, there are no charges. This is on top of the first abuse of VA Code 18.2-374.3 where he and many others were convicted of computer solicitation of children when in fact they were only lawfully acting looking for adults, not children. NOW VSP does not want unauthorized vigilantes and online trolls to interfere with their investigations, but ANY who do are problematic to them and to public safety. Instead, we should focus on requiring police to have a REAL child present in an online sting, and to have a NON-PUBLIC REGISTRY (If we must have one at all) and that would solve many of these problems,

The attached letter speaks to the significance of the problem addressed by HB 1105--the competency crisis--and provides context for the need for such an amendment to Virginia Code.

HB1105 could help reduce overcrowding in state psychiatric hospitals by giving outpatient or local jail competency restoration options when circumstances permit. Currently too many people with misdemeanor charges are confined in state hospitals for competency restoration for far longer than they would have served time in jail.

This legislation will allow Drone as a First Responder (DFR) Programs Definition: Drone as a First Responder (DFR) is a public safety drone program in which drones are strategically stationed, often on rooftops, and remotely launched immediately upon receipt of certain 911 calls. DFR missions are limited to specific incident types where aerial information can enhance safety, decision making, and operational outcomes. Overview and Impact: DFR programs across the United States have demonstrated that real time aerial information, provided before ground units arrive, saves lives, improves responder safety, reduces unnecessary deployments, and helps prevent tragic outcomes. DFR has become one of the most effective de escalation tools in modern public safety. The first DFR program launched in Chula Vista, California in 2018. Since then, the program has conducted tens of thousands of missions and publicly shares flight activity and outcomes through an online dashboard. Prior to launch, Chula Vista conducted extensive community outreach, engaged elected officials, published operational policies, and emphasized transparency. DFR is not used for random surveillance. Nationwide, DFR programs consistently return ground units to service before arrival in approximately twenty five percent of responses. This allows agencies to prioritize higher risk calls, improve response efficiency, and better manage staffing shortages. Key Benefits: DFR enhances life safety for the public and responders, provides real time situational awareness, improves decision making with verified information, de escalates incidents involving reported weapons, reduces unnecessary patrol responses, and serves as a force multiplier for understaffed agencies. DFR supports locating suspects and missing persons, assessing fires and hazardous materials incidents, improving safety at large gatherings, and delivering life saving equipment such as AEDs, Narcan, tourniquets, flotation devices, and blood products. Privacy and Civil Rights Protections: DFR programs operate with strong safeguards to protect privacy and civil liberties. These include community engagement, transparent policies, mission limitations, and strict data handling requirements. Recording does not begin until arrival on scene unless operationally necessary. Data retention follows applicable state law and body worn camera standards. DFR is not used for random surveillance, intelligence gathering, or monitoring protected speech. Required Guard Rails Prohibited Uses: DFR aircraft may not be weaponized, used for unauthorized surveillance, discriminatory data collection, personal use, wildlife harassment, or any activity that violates constitutional protections or applicable law. Search warrants are required where legally applicable. Commitment: DFR programs operate in compliance with federal, state, and local law and are designed to balance effective emergency response with the protection of individual privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties. DFR programs also emphasize training, supervision, auditing, and accountability to ensure responsible use of unmanned aircraft systems. Agencies establish written procedures, conduct regular reviews, and provide ongoing education for operators and supervisors. These measures reinforce public trust, support transparency, and ensure that DFR remains focused on life safety, emergency response, and community benefit.

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.