Public Comments for 02/02/2021 General Laws - Procurement/Open Government
HB2308 - Veterans of Foreign Wars, American Legion, etc.; quantity of land certain associations may hold.
HB2313 - Freedom of Information Act; exclusions, definition of 'Office of the Governor.'
VCOG opposes HB 2313 as an unnecessary extension of the already broad FOIA exemption for the working papers of the governor's office.
Virginia is an embarrassment for all the exemptions in the FOIA law. It is time that law abiding folks got to know what their govt. is really up to, given we pay for it. Second, why is Soviet style dictatorship replacing what the boards are for? If you don't trust the boards' recommendations, get rid of them, but stop trying to make it so that a political party scores points for trying to rig the system.
HB2327 - Prevailing wage rate; clarifies that public works includes transportation infrastructure projects.
The Virginia State Building and Construction Trades Council strongly support HB2327. This was the original intent of the prevailing wage law passed last year. Prevailing wage rates are survey based and represent the hourly rate of a worker's craft in the construction field for an economic region.
HB2259 - Governor; issuance of licenses to persons denied by regulatory board.
The Virginia Association of Surveyors (VAS) respectfully opposes HB 2259, which provides the Governor the authority to issue a license of the kind granted by a regulatory board under the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (DPOR) or the Department of Health Professions (DHP). Surveyors are licensed by, and the practice of surveying is regulated by, the Board for Architects, Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, Certified Interior Designers and Landscape Architects (APELSCIDLA) under DPOR. The APELSCIDLA board, like all DPOR boards, are charged with providing licensure in accordance with the Code of Virginia and established criteria. These criteria often track certain national standards and this process, as it is in all 50 states, is to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. The licensing of land surveyors seeks to set and uphold appropriate professional standards and qualifications to practice surveying. If a prospective surveyor is denied licensure, it is for good, objective, and defensible cause – including not being technically qualified or failure to pass the competency examination for licensure. No Governor should be expected to be able to fairly adjudicate whether a person denied licensure by any DPOR (or DHP) professional board should indeed be otherwise qualified to receive a professional license. Moreover, if a Governor were provided with this authority and were indeed to overrule the action of a professional licensing board that denied a person licensure, such action could be contrary to national standards and professional accreditation bodies. Licensing boards are charged with fairly considering and acting on professional licensure applications based on fair, established, recognized, and objective criteria. It is best that professional licensure boards retain this authority.
Virginia is an embarrassment for all the exemptions in the FOIA law. It is time that law abiding folks got to know what their govt. is really up to, given we pay for it. Second, why is Soviet style dictatorship replacing what the boards are for? If you don't trust the boards' recommendations, get rid of them, but stop trying to make it so that a political party scores points for trying to rig the system.
House Bill 2259 is described in LIS as allowing the Governor to issue a license of the kind granted by a regulatory board under the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation or the Department of Health Professions to any person whose application for such license to such board has been denied. However, the structure of the bill allows the Governor to issue a license of the kind granted by any regulatory board under Title 54.1. Subtitle IV of Title 54.1 is entitled “Professions Regulated by the Supreme Court” and includes the licensing of attorneys in Code sections 54.1-3900 through 54.1-3944. For this reason, the Court opposes the bill as introduced.