Additional Coverage:
- Virginia Cracks Down on Illegal Street Takeovers and Reckless Driving (royalexaminer.com)
Reckless drivers tearing up Virginia’s highways and public spaces may soon face tougher penalties, as legislation targeting exhibition driving heads to the governor’s desk.
Lawmakers moved swiftly this week, approving legislation that aims to curb street racing, burnouts, and illegal road takeovers — dangerous stunts that have turned deadly in recent years.
Between 2023 and 2024, Virginia circuit courts convicted four defendants for racing that resulted in fatalities, according to legislative records. One average, they served three and a half years in jail.
The problem extends beyond deadly crashes. Data from Virginia’s General District Court Case Management System, shows that 126 people were convicted of Class 1 misdemeanor racing over the past two years. While most avoided jail, 42.1% served an average of 20 days behind bars.
Illegal racing and reckless driving incidents have cropped up across the state, from Northern Virginia to Hampton Roads, Richmond and Virginia Beach. One particularly alarming case shared with lawmakers involved a Fairfax County police officer being surrounded by masked participants in a street takeover at 3 a.m. — an event where drivers and spectators block roads for dangerous stunts. Some struck the officer’s cruiser in the chaos.
“It’s not just an annoyance, it’s something that’s very, very dangerous and, quite honestly, potentially deadly,” said Del. David Bulova, D-Fairfax, who sponsored House Bill 2036.
Bulova’s bill broadens Virginia’s reckless driving laws to include exhibition driving—defined as aggressive driving near groups of two or more people. It specifically targets burnouts, doughnuts, drifting, street racing, and illegal takeovers on state highways, as well as driveways and parking lots of churches, schools, recreation centers, and businesses open to the public.
Senate Majority Leader Sen. Scott Surovell, D-Fairfax, said on the Senate floor Wednesday that the proposal will also clarify and enhance some penalties for certain types of driving, “which you might think could be reckless driving, but don’t always constitute reckless driving.”
Drivers caught participating in illegal street takeovers and reckless stunt driving could soon face harsher penalties, including up to a year in jail and a $2,500 fine — either or both — under the proposal now headed to Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s desk. The measure also calls for a six-month license suspension and vehicle impoundment for offenders behind the wheel.
Passengers aren’t off the hook either. Those caught riding on a car’s hood or roof during such events would face a $500 fine.
The bill expands Virginia’s definition of reckless driving to include injuries and deaths caused by exhibition driving. Under existing state law, street racing that results in injury is a felony punishable by 1 to 20 years in prison. If a death occurs, offenders already face an additional mandatory year behind bars — but the proposal removes that minimum requirement.
A fiscal impact statement from the Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission warns that the proposal could increase demand for bed space and resources at correctional facilities across the Commonwealth.
Shortly after discussing the bill in committee, two House lawmakers said they unexpectedly encountered a street takeover not far from the state Capitol in Richmond.
On the night of Feb. 3, at the intersection of North 18th Street and East Broad Street, Dels. Laura Jane Cohen, D-Fairfax, and Elizabeth Bennett-Parker, D-Alexandria, found themselves stopped as a group of motorcyclists — unmasked and without helmets — performed stunts and wheelies in the middle of the road.
Cohen, who was driving behind Bennett-Parker, described the incident as “minor” but still “dangerous,” noting the risk posed to cyclists and other drivers stuck at the blocked intersection.
“I already was supportive of the legislation, but it certainly gave a renewed perspective,” Cohen said before the bill’s passage.
Some lawmakers raised concerns over the bill’s wording, particularly the use of terms like “close proximity” and “spectators” in defining exhibition driving. Before it reached the full Senate, Bulova amended the language to remove references to spectators.
Bulova acknowledged that holding onlookers accountable would have strengthened the bill but said a clear-cut solution proved elusive because he and others could not find a solution without inadvertently capturing individuals who happened to be in near vicinity of such events.
With final approval now in Youngkin’s hands, Virginia is one step closer to tightening its grip on reckless driving and illegal street stunts.
by Nathaniel Cline, Virginia Mercury
Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Samantha Willis for questions: [email protected].
Print PDF 📄
Maternal Health Bills Move Forward, Now Youngkin Holds The Final Say
By
For the first time in her career, Nichole Wardlaw feels like policymakers are finally listening — not just to her, but to Black maternal health professionals and the patients they serve.
“I feel like I’ve been seen and heard, and I’ve been doing this work for a long time,” said Wardlaw, a certified nurse midwife with two decades of experience.
Wardlaw has been a steady presence for parents in need, but in recent years, Virginia lawmakers have also begun to take notice. Their efforts, shaped by voices like Wardlaw’s, have led to a slate of maternal health-focused bills moving through the General Assembly — collectively dubbed the “Momnibus” package.
The legislative push follows last fall’s Black Maternal Health Summit at the Virginia Capitol, where medical professionals, advocates, and lawmakers from across the state and beyond convened for roundtable discussions and panels.
Alongside these conversations, a rural health committee spent months touring Virginia, gathering firsthand accounts of maternal care gaps in underserved communities.
The result: a range of proposals aimed at addressing disparities, from requiring implicit bias training for medical license renewals to strengthening obstetrics training in hospitals and expanding support for midwives and doulas — both critical players in bridging maternal healthcare gaps.
One piece of the package, Senate Bill 1352, sponsored by Sen. Kannan Srinivasan, D-Loudoun, builds on a 2021 law that allowed midwives to establish private practices after completing 1,000 hours under agreements with other physicians. His proposal, along with House Bill 1635 by Del. Joshua Cole, D-Spotsylvania, would extend that opportunity to other types of midwives, expanding access to maternal care statewide.
For Wardlaw, spending 15 years working in hospitals revealed a stark reality — many Black patients didn’t feel safe in those settings. Now, as a certified nurse midwife providing care outside hospital walls, she’s able to meet clients where they are, which is especially critical for rural patients who face longer travel times after a wave of obstetrics unit closures in recent years.
“What I was finding is that being in the hospital was not beneficial for many Black women,” Wardlaw said. “A lot were leaving the hospital system because they were afraid.”
Studies show Black parents-to-be experience disproportionately negative maternal health outcomes, often due to provider bias. Black women are also more likely to die from pregnancy-related complications, a disparity confirmed by Virginia’s Maternal Mortality Review Team.
Still, unassisted home births can pose risks if medical complications arise, making midwives like Wardlaw an essential bridge in maternal care. Certified nurse midwives are not only registered nurses but also trained specialists in pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum care. Other types of certified midwives may come from different healthcare backgrounds but provide similarly vital services.
Several bills in the “Momnibus” package focus on strengthening midwifery. House Bill 1923, sponsored by Del. Jeion Ward, D-Hampton, seeks to establish pay parity for midwives, while HB 1904, from Del. Rodney Willett, D-Henrico, would ensure midwives and nurse practitioners have 24-hour on-call services.
Katie Page, a certified nurse midwife serving Farmville and Lynchburg, sees this legislative session as a turning point. She recalled speaking with lawmakers last summer when the rural health committee visited Farmville, urging them to find ways to support midwifery.
“Magic” is happening around maternal health support this legislative session, Page said.
Access to maternal care remains a challenge in Virginia, where 15% of residents lack a birthing hospital within a 30 minute drive, according to a March of Dimes report. Last year, lawmakers allocated state funding to expand OB-GYN and family medicine residencies, hoping to strengthen the workforce. But while doctors trained in Virginia sometimes leave for other states, midwives tend to remain in the communities they serve.
Still, Page is encouraged by lawmakers’ effort to support a broad range of maternal health professionals and the governor’s expressed support for addressing maternal healthcare.
“I’m glad to see lawmakers taking a both/and approach rather than an either/or one” Page said.
Wardlaw had high hopes for HB 2102, sponsored by Del. Michael Feggans, D-Virginia Beach, which would have made pregnancy an automatic qualifier for Medicaid enrollment. However, the measure failed.
Youngkin has signaled support for some maternal health initiatives, including funding doulas and perinatal hubs in his proposed budget amendments. But he could still block certain bills that reach his desk.
One proposal that previously met resistance is SB 740 by Sen. Mamie Locke, D-Hampton, and HB 1649 by Del. Cliff Hayes, D-Suffolk, which would require implicit bias training for medical professionals during license renewals. Sen. Chris Head, R-Botetourt, co-patroned Locke’s bill this year, but a similar measure was rejected in 2023.
Rather than outright vetoing it last time, Youngkin proposed an amendment requiring two hours of continuing education on maternal health disparities instead of a broader bias training program.
Locke rejected the revision, arguing that his approach fell short.
It was “a case of unconscious bias and a lack of cultural competency,” she said.
With the 2025 legislative session wrapping up this week, Youngkin has until March 24 to sign, veto or amend the maternal health bills that make it to his desk.
by Charlotte Rene Woods, Virginia Mercury
Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Samantha Willis for questions: [email protected].
Print PDF 📄
Virginia GOP Feud With Conservative Wing Spills Into Critical Election Year
By
With all 100 seats in the House of Delegates and three statewide offices on the ballot this year, Virginia Republicans are navigating internal disagreements that could shape the party’s strategy heading into a pivotal election cycle. Tensions between the 5th Congressional District leadership and the Republican Party of Virginia (RPV) have resurfaced, highlighting broader divisions within the state GOP.
The latest salvo in the intra-party battle came in the form of an open letter, signed by six Republican officials from the hardline conservative 5th District — including Chairman Rick Buchanan and five members of the State Central Committee.
The letter, sent to the committee last week, takes aim at the 80-member body’s Executive Committee, which, during a Dec. 8 meeting, attempted to penalize four local GOP officials by banning them from leadership roles for two years. The officials were ousted in September for refusing to sign a renewed locality pledge of loyalty to former state Sen. John McGuire, R-Goochland, the party’s congressional nominee, who went on to win the Nov. 5 election.
“As we step into a new year, it is vital to reflect on past actions, recognize missteps, and consider how we can position our party for success,” the letter reads. “Leadership requires not only vision but also wisdom — the ability to guide, not punish, and to inspire, not alienate. One recent decision by party leadership warrants serious discussion.”
At issue is a requirement for party officials to reaffirm their support for McGuire following his victory over U.S. Rep. Bob Good, R-Farmville, in last year’s bruising primary. The demand, framed as a “reaffirmation statement,” sparked outrage among some 5th District Republicans, who viewed it as an unprecedented and punitive measure.
“Has there ever been such a demand in the history of our party?” the letter continues. “Have party members, after vigorously supporting a candidate in a primary, ever been forced to sign a statement of loyalty?”
The conflict first flared up in June, when 25 GOP officials from the district signed a letter urging then-presidential nominee Donald Trump to reconsider his endorsement of McGuire and instead back Good, the then-chairman of the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus and a staunch Trump ally who had fallen out of Trump’s good graces after endorsing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in the Republican presidential primary.
That act of defiance by some of the district’s Republican leadership set off months of tension that culminated in September when each of the 25 officials were asked to sign the renewed pledge. Five refused, arguing they had previously pledged their support for the Republican nominee ahead of the June 18 primary election. As a result, four were stripped off their titles while one submitted his resignation.
Rich Anderson, chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia, defended the initial reaffirmation requirement but acknowledged that the State Central Committee ultimately determined that banning the four officials from leadership roles for two years was excessive.
However, for Buchanan and his allies, the issue remains far from resolved. Their letter criticizes what they see as an attempt to “humiliate, ostracize, and ultimately expel” certain members from leadership for political retribution. They argue that internal divisions, if left unchecked, could weaken the party heading into a critical election year.
“We must ask ourselves: Did these actions help us elect more Republicans?” the letter said. “Did they energize our base? Did they serve to strengthen our party? The answer is a resounding no. Such divisive tactics do not build a winning coalition; they discourage participation, suppress enthusiasm, and fracture the unity we so desperately need.”
Buchanan clarified in a phone interview Monday that the purpose of the letter was not to further divide, but unite the party in order to replicate the 2021 victory of Republican gubernatorial nominee Glenn Youngkin, who flipped Virginia red by increasing turnout in the deeply Republican districts in Southside and Southwest Virginia.
“They are attacking the red counties via us, and yet they’ve got the governor telling them that’s where we need to win elections, that we need to get more people in the red counties out to vote,” Buchanan said, referring to the party’s state leadership.
If Republicans want to win back the majorities in the state legislature and ensure a victory for Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears, the party’s presumptive gubernatorial nominee, they need to “come up with a message and reach into the homes of the folks that are my neighbors,” Buchanan said.
“That’s the only way, that’s what Youngkin did, and he did it very well. He pushed it, he had a bus tour in Southside and Southwest Virginia, and he came to see us, which is almost unheard of. You’re not going to turn those Democrats, but you can get the people out around here that don’t normally vote except in presidential elections. [But] they are attacking us for something that nobody has ever heard of, they are running people away from the party, they are splitting the party, and I’m very concerned about that.”
A threat to Earle-Sears’ campaign
John Massoud, chairman of the 6th District GOP Committee, also weighed in on the controversy, taking issue with the State Central Committee’s disciplinary measures.
“As a person intimately familiar with what happened in the 5th Congressional District, I vehemently disagreed with the RPV’s insistence that people who did not sign a second loyalty oath be removed,” he said. “My opinion is once you sign the loyalty oath, unless you have broken it, there’s no need to sign a second.”
Massoud emphasized that in his district, where U.S. Rep. Ben Cline, R-Botetourt, faced no primary challenge last year, such disputes did not arise.
“RPV respects us and we respect RPV, we work well together, and sometimes we agree to disagree, and I think a disagreement is not a bad thing,” he said.
While Massoud said he believes free speech and open debate strengthen the party, he remains firm in his opposition to how the committee handled the 5th District situation. “I vehemently disagree with how RPV handled whatever happened in that district with those few people who didn’t sign a second loyalty oath. It wasn’t needed, and RPV knows my opinion on this.”
Ongoing Republican divisions — even if not a widespread issue — could threaten Earle-Sears’ path to the governor’s mansion, warned David Richards, a political science professor at the University of Lynchburg.
“In 2021, Youngkin unified the party by focusing on broad conservative issues like parental school choice, appealing to both moderates and the far right. At the time, the MAGA wing was still recovering from Trump’s loss, and election denialism had not yet become a party loyalty test. That unity boosted GOP turnout in rural areas, helping Youngkin offset Democratic strength in Northern Virginia,” Richards said.
The 2025 election presents a different challenge, Richards added. With the GOP in control of the federal government, Democrats will be more motivated to vote, making party unity even more critical for Republicans.
“If the far right sits out, either due to frustration with Virginia’s GOP leadership or opposition to Earle-Sears, her path to victory narrows significantly. Earle-Sears will need a united party behind her to counter what is sure to be a very united Democratic Party,” Richards said.
Clashes in the Suffolk
And the 5th District isn’t the only place where local Republicans are clashing over party control and loyalty tests.
In Suffolk, GOP infighting reached a boiling point in 2023 when the 2nd Congressional District GOP Committee took the extraordinary step of dissolving the city’s entire Republican committee, erasing a 156-member organization that had been growing its conservative base.
The controversy began during the Republican nomination fight for Senate District 17, when then-Suffolk GOP Chair Dawn Jones filed a lawsuit against the Virginia Department of Elections and the State Board of Elections.
Jones alleged that the state agencies improperly changed the nomination contest from a party-run convention to a primary election, a move she claimed was designed to benefit then-Del. Emily Jordan, R-Suffolk, who was backed by Youngkin, over former NASCAR driver Hermie Sadler. A court eventually ruled in favor of a state-run primary, and Jordan went on to win the GOP nomination and the general election that year.
Jones believes the lawsuit put a target on the Suffolk Republican Committee, particularly as it had allowed Sadler to speak at its meetings — a move she argues was simply in line with party rules, since Jordan was also given the opportunity but chose not to attend. “She was the chosen one,” Jones said in a phone interview Monday.
Shortly after the lawsuit, tensions escalated when the Suffolk committee debated censuring then-House Majority Leader Todd Gilbert, R-Shenandoah, for his refusal to introduce legislation the committee wanted.
Instead of removing Jones, the 2nd District GOP Committee took the unprecedented step of dissolving the entire Suffolk Republican Committee. The panel later appointed a former committee chair to lead a reconstituted Suffolk GOP.
Jones and her allies appealed the decision to the State Central Committee, which upheld it by a majority vote. She claims the move was a calculated purge of strong conservative voices, particularly those seen as too independent of Richmond’s GOP leadership.
“I have come to realize that their objective isn’t to win, it’s to control,” Jones said. “And that’s really the way that I view this.”
Jones argued that Virginia GOP leadership is handpicking candidates behind the scenes, manipulating the process to ensure their preferred individuals secure nominations. According to her, party insiders create an environment where members feel pressured to fall in line, and those who refuse to endorse the “chosen” candidates face retaliation.
She also claimed that party operatives disrupt local GOP meetings, stirring division and chaos to weaken independent-minded committees. “They have what we call disruptors present inside of our meetings, and they will continue to create havoc,” Jones said, adding that she believes this strategy is designed to fracture committees from within, turning members against leadership to justify removals.
In the case of the Suffolk GOP Committee, Jones alleged that party leaders fabricated rule violations to justify its dissolution, specifically because the committee was seen as too independent.
“They try to separate the unit,” she said. “They try to create so much chaos within your local unit that they either are going to try to get people to go against you as a chairman, or, in our case, because we had a very strong unit, they fabricated rules that we may have supposedly broken to basically get rid of us as a unit.”
She also said that before its removal, the Suffolk GOP had been an effective, growing force within the party. “We were 156 people strong. We were making strides. We had moved the needle to the conservative way here in Suffolk by five percent. That’s significant. Since we’ve been dissolved, and they put this other group back in charge, they have lost all those gains,” she said.
As a consequence, many conservative voters in Suffolk now feel alienated from the political process, believing that GOP leadership is rigging the system to favor establishment-backed candidates, Jones said. “I’ve run into people who don’t want to show up because they feel the process has been rigged and that it’s already set. They don’t like the candidates that have been picked, and they’re not going to show up to vote for them.”
However, Anderson, the RPV chair, pushed back against the allegations and defended the decision to dissolve the Suffolk committee, arguing that the panel was dysfunctional and had become a roadblock to GOP success.
“Our job is to elect Republicans, not punish Republicans,” Anderson said, referencing the Suffolk committee’s potential plan to reprimand Gilbert over legislative decisions. He emphasized that lawmakers answer to all voters in their jurisdiction, not just local party activists.
Anderson also said multiple GOP candidates had complained that the Suffolk committee was not working cooperatively with campaigns and was instead undermining party efforts.
He also strongly denied claims that state party leadership manipulates nomination processes or favors certain candidates over others. He insisted that the state GOP remains neutral in contested primaries and does not engage in efforts to anoint preferred candidates.
“The Republican Party of Virginia does not push any candidates, we don’t run any candidates,” he said. “Candidates step forward on their own and seek the nomination on their own. We don’t sponsor candidates, nor do I or other leaders at the Republican Party of Virginia endorse or even privately indicate who we think the nominees should be in a given nomination contest.”
Instead, Anderson emphasized that the party’s role is to act as a neutral arbiter, ensuring that nomination contests are fair and conducted according to party rules. “Our job is to remain as the honest broker, enforce party rule, and ensure a level playing field so everyone gets an equal crack,” he said.
While Jones and other conservatives believe Youngkin’s endorsements influenced nomination battles, Anderson defended the governor’s involvement, arguing that it is separate from the party’s official role.
“He is the leader of our party,” Anderson said of Youngkin. “He’s elected to make tough decisions. He’s in a position where I think he can assess the electability of a given candidate, but one of the things he does not do is enforce party rules.”
Anderson maintained that accusations of backroom maneuvering and forced candidate selection were unfounded, portraying the Suffolk GOP’s removal as a necessary step to restore party order in a unit that was working against Republican interests rather than for them.
“The necessity to take an extreme action of this sort is rare,” Anderson said. “In fact, the Suffolk reconstitution is the only time that there’s been a reconstitution in the five years that I’ve been the state party chairman.”
by Markus Schmidt, Virginia Mercury
Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Samantha Willis for questions: [email protected].
Print PDF 📄
Overdose Crisis Spurs School Notification Bills, But Key Details Still Up For Debate
By
With drug overdoses continuing to strain Virginia communities, a proposal requiring schools to notify parents of overdose cases is gaining momentum in the General Assembly. However, lawmakers remain divided on whether schools should report “suspected” overdoses or only “confirmed” cases, a key sticking point that could shape the bill’s final language.
Virginia recorded 21,881 drug overdose emergency department visits in 2023, a 2% decrease from 2022, according to recent data by the Virginia Department of Health (VDH). Despite the slight decline, fentanyl overdoses remain a major concern, prompting legislative action.
Sen. Glen Sturtevant, R-Chesterfield, who sponsored Senate Bill 1240, supports a House amendment expanding the reporting requirement to include colleges and universities. His bill cleared the House Education Committee on Monday, but now faces further scrutiny in the full House. This comes after a similar proposal by Sen. Jennifer Carroll Foy, D-Prince William, failed in the Democratic-controlled House by 42-57 last session.
“We don’t want schools to wait until law enforcement confirms it, or the hospital does the toxicology or the blood work to confirm that it was, in fact, an overdose,” Sturtevant said. “We want them to sort of err on the side of providing more information sooner to parents because if we [wait] … it can take a week or longer for lab results to get back.”
A related measure, House Bill 2774, sponsored by Del. J.J. Singh, D-Loudoun, also advanced to the Senate floor. Singh’s proposal was merged with HB 2424 and HB 2287, carried by Dels. Geary Higgins, R-Loudoun, and Del. Carrie Coyner, R-Chesterfield, showing strong bipartisan interest in addressing the crisis.
“I think we would do well to take the input from everybody, from the governor’s office, from the Senate and the House, and come up with [the right] approach,” Singh said, expressing confidence in the bill’s final passage.
Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s administration has made fentanyl prevention a priority, signing two executive orders related to overdose response during his tenure.
Executive Order 26 outlined a “comprehensive” strategy to combat fentanyl and opioid abuse, while Executive Order 28 directed the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) to ensure school divisions notify parents of school-connected overdoses within 24 hours.
The urgency behind the second order came after nine opioid overdoses were documented in Loudoun County Public Schools in October 2023. The administration criticized the district for waiting more than 20 days to notify parents, despite evidence of multiple such cases.
However, Executive Order 28 did not specify a deadline for when VDOE should issue guidance, and lawmakers say a legislative mandate for VDOE and tVDH to set clear school protocols is long overdue.
Higgins said he doesn’t understand why schools hesitate to notify parents but hopes the bill will require school divisions to report where an overdose occurred and include “suspected” cases — not just confirmed ones.
“We’re not trying to point out anybody or anything,” Higgins said. “We’re trying to make sure parents know what’s going on and if you don’t know what’s going on, how do you fix it?”
With both bills now reaching each chamber, lawmakers have until Saturday’s session deadline to hammer out the final language — ensuring schools balance transparency with accuracy in overdose reporting.
by Nathaniel Cline, Virginia Mercury
Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Samantha Willis for questions: [email protected].
Print PDF 📄
License Plate Reader Bill Survives, But Surveillance Concerns Loom
By
Despite near defeat and intense debate, a proposal to regulate automated license plate readers is still alive in Virginia’s General Assembly — though not without significant revisions and shifting alliances.
House Bill 2724, sponsored by Del. Charniele Herring, D-Alexandria, aims to rein in the widely used but loosely regulated surveillance technology. Initially, Herring sought to cap law enforcement’s data storage at 30 days, but opposition from criminal justice and immigrant rights groups led her to slash the limit to 21 days.
That move, however, cost her the support of police and sheriffs’ associations, who spoke against the bill during Monday’s Courts of Justice Committee hearing.
The same panel defeated the measure last week before reviving it for further consideration. The bill has already cleared the House of Delegates, and Senate amendments now limit storage to 21 days, though departments can choose to retain data for even shorter periods.
Charlottesville Police Chief Michael Kochis, for instance, said his department keeps records for only seven days, a policy shaped by local community concerns. He has backed the legislation since it was first workshopped in the state crime commission last year.
Herring said her bill would make Virginia the most restrictive state when it comes to regulating the technology, though New Hampshire limits storage for just three minutes.
Among the 18 states that currently regulate the technology, 17 of them limit data retention. A report to the Crime Commission, which Herring chairs, shows how many states range from a few weeks to a few months. New Hampshire has the tightest restrictions on data retention while Alabama is one of the most loose at up to five years.
Advocates and some lawmakers have also raised alarms that license plate data could be subpoenaed by federal agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or by states with abortion bans, potentially exposing Virginians who travel for reproductive health care.
Herring has acknowledged that the pending state law “cannot wholly avoid federal warrants and subpoenas” but argues her bill at least sets guardrails for existing and future plate reader use.
Sens. Lashrecse Aird, D-Petersburg, and Jennifer Carrol Foy, D-Prince William, have speculated that the devices are more likely to be installed in predominantly Black and brown neighborhoods — areas that have historically experienced more negative interactions with law enforcement.
Herring’s bill also faced backlash for its proposal to allow state law enforcement to install readers along state roads. Critics argue this could lead to an expansion of surveillance before existing oversight measures are fully tested.
“I think we are doing real harm by expanding this by not allowing additional time to see how these guardrails will work and how they will be applied,” Aird said last week.
“I don’t think limiting the legislation to existing cameras will be a detriment to law enforcement. This is not the time to expand them — we need to see how this legislation will work with the cameras that are in place.”
To address those concerns, lawmakers adopted a reenactment clause on Monday.
This means that while the bill would regulate existing cameras if signed into law, and any expansion of readers along highways would require further legislative approval next year. While additional adjustments could still be made if the bill advances, this compromise may remain in place.
With the 2025 legislative session set to end this weekend, the bill’s fate now rests in the Senate. If it clears that hurdle, Gov. Glenn Youngkin will have the option to approve, veto, or amend the legislation before it becomes law.
by Charlotte Rene Woods, Virginia Mercury
Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Samantha Willis for questions: [email protected].
Print PDF 📄
Senate Panel Kills Effort to Track English Learner Funding
By
A push to examine how Virginia funds English language learners (ELLs) in public schools was shut down Monday, as the Senate Finance and Appropriations Committee rejected a proposal for data collection on the issue.
The effort stemmed from a 2023 report by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC), which found that Virginia has been underfunding schools under the Standards of Quality (SOQ) — the state’s funding formula for public education. Lawmakers had requested the report to identify gaps in school funding and determine whether ELL students were receiving adequate resources.
The funding gap is stark. A 2022 study from EdTrust, an education advocacy group, showed that Virginia school districts serving the highest number of ELL students receive 48% less revenue per student than districts with fewer ELL students, VPM first reported.
“I think it’s important for us, as a commonwealth, to provide funding for the requirements that we set forth, so that local appropriations are not needed to close that gap,” Del. Atoosa Reaser, D-Loudoun, the legislation’s sponsor, said Monday.
“That’s money that belongs to the taxpayer; and the state should be, in my opinion, funding its fair share, which the House budget works toward.”
Reaser’s House Bill 2032 would have directed the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) to collect data on expenditures and proficiency levels for ELL students. The measure also called for the identification of additional support strategies and a status report to lawmakers later this year. However, the Virginia Department of Planning and Budget found no expected fiscal impact, as data on proficiency is already collected.
Reaser’s proposal cleared the House on Jan. 28, but not without changes. Lawmakers stripped out a provision that would have allocated additional state funding for ELL students, instead folding that language into HB 1954, sponsored by House Education Committee Chair Sam Rasoul, D-Roanoke. That bill also failed but could resurface during budget negotiations in the coming days.
Last year, the legislature created the Joint Subcommittee on Elementary and Secondary Education to review JLARC’s recommendations with the goal of replacing the outdated formula. Sen. Mamie Locke, D-Hampton, the committee chair, on Monday urged the Senate Finance and Appropriations Committee to shelve the English learner funding bill, arguing that the panel’s work isn’t finished.
“It’s important we do this in a manner that we are looking at all of the JLARC recommendations,” Locke said, adding that some of the commission’s proposals have already been addressed in the state budget.
The bill also coincides with recent changes from the Virginia Board of Education, which now require more English learner test scores to be included in school accountability calculations — a shift that could have significant consequences for schools that serve large ELL populations.
However, some Democrats are pushing to delay the rollout of the new accountability system, citing concerns about fairness and accuracy in measuring student performance. For now, the debate over English learner funding remains tied to the larger fight over how Virginia funds its schools.
by Nathaniel Cline, Virginia Mercury
Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Samantha Willis for questions: [email protected].
Print PDF 📄
Speed Camera Reform Stalls in Virginia Senate
By
After lawmakers uncovered millions in speed camera revenue across Virginia, a proposal to tighten regulations on the devices has hit a legislative roadblock. The General Assembly now waits to see whether a pared-down version of the plan will survive without triggering an expansion of automated enforcement.
The holdup follows the failure of House Bill 2041 — sponsored by Del. Holly Seibold, D-Fairfax — along with two related Senate Bills, in the Senate Transportation Committee on Thursday. The 6-9 vote came amid a shake-up in the upper chamber’s leadership, with Sen. Lamont Bagby, D-Henrico, replacing Sen. Jennifer Boysko, D-Fairfax, as committee chair.
For Seibold, the outcome was frustrating, especially after making multiple concessions to local governments and camera vendors. Seibold said she even included language from Senate Bill 1209, sponsored by Sen. Mark Obenshain, R-Harrisonburg, requiring more regulations around operating speed cameras.
“I did act in best faith. I tried to give them everything they wanted, but clearly, they were working in the opposite direction of this bill all along,” Seibold said.
Her push for reform is deeply personal. Seibold said she introduced the bill in memory of three Fairfax teenagers struck by a student driver going 81 mph in a 35 mph zone in 2022. Two of them, 15-year-old Leeyan Yan and 14-year-old Ada Martinez Nolasco, lost their lives.
“I don’t care about local governments making money off these devices,” Seibold said. “Local governments have many opportunities to make money, how to drive revenue, increase taxes. This is not a tool to make money. This is a tool to save lives.”
HB 2041 would have required stricter approval for speed cameras, barred vendors from profiting off citations, ensured due process protections, and restricted revenue use to pedestrian safety improvements.
Seibold is now closely watching Senate Bill 1233, sponsored by Sen. Angelia Williams Graves, D-Norfolk, which carries the same language as her bill and awaits consideration in the House.
House Transportation Committee Chair Karrie Delaney, D-Fairfax, noted that both bills were merged on Thursday in an agreement between her and the then-Senate committee chair, Boysko. Lawmakers will now meet in a conference to negotiate final language for the Seibold-Williams Graves bill.
Delaney hopes that the legislation will advance to a conference committee, ensuring the language from Seibold’s proposal “stays alive.” The measure has already cleared the Senate. It would allow law enforcement to install monitoring systems in school crossing zones, highway work zones, and high-risk intersections to record pedestrian crossing and stop sign violations.
Still, Delaney said she was frustrated by the Senate Transportation Committee’s rejection of Seibold’s version of the bill.
“I’m disappointed by the Senate’s actions, because we had an opportunity to really make a statement against the policing for profit scheme that many localities seem to have in place right now,” Delaney said.
Before the committee voted on Seibold’s bill, lawmakers conformed a third proposal — Senate Bill 776, introduced by Majority Leader Scott Surovell, D-Fairfax — to the Seibold-Williams Graves package. But the procedural move left Seibold unable to fully explain the bill’s language or clarify where revenue from citations would be directed.
Surovell’s bill, which sought to expand speed cameras to roads in National Parks, passed in the Senate but ultimately failed in the House.
The committee’s decision reflects a broader sentiment among lawmakers: focus on tightening oversight of speed cameras rather than expanding their use.
“We all, I believe, are in agreement that these speed safety cameras have a role in helping to provide for better pedestrian safety and there are towns and localities who want to do this,” said Vice Chair David Reid, D-Loudoun, to The Mercury. “But we also have to recognize that we’ve got to have the right type of guardrails to prevent abuse.”
For now, speed camera reform remains in limbo, as lawmakers debate how far the regulations should go.
by Nathaniel Cline, Virginia Mercury
Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Samantha Willis for questions: [email protected].
Read More About This Story:
- Virginia Cracks Down on Illegal Street Takeovers and Reckless Driving (royalexaminer.com)