Connect with us

Virginia

Three interesting bills: declawing cats, sewage regulations and on-duty physicians • Virginia Mercury

Published

on

Three interesting bills: declawing cats, sewage regulations and on-duty physicians • Virginia Mercury


Hundreds of bills are filed for General Assembly consideration each year. In this weekly series, the Mercury takes a look at a few of lawmakers’ 2024 proposals that might not otherwise make headlines during the whirlwind legislative session.

House Bill 1354: Prohibiting declawing cats

This bill from Del. Marty Martinez, D-Loudoun, would prohibit veterinarians from declawing cats unless necessary for therapeutic purposes. 

Martinez told the House Agriculture Subcommittee in January that his bill would let the state Board of Veterinarians strip those vets who perform the procedure of their license if they determine it’s warranted. 

Advertisement

Daphna Nachminovitch with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals said declawing goes beyond the removal of the nail to actually amputate the first digit of every paw. As a result, she said it can cause behavioral issues and leave cats defenseless if they manage to escape outside. 

“When I worked at an animal shelter, a lot of the cats declawed were brought to us as biters because they felt very defensive not being able to use their claws,” she said.

Susan Seward with the Virginia Veterinary Medical Association also noted there are an increasing number of veterinarians who no longer perform the procedure unless there has been an injury to the animal.

Exemptions to the prohibition, said Martinez, could be made if the cat has a condition that requires the removal of claws. Cats could also be declawed in cases where the owner has a condition such as hemophilia or HIV and a physician recommends the procedure. 

However, Del. Buddy Fowler, R-Hanover, said the bill is problematic for people who want to declaw their cats to stop them from scratching.

Advertisement

“I’m concerned about a lot of people who may no longer want to have cats as pets if they cannot do that,” he said. 

Martinez said he and his wife made the “biggest mistake” when they decided to declaw their first cat, who was “never the same” after the procedure. 

“I felt I could never do that again to any animal,” he continued. “I’m an animal lover, and anything we can do to prevent any kind of cruelty to animals is something I support.”

The bill passed both chambers, with a handful of Republicans joining Democrats in support. It is now being reviewed by Gov. Glenn Youngkin. 

House Bill 870: Creating sewage sludge regulations

Advertisement

HB 870 from Del. David Bulova, D-Fairfax, would require the Virginia State Water Control Board to adopt regulations to address situations when sewers’ normal storage capacity is exceeded due to adverse weather conditions.

Bulova told the House last month these sewage overflow events are expected to occur more frequently because of the increased frequency, intensity and duration of storm events being driven by climate change. 

“I think we all agree that this bill deals with a smelly subject,” he said. 

The bill would require the Department of Environmental Quality to form a regulatory advisory panel to assist with developing regulations. The new rules would have to include procedures for creating additional on-site and alternative storage requirements, as well as stating the amount of time in which the sewage is expected to flow into state waters. 

The issue started gaining attention in 2018, when Virginia had its highest level of precipitation since 1895, according to data from the National Centers for Environmental Information. 

Advertisement

During a 2022 House hearing, Sen. Richard Stuart, R-Westmoreland, said 2 billion gallons of raw sewage were dumped into the James River in 2021 due to sewage overflow. Richmond, along with Alexandria and Lynchburg, are particularly affected because they have combined sewer overflow systems, which funnel both stormwater and sewage through the same pipes and can lead to overflows during heavy rainfall. 

From December 2019 to November 2022, state regulators cited the town Christianburg for nearly 100 sewer overflows, with each event releasing hundreds to millions of gallons of sewage. 

The legislation passed the House and Senate unanimously.

Senate Bill 392 and House Bill 353: Requiring emergency departments to have at least one physician on duty

This pair of identical bills from Del. Patrick Hope, D-Arlington, and Sen. Stella Pekarsky, D-Fairfax, would require hospitals to have at least one physician on duty and physically present at all times. Current law requires hospitals to have physicians on call and not necessarily physically present on the premises at all times. 

Advertisement

Pekarsky told the House Health and Human Services Committee last month that Virginia’s code is outdated and the bills are intended to reflect current standards and best practices, as well as “matching our citizens’ expectations.”

An emergency room physician working at Southside Medical Center and Southern Virginia Medical Center told lawmakers that when the law requiring an emergency room physician to be on call passed, the volume and complexity of patients were a fraction of what they are now.

Emergency rooms “are now de facto intensive care units, boarding patients for hours or even days waiting for a bed at a receiving facility,” she told the committee. 

While choking back tears, Sen. Wren Williams, R-Patrick, told the Senate it needs to think about the unintended consequences the bills could have on rural health care and hospitals. His district’s only hospital shut down in 2017, he said, and the area only has one practicing physician in his late 60s. While Williams said he’s still working to reopen the hospital, he contended requiring an additional doctor on staff would make it harder. 

“I really need you guys to think about unintended consequences when it comes to rural health care because this might save lives in other regions, but it’s going to hurt and it’s going to have a real impact on places like mine,” he said.

Advertisement

The bills passed the Senate unanimously and faced some Republican opposition in the House. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Advertisement



Source link

Virginia

Virginia cannabis budget language triggers legal confusion, political fallout

Published

on

Virginia cannabis budget language triggers legal confusion, political fallout


(VIRGINIA MERCURY) – Virginia’s decision to revive legal cannabis sales through the state budget instead of standalone legislation has triggered several days of confusion over the commonwealth’s marijuana laws, with lawmakers, local prosecutors, Virginia State Police and legislative officials offering differing interpretations of when key provisions take effect.

Much of the confusion focused on two issues: whether Virginia’s long-delayed retail cannabis market had accidentally been moved up by a year and whether existing criminal penalties for marijuana possession and distribution involving people younger than 21 were still enforceable.

For much of the week, the lawmakers who wrote the budget language, along with state officials, sought to settle the matter. They said licensed retail sales will not begin until July 1, 2027, and that Virginia’s current criminal laws remain in effect until then.

Virginia State Police Superintendent Col. Jeff Katz also publicly reaffirmed the agency’s enforcement position after questions arose from an internal email circulated earlier this week.

Advertisement

“VSP acknowledges that there have been rumors and questions pertaining to the agency’s posture on cannabis enforcement,” Katz said in a statement on X, formerly Twitter. “I would like to make it clear that the Virginia State Police will continue to enforce existing laws, in line with the Code of Virginia.”

Read more on virginiamercury.com

Copyright 2026 Virginia Mercury. All rights reserved.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Virginia

4 indicted in Virginia double homicide; second victim ID’d as grandmother of 6

Published

on

4 indicted in Virginia double homicide; second victim ID’d as grandmother of 6


CAROLINE COUNTY, Va. — A Caroline County grand jury has indicted four people on first-degree murder charges in connection with a double homicide after DNA evidence identified the second victim as Helen Marie Pullen Banks, a grandmother of six.

The same four suspects charged in the murder of 18-year-old Jayden McComber have now been indicted in the death of Banks, who was living in the Richmond area at the time she went missing. Investigators linked the two homicides early in the investigation through forensic evidence.

Caroline County Sheriff Scott Moser said investigators “have been working around the clock” for a break in the case “not only for the community, but for the victims as well.”

The medical examiner’s office in Richmond used DNA to identify the 56-year-old Banks after her remains were found in poor condition. Investigators confirmed her identity on July 7.

Advertisement

Banks, originally from Culpeper, had been living in the Richmond area where she was in rehab at the time she went missing, according to her family. She had a connection to at least one of the four suspects, according to Moser.

The four suspects — Devonti Gregory Pettaway, 20, of Chesterfield; Kennady Jade Lambert, 18, of Hopewell; Rashad Antonio Mayfield, 23, of Glen Allen; and Jaden Lamont Phillips, 19, of Richmond — now face charges of first-degree murder, use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, and conspiracy to commit murder in connection with Banks’ death. The charges represent an upgrade from the second-degree murder charges the four originally faced in McComber’s death.

WATCH: Brother of suspect charged in murder of Hopewell teen Jayden McComber speaks out

Brother of suspect charged in murder of Hopewell teen Jayden McComber speaks out

Advertisement

Chief Deputy Travis Nutter outlined what investigators believe is the motive in McComber’s murder.

“We believe robbery to be the motive of the incident that happened with Jayden that ultimately led to his murder,” Nutter said.

As for the motive in Banks’ death, Nutter said investigators have not yet established one.

“There is no evidence to show that there was any sort of argument or disagreement between Ms. Banks or the four charged,” Nutter said.

Advertisement

Banks was a mother of five and grandmother of six. Moser said she had no known ties to Caroline County, and that her body, like McComber’s, appeared to have been brought there from another jurisdiction.

WATCH: Neighbor reacts as suspects arrested after 2 bodies found in Caroline County

Neighbor reacts as suspects arrested after 2 bodies found in Caroline County

Advertisement

McComber’s body was found in late March in a marshy area of Byrds Mill Pond near Sparta, near the Caroline and King and Queen County line. Banks’ remains were discovered about five miles away off Bagby Road. Investigators linked the two cases early on, in part because McComber’s AirTag had pinged about a mile and a half from where Banks’ remains were found.

Moser said the case has shaken the Sparta community but stressed that investigators moved quickly and that residents should feel reassured.

“Without a doubt this is a tremendous blow to the community,” Moser said. “When you come to this county and you do these types of crimes, we’re going to do everything we can to catch you… [We] are not used to these types of crimes being committed in Caroline.”

Moser credited a broad coalition of agencies for bringing the case to this point, including Commonwealth’s Attorney Ben Heidt, the medical examiner’s office, the U.S. Marshals Service and the broader community.

“Everyone has pulled together in a time of crisis; that’s what we do well here in Caroline,” Moser said. “We’ve had a lot of support from the community, a lot of information that’s been helpful in this investigation and that’s what community is all about.”

Advertisement
    • Eat It, Virginia! with Scott and Robey

    This story was initially reported by a journalist and has been converted to this platform with the assistance of AI. Our editorial team verifies all reporting on all platforms for fairness and accuracy. To learn more about how we use AI in our newsroom, click here.

    Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

Virginia

Virginia’s voided special election cost $11.6 million

Published

on

Virginia’s voided special election cost .6 million


We now know how much it cost Virginia to hold an election that didn’t count: $11.6 million.

Of that, the state will pick up $4.99 million, leaving localities to pay the balance of $6.6 million for the April 21 special election on redistricting that the Virginia Supreme Court later ruled was placed on the ballot unconstitutionally.

The numbers come from the Department of Elections, after Cardinal News filed a Virginia Freedom of Information Act request to find out the cost of the election.

Advertisement

I contacted localities small, medium and large and none said they’d have a particular problem paying their share. All said they’d already budgeted for primary elections that they expected in June. With the push to redraw Virginia’s congressional lines, those June primaries were bumped to August, putting them in a new fiscal year, so the money set aside for the June primaries was used to cover the special election on a proposed constitutional amendment to allow redistricting.

Election costs

Total cost of April 21 special election: $11,636,147

What state will pay for: $4,999,738

What localities must cover: $6,636,147

Source: Virginia Department of Elections

Advertisement

The issue some localities face now is that the Aug. 4 primary becomes an unexpected expense, although all said they’d figure out a way to pay for it. “We always budget for extra elections, so I think we will have money to cover this,” said Buckingham County administrator Karl Carter by email. It cost $44,373 to run the special election in his county. Of that, the state will pay $9,019, leaving the county to cover $35,353. (Each locality submits its expenses and the state calculates a reimbursement rate based on that.)

Other local government officials had similar things to say. The cost of running elections — paying for poll workers is one of the main expenses — depends largely on how big a locality is. Elections cost more in bigger localities, but they also have bigger budgets.

In Virginia Beach, the election cost $750,533. The state will pay $265,509, leaving the city to cover $465,023. City spokesperson Ali Weatherton-Shook said the city would save enough money through unfilled vacancies to cover unexpected election expenses.

In Chesterfield County, the election cost $619,970. The state will pay $223,356, leaving the county to cover $396,613. “Chesterfield tries to plan ahead for these growing demands,” said county spokesperson Stephen Bays. “In the county’s FY2027 budget, we added $630,000 to the Registrar’s budget to help fill the gap to cover the increasing costs of elections.”  

The most expensive locality was, not surprisingly, the state’s biggest: Fairfax County. It cost $1,545,781 to hold the election there. The state will pay $655,424, leaving the county to cover $910,356. “We allocated additional funds out of carryover to address not only the special election on the amendment but a number of special elections due to both elected officials winning other seats and elected officials that went into the administration,” said county supervisor Pat Herrity, a Republican.

Advertisement

The closest I came to finding a locality that felt pinched by the election cost was Dickenson County. “Unfortunately, moving the primary to August added a third election to our FY-27 budget, which was already very tight,” said Dickenson County administrator Larry Barton by email. (The other two are the fall general election and presumed primaries next June for the 2027 local and legislative elections.) It cost $39,748 to run the special election in Dickenson. Of that, the state will cover $7,802, leaving Dickenson to pay $31,946.

While officials in other localities, though, said they’d have no problem paying the expense, they also pointed out the obvious: Money is finite. “Any time you spend money it competes with critical services and/or increases the tax burden on our residents,” said Herrity, the Fairfax County supervisor.

And some said they’d welcome additional state funding. “Like many localities, Chesterfield would welcome additional state funding for special elections,” said Bays, the county spokesperson. “When state funding falls short, local dollars must fill the gap, leaving fewer resources for other priorities.”

The new state budget that the General Assembly just approved does include an additional $680,000 to help with the cost of three proposed constitutional amendments that will be on the November ballot, in addition to congressional elections and, in some places, local elections.

Since I’m writing this as an opinion column, I will go ahead and inject my opinion here: The Virginia Supreme Court could have avoided this. The court declined to rule on legal challenges to the special election before the vote, citing a 1912 court ruling involving a similar challenge to an upcoming constitutional amendment. In that case, the court held that it should only rule after the vote, on the grounds that passing a constitutional amendment is akin to passing a law — and just as a court won’t intervene until after the governor signs a bill, it shouldn’t intervene until after voters approve a constitutional amendment.

Advertisement

I’m not a legal scholar, but that seems sound reasoning except for one thing: When the Supreme Court let the disputed 1912 amendment vote go forward, it was part of an election that was going to happen anyway, the 1912 presidential election — so there was no additional expense incurred. In this case, the only reason the special election was happening — and so there was expense involved. The court’s adherence to that 1912 precedent cost Virginia $11,636,147.

Of course, some might also say that Virginia Democrats cost the taxpayers that amount by skirting the rules involved in placing an amendment on the ballot, although there was legal dispute over those rules. You’ll recall that the constitutional question turned on when an election legally begins. The constitution says that the legislature must pass an amendment twice, with an election in between. Democrats contended that passing the amendment the first time in a special session in late October satisfied that requirement, because it was ahead of the November general election. The court later ruled that, legally speaking, the election really began when early voting started in September, so Democrats had misread the legal calendar. Democrats could say that Republicans are ultimately to blame, because it was President Donald Trump and Texas Republicans who started the push to redraw congressional lines to “find” more Republican districts so Democratic-controlled states such as Virginia had no choice but to respond in kind to balance things out.

Whoever you choose to blame, we can now put a dollar figure to that attempt — 11.6 million of them.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending