Questions for Governor’s Candidates
1. In the U.S. Congress, H.R. 413 is a bill designed to provide collective bargaining rights for public safety officers employed by States or their political subdivisionsCommentsClose CommentsPe has been introduced. If passed, this bill will allow for the first time in Virginia the right of public safety employees to meet and confer with their employers to negotiate wages and benefits. It is well known that Virginia is one of only a few states that has right to work laws. This Bill is one of the FOP top priorities in congress. As Governor what would your position be on the passage of this bill and the right of public safety employees to meet and confer?
McDonnell Response:
As a former prosecutor and Attorney General, I have worked closely with law enforcement personnel. I have a long record of strongly supporting funding for public safety. Throughout my career in the House of Delegates, I championed efforts to ensure appropriate funding for law enforcement and staffing standards for prosecutors. In 2005, I sponsored HB 2660 which would have improved retirement benefits for law enforcement officers had it passed. Immediately after I took Office as Attorney General, I went on record supporting the 2006 legislation to enhance law enforcement retirement benefits. I personally contacted key Finance and Appropriations Committee members to express how important it was to increase this funding. That bill passed the General Assembly and became law. As recently as this past year, I wrote Governor Kaine and asked him to protect public safety funding and spare it from cuts in the 2009-2010 biennium budget. As Attorney General, I explained that despite difficult budgetary times, we must make certain that law enforcement has the resources necessary to protect the public. When Governor Kaine cut this funding, I worked with Senator Ken Stolle to convince the budget conferees to restore the funding. Thankfully, the funds were fully returned to the budget.
My record makes clear that I fully support fair funding for law enforcement at all levels. I also have a strong record of championing law enforcement causes and working with FOP on its legislative agenda. During my tenure as Attorney General, my Office frequently worked with law enforcement on important public safety issues.
I cannot support any measure that would weaken Virginia’s right to work law. Consequently, I have concerns about this federal bill in its current form and, as it stands now, I do not support it. Rather than federal mandates that require a “meet and confer,” I believe a better solution – one I advocate – is to elect strong, public safety minded officials who will work tirelessly to ensure fair treatment and compensation for those who are on the front lines protecting our citizens as well as the families of these dedicated law enforcement professionals. I understand that in order to have an effective working relationship, employees must be able to meet and discuss issues with their employers. I believe that it is wise for all Departments to have a process in place whereby issues raised by employees can be fully and fairly addressed. As Attorney General, it was my practice to routinely hold scheduled meetings with my staff. I firmly believe that an open dialogue between management and staff is the most productive method of ensuring high morale and a motivated workforce. I believe in leadership that is accountable and takes into consideration the ideas and needs of those under their supervision. As Attorney General, my Senior Staff met with their Divisions and provided me with regular input from the career professionals who comprise the Office of the Attorney General.
What I can promise my friends in law enforcement is that if I have the honor of serving as Virginia’s Governor, I will continue my long record of being a strong advocate for law enforcement. I will not simply sit on the sidelines when matters are brought to my attention. I pledge to continue to respond to the concerns of law enforcement and always make public safety a top priority.
During challenging economic times, crime is likely to rise. You have heard me say publically that despite budgetary challenges, we must do everything we can to ensure that our citizens remain safe and that their property remains secure. This requires a commitment to adequately fund our law enforcement professionals and address their needs and concerns. I will work closely with the FOP to address these matters. As a member of Lodge 8 in Virginia Beach and endorsed individual by many law enforcement officials, I will support the law enforcement cause consistently.
Additionally, I guarantee that my Secretary of Public Safety will meet at least quarterly with FOP officers to discuss funding and other issues of importance to law enforcement. Further, I will personally meet with FOP representatives at least twice a year in order to remain involved and hear for myself what issues your Organization believes are critical to law enforcement. Over the years, the FOP has been a strong partner and a critical resource for me. I was honored to receive the Legislator of the Year Award from the FOP in 2004 and to receive your endorsement when I ran for Attorney General in 2005. I have personally worked with a number of you on important criminal law issues and initiatives. I am very grateful that we have shared so many important victories. As Governor, I assure you that FOP will play a vital advisory role on public safety and criminal justice issues. I will also personally advocate for necessary funding within the parameters of the law. A McDonnell Administration will provide unprecedented support to law enforcement.
2. The Fraternal Order of Police currently has a license plate issued though DMV. The license plate is only to be issued to members of the Fraternal Order of Police. Recently, the FOP tried to have an audit conducted by DMV to determine how license plates have been issued to non FOP members across the state. We were met with resistance by DMV and a lack of cooperation. The FOP Star that is on the license plate is a trademarked image that is only authorized to be displayed by FOP members only. A simple audit by DMV conducted with the FOP of Virginia could resolve this issue. If legislation is needed to revoke the registrations of non FOP members who were issued tags by DMV improperly would you support its passage? If elected Governor what will you do to ensure that a proper audit is conducted?
McDonnell Response:
I believe that it is an honor and privilege to be a member of the Fraternal Order of Police. I was a member of the Virginia Beach lodge when I served as a local prosecutor and I am currently a lifetime honorary member of the FOP through that lodge. I take Virginia laws very seriously and it concerns me that there might be individuals in this Commonwealth who are displaying the FOP license plate but are not members. If I am elected Governor, I will direct the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to ensure that only FOP members possess these special license plates.
In 2007, the General Assembly passed HB 1782 (2007 Va. Acts Ch. 181), which provides that all FOP license plates issued prior to July 1, 2007 would remain valid until their expiration date, but not thereafter. Further, this measure requires all persons desiring FOP license plates to re-apply and to provide “written evidence that the applicant is a member of the Fraternal Order of Police of Virginia.” Thus, only FOP members are permitted to possess these license plates once those issued prior to July 1, 2007 expire. In light of this, I do not believe that new legislation is required to address this issue.
As Governor, I will direct the DMV to explain the steps taken by that agency to comply with this law. If DMV has not taken steps to comply, I will insist that it do so. If there is evidence of improperly issued FOP license plates, I will require DMV to remedy the error, including administrative revocation of license plates possessed by non-FOP members. Should any amendments to the law be necessary to prevent misuse of these specialized license plates, I certainly would support them. FOP license plates should only be issued to members of the Virginia FOP.
3. In the 2009 General Assembly Session Delegate Jackson Miller introduced HB2136. HB2136 would have given law-enforcement officers the choice of issuing a summons and releasing the person or arresting them for Class 1 and 2 misdemeanors. Under current law, the law-enforcement officer must release the person on a summons for most Class 1 and 2 misdemeanors unless the person fails to stop the unlawful act or indicates that he will not appear as directed in the summons.
The bill also requires the officer to arrest the person if he fails to stop the unlawful act; currently arrest is discretionary when the person fails to stop the unlawful act. Out of fifty states, Virginia is one of five states that does not offer the officers the discretion to arrest or release. What is your position on changing the current law? If elected to Governor would you support the passage of similar legislation in the next General Assembly session?
McDonnell Response:
House Bill 2136 was introduced in 2009 by Delegate Jackson Miller with my full support. This important piece of legislation passed the House of Delegates by a bipartisan vote of 69-25. Unfortunately, the bill died in the Senate. The history surrounding this bill demonstrates its importance to law enforcement.
This legislation became necessary when the Supreme Court of Virginia decided Moore v. Commonwealth, 272 Va. 717 (2006). In that decision, the Court reached the conclusion that the language of Virginia Code § 19.2-74 denies law enforcement officers the authority to arrest suspects for jailable misdemeanor offenses committed in the officer’s presence, unless certain limited exceptions apply. This decision removed the discretion of officers in the field to make a custodial misdemeanor arrest under the authority of Virginia Code § 19.2-81. The Court compounded its legal error by ordering suppression of the 16 grams of crack cocaine seized from Moore’s person in a search incident to his lawful arrest. Because I believed that the Moore decision presented a critical problem for law enforcement and disrupted our criminal justice system, I took the extraordinary step of seeking review of this case in the United States Supreme Court.
In addition to asking the United States Supreme Court to review the Supreme Court of Virginia’s decision, I added a bill to my 2007 legislative agenda to amend § 19.2-74. The bill returned the discretion for officers in the field to arrest when they have probable cause to do so. Delegate Jackson Miller, a police officer and member of the FOP member, patroned the legislation.
In 2007, Delegate Miller and I were supported by an impressive law enforcement coalition, which included: the Fraternal Order of Police, the Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police, the Virginia Sheriffs’ Association, the Virginia State Police Association, and the Virginia Association of Commonwealth’s Attorneys. The bill (2007 HB 2943) enjoyed bipartisan support and passed the House of Delegates by a vote of 74-23. However, the Senate sent the bill to the Crime Commission for “study.” The Crime Commission took no action.
In 2008, Delegate Miller, aided by my legislative team at the Attorney General’s Office and the law enforcement coalition, once again fought for passage of this bill. The bill (2008 HB 493) passed the House of Delegates, this time by the even wider bipartisan margin of 87-12. Unfortunately, the bill again died in the Senate. Senator Deeds participated in the defeat of the bill by voting in Committee to “pass [it] by indefinitely.”
After the 2008 General Assembly concluded, my Office won the Moore case in the Supreme Court of the United States. In Virginia v. Moore, 553 U.S. ___, 128 S. Ct. 1598 (2008), the Court reversed the Virginia Supreme Court by a vote of 9-0. The Court held that even if the officer violated Virginia law in arresting Moore, he had not violated the United States Constitution, and the remedy was not suppression of the evidence seized. This ruling was an important victory, but did not solve the issue of returning discretion to officers in the field to make custodial arrests in appropriate circumstances. Consequently, Delegate Miller, again with the full support of the Office of the Attorney General and the law enforcement coalition, returned to the General Assembly in 2009 with HB 2136, the bill referenced in your question.
As Governor, I pledge that this bill will be included in my 2010 legislative agenda. Further, I will work with the House and Senate Courts of Justice Committees to resolve any concerns over the bill in order to facilitate its passage. Once the bill is passed by our General Assembly, I will sign it into law.
4. The issue of transportation is one that is of extreme concern to the law enforcement community. We not only patrol the streets and highways our Commonwealth, but we charged with enforcing traffic regulations. What are you plans for addressing the transportation gridlock on our state’s highways? How would you fund these plans?
McDonnell Response:
I completely understand the very real challenges we currently face in Virginia regarding transportation. As you point out, not only do they directly impact our economy and basic quality of life, but the safety challenges associated with the gridlock, particularly in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads, where I have lived for long periods of time, are significant.
With congestion comes frustration. Unfortunately, motorists may take out their frustrations by erratic and unsafe driving practices. When confronted by law enforcement, these individuals sometimes take out those frustrations directly on them. We must relieve congestion and improve the safety of our highways.