As with recent General Assembly sessions, the 2026 Session has seen many bills that aim to add provisions and requirements regarding photo speed enforcement programs that are used by various localities across Virginia. The following are the bills county officials should know about and if passed, would most impact the way current programs are operated and administered:
HB 1220 (Delaney) makes various changes to the requirements for the use of photo speed monitoring devices, including:
- Civil penalties collected should go towards the operating cost of a localities photo speed monitoring program and excess funds collected are to be deposited in a local fund used solely for planning, design, and construction projects for traffic safety; speed management; bicycle and pedestrian safety.
- Any such excess funds shall first be used for such purposes in highway work zones, high-risk intersection segments, or school crossing zones prior to being used for such purposes in any other area signage
- Data retention and storage
- Device calibration
- Making certain information available to the public
- Directs the Supreme Court of Virginia to develop a universal summons
- Delayed provisions and reporting requirements
While VACo doesn’t oppose most of the proposed language, there is a provision in HB 1220 that states, in any court proceeding for the failure of a locality or a private vendor acting on its behalf to comply with the requirements for the operation of photo speed monitoring devices, such locality shall waive its sovereign immunity in such proceeding.
HB 994 (Seibold) differs slightly from HB 1220 – the main difference is that in HB 994 expands of the use of photo speed monitoring devices to “safety red zones.” The bill would direct the Commissioner of Highways to develop criteria for designating a highway segment as a high-risk pedestrian corridor for purposes of identifying safety red zones. HB 994 includes many of the same other changes proposed in HB 1220, including the very concerning language that localities waive their sovereign immunity in court proceedings.
VACo opposes HB 1220 and HB 994 because without sovereign immunity, localities face open-ended liability for lawsuits, including high-dollar verdicts. VACo opposes any substantive change in local governments’ present defense of qualified immunity and sovereign immunity.
Also introduced are HB 1330 (Seibold) and SB 84 (Williams-Graves), which are similar to a bill brought by Senator Willaims-Graves last session. These bills would authorize state and local law-enforcement agencies to place and operate pedestrian crossing violation and stop sign violation monitoring systems in school crossing zones, highway work zones, and high-risk intersection segments for purposes of recording pedestrian crossing and stop sign violations. The bill also adds multiple guard rails to but does not expand photo speed monitoring device programs and would rename these devices to “speed safety cameras.”
Civil penalties collected through pedestrian crossing violation monitoring systems, stop sign violation monitoring systems, and speed safety cameras can be kept at the local level and used for the installation and operation of these programs. Any funds collected that exceed installation and operation expenses must be deposited in a local fund, and localities may use these funds solely for local infrastructure and safety upgrades.
There are many administrative changes to the bill including reporting requirements, calibration, signage requirements and others. VACo has no position on HB 1330 and SB 84, which passed through the Senate Transportation Committee by a 11-3 vote. HB 1330 is docketed for February 10.
VACo Contact: James Hutzler