Sex offenses prohibiting proximity to children; state parks, penalty.
Summary
SB 1108 expands Virginia’s “offense prohibiting proximity to children” law to add a new location-based restriction tied specifically to state parks. Under the bill, adults convicted of qualifying sex offenses involving minors, or similar offenses from other jurisdictions, would be permanently barred from going within 100 feet of playgrounds, athletic fields or facilities, or gymnasiums located on the premises of a state park when the purpose is to have contact with children who are not in their custody. The bill applies to offenses occurring on or after July 1, 2025.
The measure builds on existing law that already prohibits covered offenders from loitering near schools and child day programs, and from entering certain local playgrounds, athletic fields, and gymnasiums for the purpose of contacting children. It also retains the existing Class 6 felony penalty for violations. In addition, the bill includes a fiscal note stating that it may increase incarceration or commitment periods, with a minimum fiscal impact assigned for state adult correctional facilities and no fiscal impact estimated for juvenile commitments.
Impact
The bill amends and reenacts Virginia Code § 18.2-370.2, extending the post-conviction proximity restrictions for certain sex offenders to recreational facilities in state parks. It affects adults convicted of specified sex offenses involving minors, as well as persons convicted of similar offenses under federal, foreign, or other state/local laws. The practical effect is to broaden the places where these individuals are legally barred from being near children, while preserving the existing felony enforcement mechanism for violations.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests broad bipartisan support and little visible opposition. The bill advanced unanimously through Senate committee and floor votes, and the House substitute also moved forward unanimously in committee and subcommittee action. No committee transcript was provided, but the recorded votes indicate the measure was viewed favorably as a child-protection and public-safety bill.
Contention
There is no recorded substantive debate in the provided materials, and no votes against the bill appear in the committee or chamber history. The only likely area of policy tension is the balance between child safety and the scope of permanent geographic restrictions imposed on convicted offenders, especially as the bill extends those restrictions into state park facilities. The fiscal note also flags a potential increase in incarceration time, but that did not appear to generate recorded opposition.