A BILL to amend and reenact §§ 9.1-102 and 22.1-280.2:1 of the Code of Virginia, relating to public schools; school security and discipline; employment of school security officers; training requirements.
HB1035 revises Virginia law governing the Department of Criminal Justice Services and school security officers. The bill amends § 9.1-102 to expand and restate the Department’s duties, with a major focus on training, certification, model policies, and oversight for law-enforcement and related personnel. Among many existing responsibilities, the bill specifically adds or reinforces training standards on de-escalation, crisis intervention, mental health, bias awareness, autism and intellectual/developmental disabilities, human trafficking, overdose response, body-worn cameras, school security, campus security, and other specialized topics.
The bill also amends § 22.1-280.2:1 to change the rules for employing school security officers who carry firearms. It would allow a school security officer to be armed only if the person has recent law-enforcement experience, retired or resigned in good standing, meets firearm qualification requirements, completes active-shooter and emergency-response training, receives local law-enforcement verification, and is authorized by the school board or private/religious school. The bill ties school security officer training to standards administered by the Virginia Center for School and Campus Safety and requires training specific to school settings, student behavior, liability, emergency response, and working with students with disabilities or mental health needs.
HB1035 would broaden and formalize the Department of Criminal Justice Services’ authority over training and policy development for law-enforcement officers, jail officers, school security officers, campus security officers, and other public safety personnel. It would affect multiple areas of the Code of Virginia, especially § 9.1-102, by adding detailed training mandates and model-policy requirements, and it would tighten the statutory conditions under which school security officers may carry firearms under § 22.1-280.2:1. The practical effect would be to increase statewide training obligations and standardization for public safety personnel, particularly in schools and crisis-response contexts.
The available legislative history suggests the bill did not advance out of committee and was continued to the next session by voice vote in the House Public Safety Committee. That procedural outcome indicates limited immediate momentum, but the bill’s contents reflect a policy approach that emphasizes professionalization, safety, and specialized training. Overall, the bill appears oriented toward improving school and law-enforcement practices rather than reducing regulation, which may appeal to supporters focused on public safety and training standards.
The most likely points of contention are the bill’s extensive expansion of mandatory training and oversight requirements, and its restrictions on which school security officers may carry firearms. Supporters would likely view the measure as a way to improve school safety, crisis response, and accountability, while critics may object to the breadth of state mandates, the administrative burden on agencies and schools, or the firearm-related conditions for school security officers. The bill also touches on sensitive issues such as bias-based policing, mental health crises, and use-of-force training, which can draw differing views on how prescriptive state law should be.