A BILL to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Chapter 3.2 of Title 44 a section numbered 44-146.29:5, relating to Virginia Resiliency Grant Program and Fund; established.
HB937 would create a new Virginia Resiliency Grant Program and a dedicated Virginia Resiliency Grant Fund within the Department of Emergency Management. The program is designed to help localities pay for disaster and emergency recovery, mitigation, planning, training, equipment, and emergency management operating costs when federal Stafford Act assistance is not available. The bill authorizes grants of up to $100,000 to local governing bodies on a first-come, first-served basis, with priority for localities that did not receive a grant in the prior fiscal year.
The bill also gives the Department discretion to adopt guidelines, including a tiered grant structure that could provide larger awards to localities facing major infrastructure damage, housing loss, or repeated disasters. In addition, the Department may create a separate Virginia Disaster Individual Assistance Program to help households with housing stabilization, repairs, temporary relocation, and other essential recovery needs when federal individual assistance is unavailable or insufficient. The fund would be nonreverting, supported by appropriations and outside contributions, and used only for the program and any individual assistance program established under the bill.
HB937 would add a new section to Title 44 of the Code of Virginia establishing a permanent state grant and fund mechanism for disaster resilience and recovery. It would expand the Department of Emergency Management’s authority to provide financial assistance to local governments, and potentially to households, for disaster-related costs that are not covered by federal aid. The bill would create a special nonreverting treasury fund and set out rules for applications, award priorities, and fund administration, thereby creating a new state-level funding stream for emergency management and recovery activities.
There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history in the provided materials, so no direct public debate is available. Based on the bill’s structure, the measure appears aimed at supporting local disaster recovery and filling gaps left by federal assistance, which suggests a generally supportive policy intent. The fact that it was referred to Appropriations and then left in committee indicates that it did not advance, but the available record does not show whether that was due to fiscal concerns, policy objections, or procedural reasons.
The main potential points of contention are likely to be fiscal and administrative. Because the bill creates a grant program and a nonreverting fund, lawmakers may have concerns about ongoing state costs, the need for appropriations, and whether the $100,000 cap is sufficient or should be larger. Another possible issue is how grants would be distributed—first-come, first-served versus a tiered system based on damage severity—and whether the Department should rely on localized damage assessments rather than statewide thresholds. The optional individual assistance program could also raise questions about scope, eligibility, and overlap with existing federal or state disaster aid.