<p class=ldtitle>A BILL to amend and reenact § 37.2-804 of the Code of Virginia, relating to emergency custody, involuntary temporary detention, and commitment hearings; special justice and judge fees.</p>
HB754 increases the statutory fees paid to special justices, retired judges sitting by designation, and district court substitute judges who preside over emergency custody, involuntary temporary detention, and related mental health commitment hearings. It raises the per-hearing fee for those judicial officers from $120 to $150, while keeping the separate $70 fee for certification hearings and competency/treatment orders. The bill also preserves reimbursement of necessary expenses such as mileage, parking, tolls, and postage.
The bill likewise adjusts compensation for non-state-employed physicians, psychologists, other mental health professionals, interpreters appointed for deaf persons, and appointed attorneys who participate in these proceedings. Their fees are increased to $120 for commitment hearings and remain $70 for certification hearings and certain competency/treatment proceedings. The measure does not change who may be appointed or the underlying procedures for emergency custody, involuntary detention, or commitment hearings; it focuses on compensation for participants in those proceedings.
HB754 amends § 37.2-804 of the Code of Virginia, which governs fees and expenses in civil commitment and related mental health proceedings. Its practical effect is to increase the Commonwealth’s direct costs for special justices, judges, attorneys, and certain expert or interpreter witnesses involved in these hearings, and it continues to allow the Commonwealth to seek recovery of those costs from the subject of the proceeding or the person’s estate, subject to existing hardship and lack-of-good-cause limitations. The bill therefore affects state spending and reimbursement rules, but not the substantive standards for emergency custody, temporary detention, or involuntary admission.
The available voting history suggests broad support in committee, with unanimous or near-unanimous votes to report the bill with amendments and refer it to Appropriations. The bill was advanced out of the Courts of Justice process without recorded opposition in the provided votes. Its later placement in Appropriations and final status of being left in committee indicate that, despite favorable committee sentiment, it did not complete the legislative process in the available record.
The main likely point of contention is fiscal: the bill raises fees paid from Commonwealth funds for hearings that already involve multiple appointed participants, and it may increase the amount the state must initially pay before any recovery efforts. A secondary issue is whether the Commonwealth should continue to seek reimbursement from individuals subject to mental health proceedings, although the bill retains existing protections by barring recovery when no good cause for admission exists or when collection would create undue financial hardship. No transcript debate is provided, so the record shows process-level support but not detailed substantive disagreement.