[{"_1":2,"_97":-5,"_98":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6360694,"mediaKeyId","2174375-83afbfe8379ea15b8397e89fd82176e9","parentId",2174375,"title","Votes at a glance: Actions taken by the Senate technology committee, Feb. 12, 2025","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",2970000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2174375-83afbfe8379ea15b8397e89fd82176e9&start=2970&end=2970","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2174375-83afbfe8379ea15b8397e89fd82176e9/thumbnail_2970000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6360694/Virginia/Votes-at-a-glance-Actions-taken-by-the-Senate-technology-committee-Feb-12-2025","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6360694-81e21597ad54c56c6e1cb9ef5a7e401b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771163441&Signature=B6m8DPz~3OTa6EYrOpKZOZ7QVgu66eBIli5pXEyBYgVbwJfYJYB9FQHe8aOfuU~GjY6p5py7rCy5QaCJd7UmylHB-6MFQUTCLi7quWvGtS7eUn0P5AAPgQ14~vWk-1SapOvcFr68m8BzJ60TvpmRfhNmUYp9lHAg34GH8-SAwt6u-AWS~pmANWcKjhSqMq~RoV-43WwBNb7fxCelRc5yt7P1JIToP3f1VGRGUyg1gCE0XlTil5G6TQab4fzsSeheHK0u8Bwig-LTZth~Z6FHzioPSnS~h99UGOikWYOqk2bWjSR3IdxK6AfVJkhKLyToq2nNH6bT997Eld0IiZNvTw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Virginia Legislature","date","2025-01-29T00:00:00Z","article","This summary lists the motions and recorded outcomes from the Senate technology committee meeting held Feb. 12, 2025, as captured in the official transcript. It reports committee actions verbatim where tallied. For bills placed in study or otherwise referred, the committee typically requested additional review or stakeholder consultation.

Key recorded committee actions (selected)
- SB 11 39 (employer down-payment assistance): Motion to send to the Housing Commission with a letter. Vote recorded: 12-0-0. Outcome: Referred to Housing Commission.

- SB 14 52 (assumable mortgages): Motion to place in committee (PBI) for further study. Vote recorded: Ayes 14, No 0. Outcome: PBI; committee requested additional stakeholder review.

- SB 11 40: Senator Sturtevant moved to incorporate SB 11 40 into SB 14 24; the committee recorded that the bills were merged (motion seconded and approved during the hearing; recorded as merged in the transcript).

- SB 7 69 / SB 96769 (targeted advertising substitute): Sponsor presented substitute and asked the committee to take it \"by for the day.\" The committee voted to take the substitute by for the day (motion carried).

- SB 7 83 (child-data protections to age 18): Committee vote recorded as Ayes 8, No 6, 1 abstention; bill failed to report out of committee.

- SB 14 68 (CFIUS/land adjacent to military bases): After debate and questions, a motion was made to PBI. The transcript shows discussion and a motion to PBI; members asked staff follow-ups before the committee vote.

- SB 1400 (algorithmic rent/pricing tools substitute): Committee took the substitute and later voted to PBI with a letter to the Joint Commission on Technology and Science (JCOT) for review; committee members asked JCOT to examine technical and antitrust questions.

- SB 10 23 (sale of precise geolocation data): Motion to report the bill was moved and seconded. Committee tally recorded as Ayes 12, No 3 (motion carried to report).

- SB 11 36 (anti-rent-gouging/local option rent stabilization): The committee discussed the substitute and amendments, including a 10-year sunset amendment that was adopted on the floor. The final committee roll at the vote read Ayes 6, No 7, 2 abstentions (motion failed to report as amended).

How to read this list
- PBI indicates Pass By Indefinitely or placement in committee for further study; it is not final passage of a bill.
- Referred indicates the committee formally sent the measure or concepts to the named agency or commission for further analysis.
- Recorded tallies are reproduced from the transcript. Where the transcript records a roll call or an explicit tally, that figure is shown above.

Ending: Committee actions left a number of high-profile housing and technology measures in study or referred for technical review; sponsors and stakeholders will continue negotiations before final floor action.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","January 29, 2025 - General Laws and Technology - SR B (306) - 30 min. after adjournment\t\"","oneSentenceSummary","A compact listing of motions, referrals and recorded votes during the Senate technology committee meeting; includes referrals to study, merges, and committee tallies recorded in the transcript.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature VA, Virginia","taxId",77687,"location","Virginia","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_46":81,"_48":82,"_50":83,"_52":84,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":85,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":86,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6360697,"Senate motion to restrict online data collection from minors fails after broad tech opposition",119,235327,354705,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2174375-83afbfe8379ea15b8397e89fd82176e9&start=235&end=354","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2174375-83afbfe8379ea15b8397e89fd82176e9/thumbnail_235327.jpg","/articles/6360697/Virginia/Senate-motion-to-restrict-online-data-collection-from-minors-fails-after-broad-tech-opposition","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6360697-d1b9688371993c60728d20e31fd6ba56/orig.mp4?Expires=1771163441&Signature=aZqVarQ9JpDF32lneGPCy-3siPu4xez0xSOYt-izSZ~debIbj2iffbkt7CZhhE58pu7RGFqPhsUP6saugCg5X9oLAHGqMZOMx2mvnfNMvhCFYYQRVBV5ZLx9o-3YhjTggi-Fo1MQwOHf8hhGDR6mpK2mzDNDDKVeAW1HcvvbRePvFQnjmh5VyP-qnNIJ5aNMN6gY~dSasgK-a6nEYN8XZF2ommMwe3cNJbLu6uu5dBFGNjNg~pamU-72Wz3zYHzm3YvUwYwswl8Q8rl56OgJdepkq12IWi3~PWqj~0MkOh3Z~fCxMXPAMiEgHGY7ycydc-w6gT1tXgU29maJPgjPbg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A proposed expansion of child-data protections to cover all users under age 18 did not pass out of the Senate technology committee on Feb. 12 after more than an hour of testimony from privacy advocates, industry groups and civil-rights organizations.

Senator Sutterlein introduced a substitute to move the Statement of Economic Interest filing date earlier and, separately, presented SB 7 83, a bill to treat anyone under age 18 as a child for internet privacy protections. Sutterlein and supporters said the change would curb aggressive, targeted marketing at teens and protect minors from commercial data collection without parental consent.

Opposition and concerns
Industry groups including Meta, Chamber Progress, TechNet, the Northern Virginia Technology Council and NetChoice testified against the proposal in committee. Their concerns focused on these points:
- Federal preemption and conflicts: Critics pointed to the Childrens Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), which applies to children under 13, and warned that state-level expansions to age 18 could create legal conflicts or be preempted in litigation.
- Age verification and privacy risks: Dozens of witnesses said the only practical methods for verifiable parental consent would require collecting sensitive personal data (IDs, credit-card numbers or centralized age-verification systems), which itself raises cybersecurity and privacy risks for minors.
- Harm to vulnerable youth: Civil-society witnesses, including Chamber Progress and advocates for LGBTQ youth, warned the consent requirement could be weaponized by abusive guardians to prevent vulnerable young people from accessing critical resources and support online.

Committee outcome
After discussion and a substitute that included some technical changes, the committee voted on SB 7 83 and recorded the tally as Ayes 8, No 6, 1 abstention. The bill failed to report out of committee on that vote.

Nut graf: The committee debate showed broad agreement that online safety for young people is important, but committee members and witnesses were divided about the right legal mechanism. Industry groups emphasized technical and First Amendment risks; advocates emphasized the harms of unregulated data-driven targeting of minors.

Quotes
This is not a content restriction bill, Senator Sutterlein said, describing the proposal as aimed at commercial tracking and targeted advertising, not access to information.

The only way to achieve verifiable parental consent is by identifying all users of all ages, Hope Ledford of Chamber Progress told the committee, arguing the bill would increase, not reduce, the amount of personal data collected about minors.

Ending: Sponsors said they would continue consultations to find narrower options that protect minors while avoiding the practical privacy and constitutional concerns highlighted by industry witnesses.","A bill that would have defined children as anyone under 18 for online data-collection rules failed to advance after testimony from tech industry groups and civil-society advocates about privacy, enforcement and unintended harms.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":42,"_43":90,"_45":90,"_46":91,"_48":92,"_50":93,"_52":94,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":95,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":96,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6360700,"Senate panel advances review of bills on assumable mortgages, employer down-payment aid and algorithmic rent tools",3549000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2174375-83afbfe8379ea15b8397e89fd82176e9&start=3549&end=3549","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2174375-83afbfe8379ea15b8397e89fd82176e9/thumbnail_3549000.jpg","/articles/6360700/Virginia/Senate-panel-advances-review-of-bills-on-assumable-mortgages-employer-down-payment-aid-and-algorithmic-rent-tools","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6360700-b4713f59a96f31057d1bde6e6fd63ef4/orig.mp4?Expires=1771163441&Signature=Bv9JIvuCAhbLM7BD10iKKyQnM4PAGEmsNh-mY2A~BR3ks429bVU5qZ4hGrNI~ULB-~sLsK4tlpL4OJiAmuSv-oT5b7Z2RXBzhf8Ek9gXusKORmtowksUnNFaOVJ8Ti4DVXNViL9WMLv40f3kniof551E~NHwsH2eJNUdExnYBRfAFwh7EyuGU15rIYzYIwWMBekDRoXv~O06HMWWqd6o7fNJj96JA897Zk81dM7ehXTtNAkrW9XPrPF6R64Hy3CjdMDwO76XqULmNn2Zz6o0LiyCIPC8dTHdTZBuQY~urnpJRttbrwLaB4YGQweC2UxC3aMzREEVUxxxaKuaRNngzA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate committee members voted on motions to send several housing proposals to further study rather than take final action, as witnesses and stakeholders outlined sharply different views on whether the measures would ease Virginias housing shortage or create new legal and market risks.

Sponsor Senator Sturtevant brought three related housing measures to the panel: Senate Bill 11 39, a concept to create an employer-based down-payment assistance program; Senate Bill 14 52, to make mortgages in Virginia assumable; and a proposal to fold SB 11 40 into another bill (SB 14 24). The committee voted to pass SB 11 39 to the Virginia Housing Commission for review and to place SB 14 52 in the committees file for further study.

Why it matters: Lawmakers said they are looking for near-term tools that let renters and owners move despite todays higher mortgage rates, while stakeholders warned of unintended consequences that could affect lenders, credit unions and the broader mortgage market.

Assumable mortgages (SB 14 52)
Senator Sturtevant said the bill would extend assumability beyond VA, FHA and USDA loans to conventional mortgages so buyers could take over a sellers lower interest rate if they meet underwriting standards. Ronak Singh, founder of Roam, testified the change could immediately expand home affordability and estimated large statewide benefits if broadly allowed.

Banks and credit unions opposed the change. Matt Breeden of the Virginia Bankers Association told the committee the bill would force lenders to take on borrowers who might not meet that institutions underwriting standards and could conflict with secondary-market requirements. CJ Vitiepilson with the Virginia Credit Union Association said the proposal could create field-of-membership conflicts for credit unions.

Motion and outcome: The committee voted to pass SB 14 52 by for further study (Pass to be introduced or PBI). The board vote was recorded as Ayes 14, No 0.

Employer down-payment assistance (SB 11 39)
Sponsor comments: Sturtevant described SB 11 39 as a workforce housing incentive that would allow employers to help employees with down payments; he said he was working with state housing officials to locate the proper administrative home for the program.

Committee action: Senator McPike moved to send SB 11 39 to the Housing Commission with a letter; the committee approved the motion and recorded the vote as 12-0-0, sending the concepts to the Housing Commission for review.

Algorithmic rent-setting and housing-market software (SB 1400)
Lawmakers also debated a substitute bill aimed at restricting the sale or use of software that uses non-public competitor data to set rents. The sponsor, Senator Salim, said data-driven revenue-management tools can inflate rents across a region and that the substitute narrows the prohibition to software that uses non-public competitor data and revenue-management systems.

Opponents including the Apartment and Office Building Association, major property managers and the Realtors expressed concern that a broad ban would harm legitimate pricing and fraud-prevention tools and could chill investment in rental supply. Supporters such as tenant advocates, Legal Aid and community groups testified that algorithmic pricing has raised rents for low-income tenants and that enforcement is needed.

Committee action: After discussion and a substitute, the committee voted to hold the bill for further study with a request for review by the Joint Commission on Technology and Science (Jay COTs/JCOT). The committee asked JCOT to examine the substitute and produce recommendations.

Nut graf: The committee did not adopt any of the proposals as final law. Members directed additional technical review for several housing measures so legal, marketplace and administrative questions can be resolved before the General Assembly acts.

Context and next steps: The committees actions forward SB 11 39 to the Housing Commission, placed SB 14 52 in PBI (study), and asked JCOT to review the algorithmic rent-setting substitute. Stakeholders across the housing finance spectrum said they would continue discussions with sponsors and staff to seek clarifications or technical fixes.

Ending: Sponsors and advocates said they will continue negotiating details with regulators and stakeholders and that the housing commission and technical reviewers will return findings to the legislature ahead of any final votes.","The Senate technology committee on Feb. 12 advanced several housing-related proposals for additional study, including a bill to make private mortgages assumable, a proposal for an employer down-payment assistance program and debate over software that recommends rents.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Actions taken by the Senate technology committee, Feb. 12, 2025

Senate motion to restrict online data collection from minors fails after broad tech opposition

Senate panel advances review of bills on assumable mortgages, employer down-payment aid and algorithmic rent tools