Fauquier supervisors adopt local resolutions on VMI, redistricting and constitutional rights
Loading...
Summary
At the Feb. 12 meeting the board approved resolutions expressing support for VMI and opposition to specified House bills, a resolution opposing unconstitutional redistricting and a unanimous reaffirmation of support for the U.S. Constitution; one resolution had an abstention.
The Fauquier County Board of Supervisors used part of its Feb. 12 meeting to adopt several policy resolutions relating to state and constitutional issues.
The board approved a resolution expressing support for the Virginia Military Institute and opposing two bills referenced in the meeting record as House Bill 13‑74 and House Bill 13‑77. Staff explained those bills would alter VMI’s governance or assess whether it should remain a publicly funded institution; the resolution was adopted with one abstention.
Separately, the board approved a resolution expressing support for Section 6‑a of Article II of the Virginia Constitution and opposing any unconstitutional redistricting. Staff briefed members that an upcoming referendum could change the constitution but cautioned that proposed map lines could still face legal challenge depending on how they are drawn. The resolution as drafted affirmed the current constitutional language and opposed unconstitutional redistricting; the vote was recorded as 4–1.
A late item led to further discussion on constitutional protections. Initially presented as a reaffirmation of support for Second Amendment rights, the board amended the agenda and adopted a broader resolution affirming support for the entire U.S. Constitution. That broader resolution passed unanimously (5–0) after debate about whether county meetings should weigh in on state/federal policy, and about the timing of late agenda additions.
What was said: during debate, one supervisor said the board should avoid diverting attention from county business on culturally divisive national issues and questioned the timing of late‑filed resolutions. Another supervisor argued reaffirming constitutional protections is important to constituents. The transcript records several exchanges naming specific bills referenced by speakers during discussion (for example HB‑217, HB‑105 and HB‑40 were discussed by one speaker as examples of current proposals), but the board’s formal resolution identified HB13‑74 and HB13‑77 by staff.
Next steps: these are expressions of policy position by the board; they do not change Virginia law and any legal or map challenges would be decided in state courts or through the legislative process.
