Final actions taken on legislation from 2025 General Assembly including veto of funding for Charlottesville low-barrier emergency shelter

There are no more bills pending in the 2025 General Assembly. Governor Glenn Youngkin has taken final action on remaining legislation and finalized the state budget. According to the Legislation Information System, 727 bills were approved, 1,458 bills failed, and Youngkin vetoed 198 pieces of legislation.

On May 2, Youngkin also approved the budget bill and made final changes through the use of the line item veto.

“I have signed House Bill 1600, amending the appropriations made last year for the 2024-2026 biennium, with 37 item vetoes,” reads the beginning of his written explanation.

Youngkin had recommended 205 changes the final draft budget that passed the General Assembly, but only 33 were approved. He had wanted more surplus funding put aside for a “rainy-day” fund.

“I am optimistic about Virginia’s longer-term prospects for Fiscal Year 2027 and Fiscal Year 2028, and beyond, but there are some short-term risks as President Trump resets both fiscal spending in Washington and trade policies that require us to be prudent and not spend all of the projected surplus before we bank it,” Youngkin wrote.

The Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission got an update on May 1 from David Blount, the entity’s legislative liaison.

“He was really trying to find more money to put aside in reserve, I think, in anticipation of what may be happening at the federal level and, and how that might impact state revenues,” Blount said.

A total of about $900 million has been set-aside for future spending that might be necessary to offset federal cuts. Here are some of the budget items that Youngkin cut with the final stroke of his pen:

• Item 102.V would have seen $15 million in funding for a First-Time Homebuyer Program. Youngkin said that would duplicate programs elsewhere and pointed out that the legislation that would have created the program failed to pass the General Assembly.
• Item 102.S would have seen $20 million funding for a Rental Assistance Program that Youngkin said failed to pass the General Assembly.
• Item 102.T would have seen $1.5 million in funding for a Low-Barrier Emergency Shelter for the City of Charlottesville. Youngkin had suggested half the amount than the General Assembly wanted but the “the General Assembly procedurally passed by this reasonable proposal” so he vetoed the whole thing.
• Item 102.W would have seen $13 million in funding for affordable housing trusts. Youngkin would have approved a lower amount, but because the amount was adopted procedurally he vetoed all of the funding.
• Item 103.BB would have added $2.5 million to the Urban Public-Private Redevelopment fund.
• There were many other programs that received no funding because the General Assembly did not accept his proposals for reductions. These include funding for the Clean Energy Innovation Bank, a marketing campaign for the Virginia Economic Development Partnership, a tourism marketing campaign for the Virginia Tourism Authority, and new funding for geriatric and dementia services.

Another local item is worth highlighting. Senator Creigh Deeds had requested $1.4 million in funds to assist with the construction of a walking trail to connect Biscuit Run Park to the future Monacan Indian Nation Tribute Park. Youngkin vetoed it and I’ll flesh that out in a future story.

Blount updated the TJPDC Board of Commissioner on other legislation Governor Youngkin vetoed such one to allow localities to hold a referendum on the levy of a one percent sales tax increase for school construction.

“This was the second year in a row that the General Assembly passed the legislation and sent it to the Governor,” Blount said. “This is the second year in a row that the legislation was vetoed.”

Blount also drew attention to a legislative study authorized by the General Assembly that could eventually see a change to when Virginians vote.

“It’s going to be taking a look at elections and whether state elections, local elections, some or all of them should be aligned with the election timeline for federal elections, which I think is very intriguing to think about,” Blount said. “Should they recommend something ultimately that would require a change in the Virginia Constitution, which then has its own other process that lasts a couple of years.”

Take a look at HJ443 and SJ253 for more information.

Before you go: This story originally went out in the May 6, 2025 edition of Charlottesville Community Engagement. Take a look here! For more information, please visit this page which is in the process of being uploaded!