Virginia Lawmakers Revisit FOIA Fee Caps as Transparency Debate Returns to Richmond

By Michael Phillips | VABayNews

As the 2026 session of the Virginia General Assembly gets underway, lawmakers are once again taking up a familiar but unresolved question: how much should citizens have to pay to see records produced by their own government?

State Sen. Danica Roem (D-Manassas) has reintroduced Senate Bill 56 (SB 56), a proposal aimed at curbing what critics describe as excessive and inconsistent fees charged under Virginia’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The bill closely mirrors legislation that advanced deep into the process last year before stalling on a procedural vote in the House.

The renewed push sets up a broader debate that resonates across party lines: balancing government transparency and accountability against the administrative burdens placed on state and local agencies.

What SB 56 Would Do

SB 56 targets one of the most common complaints about Virginia’s FOIA system—labor costs that can quickly price ordinary citizens out of requesting records.

Under the bill:

• Fee caps would limit labor charges to the median hourly wage of an agency’s employees or the actual hourly rate of the worker performing the task, whichever is lower. This would prevent agencies from assigning high-paid staff to inflate costs, though courts could approve higher rates in specialized cases.
• Clearer notices would require agencies to explain how fees are calculated and would reorganize FOIA’s statutory language to make it easier for the public to understand.
• Structured extensions would allow agencies to request court-approved deadline extensions when records requests are unusually complex, pausing the response clock while a judge reviews the request.

Roem, a former journalist, argues that FOIA is meant to serve everyday Virginians, not just news organizations. She has cited cases in which constituents were quoted thousands of dollars for brief video footage or basic records—costs that were later reduced only after public pressure or legal assistance.

A Center-Right Concern: Accountability Without Abuse

For many conservatives and center-right transparency advocates, the issue is less about expanding government and more about enforcing accountability. FOIA laws exist to give taxpayers visibility into how public money is spent and how officials exercise their authority. When fees become unpredictable or punitive, critics argue, transparency becomes a privilege rather than a right.

At the same time, local governments and state agencies warn that FOIA compliance consumes staff time and resources, particularly in smaller jurisdictions. Groups representing counties and municipalities have long argued that strict caps could amount to an unfunded mandate, encouraging frivolous or harassing requests without covering the true cost of compliance.

SB 56 attempts a middle-ground approach—capping fees without eliminating them, and allowing courts to intervene when requests are genuinely burdensome.

How Virginia Compares

Virginia’s FOIA system has long been criticized as uneven, with wide discretion left to more than 130 localities and dozens of state agencies. By contrast, several other states place tighter limits on labor charges or bar them altogether except in extraordinary circumstances.

Supporters of reform note that, according to transparency groups, FOIA fees typically recover only a small fraction of agencies’ overall operating costs, raising questions about whether high fees are more deterrent than practical.

What Comes Next

The bill’s prospects may be stronger this year. SB 56 passed the Senate in 2025 and cleared a House committee before dying late in the session. With a new General Assembly and a new governor, supporters see an opening.

Incoming Gov. Abigail Spanberger, who will be sworn in later this month, has not publicly taken a position on the bill. Her administration’s stance could prove decisive if the legislation reaches her desk.

For now, SB 56 highlights a recurring tension in Richmond: whether Virginia’s public records law should prioritize agency convenience or citizen access. As lawmakers debate the measure, the outcome will signal how seriously the state intends to take transparency at a time when public trust in institutions remains fragile.