VADP Tides Foundation Final Grant Report, Capacity Building Grant, 2015 November 23, 2015 November 18

Online content

Fullscreen
Virginians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty
Tides Foundation Final Grant Report
October 24, 2016

$40,000 Death Penalty Mobilization Fund Grant
TFR 15-02820

Impact & Assessment

In October 2015 VADP convened five regional meetings in northem Virginia, Richmond, Norfolk,
Charlottesville, and Roanoke. We provided education on the serious mental illness (SMI)
exclusion idea and encouraged contacts with legislators to support the concept. VADP distributed
an SMI fact sheet in both individual and group meetings in the fall of 2015 and winter of 2016.

VADP worked closely with NA MI Virginia to contact mental health organizations in the
Commonwealth. As a result of these contacts, the following groups supported the SMI initiative:
“+ Mental Health America of Virginia
“> Virginia Organization of Consumers Asserting Leadership
* National Association of Social Workers - Virginia Chapter
“> Virginia Counselors Association
“> DisAbility Law Center

In January 2016 VADP sent an e-mail blast to over 3,000 supporters with information about the
SMI initiative. VADP staff attended education events sponsored by the Virginia Interfaith Center
and the NAACP to network and share information about the SMI initiative.

VADP also shared materials about the SMI initiative with Virginia staff and leadership of Amnesty
Intemational, Emerge USA, and the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington.

In February VADP gave a death penalty presentation to about 50 students at the University of
Virginia Law School. We highlighted the SMI initiative and had materials for students to take.

As a result of these and other efforts, VADP and its partners - NAMI Virginia, Virginia Catholic
Conference, and ACLU of Virginia - made a good start to its campaign to pass SMI exclusion
legislation. Delegate Jay Leftwich - a conservative Republican from Chesapeake.

We were unable to pass the bill out of the Criminal Law Subcommittee. We were, however, able to
get a hearing on the bill before the full House Courts of Justice Committee. Ultimately, the bill
was carried over to the 2017 legislative session on a voice vote.

This was a very positive first year for the SMI initiative. We were able to develop bipartisan
support for the measure and learned a lot about opposing viewpoints that will help us next year.

During a recent legislative debriefing session, VADP and its partners identified key allies and
opponents and began to develop plans to build further support for the SMI initiative for the 2017
legislative session.

During April and May VADP convened five regional meetings to northern Virginia, Richmond,
Norfolk, Charlottesville, and Roanoke. We gave an update on the SMI bill and encouraged our
supporters to continue education and advocacy efforts in their localities.

VADP and its partner organizations worked closely with the A merican Bar Association to put on an
SMI educational forum in Richmond during A ugust that drew over 40 participants. Panelists
included Richard Bonnie (Professor of Medicine & Law at the University of Virginia), Dr. James
Reinhard (Medical Director of the Virginia Tech Counseling Center), and Mira Signer (Executive
Director of NAMI Virginia). One freelance writer who attended the event wrote an op-ed about

1

the event and the execution of mentally ill people that was published in early September in the
Richmond Times-Dispatch, the largest circulation newspaper in Virginia.

We have commitments for three more SMI op-eds later this year. One will be written by Pete
Earley, a northern Virginia mental health advocate; another by UVA Law School Professors
Brandon Garrett and Richard Bonnie; and the third by Dr. James Reinhard. We anticipate that
these will be published in the Washington Post, Richmond Times-Dispatch, and Roanoke Times.

Challenges

Despite near unanimous opposition by Democrats, Governor McA uliffe’s administration supported
a bill to make the electric chair the default execution method when lethal injection is not available.
The administration convinced Courts Committee chairman Sen. Mark Obenshain (R) to support it
despite opposing a similar bill in 2014. The legislation then passed in both the House and Senate.

Govemor amended this measure and tured it into an execution drug secrecy bill. He created a
false choice: Either approve secret execution drugs (a policy rejected last year) or I veto the
electric chair bill, leaving the state without a means of executing people on death row.

This false choice generated enormous pressure on conservative legislators to vote in favor of the
Governor's secret execution drug amendment. It passed and took effect on July 1, 2016.

Evaluation & Lessons Learned

The House Courts of Justice Committee hearing on the SMI bill was instructive. Three pro-death
penalty Republican Delegates - Committee Chairman Rob Bell (Charlottesville), Todd Gilbert
(Woodstock), and Rick Morris (Carrollton) - strongly opposed the bill. They posed questions that
will need to be thoroughly addressed in the 2017 legislative session. The objections can be
summarized as (1) there is no need, the insanity defense is sufficient; (2) every capital defendant
will use this to avoid the death penalty; and (3) this is a step toward abolition of the death penalty.

In addition, we were surprised that the Virginia Association of Commonwealth's A ttorneys formally
opposed the legislation. We will need to get prosecutors who are opposed to the death penalty to
get the association to take no position on the SMI bill in next year’s legislative session.

Our Virginia SMI coalition met in April, May, July, and September to review the results of the 2016
legislative session and develop plans for the 2017 General Assembly. VADP and our partners are
working to develop op-eds on SMI legislation, meet with major newspaper editorial boards, recruit
more allies from the mental health community, develop an SMI fact sheet for public distribution,
create an SMI coalition web site, and ask our constituents to meet with legislators.

Funding & Finances

VADP ended 2015 with a positive net income of $14,748.10 and $52,574.67 in assets. For the first
nine months of 2016 VADP expenses exceeded income by $27,769.09. This deficit was largely
the result of the downturn in income during the summer and should be made up by end of year
fundraising activity. VADP had $24,805.58 in total assets (a 13.1% increase over the prior year).

Our end of year appeal will include a postal letter to over 3,800 supporters in November as well as a
series of four weekly e-mail messages with testimony from new board members during December.

VADP had a wonderful “friend-raising” event in Roanoke in June. Plans are being made for
additional events in Norfolk, Richmond, and northem Virginia early in the 2017 year.

VADP has received $10,257.50 in faith community contributions so farin 2016. Before the end of
the year, we should exceed last year’s total of $12,551.52 in support from that funding source.

2

Virginians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty
Tides Foundation Final Grant Report
October 21, 2016

$40,000 Death Penalty Mobilization Fund Grant
TFR 15-02820

Final Financial Report for the Grant Y ear
October 1, 2015 to September 30, 2016

Tides Grant
Budget Expenditures
Personnel Expenses:
Executive Director $ 35,000.00 $ 35,085.17
Personnel Subtotal $ 35,000.00 $ 35,085.17
Direct Expenses:
Travel 2,500.00 2,406.83
Postage & Shipping
Printing & Copying
Materials & Books
Database & Website 2,500.00 2,508.00
Direct Expenses Subtotal 5,000.00 4,914.83
Indirect Expenses:
Telephone & Fax
Development/Fundraising
Professional Fees
Indirect Expenses Subtotal
Total Expenses $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00


Metadata

Resource Type:
Document
Rights:
Date Uploaded:
January 6, 2026

Using these materials

Access:
The archives are open to the public and anyone is welcome to visit and view the collections.
Collection restrictions:
Access to this collection is unrestricted with the exception of select items noted in Series 5.
Collection terms of access:
This page may contain links to digital objects. Access to these images and the technical capacity to download them does not imply permission for re-use. Digital objects may be used freely for personal reference use, referred to, or linked to from other web sites. Researchers do not have permission to publish or disseminate material from these collections without permission from an archivist and/or the copyright holder. The researcher assumes full responsibility for conforming to the laws of copyright. Some materials in these collections may be protected by the U.S. Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.) and/or by the copyright or neighboring-rights laws of other nations. More information about U.S. Copyright is provided by the Copyright Office. Additionally, re-use may be restricted by terms of University Libraries gift or purchase agreements, donor restrictions, privacy and publicity rights, licensing and trademarks. The Department of Special Collections and Archives is eager to hear from any copyright owners who are not properly identified so that appropriate information may be provided in the future.

Access options

Ask an Archivist

Ask a question or schedule an individualized meeting to discuss archival materials and potential research needs.

Schedule a Visit

Archival materials can be viewed in-person in our reading room. We recommend making an appointment to ensure materials are available when you arrive.