Local arbitration agreements; disclosure of certain information.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when SB 645 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on SB 645.
You're tracking SB 645
We'll email you the moment it moves.
SB 645 — Local arbitration agreements; disclosure of certain information.
Last action — Left in Courts of Justice
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
3Passed Senate
-
4Passed House of Delegates
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2020 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
Local arbitration agreements; disclosure of certain information. Requires a locality, for any procurement contract for goods and services except for construction, construction-related services, transportation construction, or transportation-related construction--and any purchasing decision to ensure that solicitations require the bidder or offeror to disclose certain information regarding pre-dispute arbitration clauses and consider each bidder or offeror's policies and practices related to arbitration. The bill requires each locality to seek to contract with qualified entities and business owners that can demonstrate or will certify that they do not use pre-dispute arbitration clauses in contracts with employees or consumers, and to evaluate bidders and offerors based on disclosures required under the bill, in the event no bidder or offeror can demonstrate or will certify that they do not use pre-dispute arbitration clauses in contracts with employees or consumers. The bill authorizes a locality to cancel, terminate, or suspend, in whole or in part, the contract of any contractor who violates a provision of the bill and declare the contractor ineligible for further contracts with such locality.
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
120 added · 174 removedPlain-language change summary
The updated version of Bill SB 645 introduces sections that define key terms related to arbitration agreements, such as "consumer dispute" and "employment dispute." These additions clarify what types of conflicts can be involved in arbitration, which helps to protect consumers and employees by ensuring there are clear guidelines for resolving these issues. This change matters because it aims to create a fairer process for disputes, making it easier for individuals to understand their rights and the conditions under which their disputes may be arbitrated.
SESSION history | hilite | pdf | print version 20104696D20106982D SENATE BILL NO.
645 OfferedAMENDMENT JanuaryIN 8,THE 2020NATURE PrefiledOF A SUBSTITUTE (Proposed by the Senate Committee on General Laws and Technology on January 7,29, 20202020) (Patron Prior to Substitute--Senator Surovell) A BILL to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Chapter 43 of Title 2.2 an article numbered 7, consisting of sections numbered 2.2-4377.1 through 2.2-4377.5, relating to local arbitration agreements.
---------- Patron-- Surovell ---------- Referred to Committee on General Laws and Technology ---------- Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:
For any procurement contract for goods and services,services including construction, and any purchasing decision, a locality shall ensure that solicitations require the bidder or offeror to disclose information regarding pre-dispute arbitration clauses.
The locality shall require the bidder or offeror to provide written submissions, together with any documents referenced in such submissions, to allow the locality to ascertain:
Whether the bidder or offeror requires employees to sign a contract containing a pre-dispute arbitration clause as a condition of employment;
If there is an opt-out provision, what percentage of the bidder'sbidder or offeror's workforce has opted out of the pre-dispute arbitration clause;
Whether the bidder or offeror requires consumers to sign a contract containing a pre-dispute arbitration clause as a condition of purchasing products or services;
The estimated costs the bidder'sbidder or offeror's employees or consumers are required to bear to pursue arbitration;
Whether the pre-dispute arbitration clause designates a venue other than the state in which non-bidder or non-offeror party resides;
How many times the bidder or offeror filed a motion to compel arbitration in a judicial proceeding in the last five years;
How many requests for arbitration the bidder or offeror received in the last five years;
Whether the bidder'sbidder or offeror's retainer agreement with its arbitral provider gives the bidder'sbidder or offeror's directors and executives access to arbitration outcomes or findings;
Who reviews the bidder'sbidder or offeror's arbitration outcomes and how the arbitration outcomes are evaluated;
Whether the bidder or offeror retains authority to take independent action to make personnel changes based on arbitral findings.
Such disclosures shall be open to the inspection of any citizen, or any interested person, firm or corporation, in accordance with the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (§ 2.2-3700 et seq.) §C. 2.2-4377.3.
No disclosure requirements shall apply to procurements for construction, construction-related services, transportation construction, or transportation-related construction.
§ 2.2-4377.3.
In addition to other factors relevant to awarding contracts under existing law, a locality shall consider each bidder'sbidder or offeror's policies and practices related to arbitration as disclosed in submissions required pursuant to § 2.2-4377.2.
If no otherwise qualified bidder or offeror can demonstrate or will certify that they do not use pre-dispute arbitration clauses in contracts with employees or consumers, a locality shall evaluate the disclosures provided pursuant to § 2.2-4377.2 in selecting a bidder.bidder or offeror.
No bidder or offeror that fails to disclose the information required pursuant to § 2.2-4377.2 shall be eligible to enter a contract to provide goods or services to a locality.
View plain text versions (2)
- Committee Substitute Engrossed by Senate - committee substitute SB645S1 Current html January 29, 2020
- Impact statement from DHCD/CLG (SB645) View text html January 07, 2020
Action History
-
Left in Courts of Justice
-
Subcommittee failed to recommend reporting (4-Y 4-N)
-
Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
-
Motion to refer to committee agreed to
-
Read third time
-
Passed by for the day
-
Passed by for the day
-
Read second time
-
Reported from General Laws with amendments (15-Y 6-N)
-
Subcommittee recommends reporting with amendments (7-Y 1-N)
-
House subcommittee amendments and substitutes offered
-
Assigned GL sub: Open Government/Procurement
-
Referred to Committee on General Laws
-
Read first time
-
Placed on Calendar
-
Read third time and passed Senate (21-Y 19-N)
-
Engrossed by Senate - committee substitute SB645S1
-
Committee substitute agreed to 20106982D-S1
-
Reading of substitute waived
-
Read second time
-
Constitutional reading dispensed (37-Y 0-N)
-
Committee substitute printed 20106982D-S1
-
Reported from General Laws and Technology with substitute (8-Y 6-N)
-
Impact statement from DHCD/CLG (SB645)
-
Referred to Committee on General Laws and Technology
-
Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/08/20 20104696D
Sponsors
- Scott A. Surovell · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 147 not signed on · 27 voted No
Sponsors (1)
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (147)
147 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 147 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
Roll call published as PDF — view source.
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 4 | 4 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 4 | 4 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 44% | 44% | 0% | 11% |
How each member voted (9)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bourne, Jeffrey M. | — | Yea |
| Charniele L. Herring | — | Not Voting |
| Heretick, Steve E. | — | Nay |
| James A. "Jay" Leftwich | — | Nay |
| Marcus B. Simon | — | Yea |
| Miyares, Jason S. | — | Nay |
| Patrick A. Hope | — | Yea |
| Richard C. "Rip" Sullivan, Jr. | — | Yea |
| Terry G. Kilgore | — | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 15 | 6 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 15 | 6 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 68% | 27% | 0% | 5% |
How each member voted (22)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Brewer, Emily M. | — | Nay |
| Adams, Dawn M. | — | Yea |
| Aird, Lashrecse D. | — | Yea |
| Betsy B. Carr | — | Yea |
| Bulova, David L. | — | Yea |
| Cole, Mark L. | — | Nay |
| Convirs-Fowler, Kelly K. | — | Not Voting |
| Fowler, Hyland F."Buddy," Jr. | — | Yea |
| Hurst, Chris L. | — | Yea |
| James A. "Jay" Leftwich | — | Nay |
| James W. Morefield | — | Nay |
| Kathy K.L. Tran | — | Yea |
| Knight, Barry D. | — | Yea |
| Luke E. Torian | — | Yea |
| Marcia S. "Cia" Price | — | Yea |
| Marcus B. Simon | — | Yea |
| Miyares, Jason S. | — | Yea |
| Murphy, Kathleen | — | Yea |
| Paul E. Krizek | — | Yea |
| Schuyler T. VanValkenburg | — | Yea |
| Thomas C. Wright, Jr. | — | Nay |
| Wampler, William C., III | — | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 7 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 7 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 78% | 11% | 0% | 11% |
How each member voted (9)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Adams, Dawn M. | — | Yea |
| Betsy B. Carr | — | Yea |
| Bulova, David L. | — | Not Voting |
| James A. "Jay" Leftwich | — | Yea |
| Kathy K.L. Tran | — | Yea |
| Knight, Barry D. | — | Nay |
| Miyares, Jason S. | — | Yea |
| Murphy, Kathleen | — | Yea |
| Paul E. Krizek | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 21 | 19 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 21 | 19 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 53% | 48% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (40)
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 37 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Total | 37 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| % of votes cast | 93% | 0% | 0% | 8% |
How each member voted (40)
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 8 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 8 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 57% | 43% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (14)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bell, John J. | — | Yea |
| Bryce E. Reeves | — | Nay |
| Dunnavant, Siobhan S. | — | Nay |
| Ebbin, Adam P. | — | Yea |
| Hashmi, Ghazala F. | — | Yea |
| Jennifer B. Boysko | — | Yea |
| Jeremy S. McPike | — | Yea |
| Kiggans, Jennifer A. | — | Yea |
| Mamie E. Locke | — | Yea |
| Mason, T. Montgomery "Monty" | — | Yea |
| Richard H. Stuart | — | Nay |
| Ruff, Frank M., Jr. | — | Nay |
| Todd E. Pillion | — | Nay |
| Vogel, Jill Holtzman | — | Nay |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 645 do?
- Local arbitration agreements; disclosure of certain information. Requires a locality, for any procurement contract for goods and services except for construction, construction-related services, transportation construction, or transportation-related construction--and any purchasing decision to ensure that solicitations require the bidder or offeror to disclose certain information regarding pre-dispute arbitration clauses and consider each bidder or offeror's policies and practices related to arbitration. The bill requires each locality to seek to contract with qualified entities and business owners that can demonstrate or will certify that they do not use pre-dispute arbitration clauses in contracts with employees or consumers, and to evaluate bidders and offerors based on disclosures required under the bill, in the event no bidder or offeror can demonstrate or will certify that they do not use pre-dispute arbitration clauses in contracts with employees or consumers. The bill authorizes a locality to cancel, terminate, or suspend, in whole or in part, the contract of any contractor who violates a provision of the bill and declare the contractor ineligible for further contracts with such locality.
- Who sponsors SB 645?
- SB 645 is sponsored by Scott A. Surovell.
- What is the current status of SB 645?
- This bill died with 2020 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track SB 645?
- Track SB 645 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 645
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 645
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →