As part of its State of Surveillance project, Cardinal News asked law enforcement agencies to share how they have used license plate reading technology. We asked for the details behind apprehensions assisted by LPR tech. Reporters talked to police chiefs, sheriffs, commonwealth’s attorneys and a public defender, an anti-surveillance activist and a legislator. Some police sent incident reports with information redacted. Others sent full, unredacted incident reports. Some sent anecdotes describing cases in which the tech was used, but they would not provide corroborating documentation for a specific case. Some talked through such anecdotes over the phone. The responses indicate the lack of any reporting standard when it comes to law enforcement explaining their use of public surveillance tech. Still, even this piecemeal gathering starts to show how public surveillance is being used by police across Southwest and Southside Virginia.

Greene County staff say they have been forbidden from speaking directly to the press about county business. And while county officials — elected and appointed — say there is no formal written policy in place, free speech experts say even an unwritten policy blocking public information is a violation of the First Amendment. Such unwritten policies are not rare, Seth Stern, a First Amendment lawyer and director of advocacy for the New York-based Freedom of the Press Foundation, told The Daily Progress, but that doesn’t make them any less illegal. It was unclear if that policy had been fully adopted until The Daily Progress attempted to fact-check information with county staff regarding other business. Staff refused multiple public records requests via the Freedom of Information Act, a 57-year-old state law that guarantees the public access to public records held by public bodies, public officials and public employees. 

Legal expenses associated with a recent scandal at Town Hall have cost Blackstone taxpayers approximately $15,000 and counting. In addition to $2,400 spent during a six-day period in late March after a sexual harassment grievance was filed, the Town spent another $12,547 in April with Spillman, Thomas, & Battle. For the first time in years, legal bills weren’t included Council’s package for its regular meeting last Monday night, May 19th. The Courier-Record last week requested legal bills for the month of April and received an electronic copy of the seven-page statement from Town Hall. The bills for April include 91 tasks — 59 of which were redacted by Town Attorney Julian Harf. However, the date of services rendered and the charge for each task weren’t blacked-out and could be viewed.

Purcellville Town Attorney John Cafferky has resigned from the position he has held for two years. The announcement was made during Tuesday night’s Town Council meeting after being added a last-minute item to the agenda for discussion. Cafferky, who works for Blankingship and Keith law firm, said he has been “pleased and privileged” to represent the town, but that lately the amount of time requested by the town has exceeded his expectations. In 2024 the town spent $268,000 on attorney costs. In 2025, to date, the town has spent $153,000. In 2022, before contracting a firm, the town spent $262,000 on attorney fees.