To require municipalities issuing tickets to charge the entire fee for tickets
Summary
HB2050 amends West Virginia law governing driver’s license suspension when a person fails to respond or appear in court after being charged with a motor vehicle violation. Before the Division of Motor Vehicles may suspend a license, the bill requires the division to mail written notice at least 30 days in advance that clearly states both the court fine and the DMV administrative fee owed, and directs the recipient to pay both amounts to the magistrate or municipal court before suspension occurs. The bill also requires the court that collects payment to forward the administrative fee to the DMV.
The bill further defines “motor vehicle violation” broadly to include violations under chapters 17A, 17B, 17C, 17D, and 17E, as well as municipal ordinances related to motor vehicle operation that carry a fine or penalty. It excludes parking violations and other unattended-vehicle citations from that definition for purposes of license suspension and related provisions. The caption and note indicate the measure is intended to ensure municipalities issuing tickets collect the full ticket fee and to standardize how fees are handled when suspensions are triggered by nonappearance or nonresponse.
Impact
HB2050 would change the procedures used by courts and the DMV before suspending a driver’s license for failure to respond to a motor vehicle citation. It adds a mandatory pre-suspension notice requirement, clarifies that both the court fine and DMV administrative fee must be paid before suspension, and shifts responsibility to magistrate or municipal courts to forward the administrative fee to the DMV after collection. The bill would also affect the statutory definition of motor vehicle violations in multiple code sections, while carving out parking and unattended-vehicle citations from suspension-related treatment.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded votes, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the materials provided. Based on the bill text, the measure appears aimed at improving notice and fee collection procedures rather than expanding enforcement, which suggests a procedural and administrative focus. The caption’s emphasis on municipalities charging the entire ticket fee indicates an intent to tighten collection practices and reduce ambiguity about where fees are paid and remitted.
Contention
The main likely point of contention is the bill’s effect on local courts and municipalities, which would be required to collect and remit the administrative fee to the DMV and to provide clearer fee notices before suspension can occur. Another possible issue is whether the broader definition of motor vehicle violation could sweep in more offenses for suspension purposes, although the bill excludes parking and unattended-vehicle citations. Because no discussion transcript is available, the specific positions of supporters and opponents are not documented in the provided materials.