West Virginia House Bill HB2318

West Virginia 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/12/25
• Refer: 2/12/25

Caption

Relating to authorizing the Real Estate Appraiser Licensing and Certification Board to promulgate a legislative rule relating to renewal of licensure or certification

Summary

HB2318 authorizes the Real Estate Appraiser Licensing and Certification Board to promulgate a legislative rule governing the renewal of licensure or certification. The bill amends and reenacts a section of West Virginia law that lists authorized legislative rules, and specifically approves the board’s rule filed in the State Register and later refiled after modifications requested by the Legislative Rule-Making Review Committee. In practical terms, the measure gives legal effect to the board’s renewal rule for real estate appraisers and related certificate holders. It does not create a new licensing program or change the board’s authority broadly; rather, it confirms that the board may proceed with the updated renewal requirements contained in 190 CSR 03.

Impact

The bill affects West Virginia Code §64-9-1, which is part of the state’s legislative rule authorization process. By authorizing the rule, it allows the Real Estate Appraiser Licensing and Certification Board to enforce renewal standards for licensure or certification, affecting appraisers, certificate holders, and the administrative procedures used to maintain active credentials in the profession.

Sentiment

The available record suggests little to no controversy around the bill. The rule was already modified to address objections from the Legislative Rule-Making Review Committee before being refiled, which indicates the main concerns were procedural or technical rather than substantive. No committee debate or recorded votes are provided, but the bill’s narrow scope and administrative purpose suggest generally neutral or routine support.

Contention

The only notable point of contention reflected in the text is that the rule had to be modified to meet objections from the Legislative Rule-Making Review Committee before it could be refiled. That suggests some review concerns about the rule’s wording or compliance, but the bill itself does not identify any policy dispute over renewal requirements. No opposing viewpoints, stakeholder objections, or recorded dissent are included in the provided materials.