Permitting counties and municipalities to enter into memoranda of understanding for demolition of dilapidated structures
HB3133 expands and clarifies West Virginia law governing the removal, repair, and demolition of unsafe or dilapidated properties by counties and municipalities. The bill amends county and municipal nuisance/unsafe-structure statutes to expressly allow local governments to enter into memoranda of understanding with one another for demolition of dilapidated structures, and to use either the county or municipal procedures when doing so. It also updates the procedural framework for identifying unsafe buildings, serving notice, holding hearings, issuing orders, and recovering costs.
For counties, the bill preserves authority to regulate unsafe buildings and unsanitary conditions on private land, to order repair or demolition, to impose daily civil penalties, and to recover costs through liens and civil actions. It adds explicit authority for counties to demolish dilapidated structures within municipalities when a municipality requests assistance through an MOU. For municipalities, the bill retains broad authority to regulate, vacate, close, remove, or demolish unsafe structures, and it adds or clarifies procedures for administrative search warrants, notice requirements, injunction requests, receivership in certain cases, and civil actions to recover demolition or repair costs. The bill also clarifies service of process and enforcement procedures for code violations and demolition actions.
The bill amends §7-1-3ff and §8-12-16 of the West Virginia Code, broadening and clarifying local government authority over unsafe, unsanitary, dangerous, abandoned, or dilapidated structures. Its main legal effect is to authorize formal county-municipal cooperation through memoranda of understanding for demolition projects and to permit the parties to use either county or municipal statutory procedures. It also strengthens the procedural tools available to local governments, including notice, hearings, administrative search warrants, receivership, liens, civil penalties, and cost recovery against property owners or other responsible parties.
The bill appears to have been broadly supported and noncontroversial in the Legislature. It passed the House by a wide margin and the Senate unanimously, and the enrolled bill indicates it became effective from passage. The vote totals suggest strong bipartisan agreement that local governments should have clearer authority and flexibility to address dilapidated structures and public safety hazards.
No committee transcript was provided, and the voting record shows little visible opposition. The only notable point of potential contention inherent in the bill is the balance between public safety enforcement and property-owner rights: the bill expands local authority to enter property, obtain administrative search warrants, demolish structures, impose penalties, place liens, and in some cases proceed without owner agreement after notice and opportunity to respond. The bill also touches on intergovernmental coordination, with counties and municipalities needing to agree on MOUs and choose which statutory procedure to use, but the available record does not show significant disagreement over those issues.