House Bill 5040 would amend the duties of the West Virginia Commissioner of Highways to require the annual preparation and presentation to the Legislature of a comprehensive highway paving plan. The plan would be aimed at establishing routine repaving of all normally asphalt-surfaced roads in the state. It would need to set a regular schedule for each class of paved highways and be broken down by Division of Highways district and county.
The bill also requires the plan to identify the equipment and personnel needed to carry it out and to inform lawmakers of the estimated funding necessary to implement it. In effect, the measure adds a new planning and reporting obligation to the commissioner’s existing powers and duties under §17-2A-8, while leaving the actual decision-making over appropriations and implementation with the Legislature and the Division of Highways.
Impact
HB5040 would amend West Virginia Code §17-2A-8, expanding the Commissioner of Highways’ statutory duties to include an annual statewide paving plan for asphalt roads. The bill would not itself appropriate money or mandate immediate repaving, but it would require detailed district- and county-level planning, staffing and equipment assessments, and funding estimates that could influence future budgeting, capital planning, and road maintenance priorities across the Division of Highways.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment appears neutral to supportive of improved road maintenance planning. The measure is framed as an administrative and infrastructure-planning bill rather than a controversial policy shift, and its stated purpose suggests a focus on transparency, accountability, and long-term pavement management.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is likely fiscal: the bill would require the Division of Highways to develop a comprehensive repaving schedule and estimate the personnel, equipment, and funding needed to implement it, which could imply significant future costs. Another possible issue is administrative feasibility, since the plan must be specific to each district and county and cover all normally asphalt-surfaced roads, potentially creating expectations that may exceed available resources. No specific opposition or support was recorded in the provided committee or vote history.
To require DOH, when abandoning a right of way, to notify the legislative representatives in the county or counties in which this right of way is located via email and first class mail in addition to publication in the newspaper