West Virginia House Bill HB5693

West Virginia 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/9/26
• Engrossed: 3/11/26
• Enrolled: 3/13/26
• Enrolled: 3/14/26
• Passed: 3/14/26

Caption

Supplemental appropriation, Department of Tourism Revenue

Summary

HB5693 is a supplemental appropriations bill that reallocates $4,534,268.43 in state general revenue for fiscal year 2026. It first expires that amount from a prior-year Department of Tourism account, specifically the Office of the Secretary fund, returning the money to the unappropriated surplus balance in the State Fund, General Revenue. The bill then reappropriates the same amount to the Department of Tourism’s Division of Culture and History for capital outlay and maintenance. In practical terms, the measure moves unused tourism-related funds into a current-year appropriation for culture and history capital needs. It does not create a new tax or program; instead, it adjusts existing appropriations within the state budget and makes the money available immediately upon passage.

Impact

The bill amends the fiscal year 2026 appropriations for the Department of Tourism, Chapter 29 agencies, by expiring unused FY 2021 funds and adding a new general revenue appropriation for the Division of Culture and History. Its legal effect is limited to budget authority: it changes where a specific sum of general revenue may be spent and authorizes capital outlay and maintenance spending from surplus funds. The bill affects the Department of Tourism, the Division of Culture and History, and the State Fund, General Revenue, but does not alter substantive regulatory law.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have been broadly supported and noncontroversial. It passed the House and Senate with large bipartisan margins, and the final concurrence vote in the House also showed strong support. The absence of committee transcript debate suggests the measure was treated as a routine budget adjustment rather than a contested policy change.

Contention

There is little evidence of major contention in the available record. The only visible opposition is a small number of no votes in the House, which may reflect general budget objections, disagreement with the transfer of funds, or concern about the use of surplus appropriations, but no specific arguments are documented. Because the bill simply redirects existing funds within the tourism/culture and history budget, any disagreement likely centered on spending priorities rather than the legality or structure of the appropriation.