SB 129 is titled "Terminating Design-Build Board" and, based on the available bill context, appears to eliminate the state Design-Build Board. The bill text itself was not available in the provided materials, so the precise statutory changes cannot be quoted directly; however, the caption indicates the measure is a sunset or repeal bill aimed at ending the board’s existence or authority.
If enacted, the bill would likely remove or revise provisions in West Virginia law that establish the Design-Build Board, including any duties related to overseeing, approving, or administering design-build procurement processes for public projects. The practical effect would be to shift any responsibilities currently assigned to that board back to another agency, to general procurement rules, or to no dedicated board at all, depending on the underlying statutory framework.
Impact
The bill would affect state law governing design-build contracting and any statutes that create or reference the Design-Build Board. It could alter how public construction projects are reviewed or authorized under design-build methods, and it may require conforming changes to procurement, infrastructure, or administrative provisions that rely on the board’s existence. Parties most directly affected would likely include state agencies, public owners, contractors, architects, engineers, and firms that participate in design-build procurement.
Sentiment
There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history in the provided materials, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition from debate. The available information suggests the bill is administrative in nature rather than policy-expansive, which often indicates a neutral or technical legislative posture. Because no discussion is provided, the overall sentiment cannot be measured beyond the fact that the bill was introduced and referred to the Government Organization committee.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided record. If the bill is intended to terminate the Design-Build Board, potential areas of disagreement would likely center on whether the board is still needed, whether its functions should be preserved elsewhere, and whether eliminating it could reduce oversight or streamline government operations. Any opposition would most likely come from stakeholders who view the board as important for procurement consistency or industry participation, while supporters would likely frame it as a government reorganization or redundancy reduction measure.
Providing a tax credit for obtaining certain certifications by the United States Green Building Council Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design green building rating system