West Virginia Senate Bill SB 342

West Virginia 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/15/26
• Refer: 1/15/26

Caption

Board of Landscape Architects rule relating to application for waiver of initial licensing fees for certain individuals

Summary

SB 342 concerns a rule of the West Virginia Board of Landscape Architects governing applications for waivers of initial licensing fees for certain individuals. Based on the bill caption and available context, the measure appears to address when and how some applicants may seek relief from paying the board’s initial licensure fee, likely as part of the state’s professional licensing framework for landscape architects. Because the bill text is not available in the provided materials, the specific statutory changes cannot be identified with certainty. However, the bill would likely affect the administrative rules and fee-setting authority of the Board of Landscape Architects, and it may alter eligibility criteria or procedures for fee waivers for new license applicants. The bill was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, indicating it was being reviewed for legal and regulatory implications.

Impact

SB 342 would likely modify the regulatory provisions governing landscape architect licensure in West Virginia, specifically the board’s rule on waiving initial licensing fees for certain applicants. Its practical effect would be on applicants seeking initial licensure, the Board of Landscape Architects’ fee administration, and any statutory or regulatory provisions incorporated by reference into the board’s rules. Without the bill text, the precise affected code sections cannot be confirmed, but the measure appears limited to professional licensing administration rather than broader substantive law.

Sentiment

There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history in the provided materials, so sentiment cannot be measured directly from debate or roll call. The bill’s referral to Judiciary suggests it was treated as a legal or administrative rule review item rather than a controversial policy proposal. On the available record, the bill appears procedural and likely low-profile.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. Potential issues, if raised during consideration, would likely involve who qualifies for a fee waiver, whether the waiver should be mandatory or discretionary, and the fiscal impact on the board’s licensing revenue. However, there is no evidence in the supplied context showing any member or stakeholder opposition or support on those grounds.