Creating Country Roads Mapping and Marketing Act
Senate Bill 768 creates the West Virginia Country Roads Mapping and Marketing Act. The bill would allow counties to apply to the Division of Highways for an exhaustive digital mapping of back roads and secondary routes, with roads identified for scenic, historic, and recreational value. It also directs the Division to build an interactive public map and a mobile app that would let users navigate these routes and add notes, recommendations, points of interest, and road-condition updates, subject to county commission moderation.
The bill further requires mapped roads to be classified by surface type, such as paved, gravel, or dirt/unimproved, and to be marked when they require high-clearance or 4x4 vehicles because of rough terrain, stream crossings, or steep grades. The program is intended to support tourism, outdoor recreation, and local economic development by making West Virginia’s rural road network easier to explore and market.
If enacted, SB768 would add a new article to the West Virginia Code establishing a county-driven mapping and tourism program administered by the Division of Highways. It would require the Division to create an application process, develop GIS-compatible mapping data, issue an RFP for technology development, and produce an interactive map and app funded through the division’s tourism and infrastructure budget, potentially supplemented by grants. The bill would also impose new administrative duties on counties and the Division related to data collection, public updates, moderation, and annual reporting to the Legislature.
The bill’s stated purpose and findings frame it positively as a tourism and economic development measure, and the text reflects a generally promotional approach to showcasing West Virginia’s scenic back roads. Because no committee transcripts or votes are provided, there is no recorded debate or roll-call evidence of support or opposition in the available materials. Based on the bill text alone, the overall sentiment appears favorable toward expanding tourism tools and improving route information for residents and visitors.
The main potential points of contention are likely to be administrative burden, funding, and liability or accuracy concerns. Counties would need to opt in and participate in a mapping process that includes public editing and county moderation, which could raise questions about staffing, oversight, and responsibility for incorrect road-condition information. The requirement to develop a new app and mapping system using Division resources may also prompt concerns about cost, implementation complexity, and whether tourism benefits justify the expenditure. Another possible issue is how the 4x4 and road-surface designations would be maintained and updated over time.