Bill Edition

First Week’s Bills Reviewed

By Howard M. O’Cull, Ed.D.,
West Virginia School Boards Association Executive Director

Listed below are West Virginia Senate and House of Delegates bills introduced Jan. 11-13, 2006 during the opening days of the Second Regular Session of the 77th West Virginia Legislature.

(This listing does not include House Carryover Bills pertaining to public education. These will be included in a separate issue of The Legislature.)

Bills are listed topically, beginning with public education bills. A series of education-related bills follow. Lastly, some measures are cited briefly. Senate bills are listed first.

A total 84 bills are reviewed.

For a copy of any bill, please contact WVSBA: 304.346.0571. You also may contact me at hocull@wvsba.org.

Bills are posted on the West Virginia Legislature’s Web site: www.legis.state.wv.us.

Editor’s Note: Listing is not exhaustive.

PUBLIC EDUCATION

County Boards

 

Members would get expenses for training/$85 per diem

Senate Bill 25. Proposed revisions to §18-5-4 would allow county board members to receive payment for “traveling expenses incurred during any mandatory training sessions,” as well as $85 per diem for “attendance at mandatory training sessions.”

Note: This section of Code relates, in part, to county board member meetings, compensation, and affiliation with the state and national school board associations. County board members may receive up to $160 per meeting not to exceed 50 meetings per year.

Sponsored by Sen. Billy Wayne Bailey, D-Wyoming and three other Senate sponsors. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Education, then Senate Finance.
http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006
_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb25%20intr.htm
Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Boards could lease-purchase to build schools

Senate Bill 49. Proposed §18-5-9c would allow county boards to “enter into a lease-purchase agreement for land, buildings and equipment…”

In order to enter into these type agreements, county boards would have to receive the “approval of the School Building Authority...”

These are among other bill provisions:

1. If a building is or has been constructed for “the purpose of providing a school through a lease-purchase agreement,” the county board must abide by “Fair Minimum Wage Rate” laws.
2. County boards must determine whether or not there are (state) constitutional provisions that would affect lease-purchase agreements, and would be compelled to comply with those provisions.
3. County boards entering into lease-purchase agreements would be permitted to “borrow funds from the state Department of Education and (the SBA)…to make a one-time payment due at the beginning of the lease term for the purpose of reducing the annual lease payments.”

Sponsored by Sens. Jon Blair Hunter, D-Monongalia, Tracy Dempsey, D-Lincoln, and William R. Sharpe, D-Lewis. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Education, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_
SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb49%20intr.htm
Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

 

Bill would establish veterans’ vendor preference

Senate Bill 66. Proposed revisions to §5A-3-37 and §5A-3-37a would allow West Virginia vendors qualifying for “veteran status” to receive vendor preferences “as against a nonveteran West Virginia resident…”

The preference(s) would apply in cases of purchased construction, repair or improvement of buildings where the cost for such exceeds $50,000. Its provisions also would apply to other type contracts, including printing contracts.

According to the Bill Note, this proposed legislation affects both state and “local governments.”

Sponsored by Sens. Hunter, Dempsey and Sharpe. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Military, then to Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_
SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb66%20intr.http

Note: Sen. Hunter is chairman of Senate Military. Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Bill would ‘encourage’ “In God We Trust” on buildings

Senate Bill 80. Proposed §5-6-17 would encourage the “prominent” display “on public property and in public buildings in honor of this country’s heritage.”

“Governing authorities of any public property, public buildings and any building designed, constructed and maintained with public funds from the state, a county or a municipality” would be “encouraged” to prominently display the National Motto.

The state Building Commission would be responsible for developing “guidelines for such display and the Commission may provide, at its cost, an appropriate display of the National Motto to any agency of state, county or municipal government requesting it.”

Sponsored by Sen. Karen Facemyer, R-Jackson. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Government Operations, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_
SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb80%20intr.htm
Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

 

Eminent Domain addressed: Kelo v. City of New London, Conn.Case

Senate Bill 91. Proposed revisions to §54-1-2 would prohibit the state or any of its political subdivisions from exercising the right of Eminent Domain to take private property  for the primary intent of economic development wherein the ownership or control of the property ultimately becomes that of another private entity.

An exception is made for Urban Renewal Authorities to exercise the right of Eminent Domain regarding properties in areas designated as slums or blighted areas.

In Kelo, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that local governments may force property owners to sell out and make way for private economic development when officials decide it would benefit the public, even if the property is not blighted and the new project's success is not guaranteed.

The 5 to 4 ruling provided the strong affirmation that state and local governments had sought for their increasing use of eminent domain for urban revitalization, especially in the Northeast, where many city centers have decayed and the suburban land supply is dwindling.
Opponents, including property-rights activists and advocates for elderly and low-income urban residents, argued that forcibly shifting land from one private owner to another, even with fair compensation, violates the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, which prohibits the taking of property by government except for "public use."

In the majority Opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens cited cases in which the court has interpreted "public use" to include not only such traditional projects as bridges or highways but also slum clearance and land redistribution. He concluded that a "public purpose" such as creating jobs in a depressed city can also satisfy the Fifth Amendment.

The court should not "second-guess" local governments, Stevens added, noting that "[p]romoting economic development is a traditional and long accepted function of government."

Responding to Steven’ Opinion, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote that the ruling favors the most powerful and influential in society and leaves small property owners little recourse. Now, she wrote, the "specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/23/AR2005062300783_pf.html
The bill has 20 sponsors, including lead sponsor Sen. Hunter. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Government Organization, then Senate Judiciary, then Senate Finance (three references). http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_
SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb91%20intr.htm

The House companion measure is House Bill 4001. There are 11 Democrat sponsors, including lead sponsor Del. Michael Caputo, D-Marion. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to House Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_
SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/hb4001%20intr.htm

House Bill 4005, a related measure, makes no exception for use of Eminent Domain for areas designated as slums or blighted areas. There are 11 Republican sponsors, including lead sponsor Del. Cindy Fritch (Monongalia). http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_
SESSIONS/RS/BillInformation.cfm?input=4005

 

Regional Educational Services Agencies

Legislature would set RESA funding

Senate Bill 36. Proposed §18-9A-27 would require the legislature to determine the allocation amount for RESAs, distributed in “accordance with rules adopted by the (State Board of Education)

Sponsored by Senate Education Chairman Bob Plymale, D-Wayne, and three other senators. Introduced Jan. 12. Referred to Senate Education, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_
SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb36%20intr.htm

The governor’s RESA proposals, Senate Bill 127/House Bill 4014, amend
§18-9A-8a so that RESA funding is in an amount “appropriated by the Legislature.”

All three bills would be effective in FY07 and each fiscal year afterwards.

Senate Bill 127 is sponsored by Senate President Earl Ray Tomblin, D-Logan, and Senate Minority Leader Vic Sprouse, R-Kanawha. Referred to Senate Education, then Senate Finance.
http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb127%20intr.htm

House Bill 4014 is sponsored by House Speaker Bob Kiss, D-Raleigh, and House Minority Leader Charles Trump, R-Morgan. Referred to House Education, then House Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/hb4014%20intr.htm
The House Bill has a fiscal note request. Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

 

School Employees
(General)

Employees prohibited from promoting abortion

Senate Bill 68. Proposed §18A-2-14 would prohibit public school employees from “counsel(ing), refer(ing), transport(ing), or assist(ing) any student to obtain an abortion as part of or in relation to their employment.”

Bill provisions apply to persons “employed by, compensated by or providing any services  to the (sate board) or any county board.”
Those convicted of violating the statute would be guilty of a misdemeanor.

The bill has a proviso saying that “nothing in this section may be construed to endorse,  allow, permit or approve of any abortion.”
Sponsored by Sen. Dempsey. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Education, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb68%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Bill would require some background checks

Senate Bill 99. Proposed revisions to §18A-3-10 would require finger-printing of persons  who are not employed by county boards but who work “directly” with students grades K-12 on school property in order to “…authorize a person to work with children.”
Information derived from the Central Abuse Registry or the FBI could form “the basis for the denial (of) authority to work with students in (grades K-12) on school property…” (The current provision applies only to those seeking initial licensure from the state Department of Education.)

A second bill provision would exempt “parents, guardians or volunteers who are participating in a school-sponsored sanctioned event (and who will have) no “direct one-on-one contact with children” in grades K-12 from its provisions.
Additionally, background checks would not be required of volunteers who are “tutoring a student or students under the direct supervision of a classroom teacher.”

The proposed legislation would allow persons having background checks to contact either the state board or county board to receive information regarding “the results” of the fingerprint analysis. The results would have to be provided to the county board.

There are 17 Senate sponsors, including lead sponsor Sen. Dempsey. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Education, then Senate Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

 

Salaries, Wages, Benefits

Bill places 10-year cap for accrued seniority - rehiring

Senate Bill 39. A proposed revision to §18A-4-7b would place a 10-year limit on the amount of time that a teacher who returns to work after terminating employment could (may) retain his or her accrued seniority.
Sponsored by Sen. Russ Weeks, R-Raleigh. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Education, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb39%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Surplus funds would supplement salaries

Senate Bill 60. A proposed revision to §18-5-13 (proposed §18-5-13(u)) would authorize county boards to “disburse any surplus funds to teachers and service personnel to supplement salaries paid.” The expended surpluses would have to be “disbursed in equal amounts.”
NOTE: The bill note says that county boards the surplus funds “shall disburse any surplus funds.” The statute, however, authorizes county boards to undertake certain endeavors. 

Sponsored by Sens. Dempsey and Hunter. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Education, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb60%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Board-certified employees would get extra pay

Senate Bill 81. Proposed §18A-4-2b would extend the same salary bonuses to “professional (employees) who (hold) nationally recognized board certification in their educational discipline from a nationally accredited board” as teachers receive for National Board for Professional Teacher Standards certification (NBPTS).

The WVBE would be required to promulgate necessary rules to implement the statute.

Sponsored by Sen. Facemyer. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Education, then Senate Finance.
 http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb81%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Two bills relate to terminated employee wages

Senate Bill 87. Proposed revisions to §21-5-4 would establish that liquidated damages for failure to pay wages owed to a terminated employee cannot exceed the amount of wages the person, firm or corporation failed to pay when wages were due.

Sponsored by Sen. Donald T. Caruth, R-Mercer. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Judiciary, then Senate Finance.  http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb87%20intr.htm

Senate Bill 130 is a related bill. It stipulates that the terminated employee is entitled to a pay amount equal to “actual damages” if the “actual damages” exceed a regular day’s pay in the aggregate and if the employee has notified the employer of the shortfall within one year of its occurrence.  http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb130%20intr.htm

Sponsored by Sen. Joseph M. Minard, D-Harrison. Introduced Jan. 12. Referred to Senate Labor, then Senate Judiciary.  Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Re-introduced bill allows extended coaching contracts

Senate Bill 101. Proposed §18A-2-14 would allow county boards to contract with persons who have served as public school coaches for at least one year for an additional one- to three-years.

Sponsored by Sen. Hunter. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Education. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb101%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Bill concerns Unemployment Compensation benefits

Senate Bill 134. A proposed revision to §21A-6-3 would establish that an employee who provides notice of a future voluntary resignation, but who is required to leave his or her employment prior to the scheduled resignation date, is qualified to receive Unemployment Compensation benefits from the time the notice is given to his or her employer until the end of the notice period, or 30 days, whichever period is shorter.

Sponsored by Sen. Caruth. Introduced Jan. 12. Referred to Senate Judiciary, then Senate Finance.  http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb134%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Service personnel would get mileage pay from board

Senate Bill 139. Proposed §18-5-47 would require county boards to reimburse school service personnel for “mileage expended in the course of (their) employment at a rate consistent with the state mileage reimbursement rate when (they) use (their) own vehicle.”

Sponsored by Sens. Hunter, Dempsey and Shirley Love, D-Fayette. Introduced Jan. 12. Referred to Senate Education, then Senate Finance Committee. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb139%20intr.htm

 

Staffing Ratios

Three measures relate to school nurse staffing ratios

Senate Bill 53. Proposed revisions to §18-5-22 would revise the ratio of school nurses from 1 nurse per every 1,500 students in grades k-7 to one nurse per every 750 students in grades pre-k-12.

Sponsored by Sen. Hunter, Dempsey and John Unger, D-Berkeley. Introduced Jan. 11.
http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb53%20intr.htm

Senate Bill 54 is a related measure. It would require 1 school nurse per 1,500 students in grades k-12.
Sponsored by Sen. Roman W. Prezioso Jr., D-Marion and five other senators.

 Introduced Jan. 11.  http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb54%20intr.htm

Sens. Prezioso and Hunter introduced Senate Bill 88 which would require the WVDE to reimburse county boards annually for the “full cost of employing school nurses…from funds appropriated to (that agency).”
Introduced Jan. 11.
http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb88%20intr.htm
NOTE: All bills have been referred to Senate Education, the Senate Finance. Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Bills concern principals’ hiring, employment terms

Senate Bill 89. Proposed revisions to §18A-2-9 would create a “minimum” 220-day employment term” for principals and a “minimum” 215-day employment term for assistant principals beginning in FY07.

The bill also requires the employment of 1 secretary in each school. He or she is to have the “same employment term as the principal for whom he or she works.”

If a school’s enrollment exceeds 300 students, a county board must “assign, through written contract, assistant principals who work under the direction of the school principal.” (Current laws requires county boards to assign assistant principals “when needed.”)
Sponsored by Sen. Dempsey. Introduced Jan. 11.
http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb89%20intr.htm
Sens. Dempsey, Love and Hunter also sponsored Senate Bill 137. It would establish at 220-day minimum employment term for principals. It amends §18-5-45 and §18A-4-3.

Introduced Jan. 12. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb137%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

 

School Funding

 

Bill concerns allocations for low-enrollment counties

Senate Bill 14. Proposed §18-9A-15a would establish a procedure for the WVDE to use in making allocations to low-enrollment counties (those with 1,400 or less students in net enrollment, based on provisions of 2005 legislation).

In order to receive these funds, county boards must have less than 1,400 students in net enrollment”; must have “a lack capacity to provide direct services to students” as mandated by state law or WVBE policy; and, must have “made a reasonable local effort to provide direct services to students (as) mandated by state law (or WVBE policy).”

In order to allocate funds, the state superintendent is to receive applications annually, making “allocations to eligible counties as he or she determines appropriate."

The legislation is subject to funding by state lawmakers.

Sponsored by Sens. Larry Edgell, D-Wetzel and Hunter. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Education.
http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb14%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

 

West Virginia Board of Education

Bill concerns diplomas for veterans not finishing school

Senate Bill 8. Proposed revisions to §18-2-34 would allow military veterans who served in “any period of war or armed conflict” declared by the U.S. Government, including the Persian Gulf War, and who did not receive a high school diploma to be awarded a high school diploma.

In order to implement the legislation, the WVBE would be required to define the terms “war” and “armed conflict.”
Bill language deletes existing Code provisions which says the diplomas are to be awarded to World War I, World War II, Korean Conflict, and Vietnam Conflict veterans.

Sponsored by Sens. Randy White, D-Webster and Hunter. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Military, then Senate Education.
http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb8%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Firearms safety would be required curriculum          

                                              
Senate Bill 19. Proposed revisions to §18-2-8a would require the WVBE to “prescribe an orientation program for use in (grades 7-9) in the public schools of this state in the safety of firearms.”

The orientation program, to be  developed by the WVBE with the advice of the State Superintendent and the Director of the Division of Natural Resources, would have to be offered over a two-week period during the school year.

The optional program, as stipulated in current law, deals with the “protection of lives and property against loss or damage as a result of the improper use of firearms.” Other provisions concern the proper use of firearms in hunting, sport competition and the care and safety of firearms in the home.

Current law gives schools discretion to “utilize materials prepared by any nonprofit membership organization which has as one its purposes the training of people in marksmanship and the safe handling and use of firearms.”

County superintendents would be required to arrange for the program and its use in “each school in the county.”
Sponsored by Sen. Bailey and four other Senators. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Education, the Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb19%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Cross-index of forms sought

Senate Bill 97. Proposed §5A-6-4a would require the state’s Chief Technology Officer (CTO) to maintain a “central cross index repository of agency forms (in order) to promote and provide a central source of agency forms for common use and availability.”

Agencies, such as the WVDE, would be required to submit the forms requested by the CTO who may “study, develop and establish a program for the coordination between agencies to develop forms for interagency and common administrative use.”

The CTO also may check the forms for proper grammar, spelling, clerical and technical “correctness,” advising agencies of any errors “found.”

The technology officer also may develop a numbering/cataloguing system for agency forms, and make recommendations for “economical and uniform development of forms,” including measures agencies may use to avoid “undue creation and reproduction of forms.”

Among additional duties, the CTO may develop a means for acquisition of forms via electronic means, including through the use of “information systems and information technology (that is) accessible to agencies and the general public.”

In implementing the statute, the CTO is to consult with the state Division of Purchasing, which is housed in the Department of Administration.

Sponsored by Sen. Facemyer. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Government Organization. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb97%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Individual pupil “Diabetes Care Plan Act” introduced

Senate Bill 145. §18-2K-1 et. seq. would establish the “Diabetes Care Plan Act,” which requires the WVBE, in consultation with the Bureau for Public Health and the Department of Health and Human Resources, to adopt “guidelines for the development and implementation of individual diabetes care plans.”

The WVBE also is directed to consult with county board employees responsible for federal “504-compliance” and to refer to guidelines recommended by the American Diabetes Association for the “management of children , with diabetes in the school and day care setting…”

The WVBE also is to consult recent federal “resolutions” concerning “complaints alleging discrimination against students with diabetes.”
Plan requirements outlined

The following are among requirements for Individual Diabetes Care Plans:

1. Procedures for development of the plans at the written request of a student’s parent. The parent, the student’s health care provider, the student’s classroom teacher, the student (if appropriate), the school nurse if available “and other appropriate school personnel” are to be involved in developing  Diabetes Care Plans.
2. Procedures for “regular review of Individual Diabetes Care Plans.”
3. Information to be included in the plans such as school staff responsibilities, an emergency care plan and “allowable actions” to be taken given that circumstance and the extent to which the student himself or herself is able to participate in individual diabetes care and management.
4. Any additional information necessary for teachers and other school personnel to “offer assistance and support to the student.”

Under terms of the legislation, every “elementary school where a diabetic child is enrolled shall have a school nurse on staff.”
In order to comply with above provision, county boards would be prohibited from transferring a student from a school without a school to a school with a school nurse.

The diabetes care plans must “meet or exceed the American Diabetes Association’s recommendations for the management of children with diabetes in a school and day care setting.”

Additionally, WVBE guidelines must address information and staff development that is to be made available to school employees in order to “appropriately support and assist students with diabetes.”

The WVBE is responsible for updating guidelines “as necessary.”

For their part, county boards are required to ensure that WVBE guidelines are implemented in schools in which students with diabetes are enrolled.

County boards also are to make available “necessary information and staff development to teachers and school personnel to appropriately support and assist students with diabetes in accordance with their Individual Diabetes Care Plans.”

By Sept. 1, 2007, the WVBE is to make a report to the Legislature concerning its “progress regarding the adoption, dissemination and implementation” of the required guidelines.

Guidelines are to be adopted by Jan. 15, 2007 and implemented in the 2007-2008 school year.

Sponsored by Sens. Evan Jenkins, D-Cabell, Hunter and Prezioso. Introduced Jan. 13. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources, then Senate Education. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb145%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

 

Public Employees Insurance Agency

PEIA would provide acupuncture coverage

Senate Bill 104. Revisions to §5-16-7 and proposed §33-16-3s, §33-24-7i, §33-25-8g and  §33-25-8h would require health insurance policies, including those issued by the Public Employees Insurance Agency, to cover acupuncture treatments performed by a licensed acupuncturist. The “Chapter 33” designations apply to private insurance providers, including Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs).

Sponsored by Sens. John Pat Fanning, D-McDowell and Love. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Banking and Insurance, then Senate Finance.  http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb104%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

 

Teachers Retirement System

Supplemental benefits proposed; based on COLA

Senate Bill 93. Proposed §18-7A-26t would provide a Cost-Of-Living supplement to TRS retirees receiving disability annuities and who have been retired for at least five years. The Cost-Of-Living supplement also would apply to TRS retirees who are at least age 62 and who have been retired for at least five years. The Cost-Of-Living adjustment would be effective July 1.

The supplement would be equal to the percentage increase in the Consumers Price Index or 3 percent, whichever is less, multiplied by the first $18,000 of the retiree’s annual annuity.

The supplemental benefit is restricted for 2006 and 2007.

Sponsored by Sen. Hunter and five other senators. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Pensions, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb93%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

‘Rule of 80’ retirement proposal reintroduced

Senate Bill 119. Proposed revisions to §18-7A-25 would allows a TRS member to retire with full benefits when a member’s age and years of service equals or exceeds ’80.’

Sponsored by Sen. Hunter. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Pensions, then Senate Finance Committee. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb119%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

 

Higher Education

Tech President would join WVU Board of Governors

Senate Bill 9. Proposed revisions to §18-B-2A-1 would add the President of the West Virginia Institute of Technology to the West Virginia University Board of Governors. Sponsored by Sens. White and Brooks McCabe, D-Kanawha. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Education. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb9%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Children of fall parole officers could get fee waivers

Senate Bill 18. Proposed revisions to §18B-10-7 would grant tuition waivers to the children and spouses of parole and probation officers killed in the line of duty

Sponsored by Sen. Bailey and five additional senators. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Education, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb18%20intr.htm

 

Children of those killed in war

Senate Bill 32 is a related measure. Its proposed provisions would amend §18-19-1, §18-19-2, and §18-19-3 so that existing law relating to educational opportunities for children of those killed in war would include those who served in the Armed Forces of the United States at any time during which the forces or members of the reserve components are called to active duty by the President “for the purpose of entering into armed combat.”

The statute would be amended so that its benefits apply to students ages 16-25 and the child of an enlistee who gives West Virginia as his or her state of record. (After Jan. 1, 2007, benefits could only apply to post-secondary education.)
Benefits would total up to $2,000 per year.

If an eligible student were to attend a private school or an out-of-state school or a school where tuition waivers are applicable, the student would remain eligible for up to $2,000 for educational benefits per year.

If an eligible student were to receive a tuition waiver at a state institution of higher education, he or she would be eligible to receive for up to $2,000 for educational benefits per year.

(After Jan. 1, 2007 these benefits would apply only to post-secondary education.)

Acceptance of these benefits would not disqualify a student  from receiving “any other scholarships or grants for which the student may be eligible.”

There are other provisions.

Sponsored by Sen. Hunter and five other senators. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Sen. Military, then Sen. Education. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb32%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Interns could refuse to fill abortifacient orders

Senate Bill 29. Proposed §30-5-30 would allow pharmacists and other persons licensed to dispense medicine in West Virginia, including pharmacy interns, to refuse to fill prescriptions or dispense any substance that ”can be used as an abortifacient or that can be used as part of an abortion-related procedure” without being subject to “any form of discipline, penalty or punishment” because of that decision. (Such an action would be considered, under terms of the proposed legislation, as an ‘exercise of conscience.’ Also refer to Senate Bill 30.)

If actions are taken against one who refuses to dispense the abortifacient (or other substance), the business, institution or employer would be guilty of a misdemeanor, upon conviction.

There are other provisions, including right of back pay for one for whom disciplinary action was taken.

Senate Bill 29 is sponsored by Sen. Weeks. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources, then Senate Judiciary.  http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb29%20intr.htm

Senate Bill 30 also is sponsored by Sen. Weeks. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources, then Senate Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb30%20intr.htm

Also refer to Senate Bill 41, which is more extensive legislation, which would establish the “Health Care Right of Conscience Act.”
The provisions expressly apply to “medical or nursing school faculty, student(s) or employee(s), counselor, social worker, or any professional, paraprofessional, or any other person who furnishes, or assists in the furnishing of health care services.”
Additionally, the bill’s definition of “Health Care Institution” specifically applies to university medical and nursing schools, among other entities.

Under terms of the proposed statute, a health care provider has the right not to participate “in a health care service that violates his or her conscience.”

Such an individual would be immune for liability for not participating in such a health care service.

The proposed legislation has extensive provisions against discrimination for those who elect not to participate in a health care service due to conscience.

The bill’s provisions also apply to health care institutions’ “rights of conscience.” The proposed language would, in part, allow a health care institution to provide patients a consent form stating that the entity “reserves the right to decline to provide or participate in health care services that violate its conscience.”

Under terms of the proposal, the entities would be immune from discrimination for their stance of conscience, including a prohibition against denial of aid to these institutions.

Final bill provisions, styled after the above, relate to health care payers’ rights of conscience, allowing the health care payer to refuse to “pay for or arrange for the payment of any health care service or product that violates its conscience. (These provisions apply, in terms of the bill definition, to various entities and employers who contract for, pay or arrange payment for health care, including HMOs.)
There are several other bill provisions, including a listing of civil remedies and damages. for those who would violate the statute.
Sponsored by Sen. Clark Barnes, R-Randolph. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources, then Senate Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb41%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Limits would be placed on use of unborn fetus’s body

Senate Bill 40. Proposed §16-19-3a would prohibit the use of the body of an unborn fetus for any medical experimentation or scientific investigation except for diagnosis of a disease or condition suspected to exist in the mother’s or fetus’s body.

Persons convicted of violating the statute would be guilty of a misdemeanor.

Sponsored by Sen. Weeks. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources, then Senate Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb40%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Liability limited for those treating the indigent

Senate Bill 82. Proposed §55-7-25 would limit the liability of physicians who render services without remuneration to indigent persons in need of medical care or services, providing the care or service were rendered in good faith with the indigent person’s consent.

Sponsored by Sen. Andy McKenzie, R-Ohio and 6 other senators. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb82%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Bill creates ‘Dollars for Scholars’ program

Senate Bill 103. Introduced by Sen. Donna Boley, R-Pleasants, during the last several years, this bill would establish the “Dollars for Scholars Program,” which would provide low-cost loans to high school students having at least a “C” average.

The students would have to attend an in-state institution of higher education and would receive forgiveness of the loan when continuing West Virginia residency upon graduation.

The loan forgiveness would be pro-rated, based upon the number of years the graduate stays in West Virginia. (For each year of the graduate’s in-state residency, 20 percent of the loan is forgiven.)

Graduates who discontinue state residency prior to “complete forgiveness” of a loan would be required to begin paying on the “remaining loan balance within six months of discontinuing residency…”

There are several other bill provisions, including proposed Code sections relating to financing the program.

The proposal would amend several sections of existing law relating to the state’s higher education assistance student loan program (§18-22D-1 et. seq.)

Introduced Jan. 11. Sen. Dan Foster, D-Kanawha, co-sponsored the legislation. Referred to Senate Education, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb103%20intr.htm  Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

 

Education Related

Abortion

 

Bills relate to parental notification for abortion

Senate Bill 28. Proposed revisions to §16-2F-3 would require a physician to receive written consent from at least one parent or legal guardian before an abortion could be performed on an unemancipated minor.

There are specified penalties (misdemeanors) for those convicted of violating the statute.

Sponsored by Sen. Weeks. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources, then Senate Judiciary.

Senate Bill 120, a far more extensive proposal entailing judicial bypass, includes the right of the minor to petition a family court judge in order to obtain an abortion, with the judge being empowered to authorize a physician to perform the abortion. (There are several other provisions, including a physician’s affidavit affirming the abortion authorization.)

If the minor is an unemancipated minor, 48 hours’ “actual or constructive” notice must be given to the minor’s parent. Various documentation is required, including parental verification of the notice.

If a pregnant minor elects not to allow parental notification, a family court judge may authorize a physician to perform the abortion if he or she determines that the pregnant minor is mature and capable. If, however, the judge determines that the minor is not capable and mature, in his or her judgment, he or she may notify the child’s parent. Any decision rendered must be in the “best interests of the pregnant minor.”

The bill contains several extensive reporting procedures and requirements.

Sponsored by Sen. Prezioso and 18 other senators. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources, then Senate Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb120%20intr.htm NOTE: Sen. Prezioso is Senate Health and Human Resources Chairman. Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions

 

Child Welfare

‘Cross-reporting’ required of CPS workers, humane staff

Senate Bill 13. Proposed revisions to §7-10-2 would require county humane officers, when investigating animal cruelty, to make reports to various protective agencies if having  “reasonable suspicion” that a minor child or incapacitated or elderly person is the “victim of abuse or neglect or (if the humane officer) has a suspicion of domestic violence and the grounds therefore.”

In case of suspected child abuse, the report(s) would be made to Child Protective Services (CPS). In case of suspected abuse of an elderly or incapacitated person, the report  is to be made to the local Adult Protective Services Agency. In case of suspected domestic violence, the report is to be made to the State Police.

All reporting is to be done as required by current law.

NOTE: This proposed legislation also would amend §9-6-9 which relates to suspected abuse of adults and reportage from humane officers to Adult Protective Services. The proposed legislation would add a new section, §9-6-9a which would require CPS workers to report suspected animal cruelty to humane officers.

Similarly, §48-27-702 would be amended so that law enforcement officers, when investigating suspected domestic violence incidents, also would be required to report suspicion of animal cruelty to the county humane officer within 24 hours of the response to the alleged domestic violence incident.

The bill also would amend §49-6A-2 so that county humane officers are required to report suspected child abuse or neglect cases.
Additionally, proposed §49-6A-2b would require CPS workers to report suspected cases of animal cruelty to humane officers.
Sponsored by Sen. John Yoder, R-Jefferson and 4 other senators. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb13%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

 

Special needs children would receive in-state care

Senate Bill 63. Proposed §49-4-9 would require the Department of Health and Human Resources to develop in-state treatment facilities children with special needs.

One purpose for developing these facilities is to “reduce (DHHR’s) expenditures dedicated to the treatment of children with special needs in out-of-state facilities by (25 percent annually beginning in FY06).

There are other provisions, including development of legislative rules for implementing the legislation.

Sponsored by Sens. Hunter and Minard.  Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb63%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Newborn testing would include sickle cell anemia

Senate Bill 67. Proposed revisions to §16-22-3 would require newborns to be tested for sickle cell anemia (by adding this provision to the listing of required testings).

Additionally, current law would be authorize the state Bureau of Public Health to provide medical, dietary, and related assistance to children determined to be afflicted with sickle cell anemia (among other conditions).

There are other provisions.

Sponsored by Sens. Hunter, Dempsey and Weeks. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb67%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Bill would provide expanded 2006 CHIP coverage

Senate Bill 70. The purpose of this legislation, which amends §5-16B-6, is to increase the Children’s Health Insurance Program to cover children whose family income is up to 300 percent of the federal poverty level.

(The current level is 200 percent  of the federal poverty level.)

Sponsored by Sen. Prezioso and 11 other senators. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb70%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Child’s Right to Nurse Act re-introduced in 2006 session

Senate Bill 73. Proposed §16-1-19 would allow a mother to breast feed a child in “any location, public or private, where the mother and child are otherwise authorized to be.”

Sponsored by Sens. Foster, Jenkins and Sprouse. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources.  http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb73%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

EMTs could administer Epinephrine in allergy attacks

Senate Bill 77. Proposed §16-4C-14a would allow Emergency Medical Technicians to administer Epinephrine (via auto-injector devices) to treat allergic reaction and anaphylaxis (considered to be for emergency care).

Sponsored by Sen. Facemyer. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources. To http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb77%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

County officers could keep some Teen Court processing fees

Senate Bill 114. Proposed revisions to §49-5-13d would allow magistrate or circuit court clerks to retain 5 percent of fees paid as a cost for processing of Teen Court program actions originating from some motor vehicle crimes, felony or misdemeanors for which the teen has pled nolo contendere.

Sponsored by Sens. Jeff Kessler, D-Marshall, Hunter and Foster. Introduced Jan.11. Referred to Senate Judiciary, then Senate Finance. (Kessler is Senate Judiciary Chairman.)
http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb114%20intr.htm

Legislation would create CPS Ombudsman position

Senate Bill 132. Proposed §49-6F-1 and §49-6F-2 would create the position of Office of Child Protective Services Ombudsman.
The Office would be required to “investigate the administrative acts of the Department (of Health and Human Resources) related to services rendered in child abuse and neglect cases.”

The Ombudsman would be appointed by the governor with the advice and consent of President of the Senate and the House Speaker.
The Ombudsman would be authorized to “appoint an adequate number of assistants to properly perform the duties of his or her office” with these individuals’ total compensation to be within the limits of legislative appropriations for personal services. All such assistants would serve at the will and pleasure of the Ombudsman “and they shall perform the duties required by the Ombudsman.”
Proposed §49-6F-2 lists these as among proposed duties of the Ombudsman:

1. Monitoring and investigating the performance of Child Protective Services rendered by DHHR, “particularly whether the performance complies with the requirements of the Adoption and Safe Family Act.”
2. Accepting and investigating complaints against circuit or family court judges having involving allegations that the judges have “failed in their legal duties towards abused or neglected children.”
3. Intervening in pending litigation involving abused or neglected children in order to ensure circuit or family court judges comply with “legal requirements related to abused or neglected children,” appealing “judicial acts or orders to the (state Supreme Court) in the event the acts or orders appear not to be in compliance with applicable legal requirements.”
4. Reporting to state lawmakers and the governor annually concerning DHHR and the “state of the judiciary relative to each entity’s specific duties in child abuse and neglect cases.”
5. Acting as a “neutral and nonadversarial arbiter in disputes between citizens and (DHHR’s Division of Child Protective Services).”
6. Holding “citizen’s confidences when citizens make complaints against (CPS) or circuit or family court judges.”
7. Making recommendations to lawmakers and the governor for “legislative or administrative changes designed to improve (DHHR’s) performance in responding to child abuse and neglect cases as well as the judiciary’s role in protection of children from child abuse and neglect.”
8. Remaining “knowledgeable and informed regarding current law, changes in the law and trends in the law vis-à-vis child abuse and child neglect and to answer queries from the public regarding (such).”
9. Remaining “knowledgeable and informed concerning (DHHR’s) administrative practices, procedures and policies as they relate to the protection of children.”
10. Filing legal actions, including mandamus or declaratory judgment actions that seek to require “governmental officials to perform necessary activities to adequately serve and protect children or to prohibit those officials from engaging in actions that are counterproductive to the protection and welfare of children” and
11. Completing all “necessary activities intended to improve (CPS).”

The Ombudsman would be required to approve legislative rules to implement the proposed provisions of statute.

           

Sponsored by Sens. Boley, Foster and Hunter. Introduced Jan. 12. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb132%20intr.htm

           

 

Related House Bill

           
House Bill 4010 would establish the Office Family and Child Protection Ombudsman (proposed §49-6F-1) to “(coordinate) efforts on behalf of children and families involved in abuse and neglect matters,” to work with advocacy groups, to “advocate and promote systematic reforms,” and to recommend changes in “law, policy, rules or procedures necessary to enhance the protection of child (sic) and families involved in abuse and neglect matters.”

The bill includes a definitions section (proposed §49-6F-2).

The Office of Family and Child Protection Ombudsman which would be “independent of (DHHR).”

The Ombudsman would be responsible for “(promoting) public awareness and understanding of (CPS), to monitor and ensure compliance with administrative acts, relevant statutes, legislative rules, and internal policies relating to (CPS) and the investigations, placement, supervision and treatment of children in child abuse and neglect cases.”

The Ombudsman would report to the governor.

In order to ensure the independence of the office, DHHR officials would be prohibited from “initiating, carrying out or completing any investigation, review or other activity within the Ombudsman’s statutory duties and deemed necessary by the Ombudsman.”

The Ombudsman position, as outlined in proposed §49-6F-4, would require Senate consent. The individual would be required to be an attorney “…qualified by training and experience to direct the operations of the Office of Family and Child Protection  Ombudsman.”

The Ombudsman would be required to work on a full-time basis, having no other “profession or occupation.”

He or she would be prohibited from holding elective or appointive political office. His or her salary would be determined by the governor. The individual would be ineligible for Civil Service. The Ombudsman would serve a three-year term until reappointed or until a successor is named. He or she could be removed from the position only for “neglect of duty, misconduct, or inability to perform duties,” with the vacant position being filled by “similar appointment for the remainder of the unexpired term.”

            These are among duties of the Ombudsman:

1. Inspecting and review the “operations, policies and procedures of foster homes, group homes, residential of facilities, shelters for the care of abused or neglected children or any other public or private residential setting in which a child has been placed by (DHHR).”
2. Intervening in “pending litigation involving abused or neglected children in order to ensure circuit or family court judges and prosecuting attorneys comply with legal requirements related to abused or neglected children, and to appeal judicial acts or orders to the (state Supreme Court) in the event the acts or orders appear not be  in compliance with applicable legal requirements.”
3. Making various reports concerning the Ombudsman Office, including reports to legislators.
4. Recommending “administrative changes designed to improve (DHHR’s) performance in responding to child abuse and neglect cases as well as the prosecuting attorney and judiciary’s role in the protection of children from child abuse and child neglect.”
5. Reviewing DHHR’s procedures for “providing services to children who are at risk of abuse or neglect, child (sic) in Department custody, or any child who receives (CPS) services.”
6. Disseminating information to the public regarding the Office, its objectives, services provided, and contact information which must include a Web page.
7. Aiding the governor and legislature in proposing methods to “(achieve) increased coordination and collaboration among state agencies and entities, including the judiciary, to ensure maximum effectiveness and efficiency in the provision of services to children.”
8. Providing training to CPS workers, prosecuting attorneys and the judiciary relative to the “performance of their respective duties with regard to child abuse and neglect.”

Proposed §49-6F-6 would allow the Ombudsman to have access to various records, including “all written reports of child abuse and neglect matters including the names of all children involved in (CPS) investigation, treatment or placement” as well as all Multidisciplinary Team records, archived CPS records, court documents, all “on-line case management information,” Child Fatality Review Team records, records of “all state institutions serving  and state licensed facilities or residences…”

Records generated by the Ombudsman would be confidential and would not be “subject to any method of legal compulsion without a showing of good cause by the circuit or  family court.”

The information contained in the above records “may not be disclosed publicly in any manner that would disclose identifying information about complainants or witnesses.”

Additionally, the Ombudsman would be immune from testifying or producing “evidence regarding the exercise of the official duties of (his or her office or their staff with)  all related memoranda, work product, notes, and case files (being) confidential, (and) not subject to discovery, judicial or administrative subpoena, or other method of legal compulsion…”

There are certain exceptions, including cases where the Ombudsman or staff has “direct knowledge of an alleged crime and the testimony, evidence, or discovery sought is relevant to that allegation.”

Another exception would apply when the Ombudsman or staff has received a threat of imminent “serious harm to any person, and the testimony, evidence, or discovery sought is relevant to that threat or risk” and when the Ombudsman is asked to provide “general information regarding the general operation of, or the general processes employed at, the Ombudsman’s office.”
     
These provisions are included in proposed §49-6F-7.

Proposed §49-6F-8 would make Ombudsman Office employees immune from prosecution for good faith performance of duties.

The last bill provision relates to sunsetting the agency by July 1, 2010.

There are seven House sponsors, including lead sponsor Virginia Mahan, D-Summers. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to House Government Organization. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/hb4010%20intr.htm
NOTE: The State Superintendent or designee serves as a member of the Child Fatality Review Team. Local school officials, particularly some central office employees and the county superintendent, are involved with Multidisciplinary Teams, and House Bill 4010’s provisions would apply to juvenile facilities and schools operated by the WVDE.

The legislation largely emanated from circumstances regarding a Raleigh County infant who froze to death. Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Bill would expand statutory definition of “child abuse”

House Bill 4009. Proposed revisions to §49-1-3, relating to statutory definitions regarding child abuse and neglect, would expand the definitions to include parents who subject the “fetus to prenatal exposure to abusive use of alcohol or any controlled drug or substance not prescribed by a health practitioner.”

A second proposed provision would relate to a parent who “knowingly exposes the child to an environment that is being used for the manufacture, use, or distribution of methamphetamines or any other illegally controlled drug or substance.”

Sponsored by Del. Mahan and 6 other Delegates. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to House Health and Human Resources, then House Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/hb4009%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

State Police unit would investigate child abuse     

                                  
House Bill 4011. Proposed §15-2-9 would establish a special State Police Unit – the Child Abuse and Neglect Investigations Unit – for the “sole purpose of…identifying, investigating, and prosecuting criminal child abuse and neglect cases.”
The Unit would work in conjunction with CPS.

While Unit officials could assist other agencies in suspected situations involving child abuse and neglect, “nothing in this (proposed statute) may be construed to mean that the Unit will assume the duties or investigations of other State Police members or other law enforcement officers.”

The Unit would include a minimum six State Police members, five of whom would be assigned regionally to assist CPS officers, assisting these Department of Health and Human Resources caseworkers to investigate cases of child abuse and neglect, including coordinated efforts with “other law enforcement personnel.”

Additionally, various State Police Unit duties are enumerated, including maintenance of a statewide abuse and neglect statistical index of all suspected child or abuse cases reported…(in order to) enable the Unit to monitor the timely and proper investigation and disposition of child abuse or neglect cases.”

There are reportage requirements as well, including reports to lawmakers.

A final bill provision would require “every law enforcement agency of the state (to) periodically provide, as required by the (State Police Unit), statistical information  regarding child abuse and neglect cases investigated and prosecuted by that law enforcement agency.”
Sponsored by Del. Mahan and 6 other Delegates. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to House Government Organization. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BIL LS/hb4011%20intr.htm

Bill would create Child Abuser Registration Act

House Bill 4012. Proposed §15-13-1 et. seq. would establish the Child Abuser Registration Act whose purpose is to assist law-enforcement agencies in efforts to protect children from abuse and neglect by requiring persons convicted of child abuse or neglect to register with the State Police detachment in the county of their residence.

As explained in the Bill Note, the proposed statute is not to be considered penal in nature but regulatory.
These are among bill provisions:

1. On the date in which a person who has been convicted of child abuse or neglect and released on parole, probation, suspended sentence, home detention, work release, conditional release or other release from confinement, the Commissioner of Corrections or other appropriate official would be required to obtain the information outlined in statute regarding the intended whereabouts of the released individual (other information must be provided as well by the individual) and to register under provisions of the proposed Act.

(Persons who have been convicted or found not guilty by reasons of mental illness, mental retardation or addiction would be required to sign a statement saying they understand requirements that would be imposed by the statute. They, too, would be informed of the requirements to register as a child abuser under terms of the propose statute, with their signed statement acknowledging receipt of this information as “prima facie evidence that the person had knowledge of the (proposed registry requirements.)
The State Police would be required to maintain a central registry for these persons.

The proposed legislation has provisions regarding change of address.

Persons would be required to register for 10 years, with the registry term not being subject to reduction due to the offender’s “release from probation, parole or supervised or conditional release.”

If a conviction were overturned, the person could, upon court petition, have their name “removed from the registry.”

Registry information would be disseminated to various county, municipal and local officials, including the county superintendent “where the registrant resides, is employed or attends school or a training facility.”

Additionally, registry information is to be provided to CPS officials.

Elected officials, public employees or public agencies are immune from civil liability for damages arising from actions regarding the Act except if acting in bad faith.

Other bill registry provisions would relate to abuse offenders who move out of state.

Additionally, various penalties apply to those who fail to register, including a felony for not providing information regarding change to his or her status. Other penalties may include revocation of probation or parole.

There are other sections dealing with Uniform Out-of-state Parolee Supervision and a requirement that abuse registrants from other state would be required to register in West Virginia if or when moving here.

Sponsored by Del. Mahan and 6 other Delegates. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to House Government Organization. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/hb4012%20intr.htm

 

Sex Offender Registration

House Bill 4003 would require registered sex offenders to be issued special driver’s licenses or nondriver identification cards which identify the person as a registered sex offender.

The bill provides misdemeanor criminal penalties for failure to comply with the special licensing or nondriver identification care requirement(s).

The bill would amend §17B-2-3.

There are four House sponsors, including lead sponsor Del. Randy Swartzmiller, D- Hancock. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to House Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/hb4003%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Crimes

 

Voyeurism would constitute a criminal offense; exceptions

Senate Bill 83. Proposed revisions to §61-8-28 would make voyeurism a crime in cases where one had the expectation of privacy.
Under terms of the bill, the definition of “Invasion of Privacy” would be amended so that “looking upon another person with the unaided eye or with any device designed or intended to improve visual acuity, for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire of any person.”

Those convicted of the crime may be sentenced to both fines and imprisonment.

There are certain exceptions, including criminal investigations involving law enforcement personnel, security surveillance, and investigations initiated by prosecutors.

Sponsored by Sen. McKenzie. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb83%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

County Board embezzlement would be felony crime

Senate Bill 84. Proposed revisions to §61-3-20 would make embezzlement from a county, district, school district or municipality a felony which would carry a prison sentence of at least 10 years.

A special prosecutor would be appointed to prosecute county officers, agents, clerks and servants charged with embezzlement.
Sponsored by Sen. Barnes. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb84%20intr.htm

Note: This bill relates to a Randolph County employee charged with purported embezzlement of funds. Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

 

Elections

Campaign records would have to be kept for 2 years

Senate Bill 42. Proposed §3-8-5g would require candidates, financial agents or campaign treasurers to maintain all campaign-related “financial receipts for a period of two years following the filing of each related financial report.”

The records would be available to the Secretary of State’s office or county clerks for audit purposes.

Failure to maintain the records would constitute a misdemeanor offense, upon conviction.

Sponsored by Sen. Hunter. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb42%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Election materials could be opened for canvassing

Senate Bill 108. Proposed §3-4A-28 would allow election materials, in addition to equipment, to be opened for purposes of election canvassing as long as the materials are resealed immediately after opening.
(The current “re-opening” provisions apply to election equipment opened during canvassing.)

Sponsored by Sen. Hunter. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb108%20intr.htm

Individual campaign contributions could total $4,000

Senate Bill 142. Revised §3-8-12 would increase from $1,000 to $4,000 in  value the amount one could contribute for an individual’s nomination or election to office.

Sponsored by Sen. H. Truman Chafin, D-Mingo. Introduced Jan. 13. Referred to Senate Judiciary.  http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb142%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

 

Governmental Entities

Flood Protection Act would be enacted; advisory council

Senate Bill 7. Proposed §29-29-1 et. seq. would establish the Flood Protection Planning Act.
These are among its provisions:

1. A State Flood Protection Planning Council would be created consisting of the Director of the Division of Natural Resources, the Secretary of the Department of Environmental Protection, the Executive Director of the West Virginia Conservation Agency, the Director of the state Housing Fund, the Secretary of the Department of Military Affairs and Public Safety, and the Secretary of Transportation (or their designees).
2. The Council would  meet at least quarterly.
3. The Council is empowered (“may”) to serve as coordinator of all flood protection programs and activities in West Virginia.
4. In order to accomplish the above, the Council may review the state flood protection plans, updating the plans at least biannually.
5. The Council also may recommend legislation to reduce or mitigate flood damage as well as coordinating the planning of flood projects with federal agencies; cataloging, maintaining and monitoring a list of current and proposed capital expenditures to reduce or mitigate flood damage; working to improve professional management of flood plains, and establishing a single Web site integrating all agency flood information. (The Council is granted other powers and duties.)
6. A State Flood Advisory Council, consisting of no more than 20 members, would be established for the purpose of providing “technical and policy expertise and experience in flooding issues” to the Council. (Among groups having Council membership, no state or local education officials are included.)
7. The Advisory Council would meet as deemed necessary by its chairman or by a call of the majority of the Advisory Council members.
8. A 10-member Joint Legislative Oversight Commission on Flooding whose purpose is to provide “immediate and ongoing oversight of flood damage reduction and flood plain management…(by) regularly (monitoring) all activities relating to flood protection and (making) recommendations to the Legislature that offer solutions to reduce the reality and threat of future loss of life and property damages associated with flooding.”
9. The Legislative Commission would include 5 Senate members and 5 House members appointed the Senate President and House Speaker, respectively.
10. There are various reportage requirements, including a required annual report which the State Flood Planning Council is to submit to lawmakers.

Sponsored by Sen. Bailey and 3 other senators. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Government Organization, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb7%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Bill relates to state Investment Board

Senate Bill 92. Proposed revisions to §12-6-9c and §12-6-12 as well as enactment of proposed §12-6-18 would allow the state Board of Investments to “hold” in equity investments no more than 70 percent of assets of the Teachers Retirement and State Police Retirement Systems (or higher investments as may be permitted by the investment standard that would be established  through passage of the legislation.)

Thirty-five percent of the assets managed by the Investments Board could be held in international securities (currently 20 percent) or a higher percentage.

The measure would establish other investment guidelines, including possible “alternative investments” which could include venture capital, private real estate, fixed income arbitrage, etc.

Any such investments would have to be made in accordance with existing statutes concerning the state’s Prudent Investor Standard.
The newly-proposed section of statute would provide liberal construction for the Investment Board’s investing strategies so that the Board can “effectuate its corporate purposes in the financial markets of the world, as they may evolve from time to time…”
There are other proposed provisions.

Sponsored by Sens. McCabe and Foster. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Government Organization, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb7%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Commission Opinions would become “precedential”

Senate Bill 111. Proposed revisions to §6-9A-11 would allow Open Governmental Advisory Opinions (Ethics Commission) to have precedential application, meaning that any governing body or member acting in good faith reliance on “a written advisory opinion” would have absolute defense to civil suit or criminal prosecution.
(Current law extends this “protection” only to those seeking the Opinion.)

Sponsored by Sen. Jesse Guills, R-Greenbrier and Barnes. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Government Organization. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb111%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Statutory “Voters’ Initiative Act” would be established

Senate Bill 122. Proposed §3-12-1, §3-12-2, and §3-12-32 would establish the “Voters’ Initiative Act” which would give state citizens the power of referendum and initiative.

Citizens would have the right to initiate both local and state referenda by initiating a petition including the signatures of at least 12 percent of the registered voters in the “affected district” who voted in the district during the last election for governor.

For a statewide referendum, must include, in two-thirds of the counties, signatures of at least 12 percent of the voters in each county having voted in the last gubernatorial election.

Petitions must be filed with the “proper election official…after the effective date of the constitutional amendment, statute, promulgated rule, ordinance or other legislation in question.”

The proposed legislation contains provisions relating to petition certification and other similar matters.

Legislation that would reject, in whole or partly, a General Revenue Fund increase or other revenue fund appropriated by the Legislature (or other authorized governing body) “may not be effective until the fiscal year following the year of the passage of any successful referendum proposal.”

(A referendum could not be used to reject “those portions of an act or ordinance which appropriate public funds for the then-current fiscal year or to call [a referendum election”]).

A constitutional amendment, statute or legislation (or parts thereof) suspended through referenda would take effect on the date approved by voters unless the measure provides otherwise.

If measures are in conflict, the measure receiving the highest number of votes would prevail unless one measure is by law subordinate to another.

A four-year moratorium would be imposed on the Legislature or other governing body from amending or repealing any statute approved by referendum.

The Secretary of State would be responsible for proposing legislative rules relating to referenda.

There are other provisions.

No more than 5 referendum issues could be on the ballot any one election.

The legislation would apply to county boards and local governmental bodies.

Sponsored by Sen. Boley. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Judiciary, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb122%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.  

  
Bill relates to “Revenue Shortfall Reserve Fund”

Senate Bill 126. Proposed revisions to §11B-2-20 would require the state’s Revenue Shortfall Reserve Fund to be funded in an amount equal to 10 percent of the state’s General Revenue Fund budget for the fiscal year just ended, including the first 25 percent of all “surplus revenues…determined to have accrued during the fiscal year just ended…”

Sponsored by Sens. Tomblin and Sprouse (at the request of the governor). Introduced Jan. 12. Referred to Senate Finance Committee. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb126%20intr.htm

The House measure, House Bill 4015, is sponsored by Dels. Kiss and Trump (at the request of the governor). Referred to House Finance Committee. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BillInformation.cfm?input=4015

Employers could add to deferred compensation plans

Senate Bill 135. Proposed revisions to §5-10B-4 would allow a state employer to contribute to deferred compensation plans (to match the employee’s contributions).

The Consolidated Public Retirement Board would establish procedures for making these type contributions.

Sponsored by Sen. Chafin. Introduced Jan. 12. Referred to Senate Pensions, then Senate Finance.  http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb135%20intr.htm

Community Corrections group would meet quarterly

House Bill 4018. Proposed revisions to §62-11C-2 would require the Community Corrections Subcommittee (Governor’s Committee on Crime, Delinquency, and Correction) to meet quarterly.

The measure also seeks to increase revenue for the West Virginia Community Corrections Fund. (These moneys are collected by persons on probation.)

There are other provisions.

Sponsored by Dels. Kiss and Trump (at the request of the governor). Introduced Jan. 13. Referred to House Judiciary, then House Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BillInformation.cfm?input=4018

 

Public Employees Retirement System

Bill would increase PERS multiplier to 2.25 percent

Senate Bill 128. Proposed revisions to §5-10-22 would increase the Public Employees Retirement System multiplier for a retirement annuity from 2.00 percent to 2.25 percent.

There are other provisions.

Sponsored by Sen. Edwin J. Bowman, D-Hancock, Love and Sharpe. Introduced Jan. 12. Referred to Senate Pensions, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb128%20intr.htm

 

Taxation

Persons on active duty would get tax break for vehicle

Senate Bill 5. Proposed revisions to §11-5-1 would exempt one motor vehicle owned by a state resident who is on active duty in the U.S Military from ad valorem personal property taxes for any taxable year the individual remains on active duty.

Sponsored by Sen. Bailey and 4 other senators. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Military, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb5%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Bill would redefine “managed timberland” – 10-1000 acres

Senate Bill 52. Proposed revisions to §11-1C-2 would redefine “managed timberland,” for the purpose of preferential tax reduction so that the definition would apply to timberlands of not less than 10 acres nor more than 1,000 acres as owned by one corporation or one person.
If owned by more than one person, the managed timberlands would be owned “indivision.”

Sponsored by Sen. Hunter. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb52%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Tax valuations would be on 5-year cycle rather than 3-year

Senate Bill  95. Proposed revisions to §11-1C-9 would change the time for periodic valuations and assessments of property from every 3 years to every 5 years, placing a 3 percent cap on any increase in assessments in one year.

Sponsored by Sen. Boley. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Judiciary, then  Senate Finance.

http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb95%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Farm Equipment would be exempt from property tax

Senate Bill 113. Proposed revisions to §11-3-9 would exempt farming equipment and livestock from personal property valuation.
Sponsored by Sen. Facemyer. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Agriculture, then Senate Finance.

http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb95%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Sheriff fees for tax collection could increase to $30,000

Senate Bill 129. Proposed revisions to §11A-1-17 would increase the maximum amount of the commission a sheriff may receive for collecting taxes from $15,000 to $30,000.

Sponsored by Sens. Chafin and Love. Introduced Jan. 12. Referred to Senate Government Organization, then Senate Finance.  http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb129%20intr.htm

 

Tobacco

Boards of Health could not restrict smoking

Senate Bill 2. Proposed amendments to §16-2-16 would prohibit local boards of health from requiring smoke-free areas. Among other proposed provisions, the legislation would give the governor authority to allow or prohibit smoking in governmental buildings.
Sponsored by Sen. Bailey. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources, then Senate Judiciary.
http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb2%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Candy-flavored Cigarettes would be banned from sale

Senate Bill 75. Proposed revisions to §16-9A-9a would prohibit the sale of candy- or fruit-flavored cigarettes in West Virginia.
Sponsored by Sens. Foster, White and Love. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources, then Senate Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb75%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Fines increased for underage youth tobacco usage

Senate Bill 78. Proposed revisions to §16-9A-3 would increase various fines for underage youth convicted of using tobacco products, including a $100 fine for a first offense (currently $25).

For a second offense, the fine would be $150 (currently $50) as well as a sentencing to 60 hours of community service (currently 16). Additionally, the minor would have his junior or graduated driver’s license revoked until he or she turns age 18.

If the minor does not have a driver’s license, he or she could not apply for one until age 18.

Sponsored by Sen. Facemyer. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources, then Senate Judiciary.  http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb105%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Municipal courts could issue tobacco use fines - minors

Senate Bill 105. Proposed revisions to §16-9A-3 would allow municipal courts jurisdiction over juveniles who violate laws and municipal ordinances relating to tobacco use.

Sponsored by Sen. Facemyer. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Health and Human Resources Committee, then Senate Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sb105%20intr.htm Similar proposals have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

 

Resolutions

Merit selection of Supreme Court Justices proposed

Senate Joint Resolution 1. If this Resolution were adopted, it would place a constitutional amendment before voters relating to merit selection for justices of the State Supreme Court.
(The Legislature would determine matters relating to the merit selection.)

Sponsored by Sens. Yoder, Barnes and Guillis. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Judiciary, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sjr1%20intr.htm Similar resolutions have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Limit on gaming suggested

Senate Joint Resolution 2. If this Resolution were adopted, it would place a constitutional amendment before voters whose purpose is to prohibit the Legislature from expanding legal gaming, except in the four counties in which horse and dog racing tracks are located.

Sponsored by Sen. Yoder. Introduced Jan. 11. Referred to Senate Judiciary, then Senate Finance. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sjr2%20intr.htm Similar resolutions have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Eligibility to serve in the Legislature clarified

Senate Joint Resolution 4. If this Resolution were adopted, it would place a constitutional amendment before voters among whose purposes is to clarify the term “lucrative office” as applying to those eligible to seek public office. (In the past, this “term” has been considered by legal and constitutional scholars to preclude public higher education employees, including college professors, from seeking election to the Legislature.)

There are other clarifying language provisions. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sjr4%20intr.htm Similar resolutions have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

County reconfiguration

Senate Joint Resolution 6. If this Resolution were adopted, it would place a constitutional amendment before voters relating to legislative authorization to reconfigure county lines, form new counties or consolidate counties in 2012 and every 10 years thereafter, based on U.S. Bureau of Census data.

Sponsored by Sen. Chafin. Introduced Jan. Referred to Senate Government Organization, then Senate Judiciary. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Text_HTML/2006_SESSIONS/RS/BILLS/sjr6%20intr.htm Similar resolutions have been introduced/considered in past legislative sessions.

Briefly

Senate Bill 10 would provide persons who donate to a community foundations reductions on personal income taxes…Senate Bill 11 would provide an additional circuit judge for the 23rd judicial circuit (Berkeley, Jefferson and Morgan Counties which current has four circuit judges)…Senate Bill 12 would prohibit use of handheld cell phones while driving…Senate Bill 21 would dissolve the state Division of Personnel and Civil Service, permitting various state agencies and governmental departments to be responsible for their personnel matters…Senate Bill 23 would add representatives of Cabell, Mason, Jackson, Putnam and Wayne Counties in order to create the Western West Virginia Highway Authority…Senate Bill 26 would require health insurance plans to cover the cost of smoking cessation. (The sections of Code amended apply to private insurance companies.)…Senate Bill 37 would require the collections of various statistics relating to abortions performed in West Virginia, including the age of the “mother.”…Senate Bill 43 would allow county commissions to levy a recreation and amusement tax…Senate Bill 50 would require attendance of municipal officials at duly called meetings of municipal bodies if a quorum were called to conduct business. It also applies to municipal committees (where a quorum would be or is required)...Senate Bill 51 would eliminate the one-year residency requirement for filing a name change for persons who moved to another state but has not yet established residency in that state and if the person were born in West Virginia and has resided here for the greater portion of his or her life at the time of the filing of the name change petition…Senate Bill 64 would allow appointed or elected full-time or part-time salaried or hourly state officials, officers, or state employees receiving retirement compensation or benefits the right to waive all or part of their salaries if, by continuing paid employment, they would lose retirement benefits. (The individuals may choose to waive part of the compensation.) Elected officials could waive their salary only after assuming office, and could not campaign on waiving his or her salary.

Senate Bill 72 would add an additional magistrate in Raleigh County…Senate Bill 79 would require itemized statements for Medicaid recipients who receive medical services…Senate Bill 115 would “divide” the Department of Health and Human Resources into the Department of Health and the Department of Human Resources…Senate Bill 117 would create a create a tax incentive program to expand tourism attractions or amenities in the state…Senate Bill 124 would provide for an alternative method to publicly finance legislative elections…Senate Bill 131 would increase fines and penalties for persons who assault parole or probation officers (among other officers, including conservation officers)…Senate Bill 138 would allow county commissions to alter the days in which holidays are observed more to suit the wishes of their employees…Senate Bill 151 would allow county commissions to regulate and restrict, through county ordinance, locations in which a limited video lottery retailer may hold a license…House Bill 4006 would add Mercer and Raleigh Counties as participating members of the Hatfield-McCoy Regional Recreational Authority…House Bill 4008 would authorize city and county housing authorities to merge to form regional housing authorities.