Date Requested: January 25, 2019
Time Requested: 04:15 PM
Agency: Highways, Division of
CBD Number: Version: Bill Number: Resolution Number:
2200 Introduced SB375
CBD Subject: Roads and Transportation


State Road Fund

Sources of Revenue:

Special Fund

Legislation creates:

Fiscal Note Summary

Effect this measure will have on costs and revenues of state government.

    Summarize in a clear and concise manner what impact this measure will have on costs and revenues of state government.
     Currently the Division of Highways (DOH) installs, creates and maintains road signs for our state maintained roads. SB375 should have minimal impact on DOH, providing the proposed signing is conformed with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devises (MUTCD).

Fiscal Note Detail

Effect of Proposal Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
(Upon Full
1. Estmated Total Cost 0 2,400 20,400
Personal Services 0 0 0
Current Expenses 0 0 0
Repairs and Alterations 0 0 0
Assets 0 0 0
Other 0 0 0
2. Estimated Total Revenues 0 2,400 20,400

Explanation of above estimates (including long-range effect):

    Please explain increases and decreases in personal services, current expenses, repairs and alterations, assets, other costs and revenues, including assumptions and data sources and delineation between start-up and ongoing costs. Please also include a long-range schedule of costs and revenues if fiscal impact is expected to vary in future years.
    • It is difficult to determine the overall financial impact to the DOH as all structure is left to the administrative rule. With that said, a potential scenario with assumptions is shown below:
    o Approximately 1830 miles of US Routes
    o 17 routes currently signed with the US Route designation in WV
    o Assume $300/sign (labor, materials, & equipment)
    o Assume that all routes will be designated at some point
    o Assume 2 routes designated in FY 2020
    o Assume 100 miles per designated route (4 signs/route)
    o FY 2020 - $2,400
    o Full Implementation- $20,400
    o No design costs or administrative fees for DOH are included
    o No escalation nor sign maintenance costs are included


    Please identify any areas of vagueness, technical defects, reasons a bill would not have a fiscal impact, and/or any special issues not captured elsewhere on this form.
     “Historic route” does not appear to be defined in the Code. Presumably the definitions would be contained in the rule that are directed to be prepared. It is imperative that such a definition state that the term does not mean eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. DOH desires that this issue be codified in statute rather than administrative rule.
     It is difficult to determine the cost implications of this bill as well as who would absorb those costs since these details are left to administrative rule.
     It needs to be clarified that any designation will not affect the Division of Highways’ ability to properly improve, maintain and or abandons section of roadway through its processes. It should place no additional burden of documenting these decisions than those that currently exist.
     It should be clarified that any proposed signing must be in conformity with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).
     The Division of Culture and History (C&H) currently has the ability to commemorate places of historic significance through its highway historic marker program. DOH already coordinates with C&H on this program and provides installation of the markers. We are uncertain why additional signing would be required as it would seem this could be handled through the existing program.

    Person submitting Fiscal Note: Lorrie Hodges
    Email Address: