West Virginia House Bill HB2401

West Virginia 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/11/23
• Refer: 1/11/23

Caption

Relating to relocation or closure of state higher education institutions

Impact

The proposed legislation emphasizes the significant role that higher education institutions play in their communities, recognizing their economic impact and the dependency that local businesses and families may have on them. By requiring state institutions to undertake thorough studies and seek approval before any significant changes, HB2401 aims to ensure that decisions reflect a broader consideration of community needs and impacts, rather than being made unilaterally by the institutions themselves.

Summary

House Bill 2401 seeks to amend the Code of West Virginia by establishing a framework for the closure or relocation of state higher education institutions. The bill mandates that any such institution must conduct an economic and educational accessibility impact study prior to making a decision to close or transfer its physical presence. This study will then be submitted to the Higher Education Policy Commission, which is tasked with reviewing and providing feedback on the proposed plan. Only after receiving approval from the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability (LOCEA) can an institution proceed with its closure or relocation plans.

Sentiment

The overall sentiment regarding HB2401 is largely constructive, focusing on accountability and community involvement in decisions that could affect the educational landscape. There seems to be a general agreement that higher education closures or relocations should be approached with careful consideration of their long-term implications for the regions involved. However, some may criticize the added bureaucratic procedures as potentially hindering responsiveness to necessary institutional changes.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding HB2401 revolve around the balance of authority between educational institutions and the legislative body. Proponents argue that pre-approval requirements will safeguard communities from sudden decisions that could disrupt local economies. Meanwhile, opponents may raise concerns about potential delays in decision-making processes, which could hinder institutions' ability to adapt to changing circumstances. The debate around the bill highlights the tension between institutional autonomy and community oversight.