Concerning House Bill 4003, the WV First Small Business Growth Act, I am not persuaded that this legislation will reliably accomplish its stated goal of growing small businesses in West Virginia.

The bill provides substantial incentives to financial intermediaries and capital allocators through insurance premium and retaliatory tax credits, yet it contains no enforceable mechanisms to ensure that small businesses—or their workers—receive durable, meaningful benefits. There are no requirements related to wage growth, job quality, worker retention, local ownership, or reinvestment of profits into West Virginia communities.

In practice, the structure of this bill primarily reduces risk for investment funds and insurers while offering only indirect and weakly constrained benefits to operating businesses. The public assumes real fiscal risk through foregone tax revenue, while the upside of successful investments is captured entirely by private actors.

My concerns are informed not only by a close reading of HB 4003, but also by evidence from other states that have implemented similar insurance-tax-credit–based investment programs. These programs have shown mixed or poor results in terms of long-term small business growth and worker benefit, and many have been scaled back, sunsetted, or quietly discontinued after failing to deliver promised outcomes.

For these reasons, I oppose HB 4003 as written and urge the Legislature to reconsider approaches to small business development that include enforceable outcomes, worker protections, and mechanisms for the public to share in the value created by public policy.

“In any fiscal year in which the Legislature appropriates money for the program,”, is this meaning that say if the bill was passed in its current form, that the program could have money not allocated by the legislature in a fiscal year?

I support West Virginia HB 4009 because it modernizes our workforce by allowing portable benefits that follow workers across jobs. This bill supports independent contractors and gig workers by expanding access to health, retirement, and financial security benefits without disrupting flexible work models or obligating an employer to costly, regulated benefit structures. HB 4009 helps West Virginia stay competitive while respecting worker choice.

House Bill 4009 does not offer a viable solution to the problems it identifies. While the bill acknowledges that gig and contract workers face instability around healthcare, retirement, and other benefits, the proposed Portable Benefit Account model does not meaningfully alleviate those burdens.

Under this bill, participation and contributions are entirely voluntary, with no requirement that hiring parties contribute to worker benefits in any meaningful or proportional way. As a result, workers remain responsible for funding their own healthcare, retirement, and income protection, leaving the underlying precarity of contract work unchanged.

More concerning, the bill explicitly provides that contributions to a portable benefit account may not be used as evidence in determining a worker’s employment classification. This provision protects hiring parties from misclassification challenges and weakens existing labor protections, effectively insulating corporations from responsibility while offering workers little more than a new financial account.

Portable benefits can be part of a serious labor reform only when they include enforceable employer obligations and preserve workers’ rights to proper classification. House Bill 4009 does neither. For these reasons, I urge the House to vote no on this bill as written unless it is substantially revised to prioritize worker protections and corporate accountability.

Delegates, I am imploring you not to pass this bill. For decades West Virginians have been sold to the highest bidder. Given data centers unecessary tax breaks when West Virginians struggle with basic needs such as food, housing, and healthcare is deplorable. Data centers will decrease our water quality, increase our power bills, and WILL NOT create long term jobs. If we are to attract industry to WV via tax breaks it mustn’t be industry that does not create jobs, while creating pollution, expense, and an eye sore on our beautiful state.

1. I write in opposition to this bill.
2. West Virginia has a long and unfortunate history of extraction by outside entities that results in the detriment of our people and environment.
3. To preserve our culture, we must preserve our environment. Data centers consume natural resources, offering nothing of value to WV's people. We struggle to provide clean water to our own people and this would steal it from them to cool computers.
4. Montani semper libri, yet we are continually sold and traded to those who see us as expendable.
5. The Earth groans with us (Romans) as we wait for redemption. Those of the Christian faith are called to live as if the Kingdom is now and that all of Creation is our sibling. We have abused and misused this charge we were given and the damage we have inflicted is reflected in our own bodies and minds.
6. The AI bubble will not last forever and we will be left with nothing but mess, much like an abandoned well or unclaimed spoil pile.
7. I urge you for the sake of all West Virginians, present and future, to reject this betrayal of WV. West Virginians deserve so much better.
8. Thank you.

I oppose House Bill 4013 as written.

West Virginia does need economic development. What we do not need are open-ended tax incentives that primarily benefit capital-intensive projects with minimal long-term benefit to working families and local communities.

This bill creates a broad, discretionary tax credit that heavily rewards equipment purchases and construction costs, not sustained job creation. That matters, because projects like data centers—explicitly included in this bill—are well known to generate very few permanent jobs relative to the size of the public subsidy they receive. Independent economic studies consistently show that data centers often employ dozens, not hundreds, of full-time workers once construction ends, despite consuming massive amounts of electricity and infrastructure capacity.

HB 4013 allows tax credits to be calculated largely on non-manufacturing equipment and construction spending, even when permanent job creation is minimal. That is a poor return on investment for taxpayers.

The bill also allows these credits to offset multiple state taxes, including—remarkably—up to 20 percent of employee withholding taxes. That means the state can end up subsidizing a company using money that would otherwise support schools, roads, emergency services, and healthcare. That is not economic development; it is cost-shifting.

Transparency is another major concern. Information shared between the Tax Department, Workforce West Virginia, and the administering authority is explicitly exempt from the Freedom of Information Act. If taxpayer dollars are being used to subsidize private corporations, the public has a right to see the terms, the performance, and the outcomes. Sunlight is not optional when public money is involved.

The bill places “sole and exclusive jurisdiction” in the hands of the Department of Commerce to decide who qualifies, how much they receive, and whether clawbacks are enforced. That level of discretion, combined with limited public oversight, is exactly how incentive programs drift from economic policy into political favoritism.

Finally, this bill includes no enforceable community benefit requirements. There are no guarantees for:

• local hiring or apprenticeships,

• labor standards or neutrality,

• protections against layoffs after credits are used,

• limits on noise, infrastructure strain, or quality-of-life impacts,

• or binding assurances that utility upgrade costs will not be passed on to ratepayers.

West Virginians have seen this movie before. We are promised jobs and prosperity, and what we get instead are tax breaks, higher infrastructure costs, and communities left with the consequences.

I support real economic development—projects that create good-paying jobs, respect workers, strengthen local communities, and deliver a measurable public return on public investment. HB 4013 does not meet that standard.

If the Legislature wants to attract investment, it should do so on West Virginia’s terms: with transparency, strict job-creation requirements, automatic clawbacks, and clear protections for taxpayers and communities.

Until those standards are written into law, this bill should not advance.

Good morning,

• Preserve strong local zoning and land-use authority
• Require full, independent infrastructure and environmental impact studies
• Protect utility ratepayers and public water resources
• Ensure transparency and meaningful public participation

• Clear, measurable job creation benchmarks tied to real wages;
• Sunset provisions so credits expire if goals aren’t met;
• Strong accountability and clawback provisions so companies must repay credit if performance promises aren’t delivered - including enforcement
• Transparency requirements to ensure public reporting on outcomes.

House Bill 4060 addresses a narrow and largely symbolic issue while failing to engage with any of the substantive economic challenges facing West Virginia residents or small businesses.

Cashless retail is not a demonstrated, widespread problem in this state, particularly outside of a small number of urban or chain establishments. The bill provides no data showing that West Virginians are being meaningfully excluded from commerce due to an inability to pay with cash, nor does it identify essential goods or services where such exclusion is occurring.

Additionally, the bill contains minimal enforcement mechanisms and grants broad exemption authority to the Treasurer’s Office, which significantly undermines its practical effect. A modest civil fine and discretionary exemptions suggest that the bill is not intended to produce consistent or enforceable outcomes.

While concerns about financial inclusion, privacy, and access to payment systems are legitimate, this legislation does not meaningfully address those concerns. It does not improve access to banking, reduce payment processing fees, assist small businesses with compliance costs, or protect workers or consumers in any substantive way.

For these reasons, HB 4060 appears to be a symbolic measure rather than a serious policy response to a real economic problem, and it should not be prioritized over legislation that addresses wages, affordability, healthcare, infrastructure, or access to essential services in West Virginia.

I agree because it causes a unnecessary financial burden to people that own dogs especially elderly dogs. Also dogs being took away because someone cant pay is hard. With this bill it could remove the upsetting feelings and potential loss of their pet.

1. Replace the full exemption with a refundable, income-tested child/family credit that applies regardless of marital status (with a clear phaseout by income).
2. If the Legislature wants to help larger households, base it on number of dependents + income/poverty level, not on whether the taxpayer files as “married.”
3. Require a public fiscal note showing who benefits by income bracket and county, and what services may be reduced to offset lost revenue.

Encouraging larger families aligns with West Virginia's commitment to promoting the institution of the family and ensuring a nurturing environment for children. Providing tax relief to families with four or more children reflects the state's recognition of the vital contributions these families make to the community.

• Bills mandating or privileging Christian religious texts in public schools
• Bills requiring Christian religious displays in classrooms
• Official recognition and observance proposals centered on Christian doctrine

• It conditions compensation on surplus revenue while many state workers continue to struggle with rising housing, food, healthcare, and utility costs.
• It excludes non-state workers — including taxpayers funding state operations — from relief during the same surplus conditions.
• It provides no mechanism to ensure the bonus addresses workforce retention, wage compression, or cost-of-living disparities.

• Standards and Expertise: Certified fire investigators must meet rigorous national standards (such as NFPA 1033) and maintain ongoing education to accurately determine fire origins and causes.
• Economic Fairness: Classifying these specialists as professionals ensures their services are treated equitably under the tax code, similar to other highly regulated fields like engineering or law.
• Public Safety: Professional recognition reinforces the importance of high-quality investigations, which are critical for both criminal justice and the improvement of fire safety codes.

• prior income tax cuts,
• declining or uncertain federal funding,
• and agency directives to cut budgets without replacement funds,

1. A transparent fiscal impact statement,
2. Identification of which services will be reduced or eliminated,
3. Assurance that essential agencies will not absorb disproportionate harm.

Removing this tax would provide immediate relief, promote public health, and reflect basic fairness. I urge you to support this exemption.

I am a West Virginia constituent in Beckley, Raleigh County, and I oppose HB 4442.

West Virginia is already struggling to keep experienced people working for the state. We should strengthen retention and trust, not create new fault lines within the workforce.

This bill draws a hard line at $75,000 and treats state employees differently based on that number. It offers certain Tier II employees who retire under $75,000 access to benefits such as the use of accrued sick/annual leave for retirement credit and the Rule of 80.

But it also does something that alarms me: it exempts any employee earning $75,000 or more from classified civil service coverage, effective July 1, 2026.

That is a major change in protections and accountability. Classified coverage is part of what keeps state service stable, fair, and less vulnerable to favoritism and political churn. Cutting people out of that system because they earn over an arbitrary threshold is disrespectful, and it sends a clear message that performance and experience do not earn security; they earn fewer protections.

I am also concerned about clarity. The bill repeatedly hinges on the phrase “retire making less than $75,000,” and the stakes are high if that language is interpreted differently across agencies or job classifications.

When a bill changes benefits and civil service status, the language needs to be unmistakable and consistently applied.

If lawmakers want to improve Tier II retirement fairness, do that directly. Do not pair it with a provision that weakens civil service protections and risks driving more skilled employees away. Please vote no on HB 4442.

This is America. This is WV. It's not the job of the government to limit our exchange of precious metals.

I agree with this bill for a lot of reasons. Teachers go through several trainings a year and years of schooling so they can teach and help shape small minds. State police go through years of training, exercises, tests, and go through psychological stress everyday to protect the state. They both do so much for the state. However, they do not get paid enough for the work they really do. Their pay needs to be increased to properly reflect their work.

1. fully transparent, audited, and legally compliant spending across public safety programs;
2. fully funded flood prevention/recovery resources and critical infrastructure; and
3. broad taxpayer relief and essential services — before expanding retirement incentives through HB 4803.

• A municipality may create a stabilization fund by majority vote of the governing body.
• The fund may receive appropriations, gifts, grants, and any other funds made available, including non-state funds.
• The statute does not require public justification, itemized reporting, or independent audit triggers tied to fund size or use. (See W. Va. Code § 8-13A-3.)

• W. Va. Code § 6-9A-1 et seq. (Open Governmental Proceedings Act) to require enhanced disclosure of stabilization fund decisions;
• W. Va. Code § 12-1-1 et seq. to impose fiscal reporting thresholds;
• Any provision requiring public accounting of grant or federal funds once deposited into a stabilization fund.

• HB 4833 removes a fiscal cap;
• Adds no new accountability standards;
• Operates within a system where ethics oversight does not cover incompetence or mismanagement absent a defined ethics violation.

• Annual public reporting of stabilization fund balances and sources;
• Disclosure of grant or federal funds deposited;
• A documented public finding of necessity for balances exceeding a defined percentage of the general fund.

• Personal property taxation by counties (WV Code §11-6-1 et seq.);
• Annual vehicle registration fees (WV Code §17A-3-2);
• Mandatory insurance requirements (WV Code §17D-2A-3);
• State inspection/NVI requirements (WV Code §17C-16-1);
• Sales and use taxes at purchase (WV Code §11-15-3).

• a flat rate of $0.205 per gallon, plus
• a variable component tied to wholesale price (with minimums/limits).  

• maintain roads/bridges,
• plow and treat roads during winter,
• repair slides/flood damage,
• keep equipment running,
• and meet debt and matching obligations.

• reduce road maintenance operations,
• limit equipment purchase/maintenance,
• reduce contracted work (hurting WV’s economy),
• create harsh-winter funding tradeoffs (snow/ice operations consuming resources and leaving insufficient repair funds later),
• threaten debt service,
• and threaten the ability to fully match the federal highway program.  

• general revenue (competing with schools, public health, and other needs),
• higher registration/DMV fees, or
• local taxes/bonds (hardest on rural counties).

1. a verified fiscal note for this specific repeal, and
2. a replacement revenue plan that maintains State Road Fund stability and preserves federal match capacity—without regressive cost-shifting to counties and working families.

I am writing not as a political voice, but as a parent who is deeply concerned about what House Bill 4961 would mean for my family and my children.

I grew up without financial stability. I worked hard, put myself through school, and built a professional career so my children could have more opportunity than I did. My husband and I both work. We are not wealthy. We carry a mortgage, tuition payments, and the same rising costs every West Virginia family is facing. The Hope Scholarship is not a luxury for us — it is what makes our children’s school possible.

An income cap of $150,000 may sound high on paper, but in real life it does not make a family financially comfortable. It creates a harsh line where families just over the limit lose all support, even though their day-to-day reality looks nearly identical to those just under it. We would not suddenly have extra money for tuition. We would simply lose the support that makes this education possible.

What hurts most is the message this sends. Parents like me worked hard to climb out of poverty and build stability, only to be told that doing better means losing access to opportunity for our children. That feels less like fairness and more like a penalty for upward mobility.

Our children are thriving in their school. They feel safe, supported, and excited to learn. Losing the Hope Scholarship would not mean we suddenly have the means to cover tuition — it would mean stress, uncertainty, and potentially removing them from the environment where they are flourishing.

This bill does not just change numbers on a page. It affects real children, real families, and real futures. Please do not turn the Hope Scholarship into a program that pushes working middle-income families out of educational choice. I respectfully ask you to oppose HB 4961 or reconsider the hard income cap.

• A fiscal impact analysis showing long-term healthcare savings
• Evidence that gym membership deductions reduce state healthcare costs
• Safeguards to prevent revenue loss during an already constrained state budget

• Broad, income-neutral health credits
• Investments in community recreation infrastructure
• Expanded access to preventive healthcare and rural wellness programs

• Continuous service
• Local institutional knowledge
• Department-specific experience

• Article III, §10 of the West Virginia Constitution (Equal Protection and Due Process)
• Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (Equal Protection Clause)

• W. Va. Code §7-1-1 (County commissions as governing bodies)
• W. Va. Code §7-7-7 (County compensation authority)

• Higher salary placement
• Increased overtime eligibility
• Accelerated retirement qualification

• Artificial inflation of service credit
• Accelerated vesting
• Increased unfunded pension liabilities

• Disciplinary records
• Performance evaluations
• Internal investigations

• Public safety outcomes
• Emergency response capacity
• Community policing effectiveness

• Article III, §10 of the West Virginia Constitution
• Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

• Clinically relevant dose-response studies are discouraged or rendered nonviable;
• Research protocols cannot reflect real-world medical use;
• Institutional review boards and universities are deterred from participation due to compliance and liability concerns.

• the Medical Cannabis Program has reached functional maturity;
• regulatory obstacles have been resolved;
• patient access, provider participation, and research infrastructure are operational at scale.