Public Comments

I strongly oppose HB 4600.

This bill does not strengthen election integrity. It weakens democracy by discarding legally cast ballots for reasons entirely outside the voter’s control.

HB 4600 would require absentee ballots to be received by 8:00 p.m. on Election Day, regardless of whether the voter mailed the ballot on time. In a rural state like West Virginia—where mail service can be slow, unpredictable, and dependent on geography—this is not a neutral administrative change. It is a deliberate barrier to participation.

West Virginians who follow the rules should not lose their vote because of a mail delay they did not cause.

This bill disproportionately harms rural voters, elderly voters, voters with disabilities, and West Virginians serving in uniform or living overseas. These citizens rely on absentee voting not for convenience, but out of necessity. HB 4600 tells them their vote matters less if it arrives a day late, even when it was mailed on time.

That is unacceptable.

There is no evidence of widespread absentee ballot fraud in West Virginia that justifies this change. None. HB 4600 addresses a problem that does not exist, while creating a very real problem for lawful voters. That is not election integrity; it is voter suppression by bureaucratic deadline.

Our Constitution protects the right to vote. The role of government is to count valid ballots, not invent new ways to throw them out. A ballot postmarked by Election Day is a lawful expression of the voter’s will and should be counted. Period.

If the Legislature truly wanted to strengthen confidence in elections, it would focus on transparency, adequate election funding, reliable mail service, and clear chain-of-custody rules—not arbitrary cutoffs that silence voters after they have done everything right.

HB 4600 moves West Virginia in the wrong direction. It makes participation harder, not easier. It undermines trust rather than building it.

I urge the Legislature to reject this bill and stand up for the fundamental right to vote—for all West Virginians, in every county.

• lawful under federal or state law, or
• constitutional under court rulings.

• property transactions,
• financial account actions, and
• temporary relocation of children.

• creating state criminal penalties,
• restricting family and custody decisions, and
• extending post-deployment enforcement periods.

• no custody order is violated, and
• no finding of harm or abandonment exists.

• impose criminal penalties, or
• enforce family restrictions when the underlying deployment is unlawful or unconstitutional.

• incidents are not documented,
• footage is denied,
• officers are not identifiable, results in no oversight and no remedy for the public.

• failure to enforce existing harassment and stalking laws,
• refusal to document incidents,
• denial of public records,
• or lack of officer identification.

• proper documentation,
• public access to records,
• identifiable officers,
• and enforcement of existing harassment and stalking laws,

• evidence-based standards of care
• professional duty to treat medically indicated conditions
• non-discrimination in access to healthcare

• allows refusal of care based on ideology, and
• simultaneously limits a patient’s ability to seek legal remedy

• immigration-status inquiries during routine policing,
• data sharing for immigration enforcement purposes,
• or the use of minor law enforcement encounters as “impact” metrics,

• Please support House bill 4715. Without going into the details of explaining the bill, my primary goal is to keep my children in West Virginia. My son is a PA. My daughter-in-law is a doctor of medicine, both practicing in West Virginia.  We are seeing more opportunities opening up in other states, eliminating  the administrative burdens, and want the same opportunity here in the mountain state.   Amending the bill to mandate minimum number of  hours of patient care before eliminating the administrative burden of signing a contract with an Md is recommended and acceptable. I see a nurse practitioner as my primary care and a physician assistant for my specialty doctors and know first hand of their abilities. I would like the ability to choose who I see for medical visits and alleviate the shortage of care providers in southern West Virginia where I live. This bill answers those needs.  Many thanks to the sponsors of this much needed legislation. Respectfully

1. Undefined funding source / amount

• The bill requires the “foundation allowance for instructional funding” to be distributed directly and equally to teachers, but it does not define which line-items or how much money qualifies as “instructional funding,” nor how the amount per teacher is calculated.  
• Without definitions, this could cause inconsistent implementation across counties and budget confusion.

2. “Direct and equal” distribution may not match classroom needs

• HB 4860 mandates funding be equal to teachers rather than based on student enrollment, grade level, subject area (e.g., CTE/labs), special education needs, or classroom size.  
• Equal distribution can be simple, but it can also misalign with real cost differences between classrooms.

3. Procurement controls are reduced

• The bill explicitly exempts purchases from district vendor registration and quote requirements.  
• Those controls exist to prevent waste, favoritism, and price-gouging. Removing them increases risk and makes it harder to ensure best value for taxpayers.

4. Account ownership / liability is unclear

• The account is held in the teacher’s name for “exclusive use,” funded by state deposits, and accessed by P-card.  
• The bill does not address what happens when a teacher transfers, resigns, is terminated, or retires (e.g., who controls remaining funds, how funds are recovered, and who is liable for disputed charges).

5. Online publication is transparency—but could create privacy/safety issues

• Publishing purchases online may improve transparency, but HB 4860 does not specify what details must be posted (vendor name, item description, campus/teacher identifier, redactions).  
• If postings are tied to individual teachers, it could expose staff to harassment or targeted complaints while they are trying to supply classrooms.

6. Training is required, but enforcement/auditing is not

• The bill requires the State Auditor to provide training, but it does not set audit intervals, penalties, dispute processes, or enforcement mechanisms for misuse.  

• Define “foundation allowance for instructional funding” and specify the appropriation/budget mechanism.
• Restore basic procurement safeguards (e.g., allow exemptions only up to a dollar threshold; require receipts/itemization; restrict certain merchant categories).
• Add clear rules for allowable purchases, returns, lost/stolen cards, fraud reporting, and what happens to funds when employment ends.
• Require standardized transparency postings with redaction rules and no personally identifying details beyond what is necessary.

1. State Policy Focuses on Corporate Infrastructure Rather Than Community Needs The bill declares data centers to be “critical national infrastructure” and directs the Department of Economic Development to certify and accommodate these facilities. The bill does not include parallel findings or programs addressing the needs of residents, small businesses, local infrastructure, or essential public services such as water, wastewater, housing, healthcare, or workforce stability.
2. Absence of Community Benefit or Local Impact Requirements HB 4854 does not require community benefit agreements, local hiring commitments, wage standards, infrastructure mitigation, or contributions to local public services. Counties and municipalities may still bear increased costs related to utilities, roads, emergency services, and environmental oversight without any statutory mechanism to offset those impacts.
3. Indirect Costs Remain With Ratepayers and Taxpayers While the bill prohibits direct subsidies, it does not address indirect public costs associated with high-impact data centers, including increased demand on electric generation and transmission, water resources, wastewater treatment capacity, and environmental monitoring. These costs are likely to be absorbed by residents and ratepayers rather than the private operators benefiting from the infrastructure.
4. Reduced Transparency Through Confidentiality Provisions The bill exempts data center business information from disclosure under the West Virginia Freedom of Information Act. This limits public oversight of facilities that are explicitly designated as high-impact and critical infrastructure, even though their operations may significantly affect surrounding communities and public resources.
5. Unequal Treatment Compared to Small Businesses and Local Enterprises Small businesses and local employers do not receive expedited certification, confidentiality protections, or legislative recognition as critical infrastructure. HB 4854 establishes a regulatory and policy framework tailored specifically to large corporate entities without comparable consideration for locally owned businesses that employ West Virginians and contribute to community stability.
6. No Requirement to Align With Environmental or Infrastructure Capacity The bill does not require certification decisions to consider existing water quality issues, wastewater system capacity, environmental contamination, or cumulative infrastructure strain. This is particularly concerning in a state already facing documented challenges with water systems, sewage treatment, and environmental compliance.

• Lawfully present international students,
• Individuals lawfully present under federal Compacts of Free Association,
• Indigenous persons with federally recognized cross-border rights,
• Asylum seekers and parolees awaiting federal adjudication,
• Tourists and visitors from countries subject to heightened scrutiny.

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.

My name is Jason Snead, Executive Director of Honest Elections Project Action, a nonprofit entity dedicated to defending the right of every American to vote in free and honest elections.

HB 4600 is a straightforward and necessary update to this state’s election laws. It shifts West Virginia away from the current postmark standard for advance voting ballots to an unambiguous rule that every ballot must be received by the close of polls on Election Day to count.

Adopting this legislation will promote integrity and public confidence in elections. By requiring that advance mail ballots be received by the close of polls, HB 4600 will speed vote tabulation and ensure the delivery of timely and accurate results. Shifting to an objective Election Day receipt standard also avoids messy post-election litigation. In states with postmark standards, these lawsuits often revolve around efforts to count late ballots that arrive without a postmark, and thus no guarantee they were not fraudulently cast after the election. Few situations do as much to sap public trust as prolonged vote counting or litigation aimed at affecting election results by counting otherwise illegal votes. This bill’s provisions make both situations less likely.

Moreover, passing HB 4600 would align West Virginia law with the policy currently in effect in the majority of states. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, over 30 states require ballots to be received on or before Election Day. This includes ‘blue’ states like Delaware and ‘red’ states like Florida. Of West Virginia’s neighboring states, Ohio and Kentucky all require ballots be received by Election Day. Furthermore, polling shows the public strongly favors these laws. In fact, polling conducted by the Honest Elections Project shows that 89% of Americans believe that ballots should be received by Election Day.

By clearly defining the deadline to receive a mail-in ballot, HB 4600 makes it easier for voters to plan ahead. Ensuring that a mail ballot is received by Election Day is a simple requirement to meet, and as I mentioned previously, is a requirement that is overwhelmingly embraced by the voting public.

This year alone, lawmakers in Kansas, North Dakota, Ohio, and Utah have all acted to set their states’ mail ballot deadlines at Election Day. I urge you join these states and align West Virginia with the clear national standard that all ballots should be received by Election Day.

• Special education
• Art teacher
• Conservation biology
• Health and human services
• History teacher
• Developmental psychology (children)
• Social work
• Elementary education
• Child development
• Educational psychology
• Middle school education
• Early childhood education 
• high school education

This bill would be an extremely positive change for the public school system.

1. Please support Bill 4834 which will sanction wrestling for girls.

I strongly urge legislators to reconsider a rigid 180-day student calendar and instead support a more flexible model, such as 170 instructional days for students while maintaining 200-day teacher contracts.

Research does not show a meaningful academic difference between 180 days and slightly shorter calendars unless the added time is used for high-quality instruction. National studies and federal reviews consistently find that simply adding days produces only modest gains at best, while the quality of instruction, targeted intervention, and teacher preparation time matter far more. Several states already operate below 180 days or use hours-based requirements with no loss of accountability.

Reducing the student calendar to 170 days or focus on hours-based instruction would not reduce teacher pay or contracts, but it would create intentional time for professional development, data-driven instruction, parent communication, and-critically-IEP meetings and special education compliance. Currently, these legally required responsibilities are often completed by teachers during planning periods, after school, or on personal time. A 170-day student calendar would allow districts to meet federal and state mandates without asking teachers to sacrifice instructional planning time that directly benefits students.

There is also a fiscal benefit. While most education costs are fixed, districts can realize modest but real savings in transportation, food service, and building operations when student days are reduced-without cutting salaries. Those savings can and should be reinvested into tutoring, attendance supports, and teacher retention.

West Virginia does not need more seat-time mandates. We need smarter use of time. A flexible calendar that protects 200-day teacher contracts while reducing student days to 170 is a practical, research-supported solution that prioritizes instructional quality, compliance, and educator sustainability.

This bill should not be passed because teachers, although less likely than students to commit school shootings, are still capable. Teachers and staff, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office from 2009 to 2019, account for 4% of school shootings, totaling to 14 school shootings committed by teachers. Taken into consideration, as well, how easy would it be for students to find and take a teacher’s gun? Too many risks to consider before passing this bill, therefore I believe this bill should be denied.

I am a West Virginia public school teacher with 20 years of experience across multiple grade levels, from elementary education to high school Career and Technical Education. I fully support accountability and high-quality instruction, but the current 180-day mandate prioritizes seat time over meaningful learning—particularly in West Virginia, where winter weather regularly disrupts the school calendar. When schools are forced to extend into June to “make up” days, the result is often supervision rather than instruction, which raises real concerns about how we define educational success for our students.

State testing schedules and graduation timelines in West Virginia do not move. Elementary and middle school testing occurs in early May, with SAT and CTE NOCTI testing scheduled in that same general window. High school seniors graduate by the end of May. Teachers continue working until the final contracted day, but once testing and graduation are complete, the system has already determined when meaningful academic instruction ends. Extending the school calendar beyond that point does not improve outcomes and instead creates concerns about student engagement, attendance, and instructional effectiveness.

Reducing the mandate to 160 days would allow West Virginia schools the flexibility to focus on quality over quantity while still holding educators accountable for student learning. West Virginia teachers have consistently shown they can adapt, prioritize standards, and deliver results even when weather-related disruptions occur. This proposal reflects the realities faced by our students, families, and educators and places meaningful learning—not optics—at the center of policy decisions. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss these concerns further with anyone, from the perspective of someone who has truly seen education at every level and understands how these decisions impact West Virginia classrooms.

I respectfully submit this comment in opposition to House Bill 4090.

While I recognize the intent to expand support services for students and families, HB 4090 raises significant constitutional, legal, and practical concerns when applied in a public school setting.

Public schools are state actors and must operate within the constraints of the First Amendment. Authorizing county boards of education to employ or accept volunteer chaplains (an inherently religious role) creates a substantial risk of violating the Establishment Clause by appearing to endorse religion or religious practice. This risk is heightened in schools, where students are minors and particularly vulnerable to perceived pressure or coercion from authority figures.

Even if participation is described as voluntary, courts have repeatedly held that subtle or indirect coercion in schools is constitutionally impermissible. A board-sanctioned chaplain operating within a school building may reasonably be perceived by students and families as representing the school’s approval of religion, or of particular religious beliefs, which public schools must avoid.

Additionally, the bill explicitly exempts chaplains from state certification and licensure requirements. This lack of standardized training and oversight raises serious concerns regarding religious neutrality, student rights, trauma-informed practices, and appropriate boundaries. Removing professional credentialing does not reduce risk, it increases it, both constitutionally and operationally.

The bill also provides no clear safeguards to ensure religious neutrality, denominational balance, or equal access for students who hold minority religious beliefs or no religious beliefs at all. Government entities may not favor one religion over another, nor religion over non-religion, and HB 4090 provides insufficient guardrails to prevent this outcome.

Finally, while the bill attempts to limit civil liability for chaplains, statutory immunity does not protect school districts from federal constitutional claims, litigation costs, or potential loss of federal funding. This legislation could place county boards in an untenable position, exposing them to legal challenges while offering little clarity on implementation or compliance.

West Virginia’s schools face urgent challenges related to academic outcomes, mental health, staffing shortages, and school safety. Any expansion of student support services should be clearly secular, professionally regulated, and constitutionally sound.

For these reasons, I urge the Legislature to reject House Bill 4090 or substantially revise it to ensure compliance with constitutional requirements and to protect students, families, and school districts.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide public comment.

Mariah Richards

I recognize that West Virginia’s public education system faces serious challenges related to enrollment decline, funding pressures, and regional capacity. Exploring structural changes is reasonable, and a study on school district unification is not inherently misguided.

However, HB 4037 goes too far by mandating consolidation before the study is completed. While the bill directs the State Board of Education to evaluate unification options, it simultaneously locks the state into reducing 55 districts to no more than 27 by July 1, 2029, regardless of what that analysis may show. This places the conclusion ahead of the evidence.

Large scale consolidation in a rural, geographically complex state carries significant risks. Past regionalization efforts (i.e. RESAs) have shown that consolidation does not automatically result in cost savings, improved services, or better outcomes. Yet this bill lacks critical detail regarding governance, fiscal accountability, staffing impacts, community representation, and operational feasibility.

If consolidation is to be considered, it should be data driven, incremental, and regionally flexible, with clear success metrics and meaningful stakeholder input. I urge the Legislature to remove or delay the mandatory consolidation deadline and allow the study process to genuinely guide future action.

Reform of this magnitude demands caution, transparency, and evidence and not predetermined outcomes.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Mariah Richards

Even though the bill sounds great in theory, starting late means that students would get less days for breaks throughout the year to reach the 180 day requirement.

Whereas there is more food, fuel, fiber, and medicine in the Cannabis plant than any other plant on Earth, this fact renders it the most beneficial plant on Earth. Find a more beneficial plant.

Whereas we are Free Americans with the Manifest Destiny to work well within the cycles of nature for our prosperity.

Whereas this Nation’s Cannabis Prohibition has proven itself to defy the very essence of Freedom and Liberty of our American Revolution and the Natural Order.

Whereas West Virginia’s legalized Hemp and Medical Cannabis Laws and Rules have proven to be overbearing, cost prohibitive, draconian, and useless.

Whereas West Virginia’s citizens are actively purchasing Recreational Cannabis products in neighboring States, paying those States taxes whose monies, unlike West Virginia, legally utilize those monies for a host of State Programs.

It is with all due respect that I demand Passage of this Bill. While these modest improvements fall short of the Complete Elimination of the Cannabis Prohibition, it is at least offering to save West Virginia untold sums of money from enforcement and will help lead to utilizing this State’s number one cash crop as a proven profitable enterprise. This will in turn lead to spin off industries and a variety of multipliers throughout out State's economy. I also demand the release of all Incarcerated Cannabis Convicts in West Virginia as it makes no sense to imprison citizens for their use of the Most Beneficial Plant on Earth. MAKE IT SO,

The ten commandments are a religous idea. A religous idea should not be affiliated with public schools. Religion should be kept separate. Students who do not believe should not have to believe they have to follow the commandments.

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.