Public Comments

Good morning,

• Stone v. Graham (1980): The Supreme Court specifically struck down a law requiring the Ten Commandments in classrooms, holding it was an inherently religious, not educational, action.
• McCreary County v. ACLU (2005): Affirmed that government displays of the Ten Commandments are unconstitutional when they have a religious purpose.
• Coercion Doctrine: Argue that, because public school attendance is mandatory, displaying the Ten Commandments creates a captive audience and coerces religious expression upon students. 

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.

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.

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.

I am submitting these comments in my capacity as a journalist who has spent nearly 20 years covering courts, law enforcement, and crimes involving sexual violence and children in West Virginia.

The intent behind §61-8B-19 — protecting the identities of victims of sex crimes — is valid and necessary. No responsible journalist disputes that goal. However, in practice, the statute has produced unintended consequences that undermine transparency, consistency, and public safety.

By sealing arrest-stage court records for a wide range of serious offenses, the statute restricts access to documents that have historically been public, including criminal complaints and warrants. These records do not exist to satisfy curiosity; they exist to ensure accountability, public awareness, and trust in the justice system.

The result has been a significant public safety gap. In many cases, the public does not learn that a person has been accused of a serious sex crime until weeks or months later, often when the case reaches circuit court. By that point, opportunities for community awareness, institutional safeguards, and additional victim reporting may already have passed.

The statute has also created widespread inconsistency in magistrate courts across the state. Some magistrates release records with redactions. Others refuse to release them at all. Magistrates and magistrate court clerks frequently express uncertainty about what the law permits. As a result, access to public records varies depending on geography rather than law, which erodes confidence in the system.

Importantly, repeal of §61-8B-19 does not require the disclosure of victim identities. Victims can and should be protected through targeted redaction, the use of initials, and removal of identifying details — practices already used successfully by many courts and police officers tasked with writing these documents.

Sealing entire records is not the only method of victim protection, and it is not the most precise one. A more narrowly tailored approach would protect victims while preserving the public’s right to know when serious criminal charges have been filed.

House Bill 4468 restores balance. It supports victim protection, promotes consistent court practices, and reinforces the long-standing principle of open courts. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the passage of House Bill 4468.

• Logging operations (Logging has the highest occupational fatality rate in the nation! 10x the national average.)
• Excavation sites and operations involving explosives
• Industrial equipment causing amputations (power saws, metal presses, meat processing, etc.)
• Radioactive materials exposure

House Bill 4433 should not become law.

Let me be clear at the outset. Human trafficking is real. It is evil. It destroys lives. Those who traffic human beings deserve aggressive prosecution, long prison sentences, and the full force of the law. Nothing in opposing this bill weakens that commitment. In fact, this bill weakens it itself.

HB 4433 does not strengthen our fight against human trafficking. It politicizes it.

At its core, this bill introduces a dangerous and unethical idea into West Virginia law: that a victim’s humanity and right to justice depends on their immigration status. The provision denying restitution to trafficking victims labeled as “illegal aliens” is not only morally wrong, it is counterproductive and cruel. No human being is illegal. No victim of exploitation becomes less worthy of justice because of paperwork or status.

This bill tells traffickers something dangerous: exploit undocumented people, because the law will deny those victims restitution and discourage them from speaking up. That is not justice. That is an incentive structure that benefits criminals.

From a legal standpoint, this legislation is largely redundant. Human trafficking, human smuggling, forced labor, and sexual exploitation are already crimes under comprehensive federal law. Immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility. West Virginia does not govern deportation, lawful presence, or immigration status. Pretending otherwise is not governing. It is political theater.

When state legislators attempt to graft federal immigration enforcement onto state criminal law, they invite constitutional challenges, preemption conflicts, and uneven enforcement. Worse, they distract law enforcement from doing what actually stops trafficking: identifying victims, gaining cooperation, dismantling networks, and prosecuting perpetrators.

Ethically, this bill fails a basic test of justice. Punishment should fall on the guilty, not on the exploited. A legal system that denies restitution to a trafficking victim because of immigration status is not upholding the rule of law. It is abandoning moral responsibility. It confuses border politics with human suffering, and in doing so, it cheapens both.

There is a difference between being tough and being just. This bill chooses toughness as a performance while sacrificing justice in practice. It adds penalties without adding protection. It expands forfeiture without expanding victim services. It uses the language of public safety while undermining the very cooperation law enforcement needs to keep people safe.

West Virginia can and should be uncompromising in prosecuting traffickers. We can protect children. We can punish exploitation. But we must not do so by denying the humanity of victims or turning our criminal code into a vehicle for fear-based politics.

HB 4433 does not make West Virginia safer. It makes justice conditional.

For those reasons, this bill should not become law.

• I respectfully oppose any proposal to designate a Memorial Day or official state recognition for Charlie Kirk in West Virginia.

  Memorial days and state honors should be reserved for individuals or events that unite our communities and reflect broadly shared values of service, sacrifice, and respect for all West Virginians. Charlie Kirk is a highly partisan national political figure whose work and public statements have been deeply divisive and controversial. Granting an official day of recognition risks politicizing state honors and alienating many residents who do not share or support his views.

  West Virginia has countless veterans, first responders, educators, miners, community leaders, and public servants whose contributions directly benefit our state and whose service brings people together rather than deepening political divisions. Our limited capacity for official recognition should prioritize those who have demonstrated clear, positive, and unifying impact on the people of West Virginia.

  For these reasons, I urge lawmakers to reject this proposal and keep state-recognized memorials and honors focused on individuals and causes that genuinely reflect the shared values and interests of all West Virginians.