Public Comments

As President of the West Virginia Beekeepers Association, I strongly support SB 927 as written, without amendments. Beekeeping in West Virginia has long operated under science-based oversight through the West Virginia Department of Agriculture. This statewide framework ensures consistent regulation, coordinated disease management, and responsible hive stewardship. Uniform standards protect not only beekeepers and farmers, but also our communities. Clear, statewide regulation helps prevent unmanaged colonies, reduces disease risk, and ensures bees are kept responsibly in a way that supports both agriculture and the public. SB 927 strengthens that framework and should be passed without alteration.

Please consider the families that are served with funds that flow through the state office. Children and families will be affected by these cuts. This is not the way to solve problems please continue to invest money  in West Virginia's future and that future is the children of this state.

I support SB 927 without amendments. I was a cookie vendor at the WV Winter Blues Farmers Market and there were many bee vendors that could could use this type of Legislation. With the sprawling landscape that is West Virginia, Bee Keeping in general is a core monetary way of life for some of these vendors - or they at least benefit monetarily from having their apiary. 🐝

Our childcare team are second parents to our children. They see them more hours of the week than I do! The work so hard to ensure they grow up in a nurturing , educational, a safe environment and I can focus on my role in society during my 9-5 job. I wouldn’t be able to be exceptional veterinarian if I was worried my children weren’t cared for well. I see the  dedication and commitment to helping children such as mine and others grow. They work so hard and sacrifice time with their own families. I so wish they were compensated more as their dedication is beyond value. It is my hope that if compensation is better then retention of staff will improve.        

Family childcare programs are essential small businesses operating on very thin margins. Even the possibility of funding disruptions has immediate and far-reaching consequences. Dedicated educators feel compelled to continue caring for children without timely payment to ensure their safety and well-being. This is not sustainable and places educators’ own financial security at risk. These changes put childcare providers at risk for burnout, loss of income, and in some cases, closure. We NEED fair, sustainable practices that allow us to care for children, ourselves and our families!! Without stable and predictable childcare, many parents—particularly women—may be forced to leave the workforce or reduce hours, impacting family stability and local economies. Funding uncertainty forces families to scramble for backup care, disrupting the consistent, trusting relationships children build with their caregivers.  

I am apposed to SB 137.  It seems we spend a lot of money housing offenders, rather than the many other needs in WV.  We are near the bottom of so many health and education lists.  I don't see how locking more people in cages is going to help our people.  What if we tried focusing on treatment and prevention options for a change.  Locking more and more people up, doesn't seem to be helping us improve very much.

Please support this bill to help EMS in WV

I am strongly opposed to this bill!

March 2, 2026  West Virginia State Capitol   1900 Kanawha Blvd E   Charleston, WV 25305  RE: Statement of Support for HB 5060 – Decentralized Unincorporated Nonprofit Association (DUNA) Act  The Digital Chamber (TDC) submits this letter in support of West Virginia’s House Bill 5060. TDC is the world’s oldest and largest blockchain trade association, representing more than 250 member organizations across the full innovation ecosystem, many of whom have employees and users in West Virginia.  In 2025, the Digital Chamber launched the State Network to advocate for thoughtful and transformative digital asset policies in state and local government.  West Virginia’s existing Uniform Unincorporated Nonprofit Association (UUNA) Act has long served the community, including, church groups, homeowners’ associations, and civic organizations, enabling them to own property, enter contracts, access liability protections, adopt governance rules, pay taxes, and dissolve or merge.  HB 5060, the proposed DUNA Act, (Decentralized Unincorporated Nonprofit Association (DUNA) modernizes this established legal framework and extends these same rights and protections to digital entities operating on blockchain networks. By creating a legal home for decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) in West Virginia, SB 1030 would allow these entities to operate in the state with full legal standing, which would create jobs and strengthen the local economy.  Specifically, HB 5060 would: raise the membership threshold to 100 members to ensure meaningful decentralization of decision-making; permit digital associations to engage in profit-making activities when those activities further their nonprofit purpose; provide liability protections for DUNA members; allow associations to operate entirely or partially on chain; and enable transition to an UUNA status if membership falls below 100 members.   The timing is significant. Federal digital asset market structure legislation is advancing and expected to incentivize hundreds of decentralized organizations to reshore to the U.S. Currently, Wyoming is the only state with a Decentralized Unincorporated Nonprofit Association (DUNA) framework in place. West Virginia has an opportunity to act now. Passing HB 5060 will create a hub for scalable, technology-native enterprises, create new, high paying, technical jobs, strengthen economic competitiveness, and drive long-term investment in the state’s future.  TDC applauds West Virginia’s legislature for its consideration and stands ready to provide any additional information or testimony. We strongly urge the passage of HB 5060 and are committed to supporting West Virginia’s growth as a leader in the digital economy. TDC is proud to serve as a resource to legislators, stakeholders, and the public as this important legislation moves forward. 

West Virginians for Affordable Health Care opposes the Governor's proposal to reduce the state's progressive personal income tax and slash revenues by $250 million annually. The House's budget already cuts Medicaid by nearly $100 million and fails to make much-needed funding improvements to public education, new funding for child care assistance, water infrastructure or other pressing needs. The near %100 million cut to Medicaid is actually closer to $300 million with the loss of matching funds. We urge lawmakers to preserve funding for programs that service children and families and grow our economy.

Forget the formalities. This is a truly disgusting bill. People are struggling everyday to keep roofs over their heads and food on their plates and this what you give the people. Homelessness is not a choice, it’s a decision made by the people in power. They make living harder and harder everyday. So much so that they don’t want to see what they’re doing and are banning them from public eye. That way they don’t have to deal with them. Out of sight, out of mind, right? Maybe if the people in power made bills to lift the lower class up, such as Bernie Sanders, there wouldn’t even be a need for this bill. I could keep going about the amount of debt people are in for basic necessities, paying a livable wage, access to healthcare, billionaires that should pay their share, etc. etc.. I’m sure you all already know this, but choose the “sweep it under the rug” route every time. I hope that you can bring any empathy you may have to the forefront and reconsider this bill along with many others, I’m sure. Thank you and have the day you deserve.

SB 392 provides for a very small tax cut for the average household in West Virginia, all at the cost of many other services that support children and families in West Virginia. It will result in additional cuts to Medicaid on top of the cuts from the Budget Reconciliation bill passed by Congress. These tax cuts will primarily benefit the wealthy. Meanwhile our infrastructure, our public education system, support for child care which businesses need for families to be employed - all will be negatively impacted by this tax cut bill. Invest these dollars in public services that help ALL children, families, and workers thrive in West Virginia.

Please support us as provider so we can continue to provide quality care for our neighbors in WV. I encourage the passing of the Bill 4191 This will help us as providers alot.

please don't take away our money.  as child care provider . I want to keep our money.  and  please don't take away our money. or the program.

As your constituent, I am writing to ask you to vote YES on Com. Sub. for HB 4191. West Virginia is facing a child care crisis that affects families, businesses, and our economy. HB 4191 takes meaningful, practical steps to address it. The bill provides expanded tax credits for employers including small businesses who invest in child care for their employees, whether on-site or through contracts with local child care providers. It modernizes how child care providers are reimbursed through enrollment-based payments in conjunction with attendance verification requirements, giving child care providers the stability they need to keep their doors open and their staff employed. The bill also addresses the harmful “cliff effect” that causes families to lose all child care assistance the moment their income rises slightly, discouraging career advancement for working families. This bill is good for children, good for working parents, good for employers, and good for West Virginia’s economy. I urge you to support it. Thank you for your time and your service to our community.

as a childcare provider in Berkeley County West Virginia for five years now I think it’s crucial that the bill be passed for involvement versus attendance if that bill is not passed and we go back to attendance versus enrollment. I believe that as a childcare provider that provides childcare for three teachers that teachers in Berkeley County, we would no longer be able to hold their spots for their children because they only come a few times a month or on two hour delay delays we can’t keep a spot for them in the summertime and then they’re scrambling to find childcare when school starts back up. We can’t continue to hold spots for children that are out sick with the flu for 5 to 10 days or RSV or Covid for their illnesses vacations, etc. I think enrollment versus attendance is very critical for subside families.

I pulled my child from the school system in order to protect them from bullying and abuse.  I strongly oppose HB 5669.  If child welfare is actually important, overhaul the CPS and school systems.

My name is Bridget Spiddle, and I work for the state policies department at the Marijuana Policy Project. We strongly support HB 5260, which would  improve medical cannabis patients' lives by allowing edible forms of cannabis to be sold in the medical cannabis program.  HB 5260 would permit plain, geometrically shaped lozenges and gelatin forms, allowing patients to achieve more predictable, long-lasting relief of their symptoms. All but one of the other 40 medical cannabis states already allow the sale of edible medical cannabis to patients in their programs.  Patients find edibles to be especially helpful as an alternative to harmful opioids, to ease their chronic pain and nausea. Sergeant Kitzhaber, a US Air Force veteran who has service-related cancer from handling radioactive material during his military service, has experienced this during his battle with cancer has testified before Idaho courts the help access to edibles has had for him during his cancer journey. He explained that when he traveled to states where edibles are legal, the relief he felt replaced many of his harmful medications, including morphine, hydrocodone, and oxycodone.¹ There are similar stories to his across the nation, where veterans and everyday Americans find immense relief through having the option of edible forms of cannabinoids. State medical programs ensure product safety by enacting regulations that include requirements for child-resistant packaging and labeling. HB 5260 includes child-safe guardrails, including banning bright colors, requiring a standardized symbol to warn the product has cannabis, and prohibiting edibles from resembling any commercial candy. Allowing well-regulated, legally produced edibles avoids driving patients to the unregulated intoxicating hemp and illicit market. Patients deserve the flexibility to choose the form of medication that best suits their needs. Expanding medication options to allow pre-dosed 10 mg edibles is a needed change for West Virginia’s program. Many patients find edibles to be a discreet and safe method to receive the therapeutic benefits of cannabis. In addition, some West Virginians are unable to tolerate inhaled forms of cannabis due to COPD and other medical conditions. Patients can already make edibles at home pursuant to W. Va. Code § 16A-3-3 (c), but doing so is time-consuming and is often not realistic for patients with disabilities and serious illnesses. Patients are less likely to get standardized doses of cannabinoids if their edibles are produced in a home kitchen. Regulated, commercially produced products can also have more safeguards to ensure they are not confused with non-cannabis products. We hope the legislature will expand medical cannabis options for West Virginia patients.
¹https://idahocapitalsun.com/2025/03/17/will-idaho-legalize-medical-marijuana-state-lawmakers-open-discussion/

This bill is so "popular" that they couldn't pass it by following their own rules, so now they are trying to suspend the rules to pass it.

SB 392 and other proposed tax cuts put ‘wants’ ahead of ‘needs’, set us on a disastrous path of fiscal irresponsibility, and preclude much-needed and meaningful investments in programs that will actually grow our state’s economy in a sustainable way. In 2023, many of you passed legislation to set additional tax cuts into place when economic indicators are met. West Virginia’s tax collections are now falling hundreds of millions of dollars below the revenue baseline to trigger additional tax cuts. That also means our budget has shrunk in inflation-adjusted dollars. Since FY 2019 (the baseline for additional tax cuts), more than 70 public schools have been lost, more than 200 child care providers have closed their doors, and we’ve lost thousands of state and local public sector jobs. Enacting more tax cuts that override the trigger before fully funding Medicaid, enacting independent recommendations to strengthen public school funding, increasing funding for child care assistance, addressing longstanding infrastructure and water issues, or fully addressing our worst-in-the-nation child welfare crisis is unconscionable and bad for our economy. Enacting tax cuts today while pushing out school funding improvements to FY 2030 is neither pro-family nor pro-economic growth. Decades of research point to the ties between public education funding, public infrastructure and transportation funding and economic growth. In states that have cut taxes and failed to see growth as a result, it has been because they cut taxes so deep they undermined the public services that do grow the economy. That is exactly the scenario you face today if you move ahead with SB 392 or any tax cut that takes away from these essential public services. According to the Morrisey Administration’s own six year financial plan, West Virginia faces a budget gap of $200 million in FY 28 and growing. And that estimate comes before taking into consideration the likelihood that West Virginia will be on the hook for tens of millions of dollars next year in SNAP benefits or that you will need tens of millions of dollars to offset Congress’ phasedown of the provider tax to continue funding Medicaid at current service levels. Your vote on this bill will determine the future of West Virginia; will you meet the requirements to provide a thorough and efficient system of free school that the constitution requires? Will you ensure every West Virginia family has access to high-quality and affordable child care so that they can work? That West Virginians in all corners of the state have the infrastructure, water, and sewage services they deserve? Or will you enact another tax cut that provides crumbs to the average West Virginia household while asking them to make do with fewer public services, all to give thousands of dollars in tax cuts to the state’s wealthiest?

This bill criminalizes homelessness without offering an alternative solution. If a person has no home, where are they supposed to sleep? West Virginia jails are already overcrowded, and a homeless person is still homeless after being released from jail. If you want people to stop sleeping on the street, the solution is to provide safe, clean, and affordable housing options for EVERY person.

This bill is important to all childcare providers in the state of WV. We are essential and we deserve to have some stability with our daycares. Please vote yes and help WV providers, families and children.

Investing in childcare is investing in West Virginia’s future.  Access to reliable, affordable childcare is not just a family issue — it is an economic workforce issue. I respectfully urge you to pass HB4191.

I strongly support SB 927. Beekeeping is not just a hobby in West Virginia — it is essential infrastructure for our agriculture, food supply, and rural economy. Pollinators directly support fruit, vegetable, and seed production across our state. SB 927 keeps oversight under the West Virginia Department of Agriculture, where regulation can remain science-based, consistent, and statewide. That consistency matters. Patchwork local control would create confusion, discourage new beekeepers, and undermine the stability our agricultural community depends on. Clear, uniform standards protect: Beekeepers Farmers Property owners Consumers Strong bees mean strong agriculture. Strong agriculture means a stronger West Virginia. I urge you to pass SB 927 without weakening amendments and maintain statewide, science-driven regulation under the WV Department of Agriculture. Thank you for your consideration.

Our teachers are the heart of our community. The amount of guidance, support, and structure they provide our children within early education is integral to their long term development. Early education teachers are shaping our children emotionally and physically to equip them with skills for success to complete higher education in the long run. They deserve adequate compensation and support to continue to provide the services they provide so wholeheartedly.

  As a West Virginia beekeeper, small farmer, and founder of Unity Sisters Farms on the West Side of Charleston, I strongly support Senate Bill 927.This bill does not create unnecessary change. It strengthens and reinforces the structure that is already working under the West Virginia Department of Agriculture. It keeps oversight consistent at the state level and ensures science based regulation of apiaries across West Virginia.For me, beekeeping is not a hobby. It is part of how I educate families, support pollination for local gardens, and generate agricultural income within my community. I operate just feet away from a church and in close proximity to neighboring homes. My bees were inspected within days of establishing my hive, demonstrating that our current system is responsive and effective.Bees are essential to West Virginia agriculture. They pollinate apples, pumpkins, cucumbers, berries, tomatoes, and many other crops grown across our state. Healthy pollinator populations directly impact food production, farm sustainability, and local economies.Senate Bill 927 protects responsible beekeepers, supports farmers who depend on pollination, and maintains clear, consistent statewide authority. It builds on what we already have instead of creating confusion or fragmentation.West Virginia’s motto reminds us that Mountaineers are always free. Supporting responsible beekeeping allows residents the freedom to participate in agriculture, support their families, and strengthen their communities under clear and consistent state guidance. I respectfully urge the committee to advance Senate Bill 927.

I strongly support Del Hornbuckle's proposed amendment to add income caps to the Hope program.  This is so important to ensure the funding goes to families that actually need it.  Additionally, it keeps Hope from blowing a huge hole in the state budget.  The WV Constitution requires the state provide a thorough and efficient system of free schools.  The state must fulfill its obligation to ensuring it has strong public schools before spending money on other programs.

My name is Sara Whitaker, and I am the Criminal Legal Policy Analyst at the West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy (WVCBP). There are many reasons to oppose this bill, as detailed in this fact sheet: https://wvpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/SB-137-Overview.pdf.   But I want to share what I’ve seen firsthand. I spent a decade in the Kanawha County Public Defender’s Office, where I represented people charged with felonies, including the offenses contemplated by this bill. But it’s in my work at WVCBP these last four years that I have met and worked with dozens of people who were convicted of these offenses. Some have come home from prison; some are still incarcerated.   It has been eye-opening. If you are a public defender or a police officer or a prosecutor or a judge, you see this person in the immediate aftermath of the harm they committed. And, unless you are a defense attorney who works directly with them, you see very little of the person through the criminal trial process. If the person is convicted and sentenced to prison, the story stops there for those who work in the trial courts.   At the Center, I’ve had the chance to meet people 10, 15, 20, 30 years after they were sentenced. Naturally, these people bear little resemblance to the person they were during the trial or when the arrived in prison. They have gotten older and have grown up. They have taken classes to get earn their GEDs or even a college degrees. They are sober and have completed long-term substance abuse treatment. And they are finding ways within the prison walls to put their rehabilitation into practice.  

• One man co-created an arts program at his prison. The art created by him and others has been exhibited around this state, in this capitol building, and even in New York City. Because this artist grew up with folks who had suffered in the foster care system, he and other incarcerated men regularly donated art to fundraisers benefiting children in the system.
• A woman at Lakin turned her prison library job into an opportunity to teach other women how to read. For years, she has crocheted knit hats for babies born in a local hospital.
• A man at Mt. Olive facilitates a curriculum for men who want to become better dads, spouses, siblings. He does this to help men prepare for release – even though his sentence of life without mercy means he will never have that chance.

  These people are exceptional, but they are not the exception. Our prisons are full of people who have worked hard to do accountability behind bars.   I want to address one reason the prosecutors’ association has argued why lawmakers should increase these sentences. They argue that parole hearings are traumatic for the victims who lost loved ones.   I completely agree with this. I have listened to many parole hearings over the last few years and have seen how they are perfectly designed to produce that effect.   First, the state does not provide victims much information about the person in prison. The law requires notification of hearings and of release. But there is no information given to a victim about what the person incarcerated has done since the victim last saw them at the sentencing hearing. Nothing that may be able to answer the question many survivors have: Is this person a threat to me or anyone else?   Second, during the Covid pandemic, the parole board moved to virtual hearings. They interview the parole candidate by video, while victims and witnesses may only appear by phone. Because there are many hearings in a day and no specific times given, this could mean a victim waiting by the phone for hours on the hearing day. Even though the Covid emergency ended years ago, the parole board continues to rely on impersonal virtual hearings.   Finally, the hearing itself does not allow people to directly address the person who harmed them. In fact, they will be told not to do this and to direct their remarks to the board. This means that victims who have waited years cannot say what they’ve been waiting to say. Nor can they ask the incarcerated person questions that may be critical to the victim’s sense of closure and healing.   I agree that the current parole hearing process is not working for the people involved. The legislature has the power to change that. But that is not what this bill does.   Instead this bill contemplates an extra half million dollar investment, the cost of ten extra years, to incarcerate each person sentenced. Those costs will most certainly rise in the coming years. Especially as DCR must spend more on infrastructure and medical care to accommodate an aging prison population. Our prisons already have hospice units and dementia wards. Increasing mandatory minimums will only increase demand for specialized housing.   There is no fiscal note or finance reference so we don’t have official estimates as to how much of the state budget will need to be diverted to corrections if this is implemented.   But we do have research from dozens of studies that “increasing already long sentences has no material deterrent effect.” Experts have long known that people “age out” of crime. And research consistently shows that older people are less likely to re-offend after release from incarceration, while cost of incarcerating them can be significant.   This bill does not prevent violence, nor provide resources to help victims heal. I hope you will vote against it.

Dear Members of the House,

I am writing in support of HB 5559.

As a West Virginia Licensed Independent Clinical Social Worker practicing in our state, and also a resident of West Virginia, I see firsthand the ongoing need to strengthen access to high-quality mental health care across our state. Legislation like HB 5559 represents an important step toward improving systems that directly impact West Virginians’ ability to receive timely, consistent, and effective services.

Our state continues to face provider shortages, geographic barriers, and increasing demand for behavioral health care. Policies that modernize and strengthen our infrastructure are critical to ensuring that individuals and families do not fall through the cracks. Many other states have already passed similar legislation, and if West Virginia fails to act, we risk falling behind in access, workforce development, and overall competitiveness in behavioral health care.

With the legislative session ending next week, I would sincerely appreciate seeing this bill make it to the floor for a vote rather than risking having to wait another year for progress on this issue.

Supporting HB 5559 signals that West Virginia is committed to improving access, supporting its workforce, and prioritizing the well-being of its residents. I respectfully urge you to vote in favor of this bill.

Thank you for your time and service to our state.

Dear delegate of the House of Delegates’ Judiciary Committee: As a library with a nationally recognized war museum within my main facility, knowing that things will be easier for the Curator and his board with regard to HB5059 and what it helps with is tremendous. We ask you to help HB5059, Relating to authorizing cultural heritage institutions to claim title to certain property in possession of the cultural heritage institution after providing certain notices, advance in the Judiciary Committee. This bill will benefit West Virginians who loan or donate items to the state’s cultural heritage institutions and will improve the institutions' ability to support historical preservation and education in the state. It has broad support across the state’s libraries, museums, archives, and historical societies. Issue and Impact: • West Virginia’s laws pertaining to abandoned property do not adequately address issues faced by donors and staff of libraries, museums, archives, historical societies, etc. Donations or loans to these institutions are distinct from typical abandoned property in that the donation or loan signifies intent for the citizen’s relationship with the organization. • Libraries, museums, archives, and historical societies often have materials that were gifted long ago and for which they have no ownership records and have items loaned years ago which cannot be returned because they cannot find or contact the lender. Institutions are required to care for these items, but do not own them. These items take up storage space but cannot be conserved, loaned, disposed of (in the case of unwanted gifts), or made accessible to the public (in the case of materials with unique restrictions). • This bill will benefit citizens who donate or loan materials to cultural heritage institutions (and their descendants) by protecting their ownership rights, facilitating the recovery of lost assets, and helping descendants carry out donors’ final wishes for their property. • This bill will benefit cultural heritage institutions by allowing them to legally and ethically care for the collections entrusted to them, cutting down on financial waste, streamlining processes, and enabling them to provide the best educational experiences to visitors. • This bill will benefit the state by helping its cultural heritage institutions eliminate waste of space and resources spent on materials they do not own. It will enable these organizations to better steward their budgets and their collections, so they can better steward the heritage and education of our state. This industry has been hit hard by the economy and dwindling grant-based resources; this bill will help keep them thriving. • West Virginia is one of only two states lacking laws addressing abandoned property in cultural institutions, according to the Abandoned Property Project from the Society of American Archivists. Each of West Virginia's neighboring states has such a law.   Thank you.

I support SB 927 without amendments. Pollination supports West Virginia agriculture and farm income. Uniform statewide regulation protects investment and keeps agriculture predictable. Please pass SB 927 as written to protect our state’s agricultural economy.

Providers need more pay. As a business owner we have to be able to compete with McDonald's @15.00 an hour and the Wear house industry which pays @25.00. Providers are still making 13.00 a hour in this inflation. Please help us!!

Please move this bill out of committee and onto the floor! Demonstrate that you care about the basic needs of your citizens in the southern counties and other communities that don't have clear, clean water to drink, bathe in, or cook with. Although this bill provides only minimal funding and won't solve all the current water problems, it's a step in the right direction.

I respectfully urge the House Judiciary Committee to pass this anti-discrimination bill on to be voted for on the floor. West Virginia should be like a city on the hill, shining like a light in its protection of all its citizens. Banning discrimination based on disability, gender identity, and sexual orientation would complete our Civil Rights Act. It would also be viewed as business-friendly for a state that seeks more extensive economic development and friendly for individuals and families who might wish to move into our state, which is leaking population. Nearly everyone in West Virginia rightfully bemoans the negative stereotypes and bad reputation we seem to have in the minds of many Americans. Passing this bill is one way to demonstrate we welcome and protect everyone.

This is a much-needed bill for centers to stay open to serve the public as they should be able to

first and foremost, I am a parent who relies on daycare for my child. I literally cannot have a job without it. My mental health greatly depends on this and daycare is SO SO IMPORTANT! Please pass this bill. My child’s daycare is wonderful and is helping him grow and thrive, as well as helping me because I can work and contribute to my family. Our economy is terrible right now and we barely make enough to make this work but it is so crucial that you pass this. West Virginia is currently grappling with a child care crisis that is impacting families, businesses, and our economy. HB 4191 offers practical solutions to this pressing issue. The bill proposes expanded tax credits for employers, including small businesses, who invest in child care for their employees. It also introduces a more modern reimbursement system for child care providers, ensuring stability and sustainability for these essential services. Additionally, HB 4191 tackles the harmful "cliff effect" that hinders working families' career advancement by abruptly cutting off child care assistance. Supporting HB 4191 is crucial for the well-being of our children, working parents, employers, and the overall economy. Your vote in favor of this bill is greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time and dedication to our community.

Please support bill 4191 to help our childcare academy and continue to emphasize the importance and value of our center!

This bill will help make childcare available to more people. Childcare availability is essential for employers and to the workforce. Please do WV  a favor and pass this bill!

You cannot arrest your way out of homelessness. HB 5319 punishes people for existing when they have nowhere else to go. That is not policy. It is displacement. Real leadership invests in solutions.  I strongly oppose this bill.

PUBLIC COMMENT — Com. Sub. for Senate Bill 392 Chairman Criss, Vice Chairman Riley, and Distinguished Members of the House Finance Committee: I serve as State Director of Prevent Child Abuse West Virginia. Every day, I see the public systems that West Virginians have built together doing exactly what they were designed to do: keeping children safe, strengthening families before crisis hits, and laying the groundwork for communities where people can thrive. Home visiting programs, family support centers, child protective services, and community-based supports are how we get this done together. This is the work no family and no county can do alone. Com. Sub. for Senate Bill 392 would undermine the public investment that makes these systems possible. Our children’s safety and well-being should be our state’s highest priority. Pulling $125 million to $250 million annually out of the shared systems that protect children will place children at risk, especially when those systems are already stretched to their limits and when federal support for programs serving families is uncertain. These Systems Are Foundations, Not Line Items When West Virginians talk about what makes a good community, they describe safe neighborhoods, strong schools, and thriving families. Those are the results of shared public investment. Child protective services, home visiting, parent education, foster care, child care assistance: these are not abstract government programs. They are the structures that communities rely on to protect their most vulnerable members and to prevent problems that, left unaddressed, cost everyone far more down the road. At Prevent Child Abuse West Virginia, we know what these systems accomplish when they are properly resourced. Evidence-based home visiting programs, such as Parents as Teachers, connect new parents with trained professionals who help them build the skills and stability their families need. Family Support Centers give communities a place to turn before a problem becomes a crisis. These are proven approaches that keep children safe and keep families together, and they are sustained by the public revenue that SB 392 proposes to reduce by up to a quarter of a billion dollars. Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost It matters who actually benefits from this proposed cut and who bears the consequences. Over the past decade, two-thirds of combined state and federal tax cuts have flowed to the wealthiest twenty percent of West Virginia households -- those earning approximately $200,000 or more per year. The wealthiest five percent, with average incomes above $500,000, now pay $1.2 billion LESS annually in combined taxes than they did before these rounds of cuts began. Meanwhile, the systems that serve the children and families, including child care, child abuse prevention programs, healthcare, and nutrition programs, have been held flat or cut. State child care funding has been reduced by half since FY 2014. This pattern is upside down. Another across-the-board cut deepens it. The largest dollar benefits flow to those at the top, while the services that hold communities together -- the programs that families earning $35,000 or $45,000 depend on most -- are the first to be squeezed when revenue falls short. That is not a tradeoff that strengthens West Virginia. We need to protect the commitments West Virginia has already made. Commitments to fund healthcare for children and seniors through Medicaid. Commitments to keep our children safe through an effective child welfare system. Commitments to educate our children, pave our roads, and protect public safety. The governor’s own six-year financial plan projects cumulative budget gaps totaling $1.2 billion between FY 2028 and FY 2031, driven by the growing cost of the Hope Scholarship and successive rounds of income tax reductions. The current FY 2027 budget is balanced only through $270 million in one-time surplus funds, including $170 million for Medicaid, an ongoing obligation that will have to be absorbed by the general revenue budget in future years. Enacting an additional $250 million annual reduction deepens our state's structural deficit, which threatens the systems families depend on. We Know What Works. The Question Is Whether We Will Fund It. Lawmakers do not need to guess about what happens when the systems protecting children are properly resourced and what happens when they are not. We have strong evidence on both sides. When families can access home visiting, parent education, and community-based supports, children stay safer, families stay together, and the state avoids the far greater costs of foster care, court proceedings, emergency placements, and the long-term consequences of abuse and neglect in health care, corrections, and lost productivity. Prevention is how we get ahead of the problem. It is the most fiscally responsible investment the state makes. And this Legislature has seen the other side. Last session, in the FY 2026 budget, the governor’s $182 million request for the foster care system was reduced to approximately $121 million. The Department of Human Services warned publicly that this reduction would significantly hinder its ability to serve children in foster care and respond to the pressing challenges facing the system. West Virginia currently has more than 5,800 children in state care, without enough caseworkers, enough in-state placement beds, or enough services to meet their needs. A further reduction in available revenue makes it harder, not easier, to do right by those children and the communities they belong to. Federal Changes Make State Investments More Important, Not Less West Virginia funds a larger share of its budget through federal dollars than nearly any other state. Federal funding supports child care assistance, foster care and adoption services, Medicaid, and child welfare programs administered through the Department of Human Services. Additional federal reductions to Medicaid, education, and social services remain under active consideration. If state leaders want West Virginia’s children and families to remain protected regardless of what happens in Washington, the most important thing this Legislature can do is preserve the state’s own capacity to invest. Removing $250 million in annual revenue does the opposite. This Is a Choice About What We Are Building Together Children do not experience budget cycles. The child who is harmed this year because a prevention program lost its funding cannot be made whole by a supplemental appropriation in January. The family that falls apart because a home visitor’s position was eliminated does not reassemble when the next fiscal year begins. When it comes to child safety, the consequences of underfunding programs are permanent. Those consequences impact not only the children themselves but also every community in this state. Prevent Child Abuse WV respectfully urges lawmakers to choose a different path. We should sustain our commitments to our children. There is an existing system of income tax reductions that is already codified, which will reduce taxes automatically when the state can afford to do so. Lawmakers should defer action on any additional tax cuts until the federal funding picture stabilizes and the state’s projected budget gaps are addressed. Conclusion When families are strong and children are safe, every community in West Virginia is stronger for it. Fewer children enter foster care. Fewer families reach crisis. Schools function better. Workplaces are more stable. The downstream costs that strain county budgets, courts, and health systems go down. This is what shared investment in prevention makes possible, and it is what Com. Sub. for SB 392, at this scale and at this time, puts at risk. West Virginia’s children rely on the public systems that this Legislature has built and the shared commitment to sustain them. Com. Sub. for SB 192 undermines that commitment to our children. We cannot afford for our children to pay the price. Thank you for your time, your service, and your consideration. Respectfully submitted, Jim McKay State Director Prevent Child Abuse West Virginia A project of Team for West Virginia Children  

The Child Care  community needs your support of this bill. Our children and families depend on it.

Cutting taxes should not be even considered as an option until every West Virginian has access to clean drinking water, roads that are not full of potholes, schools that are not hours away, and child care access so they can go to work to earn income in the first place. West Virginians need basic infrastructure! Business won't come if they can't drive on the roads and turn on a tap and get clean water. Take care of real problems.

I support an increase the tax credit for employers who provide child care services for their employees though an amendment of the WV personal income tax code, §11-21-97.  Providing quality and accessible child care builds a stronger and more reliable work force which make families and communities stronger.

The state of West Virginia faces major pressing issues including a need to update infrastructure to supply clean and reliable water to all; a need for affordable daycare; a need for a strong public school system that prepares the young people in our state for bright futures.  We also need to be able care for our most vulnerable - those with intellectual and developmental disabilities among others. A tax cut is simply reckless.  The average family will save only $50 a year while the increased electrical costs, lack of water, lack of a strong education system and other issues go unaddressed.  Lower taxes will not make WV a more desirable place to live if it does not first address these basic needs.

Is the rationale based on our dependence on Federal dollars?   What, exactly, are we funding so well that we do not need tax revenue?   Starve the poor to make room for the rich.  Disgusting.

After seeing the lopsided scores in so many games since passage of the bill allowing transfer portals for high school athletes, I believe this bill is a no brainer. Our high schools should not be imitating the colleges and universities in this way.

House rejection of the amendment exempting areas of the state without available shelter beds demonstrates that the intentions behind this bill are punitive.  The causes of homelessness are many and complex. Until we have made serious efforts to solve the root causes and to provide housing as well as other assistance to those without permanent shelter, we must not punish those who have nowhere else to sleep but in public spaces.

Another tax cut is simply irresponsible.  Don’t do it.

Over the past decade, the legislature has reduced funding for childcare, leading to a significant decline in available childcare slots and creating many childcare deserts across the state. Childcare workers receive very low wages, families struggle to afford the actual costs of childcare, and many childcare providers are unable to sustain their operations financially. HB 4191 addresses the childcare crisis by adopting a comprehensive strategy to benefit families, employers, and childcare workers:

• Introduces tax incentives for businesses that sponsor or provide childcare for their employees, supporting employers in the process.
• Requires the state to provide childcare subsidies based on a child’s enrollment status instead of a daily rate. This approach stabilizes funding for childcare providers serving lower-income families.
• Ensures the government employs an accurate model to assess the cost of care, moving away from the current low reimbursement rates that fail to cover actual childcare expenses. This forward-looking measure promotes financial stability for the future.
• Empowers the Department of Human Services, which oversees state childcare funding, to mitigate the cliff effect families face when transitioning off subsidized childcare, ultimately supporting families in their childcare needs.

Legislators, Additional cuts to the personal income tax is wildly irresponsible at this time. Our state has too many needs- public education funding, childcare funding, foster care... the list goes on. The need is urgent. Choosing a tax cut now isn't going to benefit most people very much, but it will greatly hurt our state as a whole.

We want clean water, solid public education and stable funding for healthcare, food assistance and childcare. Tax cuts will contribute to a diminishing quality of life in WV. The state has financial obligations to meet. Vote no on this bill.

As someone who works in the criminal justice arena, I know first hand that adding years to people's sentences by extending parole eligibility will cost taxpayers a lot of money. Extending parole eligibility will add more burden to an already overburdened prison system which is struggling to house prisoners and provide fully trained correctional officers. Our parole board already does a good job weighing who should be released on parole and we should trust their judgment.

This bill is awful! Instead up upping the sentences, clogging up our system even more there needs to be a rehabilitative services to encourage redemption. Imposing longer sentences will not be a solution but more of a crippling status . Good People make bad choices every day in some way…please rethink this bill and Vote AGAINST IT!!

Enhancing penalties makes us feel like we are doing something to prevent crime, but there isn’t really any evidence to support that doing so has any impact whatsoever.  As was heard in House Judiciary committee on March 2nd, violence is often fueled by drugs, alcohol or untreated mental illness.    So if we as a state really want to be "tough on crime" then we need to invest in family supports and mental health treatment.   SB 137 will cost the taxpayers millions in additional costs to our prisons, while doing nothing to address root causes.

We cannot fix homelessness through punishment. We have to address the underlying causes: lack of jobs, accessibility to affordable housing and healthcare. Homelessness should not be criminalized. Please take up the issues of the economy, affordable housing and healthcare access, rather than incarcerating people for being down on their luck. Offer real solutions. This is not a true effort to solve a public issue. Thank you for taking time to read my comment.

Homelessness is a complicated and heartbreaking problem. long-term solutions require heroic efforts to accompany people and give them access to both mental health and addiction, recovery services.   This  outdoor camping ban  appears to be designed to force this population to relocate to other states.  this is a heartless solution to a difficult problem that requires human compassion.  his proposed law in my opinion, codifies  a hardness of heart- in addition to adding suffering on the homeless population, the rest of us West Virginians will be less empathetic, and more set in the ways of cruelty.

Criminalizing homelessness is cruel and unusual punishment. They need our help the most and you want to punish them for existing? This is insane. Housing homeless people would be far cheaper and better for our economy in the long run. Imprisoning people costs the people too much money. This isnt what Jesus would do either, but you all are only Christian when it's convenient for your narrative, not in actual practice.

As someone that is a peer recovery coach and who has struggled with substance use in the past and homelessness. I cannot make this make sense. I work trying to help house people and public housing as well as HUD have time-frames from the time someone gets charged to get them into housing. Then this causes their issues with housing to continue for even longer and creates a cycle thats almost impossible to escape. Then we're gonna put more pressure on an overloaded system like the department of corrections for mental health disorders and being down on your luck. West Virginia we are better than this. I am someone with 7 years in recovery and haven't forgotten the struggles I faced none of this is going to solve homelessness. Come up with real solutions and stop being lazy.

There is absolutely NO evidence that increasing sentencing deters crime. Increasing the minimum time only takes control from judges and parole boards ro give people a chance who have changed their lives,  if you want to i crease punishment Increase the maximum amount of time giving judges more discretion when sentencing.

Mandating that “West Bank” not be used and the biblical names “Judea” and “Samira” be used instead would be a violation of the principle of separation of church and state.  We should not be using references to the Bible, the Koran or any religious document as a reason to enact legislation   If the historical use of the names is accepted as a logical reason, then should we eliminate the “West” in our state’s name? If history is important to us, then we should call it “Palestine,” which has been used to name the region between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River for over 2,500 years, dating back to the 12th century BCE. In the 5th century BCE, Greek historians formally applied “Palestine” to the region.  It is the Palestinians who live there.  Should they be responsible for any name assigned to the land? While Israel feels it has a right to the West Bank, the international community widely considers it occupied territory to which they have no legal rights, and settlements there are illegal.  The genocide of Palestinians over the past 75 years, and most recently in Gaza, and the apartheid conditions that Israel has imposed on millions is enlightening more of us who have engaged in reading and learning about the history of the region and the current realities. Is there any among you who has widely read or studied the history of historic Palestine?  May I suggest you begin with works by Israeli authors such as The General's Son by Miko Peled or The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine by Ilan Pappe?  These documented works would help you to understand why our support of Israel's wishes on the federal and state levels is contrary to the principles of our constitution and democracy.  

This bill should not be a priority for West Virginia. How often is the region the "West Bank" even used in official state documents? We have real and serious problems in our state, and our legislature should not be wasting time with bills like this, which are just meant to stir up anger and division. The West Bank is the legitimate name for this region and has been for decades. It is not the business of WV state lawmakers to change that. I strongly oppose this bill and ask that our state representatives please focus on the serious issues our citizens face, like clean water, foster care, public education funding, infrastructure, and jobs.

Im literally exhausted trying to keep up with all of the horrible things coming out of our government right now.  I have to get up and take care of cancer patients tomorrow, but here I am taking time to tell you that keeping the unhoused population from staying in tents when YOU have literally provided them with no better alternatives is absolutely cruel and ridiculous. Less time against trans people, less time letting everyone have machine guns, and more time focus on making this state better. Be better! Do better!

West Virginia Legislature Members, Re: Senate Bills 533, 561 & House Bills 4381 My name is David Weaver, and I am a retired part time pastor with the United Methodist Church. I served for 20 years as a pastor before retiring in 2025. The churches that I served voted in the spring of 2024 before the general conference that they wanted to disaffiliate if the vote of general conference passed legislation that allowed same sex marriage to be performed in our churches. In May of 2024 general conference did pass that legislation but immediately following they passed legislation to end disaffiliation. That left us with our only way out of the denomination would be to close our churches and turn all our assets over to the WV Annual Conference and leave them closed for period of time and try to buy back our church buildings. We do not want to close; we want to disaffiliate from the denomination. The legislation that is proposed by the West Virginian Legislature would allow us to disaffiliate. Is this correct? If so, we support this legislation and encourage you to vote for and support this legislation. If you have questions or advice for me, please contact. Sincerely, David Weaver 2038 S Calhoun Hwy, Grantsville, WV 26147 304-354-6217 home, 681-578-4784 cell

Don't criminalize homelessness, instead spend money on services that address the problem such as mental health services.

I am the Director of the West Virginia & Regional History Center (WVRHC) at West Virginia University.  We preserve over 5000 archival collections and many other historical materials that we make available to the public. We follow best practices for documenting the donation of collections to our archive and honor the wishes or our donors. In the past, the standard for record keeping was very different, so we don’t always have the paperwork that we currently feel is necessary to document donations, transfers, and loans.  This bill offers collecting institutions like the WVRHC an opportunity to establish ownership of items in our collection when we don't have documentation. It is not an attempt to transfer private property interests from rightful owners or their heirs. In most cases, the collection materials addressed in the legislation were given to institutions with the purpose of being part of a historical collection as either a loan or donation. They were given with intent, but documentation is lacking. This bill helps to rectify the problem. 48 other states have legislation to address this common issue. I have volunteered and worked in historical organizations for over 25 years. Many have this same problem – stewarding materials they don’t own but are investing time and money in preserving. This bill is a critical step forward in providing a path to establishing ownership for institutions and following professional standards for the administration of our collections. It also benefits citizens who donate or loan materials to cultural heritage institutions (and their descendants) by protecting their ownership rights, facilitating the recovery of lost assets, and helping descendants carry out donors’ final wishes for their property. I urge you to support this bill. Thank you!

As we look at the current cost of incarceration and we hope for rehabilitation the increase in time for eligibility to parole, would be negatively impacting the community in multiple ways the first is the financial strain it would take effect on this state which is already in a major issue with the conditions the prisons are in, multiple doors don’t work in many prisons the power and WiFi go out frequently and mass punishment already occurs within these facilities  due to the staffing shortage, so add to increased inmates your housing at over populated facilities and the food cost for an additional ten years the climb of cost would be astronomical for a state in which already can’t not afford the prison system we have. Then to take away a glimpse of hope of release would increase the risk of an inmate not rehabilitating, like inmates many of us do things based off what we would expect as an outcome to then change that expectations, decreases the drive to be productive. We strongly urge you to reconsider these adjustments in the moral , financial aspects of the prison system, I urge you to interview and process time with inmates of these statues prior to making decisions, as I have heard many CO talk about the change someone can make and often do make inside these prison walls in WV this won’t help the recidivism rate, it won’t help crime prevention it will have a negative impact in multiple ways ..

This bill is a direct attack against school choice and school freedom. What happened to Raylee was a despicable tragedy, but her parents withdrawing her from public school claiming "homeschool" is not why she died. The problem is and has been for many years CPS. If legislators would spend more time attempting to solve the problems in CPS these types of awful cases would not happen. CPS was aware of and was actively investigating Raylee's case. In fact, they had already been in the home but for some reason failed to take any action. Once again CPS failed their duty BUT they are under an immense strain, they are perpetually understaffed, underpaid, and largely undervalued. Focus on where the real problem lies and leave law abiding parents alone. Help CPS to do their jobs. Spend time and money solving that problem.

To Whom It May Concern,

  As a 26-year-resident and taxpayer of West Virginia, I am writing to express my support of House Bill 5611, a bill to amend and reenact §5B-2-21b of the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, relating to clarifying the management of data centers in areas with majority karst hydrogeology.  

I urge the legislature to support this as well, in order to protect our natural resources and residents from ill-advised data centers.

  Sincerely, Laurie A. Allen

I do not agree with this bill, any offense after this one will give them a life sentence, even if just shoplifting. I am a prison wife, and this bill will ruin lives even the smallest offense.

This is simply a way to prevent innocent parents from homeschooling.   Anyone can make an accusation.  Ninety percent of CPS allegations find no fault.  Stop this nonsensical bill!

I’m appalled that this was even entered into legislation. As an adult, do you ever use a calculator? It’s imperative that students of every age know how to utilize a calculator!

Written Testimony of Celeste Trusty State Legislative Affairs Director, FAMM Opposition to HB 4761 West Virginia House of Delegates Committee on the Judiciary March 2, 2026   FAMM would like to thank Chair Akers, Vice-Chair Maynor, Minority Chair Fluharty, Minority Vice-Chair Hansen, and members of the West Virginia House of Delegates Committee of the Judiciary for the opportunity to express our strong opposition to HB 4761, which would drastically increase mandatory minimum sentences of incarceration and time served requirements for people with certain criminal convictions.  Mandatory minimum sentences contribute to over-incarceration, separate families, and divert resources from evidence-based strategies that work.  Increasing mandatory minimum sentences will undoubtedly cause widespread harm to West Virginians in the absence of efficacy. FAMM opposes HB 4761 and encourages members of the House Committee on the Judiciary to do the same. FAMM is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that advocates sentencing and prison policies that are individualized and fair, protect public safety, and preserve families.  For more than three decades, FAMM has been on the front lines fighting against mandatory minimum sentences - and the data supports the validity of our work.  It has been well-known for decades now that mandatory minimum sentences do not work to deter crime and are a colossal drain on taxpayer resources, yet HB 4761 relies on these outdated and wasteful concepts in what would surely be an unsuccessful effort to protect public safety.[1] Mandatory minimum sentences like those established and increased in HB 4761 require judges to impose blanket minimum sentences to every person convicted of a specific offense, removing a judge’s ability to consider the specifics of the situation, individual victims, the individual person they are sentencing, or any mitigating factors.  What results all too often is a sentence that is counterproductive, wildly expensive, and ineffective at protecting the public from the very concern the legislature is trying to address.[2]  FAMM understands the valid concern with the impact of crime on communities across the state and our country. However, increasing mandatory minimum sentences is simply not the answer.  This is supported by more than three decades of evidence showing that mandatory minimum sentences do not make our communities any safer. HB 4761 would double the length of the mandatory minimum term of incarceration for second degree murder, increasing the sentence to 20 - 40 years from the current 10 - 40 years, and would increase the mandatory minimum sentence for people convicted of first-degree murder after July 1, 2026, from 15 years to 15 years prior to parole eligibility.  HB 4761 would also establish mandatory minimum sentences of 10 - 40 years and 5 - 20 years for attempted first- and second-degree murder, respectively. Incarceration is meant as a form of punishment and to protect the public, but also meant to rehabilitate, educate, and support people as they prepare for a successful return to the community.  FAMM believes that people should have meaningful opportunities to be released back into the community when their continued incarceration no longer serves any public benefit.  HB 4761 runs counter to that goal and would increase incarceration lengths and costs for every person convicted of second-degree murder and voluntary manslaughter or serving life sentences, regardless of their individual rehabilitation and readiness to return to the community. West Virginians pay an average of nearly $50,000 each year to incarcerate each person, and those costs can drastically increase as people age and require increased medical care while serving longer prison sentences.[3] Legislating blanket increases on minimum terms of incarceration based on conviction or sentence will undoubtedly increase the fiscal burden on West Virginia’s taxpayers without tangible benefit to the safety of their communities.  Additionally, the provisions included in HB 4761 ignore the role of the Parole Board who makes individualized decisions about readiness for release from incarceration, and whose decisions on granting release show that the populations of people targeted with increased punishment by this bill generally have much lower recidivism rates when released on parole.[4] FAMM encourages the West Virginia House of Delegates Committee on the Judiciary to reject HB 4761 and instead focus on implementing evidence-based policies that serve to support West Virginia’s communities and protect public safety.  Thank you for considering our feedback, and please do not hesitate to reach out with any questions at ctrusty@famm.org or 267.559.0195.   [1] FAMM Policy Briefing: Mandatory Minimum Sentences, FAMM, January 2024. https://famm.org/wpcontent/uploads/2024/03/Mandatory-Minimum-Briefing-Paper-Final.pdf   [2] The Case Against Mandatory Minimum Sentences, FAMM, April 2021. https://famm.org/wpcontent/uploads/2021/04/The-Case-against-Mandatory-Minimum-Sentences.pdf   [3] DCR Annual Report FY 2024, p. 43; DCR Annual Report FY 2025, p.43. Total prison spending increased from $271.7 million in FY 2024 to $348.2 million in FY 2025.   [4] DCR Recidivism Report, July 2024, p.2. DCR defines recidivism as anyone coming back to prison within 3 years – regardless of whether it was a new crime committed or a parole violation (e.g., a missed appointment). In other words, recidivism does not necessarily indicate a new criminal offense.

Written Testimony of Celeste Trusty State Legislative Affairs Director, FAMM Opposition to HB 4758 West Virginia House of Delegates Committee on the Judiciary March 2, 2026 FAMM would like to thank Chair Akers, Vice-Chair Maynor, Minority Chair Fluharty, Minority Vice-Chair Hansen, and members of the West Virginia House of Delegates Committee of the Judiciary for the opportunity to express our strong opposition to HB 4758, which would drastically increase mandatory minimum sentences of incarceration and time served requirements for people with certain criminal convictions.  Mandatory minimum sentences contribute to over-incarceration, separate families, and divert resources from evidence-based strategies that work.  Increasing mandatory minimum sentences will undoubtedly cause widespread harm to West Virginians in the absence of efficacy. FAMM opposes HB 4758 and encourages members of the House Committee on the Judiciary to do the same. FAMM is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that advocates sentencing and prison policies that are individualized and fair, protect public safety, and preserve families.  For more than three decades, FAMM has been on the front lines fighting against mandatory minimum sentences - and the data supports the validity of our work.  It has been well-known for decades now that mandatory minimum sentences do not work to deter crime and are a colossal drain on taxpayer resources, yet HB 4758 relies on these outdated and wasteful concepts in what would surely be an unsuccessful effort to protect public safety.[1]  Mandatory minimum sentences like those established and increased in HB 4758 require judges to impose blanket minimum sentences to every person convicted of a specific offense, removing a judge’s ability to consider the specifics of the situation, individual victims, the individual person they are sentencing, or any mitigating factors.  What results all too often is a sentence that is counterproductive, wildly expensive, and ineffective at protecting the public from the very concern the legislature is trying to address.  FAMM understands the valid concern with the impact of crime on communities across the state and our country. However, increasing mandatory minimum sentences is simply not the answer.  This is supported by more than three decades of evidence showing that mandatory minimum sentences do not make our communities any safer. HB 4758 would establish a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 to 40 years for attempted murder of the first degree and increase the mandatory minimum sentence for people convicted of first-degree murder on or after July 1, 2026, from 15 to 25 years served prior to parole eligibility. Incarceration is meant as a form of punishment and to protect the public, but also meant to rehabilitate, educate, and support people as they prepare for a successful return to the community.  FAMM believes that people should have meaningful opportunities to be released back into the community when their continued incarceration no longer serves any public benefit.  HB 4758 runs counter to that goal and would increase incarceration lengths and costs for every person convicted of second-degree murder and voluntary manslaughter or serving life sentences, regardless of their individual rehabilitation and readiness to return to the community. West Virginians pay an average of nearly $50,000 each year to incarcerate each person, and those costs can drastically increase as people age and require increased medical care while serving longer prison sentences.[2] Legislating blanket increases on minimum terms of incarceration based on conviction or sentence will undoubtedly increase the fiscal burden on West Virginia’s taxpayers without tangible benefit to the safety of their communities. Additionally, the provisions included in HB 4758 ignore the role of the Parole Board who makes individualized decisions about readiness for release from incarceration, and whose decisions on granting release show that the populations of people targeted with increased punishment by this bill generally have much lower recidivism rates when released on parole.[3] FAMM encourages the West Virginia House of Delegates Committee on the Judiciary to reject HB 4758 and instead focus on implementing evidence-based policies that serve to support West Virginia’s communities and protect public safety.  Thank you for considering our feedback, and please do not hesitate to reach out with any questions at ctrusty@famm.org or 267.559.0195.   [1] FAMM Policy Briefing: Mandatory Minimum Sentences, FAMM, January 2024. https://famm.org/wpcontent/uploads/2024/03/Mandatory-Minimum-Briefing-Paper-Final.pdf   [2] DCR Annual Report FY 2024, p. 43; DCR Annual Report FY 2025, p.43. Total prison spending increased from $271.7 million in FY 2024 to $348.2 million in FY 2025.   [3] DCR Recidivism Report, July 2024, p.2. DCR defines recidivism as anyone coming back to prison within 3 years – regardless of whether it was a new crime committed or a parole violation (e.g., a missed appointment). In other words, recidivism does not necessarily indicate a new criminal offense.  

Written Testimony of Celeste Trusty State Legislative Affairs Director, FAMM Opposition to SB 137 West Virginia House of Delegates Committee on the Judiciary March 2, 2026 FAMM would like to thank Chair Akers, Vice-Chair Maynor, Minority Chair Fluharty, Minority Vice-Chair Hansen, and members of the West Virginia House of Delegates Committee of the Judiciary for the opportunity to express our strong opposition to SB 137, which would drastically increase mandatory minimum sentences of incarceration and time served requirements for people with certain criminal convictions.  Mandatory minimum sentences contribute to over-incarceration, separate families, and divert resources from evidence-based strategies that work.  Increasing mandatory minimum sentences will undoubtedly cause widespread harm to West Virginians in the absence of efficacy. FAMM opposes SB 137 and encourages members of the House Committee on the Judiciary to do the same. FAMM is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that advocates sentencing and prison policies that are individualized and fair, protect public safety, and preserve families.  For more than three decades, FAMM has been on the front lines fighting against mandatory minimum sentences - and the data supports the validity of our work.  It has been well-known for decades now that mandatory minimum sentences do not work to deter crime and are a colossal drain on taxpayer resources, yet SB 137 relies on these outdated and wasteful concepts in what would surely be an unsuccessful effort to protect public safety.[1] Mandatory minimum sentences like those increased in SB 137 require judges to impose blanket minimum sentences to every person convicted of a specific offense, removing a judge’s ability to consider the specifics of the situation, individual victims, the individual person they are sentencing, or any mitigating factors.  What results all too often is a sentence that is counterproductive, wildly expensive, and ineffective at protecting the public from the very concern the legislature is trying to address.[2]  FAMM understands the valid concern with the impact of crime on communities across the state and our country. However, increasing mandatory minimum sentences is simply not the answer.  This is supported by more than three decades of evidence showing that mandatory minimum sentences do not make our communities any safer. SB 137 would increase the mandatory minimum sentences for second degree murder from 10 to 40 years to 15 to 60 years and from three to 15 years to five to 25 years for voluntary manslaughter.  SB 137 would also increase the mandatory minimum time served prior to parole eligibility for people serving life sentences from 10 to 20 years, and from 15 to 25 years for people serving life who have two prior felony convictions.  People convicted of first-degree murder after July 1, 2026, would also be required to serve 25 years before parole eligibility, a 10-year increase from the current requirement. Incarceration is meant as a form of punishment and to protect the public, but also meant to rehabilitate, educate, and support people as they prepare for a successful return to the community.  FAMM believes that people should have meaningful opportunities to be released back into the community when their continued incarceration no longer serves any public benefit.  SB 137 runs counter to that goal and would increase incarceration lengths and costs for every person convicted of second-degree murder and voluntary manslaughter or serving life sentences, regardless of their individual rehabilitation and readiness to return to the community. West Virginians pay an average of nearly $50,000 each year to incarcerate each person, and those costs can drastically increase as people age and require increased medical care while serving longer prison sentences.[3] Legislating blanket increases on minimum terms of incarceration based on conviction or sentence will undoubtedly increase the fiscal burden on West Virginia’s taxpayers without tangible benefit to the safety of their communities.  Additionally, the provisions included in SB 137 ignore the role of the Parole Board who makes individualized decisions about readiness for release from incarceration, and whose decisions on granting release show that the populations of people targeted with increased punishment by this bill generally have much lower recidivism rates when released on parole.[4] FAMM encourages the West Virginia House of Delegates Committee on the Judiciary to reject SB 137 and instead focus on implementing evidence-based policies that serve to support West Virginia’s communities and protect public safety.  Thank you for considering our feedback, and please do not hesitate to reach out with any questions at ctrusty@famm.org or 267.559.0195.   [1] FAMM Policy Briefing: Mandatory Minimum Sentences, FAMM, January 2024. https://famm.org/wpcontent/uploads/2024/03/Mandatory-Minimum-Briefing-Paper-Final.pdf   [2] The Case Against Mandatory Minimum Sentences, FAMM, April 2021. https://famm.org/wpcontent/uploads/2021/04/The-Case-against-Mandatory-Minimum-Sentences.pdf [3] DCR Annual Report FY 2024, p. 43; DCR Annual Report FY 2025, p.43. Total prison spending increased from $271.7 million in FY 2024 to $348.2 million in FY 2025.   [4] DCR Recidivism Report, July 2024, p.2. DCR defines recidivism as anyone coming back to prison within 3 years – regardless of whether it was a new crime committed or a parole violation (e.g., a missed appointment). In other words, recidivism does not necessarily indicate a new criminal offense.

Monday, March 2, 2026 Dear Members of the House Education Committee, My name is Devin Babcock and I serve as Senior Legislative Director for ExcelinEd in Action. Our organization works with state lawmakers and partner organizations to pass legislation that empowers families with educational opportunity, prepares students for college and career, prioritizes early literacy grounded in the science of reading, expands innovation and strengthens school performance. I am writing to express ExcelinEd in Action’s support for Senate Bill 155, which would allow West Virginians without traditional teaching certification to be hired to teach when no fully certified teacher is available. Adjunct teachers may be employed part-time or full-time, compensated outside the standard salary schedule and are not guaranteed benefits unless agreed to by the county board. The proposal is strong, as it opens new pathways into the education profession while maintaining strong standards for experience requirements, background checks, mentoring, training obligations and reporting requirements. We urge you to support Senate Bill 155 and bring new educators into the schools that need them most. By prioritizing teacher recruitment, we ensure quality education, allowing students to benefit from motivated teachers who can provide consistent and high-quality instruction. Thank you for your consideration of this important policy.   Respectfully, Devin Babcock Senior Legislative Director ExcelinEd in Action

Absolutely, they should carry edibles.  I feel its an easier more sufficient way for the medication to be consumed.

I oppose this bill, as there are instances that it could be abused to the detriment of a child and his/her family.  There are those who might instigate a CPS referral in error or in retribution against a family.  This would then erroneously disrupt child’s family life and education.  There are already laws and measures in place to protect children when there is suspected abuse.

When parents can work, businesses thrive and communities grow. #SolveChildCare

Please

Sirs, \Please support House bill 5611 giving more control to local governments and the people in the decision process. Respectfully submitted

To: House Public Education Committee From: Gretchen Morrison Date: 3/2/2026 Re: House Bill 5053 – Oppose  Dear Members of the House Public Education Committee, On behalf of the Pacific Justice Institute, please accept this as the formal statement of opposition for House Bill 5053, which undermines the rights of parents to choose the best educational option for their children. It creates an unreasonable burden on parents who wish to homeschool their children by forcing them to wait ninety days to homeschool, without any proof of wrongdoing by the parent(s). This bill violates parental rights codified in the Parent’s Bill of Rights by infringing on a parent’s right to direct their children’s education without the requisite burden of proof. W. Va. Code § 49-12-3. HB 5053 creates an unnecessary expense on the state by requiring the WVDE to conduct surveys and analyze them when private organizations have already done this. The Cardinal Institute has published white papers discussing West Virginia’s public schools with policy suggestions the committee could adopt without expending more limited state resources. See Research, Cardinal Institute for West Virginia Policy, https://cardinalinstitute.com/research/. Staff at the Cardinal Institute, some of which are former teachers, would likely gladly provide suggestions on how to achieve the goal of this bill without the negative consequences. This bill is bad policy as it makes many assumptions without actual data to back up those assumptions. “Upon reaching the pre-petition stage, a county often receives a homeschool notice.” House Bill 5053 (emphasis added). Calling West Virginia’s homeschooling parents’ educational choice an “easy out” when they feel the public schools no longer provide the best option for their child further adds to the contentious sentiment that modern public education is against parental rights. Id. Most homeschool families sacrifice time, money, and employment opportunities to homeschool their children. Referring to this familial sacrifice as an “easy out” does not repair the distrust many parents now have in public education. Id. HB 5053 also assumes that West Virginia’s homeschooling parents could have some sort of ulterior motive for homeschooling their children to avoid assessments. “Additionally, there is concern that families may use a homeschool over-the-summer credit to bypass the required reading proficiency standards ….” Id. (emphasis added). Drafting legislation based on assumptions and fears of what could happen in a tiny minority of cases is policy making based on conjecture. This is in addition to infringing on the rights of most parents who choose to homeschool for valid reasons, while also following the law. The ninety-day mandatory waiting period in public schools places an unreasonable burden on parents who wish to homeschool. Id. There could be many legitimate reasons to homeschool a child: to escape bullying, the physical condition of the school, the academic quality of the school, medical or health reasons, or merely wanting to provide better educational content based on the parents’ values. This bill is vague with reference to when the ninety days apply and at what point a parent is considered in the “pre-petition process” for the purposes of the proposed bill. HB 5053. It could be easy to envision a simple disagreement with the school’s administration being construed as a pre-petition process to punish the parent(s). This bill at a minimum, needs major revisions to honor parental rights and not be vague, so parents are apprised on how to avoid the ninety-day waiting period, and how to avoid being considered in a “pre-petition process.” The desire to protect children is commendable. If the legislature wants to end a loophole that has been created in the system with reference to avoiding mandatory assessments, it needs to find another way that does not create an unreasonable burden. HB 5053 could infringe upon religious liberties and a parent’s right to homeschool their child with religious curriculum. Recent Supreme Court precedent reaffirmed parents’ religious beliefs apply in public schools and the education context. In Mahmoud v. Taylor, 606 U.S. 522, 558, (2025), the Court held that parents’ have a right to opt their children out of lessons that directly conflict with their religious beliefs after the challenged policy could not pass strict scrutiny. The Pacific Justice Institute opposes this bill for its burden on the educational rights of parents and the potential infringement on religious liberty for those parents who wish to homeschool to provide religious curriculum for their children. This bill needs substantial revisions before advancing any further, if at all, to avoid infringing on parents’ right to direct the educational and religious upbringing of their children. Mahmoud, 606 U.S. at 585-86; W. Va. Code § 49-12-3. Thank you for your consideration of this letter as you review and discuss HB 5053. Best, Gretchen Morrison Staff Attorney, Licensed in West Virginia PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE gmorrison@pji.org Andrea Hitefield, Esq. Legislative Counsel PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE ahitefield@pji.org

I spoke with the House Judiciary Committee on Friday 2/27/26. I want to thank the Committee for their time, Committee Chairman Akers for allowing me to speak, and for helping to advance our legislation by sponsoring it. I would like to myself available to the Legislative Members on this House Bill as one of the Organizations that has helped to originate it. I serve as Museum Curator at the World Scouting Museum and the Vice President of the West Virginia Association oF Museums. We strongly support and request passage of this House Bill to help West Virginia align with 48 other US States legislation and fill critical gaps that could harm our institutions.

Hello.  I’m a constituent of Monongalia County who is concerned about HB5319. Jailing our neighbors for experiencing homelessness is not only a huge expense to our communities, but has shown little to no results in other communities around the country. "Camping bans” have grown in popularity around the United States, but there is NO empirical evidence to show these bans reduce homelessness (National Alliance to End Homelessness). People arrested for being unsheltered are less likely to get the help they need from social services. Interactions with law enforcement break existing connections with social services providers. Serving time also makes it harder for individuals to maintain stable work and receive important services like healthcare, which is often needed to help stabilize someone’s path to housing. Bans cost municipalities millions of dollars in judicial and enforcement expenses—valuable funding that could be used to provide affordable housing. Providing affordable housing and supplementing similar programming have been shown to offset hospital costs. With nearly half of West Virginians relying on Medicaid, offsetting these kinds of health costs would be hugely beneficial for state funding. Statewide camping bans are expensive and dangerous for all of us, costing millions and providing limited results. Please vote NO on any statewide ban. Funds should be used to stabilize communities with affordable housing and thoughtful, effective programming. Local municipalities’ right to choose how they govern should also be protected.

I oppose this bill because it is a lazy approach to addressing regulation. Regulations serve an important purpose in bringing the laws passed by the legislation into force.  Saying that every regulation needs to be re-justified from ground zero every handful number of years is a tremendous waste of state dollars. The reasoning behind and need for most regulations rarely changes. Further, saying that existing regulations have to be removed to pass new ones is insane. Either you need the regulation or you don't. Needing new regulations is not a reasonable ground for eliminating existing ones. It's the legislature's job to review regulations. Do your job and review the rules bundles before you. If you think there may be a need to revisit a particular issue in the future, include a sunset clause on that specific rule. Don't waste taxpayer money reevaluating every single rule because you're all too lazy to do the job you were elected to.

I do not agree with SB 745s option to remove condiments containing dyes and sugars without a safer and more natural alternative. This will leave our children more deprived than they are already from school meals. They are served the bare minimum under the guise of “clean eating” while our tax dollars pay into a fund large enough to send meals home with kids who may not have one! Definitely recommend reconsideration on this senate bill!

If this is supposed to help an industry during a temporary downturn, it should be a temporary tax cut with a date certain or formula for reinstating the original tax rate.

This bill is so important! Solve Child Care!

I do not support this bill for several reasons.  I would like a midwife bill to include the decriminalization of midwifery.  Although licensing CPMs may seem to solve many “problems,” there are many other states that have tried to control midwifery through legislation.  There is no pathway or protection for traditional midwives.  Often after a CPM bill is passed, it creates an opening for persecuting other types of midwives.  Additionally this bill lists conditions that a midwife must refer out to a higher level of care.  These conditions can be inaccurately diagnosed and no medical care should ever be forced in any way.  This bill creates allegiance to the state and license and takes the power away from the client.