Question #1. Flooding is one of the most serious environmental issues facing West Virginians. In 2023, the Legislature created a Flood Resiliency Trust Fund to enhance flood prevention and protection, using primarily nature-based solutions and concentrating in low-income areas. For many years, this Trust Fund was unfunded. In 2026, the Legislature approved $5 million for the Trust Fund, which CWV believes is wholly inadequate. Will you support dedicated, ongoing state funding for flood resilience and oppose efforts to weaken or divert those funds?

Yes. We should always try to prevent the unthinkable of mother nature. By having prevention and protection from flood a lot more families can feel safe. A lot of families struggle with property taxes and insurance if they can even afford it, so helping prevent flooding we will actually be helping everyone despite how much money they have.

Question #2. The Ohio River and its tributaries supply drinking water to communities across West Virginia and support many other water uses. This critical water source may soon become overburdened with new petrochemical facilities and data centers. But permitting is still done separately by facility, with no limits on overall water withdrawal rates. Will you support legislation that establishes enforceable limits on cumulative water withdrawals from the Ohio River basin, prioritizing the protection of drinking water supplies and existing users?

Yes. As I am against data centers, I will say that of course we need limits of water withdraw.

Question #3. PFAS, a family of “forever chemicals” linked to cancer and other serious health effects, have contaminated drinking water in West Virginia for decades. Yet the state has no enforceable limits on PFAS discharges from industrial facilities into surface water, forcing communities to rely on slow or inadequate federal action. Will you support legislation establishing enforceable state limits on PFAS in industrial discharges?

Yes. Of course we should always have limits on PFAS and anything else going into our environment.

Question #4. West Virginia’s Ohio River communities already live with air and water pollution from a dense concentration of petrochemical and chemical facilities, and more are being proposed or expanded. The state currently permits each facility separately, with no requirement to consider the combined burden on host communities. Will you support legislation requiring cumulative impact assessments before new or expanding petrochemical facilities are approved in areas already overburdened by industrial pollution?

Yes. As we do have chemical plants within reach of each other, all the populations together should be considered.

Question #5. Methane is often leaked from improperly maintained, orphaned or abandoned gas wells. It is the most potent greenhouse gas known, can contaminate groundwater, and be hazardous to local residents. During the 2026 session, legislation was proposed (HB 5414, HB 5415) that would prevent future orphan gas and oil wells by requiring an operator to post a bond sufficient to cover the full cost of plugging, or to pay production-based amounts into an escrow fund sufficient to plug the well at the end of its useful life. If similar legislation is introduced in 2027, will you support it?

Yes, to me it does not make sense why we have orphaned gas wells. They all need capped.

Question #6. Large solar generating arrays are often located on farmland. Will you support incentives and permitting reforms that encourage large solar to be sited on brownfields/degraded or previously mined/industrial lands, to help West Virginia protect prime farmland and intact forests?

Yes, we should not be touching our farmlands with anything but crops/livestock. We have plenty of other options for add solar too.

Question #7. Currently, West Virginians have no local control through their municipal or county governments over the siting, construction, operation, water use, or environmental compliance of micro-grids and data centers. Will you support legislation to restore local control over these factors?

Yes. I am for getting rid of government overreach. Local control is needed.

Question #8. During the 2026 session, legislation was introduced that would have protected private wells, and controlled groundwater and aquifer depletion by data centers and other industrial development (HB 4683). If similar legislation is introduced in 2027, will you support it?

Yes. As I am against data centers, because of the no transparency at all with them. I will fight to keep our resources from them.

Question #9. West Virginia leads the nation in deer/vehicle collisions, killing over 10,000 deer and creating property damage and risk to human life. Highway fencing and the construction of wildlife under- and overpasses dramatically reduce this needless damage and risk. If legislation is proposed in 2027 to study the feasibility of wildlife crossing corridors in high-risk areas, will you support it?

Yes. As we are the number one state in deer accidents, I will definitely be for this. Personal experience after the army moving back and car insurance going up a few just because of this deer fact.

Question #10. In the last several sessions, legislation has been introduced that would have opened West Virginia state parks and forests to development, thereby changing their character. This legislation included opening these protected areas to motorized vehicles and developing them for commercial use. If similar legislation is introduced in 2027, will you oppose it?

Yes. Every park and forest needs protection. I am a huge outdoorsman.

Question #11. Why should West Virginia voters concerned about the effects of climate change, such as destructive storms that can cause flooding, and environmental pollution on their daily lives choose you over your opponent?

I have a servant’s heart as a former volunteer firefighter, active army, and helping in the community. As I can say I’m not the politician that acts like he cares for the people, I actually do. My campaign has been about our WV families and doing right by them.

Question #12. If the greenhouse gas emissions from the burning of fossil fuels by electric utilities must be reduced, what is the best way to do this while still supporting fossil-fuel workers and communities?

This would have to go as a phased transition that focuses on the economic stability of the local communities.

Question #13. Suppose an industrial development is proposed for your district. Promises of jobs are made in support, but you have doubts about how many and what types of jobs would actually result. Environmentalists oppose the development, citing concerns about harm to water resources, but you have doubts about how serious the harm would really be. How would you resolve these doubts on both sides? To whom would you listen?

We currently have this situation with our data centers. They promise hundreds of jobs but it’s a lie and actually a skeleton crew. I would resolve these issues finding out the truth about the development and exposing the lies. I would listen to the people over a company or government.