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. I have seen firsthand how devastating floods can be to families and communities. Just last year, with the flooding in Ohio County where I work in the schools, many of our families’ homes were flooded, vehicles lost, and a bridge washed away. The community pulled together and many outside organizations came to help; our community was fortunate. However, had the state properly funded the Flood Resiliency Fund, our community would have had a proper safety net. Not every community in West Virginia that has experienced devastating flooding has been as lucky as we were in Ohio County and they deserve the state’s help just as much as we did.

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. Absolutely! Our legislators endangered our communities with HB 2014. The bill does not require any transparency or enforcement of water usage which is unacceptable.

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. WV has some of the highest Cancer rates in the country and I think PFAS, among other things, has likely contributed to that.

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! That seems like a very sensible idea and good policy.

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. Absolutely! We need to develop legislation that addresses our current orphaned wells.

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. That makes perfect sense to use brownfields/degraded or previously mined/industrial lands for solar farms in order to protect our good farmland and forests.

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! HB2014 was a terrible bill. I am in full support of our communities having local control.

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. Many rural areas depend on well water. We have to have legislation that protects against aquifer depletion.

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. 

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. 

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?

Voters should choose me because I will push for legislation that protects the people and our environment while my opponent has largely ignored environmental concerns or voted against protections. My opponent voted for HB2014.

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?

I’m not sure. This is something I would need to research and seek guidance about. I would probably need to bring several experts to the table. I’d trust the West Virginia Citizens Action Group and Delegate Evan Hansen for some recommendations.

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?

I would want to see the data. I’d visit at least a couple of places where this industry is currently running operations. If there are issues at their other locations, that would be a cause for concern in allowing the industry into our district without strong policy in place. I would listen to the concerns of the environmentalists and invite them to investigate further with me. I also would want my district to be aware of the potential impacts and get feedback from them. If we can’t pass legislation that protects my district from potential risks, then I wouldn’t be for that industry.