As part of the Moorefield Examiner’s coverage of the Nov. 3 general election, Betsy Orndoff-Sayers and Steven Schetrom, both candidates for the West Virginia House of Delegates – 86th District, were invited to answer the same set of questions on issues affecting Hardy County and the state.
Each candidate received the questions at the same time, was given the same deadline to respond and was asked to work within the same general guidelines. Their responses are presented below to give voters an opportunity to compare the candidates’ positions in their own words. Responses appear as submitted, in their own words.
Moorefield Examiner (ME):
Solar and large-scale land use
We’ve had zoning for more than 50 years, giving officials and residents a way to decide where agricultural, residential and industrial uses belong. The proposed MN8 Old Fields solar project would require large areas currently zoned agricultural or residential to accommodate a utility-scale energy development. As a delegate, would you protect the authority of counties with established zoning to make those land-use decisions locally, or should the Legislature or state regulators be able to override local zoning for projects deemed important to statewide energy or economic-development goals? Where would you draw that line?
Orndoff-Sayers: Zoning and comprehensive plans let local citizens – the people most affected by change — encourage growth while maintaining their quality of life. The state legislature SHOULD NOT be able to override local control of this kind of important decision making. I will work to repeal House Bill 2014, which took that control away.
Hardy County, Wardensville and Moorefield are lucky enough to have comprehensive planning and zoning in place, and I encourage all other counties and towns to do the same.
Schetrom: Yes. I believe counties that have established zoning should retain a meaningful voice in deciding where large-scale developments are located. This is not a new position for me—in 2022, I actively opposed House Bill 4553, and when similar legislation returned as House Bill 2459 in 2023, I again worked to protect local zoning authority against legislation that would have allowed certain large-scale electric-generating facilities in any zoning district. Hardy County has had zoning for more than 50 years, and those rules should not simply disappear because a particular project is considered important at the state level. At the same time, local government has a responsibility to apply its rules fairly and recognize the property rights of landowners. My position is not anti-development—I have consistently supported economic growth—but how and where development occurs matters, and the state should be very cautious about overriding legitimate local land-use decisions.
ME:
HB 2014, Data Centers and State Preemption
Related to the first question, supporters of HB 2014 say its incentives for data centers and microgrids could bring billions of dollars in investment, strengthen West Virginia’s energy economy and generate revenue for tax relief. Critics argue the law went too far by stripping counties and municipalities of authority over zoning, noise, lighting and other local impacts while redirecting much of the property-tax revenue that traditionally supports local government and schools. Do you believe HB 2014 strikes the right balance between attracting major investment and preserving local control? If not, what specifically would you change?
Schetrom: I support bringing major investment and new economic opportunities to West Virginia, but I believe HB 2014 went too far in removing local authority. The law exempts certified projects from county and municipal zoning, noise, lighting, viewshed, development and other land-use requirements. I would support revisiting those provisions so communities retain a meaningful role in addressing the local impacts of these projects. I would also review the revenue-distribution provisions to make sure counties, schools and other local entities providing services receive an appropriate benefit from development occurring within their borders. We should be able to welcome investment to West Virginia without requiring communities to surrender virtually all local control in the process.
Orndoff-Sayers: HB 2014 is a terrible law, and I will work for its repeal. It reroutes tax funding away from counties and ignores some of the big local issues around data centers, such as water quality and quantity issues, electric power consumption, and environmental and public health concerns. If communities want this type of development, then the W.Va. Office of Economic Development should work directly with those counties and towns to develop clear plans to address the water, power, and decommissioning impacts.
ME:
Public schools and the state-local funding divide
West Virginia committed roughly $277 million to the Hope Scholarship Program for the 2026–27 school year, even as the Legislature again left the state’s public-school funding formula largely unchanged. Declining enrollment, rising costs, and aging infrastructure contributed to a proposed excess levy that voters rejected in May. As a delegate, would you make reform of the public-school funding formula a priority, and how would you balance that need against the state’s growing financial commitment to the Hope Scholarship? Be specific about what you would change.
Orndoff-Sayers: Diminishing budgets, outdated funding formulas, and the Hope Scholarship are all draining resources from our public schools just when they need more help to attract quality teachers and give our children a great education. We need to bring new thinking to our public schools.
It’s a proven fact that smaller classrooms are better for students. We should look at more K-12 school solutions. Young kids should not be on a bus for more than an hour to get to school!
And I will work to create income limits and accountability to the Hope Scholarship, where there are none now. I’d propose using the federal median household income ($87,480) as an eligibility cap. And I’d also limit funds to be spent ONLY in West Virginia, not out-of-state.
Finally, since attendance and grades matter, our home schools, charter schools and Hope Scholarship recipients must use the same standard testing used in our public schools, to make sure that all our children are learning and mastering their subjects.
Schetrom: Yes, reforming the public-school funding formula would be a priority for me.
The current system places tremendous pressure on rural counties experiencing declining enrollment even though the costs of operating schools, transporting students, maintaining buildings and providing quality instruction do not decline at the same rate. I would examine changes that give greater consideration to geographic size, transportation costs, fixed operating expenses and the unique challenges of smaller rural school systems. I recognize that the Hope Scholarship is now part of West Virginia’s education system, but its growth cannot come at the expense of our constitutional responsibility to maintain strong public schools. In Hardy and Pendleton Counties, our public schools are not simply institutions—they are an essential part of our communities—and state policy should recognize that reality.
ME:
Flood Resiliency
As Hardy County approaches the anniversary of the devastating 1985 flood, West Virginia continues to experience destructive flooding, yet the Flood Resiliency Trust Fund created in 2023 received its first appropriation only this year and with only $5 million. As a delegate, what level of ongoing state investment in flood prevention and resiliency would you support, and should that funding be a recurring budget priority rather than dependent on year-end surpluses or emergency spending after a disaster?
Schetrom: Flood resiliency should be a recurring state budget priority rather than something we address primarily after disaster strikes. I support establishing a dependable annual appropriation to the Flood Resiliency Trust Fund, with additional investments when state revenues allow, rather than relying almost entirely on year-end surpluses. Those dollars should be directed toward projects supported by sound data—improved drainage, mitigation, infrastructure protection, watershed work and other measures that can demonstrably reduce future losses. Every dollar we wisely spend before a disaster can potentially save substantially more in emergency response and rebuilding afterward. The 1985 flood remains part of Hardy County’s collective memory, and preparedness is one of the fundamental responsibilities of government.
Orndoff-Sayers: Flood resiliency needs to be locked in annually to the state budget, not as an afterthought, and $5 million is a pittance. West Virginia has seen an increase in flooding and a decrease in support from the federal government and FEMA. This is a statewide problem and it needs a statewide solution. However, there’s a critical role to be played locally, and we must return flood dam oversight to our county Conservation Districts, instead of Charleston. Our folks have a much better idea of what’s going on with our dams than a bunch of political appointees five hours away.
ME:
Taxes
Generally speaking, no one wants to pay higher taxes. Local voters recently rejected an EMS and school levy. Earlier this year Governor Morrisey sought a 10% personal income-tax cut in 2026. The Legislature approved 5%. Supporters argue that further cuts would help families and attract investment, while critics question whether the state can afford them alongside public-service needs. Would you support additional income-tax cuts? If so, explain how you would pay for them, and identify which funding priorities you would protect or what specific spending reductions or replacement revenue would you support? If you support raising them, where would you seek to direct them?
Orndoff-Sayers: This isn’t a popular statement, but taxes are how governments can do their work. If you cut all the taxes – income taxes, property taxes, corporation and severance taxes — you’re not able to have roads, schools, parks, emergency services, and everything else we take for granted. That said, the state income tax structure definitely needs some creative solutions. I’d propose using the state median household income ($59,608) as a baseline for taxes. Make under the amount, no income taxes. Make more than that amount, you pay a fair, graduated income tax. The tax cut that the Legislature approved provided just a small amount of money to most working-class West Virginians – the wealthy and the corporations got a big tax cut. And instead of removing the guardrails on how and where money is spent at the state level – which our governor and legislature have been doing – we need to ensure accountability and transparency to make sure these funds go where they’re intended and most needed.
Schetrom: I support reducing taxes when revenues and economic conditions make those reductions sustainable, and I supported the Legislature’s measured approach of approving a 5% personal income-tax reduction this year rather than committing to a larger cut without sufficient certainty about future revenues. Tax reductions should not be financed by weakening essential services or simply shifting costs from the state onto counties and local taxpayers. My priorities would include protecting public safety and EMS, education, infrastructure and the state’s core obligations while continually looking for efficiencies and unnecessary spending. I also believe the Legislature must recognize the increasing financial burdens it has placed on county governments, including regional jail costs and EMS. The goal should be lower taxes through economic growth, responsible budgeting and efficient government—not reductions in one tax that ultimately force another level of government to raise taxes.
ME:
Keeping Hardy and Pendleton Counties First
Both of you come to this race from local government, where you have been directly accountable to the communities you serve. In Charleston, you would face broader influences, including party leadership, fellow lawmakers, lobbyists, donors, and statewide interests that may not always align with Hardy County’s. When Hardy County’s interests conflict with those influences, which comes first, and how should voters hold you accountable for those choices?
Schetrom: The people of Hardy and Pendleton Counties will always be my top priority, far ahead of any loyalty I feel towards my party, donors, or special interest groups. When I believe legislation harms the interests of the 86th District, I will speak up and work to change it, regardless of who sponsored it or supports it. That said, I am a proud Republican, and I believe that my party affiliation will allow me to better serve Hardy and Pendleton Counties. Republicans have a supermajority in the legislature, which means that Democrats like my opponent would simply be ignored by state leaders in Charleston. If I have the honor of serving as your delegate, I promise to remain just as accessible and open about my positions and voting intentions as I’ve been as your County Commissioner.
Orndoff-Sayers: as mayor of Wardensville — a job I will be able to continue whatever happens on Nov. 3 — I learned that the best way to make my town better was to collaborate with other mayors, plus county, state and federal officials. You’ve heard that rising tide lifts all boats? Hardy County doesn’t stand alone, nor does any other county.
As a delegate serving Hardy and Pendleton counties, I’ll continue the work I’ve started, building bridges across the geographic and political divides. We all need to work together to share resources regionally and statewide, solve problems, and look for sustainable solutions. Hardy and Pendleton counties need affordable housing, food security, childcare access, and access to domestic violence resources. Regarding accountability, you can reach me anytime via phone, email, in my office in town hall, or just running into me on the street. I’ll continue to be accessible to a wider constituency.
And if folks don’t like how I’m doing, delegate is just a two-year term. If I’m not working out, elect a new one! It’s the American way.
