As part of the Moorefield Examiner’s coverage of the Nov. 3 general election, all four County Commission candidates were invited to answer the same set of questions on issues affecting Hardy County and the state.
Republican candidate Mike Phillips did not respond to multiple requests from the Examiner. Democrat candidate Shawna Crites accepted the invitation but never provided responses. Following are the responses from No Party candidate Hunter Flinn and Independent Doug Mongold. Responses appear as submitted, in their own words.
Moorefield Examiner (ME):
The Future of EMS
Reliable EMS is an essential county service, but staffing, funding and coverage remain ongoing challenges. What responsibility should Hardy County assume for providing and funding EMS, versus the state, and do you believe the county’s current and proposed Special Ambulance Service Ambulance Fee provide a sustainable model? If not, what specifically would you change, including funding, staffing or how services are organized?
Hunter Flinn: Reliable EMS is essential, and Hardy County must ensure dependable emergency coverage. I respect the paid and volunteer personnel who provide these services and understand the costs involved. However, I do not currently support the proposed Special Emergency Ambulance Service Fee because questions remain about how the funds would be distributed and how the fee would affect residents and businesses. Before asking taxpayers to pay more, the county should provide a transparent accounting of current salaries and job descriptions, determine what state funding is available under House Bill 5168, adopted in 2026, and identify inefficiencies. Any fee should be based on documented needs, receive public review, and account for its impact on Hardy County residents and business owners.
Doug Mongold: This is an essential service needed throughout the county that requires us to be creative in how we utilize county and state funding to pay for it; it is made complex by the fact that we have two different geographical locations in the county with limited resources and the same needs. The current model is sustainable but needs to be consistently reevaluated as funding and resources change. With the new state funding that was just passed with House Bill 5168, the hope is that we will be able to keep the EMS fee as low as possible.
ME:
Animal Control and County Oversight
Recent concerns about conditions and operations at the Hardy County Dog Pound have raised questions about animal care, transparency, volunteer access and county oversight. Do you believe the current model is working? If not, what specifically should the County Commission change — including management, staffing, funding, written operating standards or partnerships with the Humane Society and other rescue organizations?
Mongold: I don’t believe the current model is working. I would like to see the county work with the Humane Society and volunteer organizations to change the perception of the Hardy County Dog Pound and to make the facility one where all animals are being treated humanely and the facilities are maintained and clean. We need to establish a committee to provide oversight of staffing and written operating procedures as well as to develop transparent partnerships with the Humane Society, rescue organizations, veterinarians, and volunteer groups to enhance the daily care of animals as well as the physical facility and report back to the commission monthly.
Flinn: First, I would seek needed funding for structural improvements at the current Hardy County Dog Pound. Then, I support pursuing a formal partnership with the Humane Society of Hardy County or similar organization to operate the county-owned dog pound under a clear, accountable agreement. This partnership could improve daily care through consistent feeding, cleaning, exercise, socialization, medical attention, and volunteer support. This could also strengthen adoption efforts. Separating shelter care from field responsibilities would allow the dog catcher to focus on animal collection while ensuring the facility receives dedicated attention. This type of partnership could provide more humane care, increase adoptions, and create a healthier future for Hardy County’s dogs.
ME:
Growth, Housing, and County Character
Hardy County faces competing pressures to create jobs and expand its tax base, preserve farmland and rural character, and ensure that working families can afford to live here. What is your vision for the county’s economic growth, and what specific tools within the County Commission’s authority would you use to balance development, land preservation and the need for affordable housing?
Mongold: Hardy County is in the process of developing a new industrial park; we are currently working to add water and sewer infrastructure. This will provide an opportunity to bring in businesses which will offer good-paying jobs and is being developed through the Hardy County RDA (Rural Development Authority). Working within the authority of the County Commissioners and under state and federal mandates, farmland preservation is handled through the Hardy County planning commission which establishes zoning ordinances and implements the 10-year comprehensive plan; this creates the balance in development. We need to seek reasonable growth through businesses that will generate jobs and new tax revenue that don’t take away from the character of our community.
Flinn: My vision for Hardy County is to see us continue investing in our arts culture, tourism, parks, and recreational opportunities. In partnership with the Hardy County Development Authority, I would like to explore the development of small-business villages in Hardy County to host local entrepreneurs, service providers, and small businesses. Affordable housing and economic growth are connected to more than just responsible land use and availability. Public schools, employment opportunities, broadband access, road conditions, sidewalks, and other infrastructure all influence where people can afford to live and where businesses can succeed. Ultimately, I believe Hardy County can welcome new opportunities without losing sight of what makes it home.
ME:
Transparency and Accountability
The Commission manages public money and appoints or participates in numerous authorities and boards, such as HCEAA, the RDA, the Day Report Center, and the dog pound, among others. It also disperses “grant” money to area organizations. What information about county government do you believe residents currently have too much difficulty obtaining, and what specific changes would you support to make government spending, meetings, decisions and public records more accessible?
Flinn: I believe residents deserve clear information about how tax dollars are spent and decisions are made. I would support livestreaming public meetings, creating a centralized archive of agendas, minutes, recordings, and votes, and creating a monthly county meeting schedule so residents can easily see when and where meetings will take place. I would also advocate for transparency in grants and contracts, regular town halls and surveys, and a central contact to help residents navigate county government.
Mongold: It’s important to be transparent with the essential issues that are being handled which impact the county and its citizens. Information is readily available to citizens who are trying to obtain it. Currently all meetings are open to the public, including committee meetings. Commission meetings are available live and online. Agendas for the meetings are published on the Secretary of State’s website. I would encourage interested citizens to visit the County Commission website to obtain information about meeting dates and times.
ME:
Solar, Zoning, and Land Preservation
The proposed MN8 Old Fields solar project would place a large utility-scale energy development on land currently zoned primarily for agricultural and residential use and is now moving through Hardy County’s planning and zoning process. Do you support the project and the process the county is following? More broadly, how should the Commission weigh potential tax revenue and economic benefits against farmland preservation, neighboring property owners and the county’s long-term land-use goals?
Mongold: I support potential solar projects and the process the county is following. The planning commission is in the process of developing guidelines for this project or any other future solar projects in the county. It is vital to follow the recommendations from the county planning commission who have sought the input from all stakeholders in this project. As a member of the planning commission, I can say that we have taken into consideration the economic benefits and tax revenue as we make our recommendations to the County Commission.
Flinn: I do not support placing a large utility-scale solar project on farmland. Agriculture is one of Hardy County’s greatest assets, leading West Virginia in agricultural sales by $153 million over the next-highest county. We must weigh the proposed PILOT/Community Benefit Agreements against potential impacts on agriculture, environmental impacts, tourism, existing businesses, property values, and future generations. The Planning Commission’s solar ordinance could allow industrial solar on land zoned Agricultural throughout the county. Before this is approved, studies are needed to understand the impacts.
