By Patrick Hurston
Facing rising costs, declining enrollment, and what local school officials describe as an outdated state funding formula, the Hardy County Schools Levy Committee recently held two townhall-style meetings to raise awareness, understanding, and support for the levy that will appear on the May 12 ballot. A third townhall is scheduled for Apr. 29 at 6:30 p.m. at Walnut Grove Church of the Brethren in Moorefield.
At an Apr. 22 meeting at the Wardensville Visitor’s Center, members of the Committee, including Committee Chair Quincy Combs and Ann and Mike Funkhouser joined Superintendent of Schools Dr. Sheena Van Meter to provide an overview of the levy and answer questions. Committee members urged attendees to support the levy, which they say is critical to maintaining current programs and staffing levels, reminding people that ultimately this is about the kids.
Combs opened the meeting by outlining both the structure of the proposed levy and the financial pressures driving the request, framing the decision as a choice between preserving services or entering a period of sustained cuts.
“This is not about adding positions,” Combs said. “This is about retaining the employees that we have.”
The proposed levy includes five primary components:
Employment and retention support, aimed at preserving roughly 13 current positions;
Academic intervention services, including staff who work with struggling students;
Student athletic support, making school sporting events free for county residents and reducing the burden on families with several kids in school sports;
Employee compensation support, including two $500 annual payments to help offset rising cost of living increases; and,
Facilities maintenance and improvements.
At the center of the discussion was the state’s school funding formula.
“So, the funding formula in the state of West Virginia is broken and hasn’t been significantly updated since 1993,” said Van Meter. “And that formula is how we receive our funding and how all counties receive their funding in West Virginia,” she said.
The formula determines how much each county receives based on enrollment and a set of assumptions about a range of things including staffing, transportation, technology, textbooks, and operations, among other things, explained Van Meter. Those assumptions; however, no longer reflect realities, according to the Committee and Van Meter.
Hardy County, for example, now serves a higher proportion of high-needs students, including those requiring more special education support and English language services. Those needs require more staff per student than the formula accounts for.
As an example, Van Meter explained that state law requires one adult for every four special needs students. “We have a 25 percent special education rate,” Van Meter said, noting some classrooms require multiple adults for a small number of students.
“We have a lot more students that are very high needs now than we’ve ever had. So, it’s not the same as having one teacher for 25 kids in a classroom,” she said. She also pointed to the fact that Hardy County schools have one of the highest percentages of English Language Learning (ELL) students in the entire state. These two issues alone “lop side” the formula as established, whereas Pendleton County has no ELL students and doesn’t have to provide the extra, specialized staff, she explained.
At the same time, officials say enrollment has declined by more than 260 students over the past decade, reducing funding while many costs remain fixed or have increased.
“When enrollment goes down, the funding goes down, but the expenses don’t go down,” she said.
Utilities, transportation routes, and building maintenance remain largely unchanged regardless of student count, creating what administrators described as a structural imbalance.
Van Meter said she and other county school superintendents lobbied in Charleston to change staffing ratios in the funding formula. Those efforts did not gain enough traction.
Draft legislation that would have provided adequate funding for every county school system but one and that would have prevented the type of closures and consolidations that the state is seeing failed to advance. Van Meter said it would have cost $150 million. Instead, she said, “They spent almost $300 million funding the Hope Scholarship.” Van Meter made it clear she supports school choice but pointed out that 92 percent of kids attend public school.
Speakers outlined a range of potential impacts if additional funding is not secured through the levy.
Positions most vulnerable include social workers, interventionists, assistant principals, and certain career and technical education programs, roles not strictly required by state code but described as essential to student support.
“These are positions that are not providing direct instruction… and are not required,” Van Meter said, explaining how cuts would likely be determined.
Those roles, however, extend beyond academics. Speakers highlighted services such as food and clothing assistance, mental health support, and individualized academic help.
“They take care of their needs outside of the school as well,” Anne Funkhauser said of school-based social workers. She pointed to social workers driving kids to school that aren’t on a bus route or providing meals to kids in need.
Over time, officials warned, cuts could expand to include elective courses, advanced placement offerings, and potentially entire programs, as resources are redirected to meet minimum state requirements.
Unlike most counties in West Virginia, Hardy County does not currently have an excess school levy in place. Officials noted that 44 of the state’s 55 counties supplement school funding through levies, often allowing for higher salaries or expanded programming.
Hardy’s proposal represents about one-third of the maximum levy allowed under state law, meaning officials opted for a smaller request than permitted.
“We could actually have gone… much larger,” Van Meter said, but chose a more limited approach to reduce the burden on taxpayers.
If approved, the levy would provide a local funding stream to stabilize staffing and maintain current services. If rejected, officials said the county would likely face a series of incremental cuts beginning as early as the next budget cycle.
The levy could be resubmitted in a future election, but administrators cautioned that delaying action would likely result in immediate reductions and longer-term challenges.
“We’ve made our significant cuts,” Van Meter said. “We’re not going to be able to keep doing it anymore.”
For voters, the decision ultimately comes down to weighing the cost of the levy against the potential loss of programs and personnel that, officials argue, have become integral to the county’s schools.
To calculate the estimated cost of the levy to you, visit www.hardycountyschools.com/page/levyinfo2026
