Name Karen Nance
Office Sought WV House of Delegates
Party Affiliation Democrat
District 23
City/Town Barboursville
Campaign Website Elect Karen Nance for Delegate
Data shows that Black and low-income students are disciplined at a higher rate than their peers in West Virginia schools. Involvement of School Resource Officers (SROs) exacerbates these discrepancies and can lead to the school-to-prison pipeline. Studies show SROs do little to make schools safer, while contributing to harsher discipline and drawing resources away from other services like mental health and other support services. What is your position on having SROs in schools?
I was a member of the Cabell County School Board from 2014-18. There is a push across the country to put guns in the hands of principals and teachers. SROs provide an alternative. SROs should only arrested students for criminal offences such as bringing weapons to school, selling illegal drugs, and assaults, offences that school administrators would have to call the police to handle. The administrators deal with disciplinary issues with suspension or expulsion to the alternative school. This is when the social workers are most beneficial. I do believe that additional training of SROs is needed to better protect students’ rights. SROs should not be involved in student discipline unless a crime is committed on campus The courts and Legislature need to address the pipeline “schools-to-prison” issue with alternative sentencing for criminal acts in schools. The courts and Legislature need to address the issue that minorities are being arrested to a greater degree. If this is occurring in a school, district administrators need to investigate the issue and enact policy to stop the practice if found and discipline the individual school’s administrators. Social workers that offer mental health and other services are now in the schools. We can do both. Again, I fear, if we take the SROs out of the schools, the public, which knows school shootings have occurred in other schools, will push for and maybe get guns in the hands of educators. Furthermore, it has been my experience that students and educators get injured when the staff, including social workers, try to intervene in these criminal offences because they are not trained to do so. SROs just being there, serves as a deterrent. There is no good answer for these issues. The reality is crimes occur in schools and students and staff need protected. If a SRO is abusing a student’s rights in a school, the school board should ask for a replacement.
Mental health has been a growing concern since the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. Conversations on mental health are complicated by the prevalence of substance use disorder (SUD) in the state. WV has long wait times for mental health services including SUD treatment. One proposal is using mental health teams as first responders. Would you support funding for more mental health response teams? Why or why not, and what if any is the role of the legislature in solving this issue?
I would advocate for mental health response teams. Trained mental health professionals can often de- escalate a situation when the presence of police offers may exasperate the situation. In many cases across the country, under the influence individuals, autistic persons, and persons with mental illnesses are being killed or badly injured by police who do not know how to de-escalate the situation. These individuals may be irrational and a possible danger to themselves and others. If not an immediate threat, they should not be the subject of police action. These situations can end in the death of the subject and/or police officer(s) over a traffic stop, violation of city ordinances, creating a disturbance, etc . In no court of law would these individuals be subject to corporal punishment for merely committing a criminal offence. A mental health response team can decide if the individual needs arrested. It is a tragedy that so many people are addicted to drugs and alcohol, have mental disorders, and/ or other disabilities that are not apparent to the necked eye. There is often no way for a typical police officer to diagnose an individual’s particular disability without the expertise of mental health professionals. Mental health response teams save lives.
In Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. In response, the West Virginia Legislature banned most abortions. Do you agree or disagree with this new law? What do you think West Virginia's abortion policies should be?
I believe the new law making most abortions illegal is extreme and an overreach into the private lives of West Virginians and limits their right to make decisions for their families. I would like to shape a law that returns to women the rights they had under Roe Vs Wade. Our laws should not be based on the beliefs held by a few churches especially when those beliefs are not held by other churches, religions, and non-religious groups. The First Amendment guarantees freedom of religion. This amendment by laws and courts has been weakened as well as the “separation of church and state” doctrine supported under legal precedent. We need to make it clear to our representatives that we did not elect them to represent their church. They are supposed to be representing all citizens.
Several West Virginia municipalities have passed ordinances that expand the definition of racial discrimination to include discriminating against traditional or natural hair textures and styles. Would you support expanding this protection statewide? Why or why not?
Yes. I support laws that make it illegal to discriminate against persons over their traditional or natural hair textures and styles. Growing up in the 1960s and 70s when school systems and employers discriminated against long hair, I understand the importance of being able to make your own decision about your hair.
Many states have created laws that seek to limit the teaching of "divisive concepts" or "critical race theory.” West Virginia narrowly missed passing a similar law during the 2022 Legislative Session. What is the value or harm in teaching these topics and what role should the legislature play in determining this curriculum?
I am among other things, a historian. I believe that history is a mosaic of many stories, and all our stories are important and require research and telling. Some history will make you uncomfortable and other history proud. Different people will be affected differently. History is about knowledge. If we do not teach it to our children, the rest of the world will know it, and we will be at a disadvantage. The old cliche that says “if you do not know your history, you are doomed to repeat it” is very true. Since white students’ parents were the ones complaining to their representatives about their children learning minority history, the bill would in effect eliminate most minority history. I would not support any bills that limit our children’s right to learn all our history. The legislature should not interfere in curriculum; they are for the most part not educators. We have a State Board of Education and system for public input into all education policies including curriculum that is open to all, not just a few of supporters of a political party agenda. Politics do not belong in education.
Currently there is no statewide law protecting people in matters of employment, housing, and public accommodations based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. Do you support or oppose adding sexual orientation and gender identity to the state’s nondiscrimination law? Why or why not?
I do support a law adding sexual orientation or gender identity to the state's nondiscrimination law because unfortunately such discrimination still exists.
There is increasing tension with communities of people who are unhoused or face housing insecurity. Police breakups of encampments are common, and municipalities have shown growing opposition to low-barrier housing and recovery housing. How would you address community concerns while protecting the rights of unhoused people?
I worked with the Homeless Coalition and Housing Authority. The reasons for unhoused people are complicated and vary by each individual for example addiction to alcohol and/or illegal drugs, mental disability, criminal records unpaid utility bills, evection for non-payment of rent, and financially unable to live in housing outside public housing communities where conditions are often poor. Many will not live in a shelter because they would have to give up their alcohol or illegal drugs. Many would just rather be on the street than live in the shelter. Others have a mental disability that prohibits them from trusting government housing. Each case’s needs are different. They gravitate to the Cities where they can access programs that provide food and other assistance. Housing First programs help them get into housing if they want to do so. Some individuals prefer living on the streets and they continue to do so as is their right. This creates an enormous problem for cities that have to balance the unhoused people’s rights with public safety and public health. Many Cities have approached the problem by providing tiny housing units where they live. These facilities can become unsanitary if there is not enough funding to keep them clean or supervision to keep them safe. Those with addictions need more sober living programs and housing. However, locating sober living housing is tricky. It is beyond the control of administrators of these programs to guarantee their clients stay sober. Many clients will not recover with just one trip through the program. They backslide. Thus, it is best to put the sober living facilities outside areas with high illegal drug activity to avoid temptation. These areas are often family residential neighborhoods. Drug dealers start hanging around looking for old clients and the residents want the facilities shut down. I would encourage the facilities be located in mixed commercial residential areas with low crime of possible.
Jails in West Virginia are overcrowded, have some of the nation’s highest death rates, and are bankrupting some counties. Prisons are understaffed, making them dangerous for residents and staff alike. What steps should West Virginia take to address these issues?
First provide more funding and higher pay for correction officers. Improve training for the correction officers. The State Police evidence lab is understaffed, and processing evidence is very slow. The lab requires better funding. Inmates are denied a right to a speedy trail. This causes inmates, who cannot afford bail, to be incarcerated far longer than necessary especially inmates that are not guilty or could plea to a lesser offence and be released on parole. Change bail laws to get nonviolent offenders out of jail prior to trial. Pay for ankle monitors for those who cannot afford them when appropriate. Improve legal representation for minorities that often remain in jail for lack of good council. The regional jail bill is funded by the county, but once convicted, the inmate goes to a state facility funded by the state. Thus, a speedy trail also benefits counties. It lowers the number of prisoners eliminating overcrowding issues such as health and safety.
Taxpayers who have served time behind bars and are currently on probation and/or parole cannot vote in West Virginia. The West Virginia Senate Judiciary Committee joined a growing number of states this year and passed a bill that would have expanded that right to people in community corrections. When, if ever do you think people should lose their right to vote? When should that right be restored?
I disagree with the new proposed law that would further limits the right to vote. I would entertain expanding the right to vote to those on probation.
Study after study shows that gender-affirming care is lifesaving for trans people. And yet, some states have banned things like hormone therapy and even labeled gender-affirming care for minors as child abuse. How can West Virginia, a state with a large percentage of trans-identifying teens, best protect transgender people?
I am against passing laws that ban hormone therapy and gender-affirming care for minors as child abuse. I believe this is a private matter to be decided by families. I am a firm believer that everyone is equal under the law. Everyone has the right to choose their sexual orientation. Trans-identifying teens have the same rights. I would not support any law that took their rights away.