A no-interest Tucker County loan program intended to help sheriff’s deputies buy firearms and accessories hasn’t been used by any sheriff’s deputies for at least the past five-and-a-half years, according to Sheriff Jake Kopec. Meanwhile, Tucker County Commissioner Fred Davis allegedly used the program four times during that period to buy items for himself, according to court documents.
Kopec said he never used the program, nor have any of his deputies, since he became sheriff Jan. 1, 2021. He added, “I had honestly forgotten we had it until it was flagged in the audit and turned over to the state.”
The Tucker County Commission created the “Sheriff’s Incentive Program” in 2019 as a perk to help recruit sheriff’s deputies. The program allowed sheriff’s deputies to use county funds to purchase personal items “consistent with law enforcement” and then reimburse the county for those items later, without paying interest on the loans.
Davis and the other two Tucker County commissioners, Mike Rosenau and Tim Knotts, were charged Thursday with “unauthorized expenditure by local official” for allegedly authorizing Davis to use the program to buy a crossbow, firearms ammunition, and other items for himself.
Tucker County records included with the charging documents show that Davis used the program on Oct. 15, 2020; March 30, 2022; Oct. 30, 2023; Nov. 14, 2024; and Aug. 12, 2025. The charges filed against the three commissioners relate only to the most recent purchase, in the amount of $3,991.
Rosenau and Knotts did not respond to calls Tuesday seeking comment for this story. Defense attorney and former Circuit Judge Paul Gwaltney, who is representing Davis, said he could not comment on the details of the case.
“We hope to work hard for Mr. Davis and show his true love for the community,” Gwaltney said.
Country Roads News is trying to determine who, other than Davis, used the program, which recently was disbanded. Lowell Moore, who was a member of the commission in 2019 and voted in favor of creating it, said “it was intended solely for the deputies’ use.” Moore, whose term on the commission expired at the end of 2022, said he recalls that the program was used “two or three times” by sheriff’s deputies.
“It was very minimal, I don’t remember what they purchased with it,” Moore said. “I don’t remember Freddy ever using that while I was there. If he used it, I was never informed of it.”
Preston County Prosecutor James Shay Jr., who filed the charges against the commissioners, was assigned to the case after Tucker County prosecutors recused themselves. Shay said that his investigation has not uncovered anything that would suggest additional charges could be filed against the commissioners.
The following item is from Tucker County Commission meeting minutes leading up to the 2019 approval of the Sheriff’s Incentive Program:
“The Tucker County Sheriff Department would like to have an incentive put into place that would allow a Sheriff’s Deputy to purchase item/item’s that are consistent with Law Enforcement. This incentive would be paid up front by the County and then the Sheriff’s Deputy will pay back the total amount coming out of their pay checks until paid off. The Tucker County Sheriff Department thinks this would be an incentive to keep Deputies that are already hired and to help bring new hires to the Sheriff Department.”
All three commissioners voted to rescind the program on June 17, 2026.
The three county commissioners are scheduled to appear in court August 18 on the misdemeanor charges. Shay said he expects the commissioners to be released on personal recognizance bonds because there is no flight risk.
The commission is scheduled to hold its next regular meeting at 9 a.m. Wednesday.
Prosecutor Shay noted that the signatures of the commission president, the sheriff, and the county clerk appear on checks disbursed by the county. In West Virginia, local sheriffs also serve as the treasurer and tax collector, an antiquated system that many states have abandoned.
The sheriff and the clerk were not charged because those offices are not responsible for ensuring that expenditures are valid, Shay said. The sheriff’s signature is to guarantee that sufficient funds exist to cover an expenditure, and the clerk’s signature conveys that the funds are being drawn from the correct account, Shay said.
However, the commission president’s signature is meant to convey the validity of the expenditure, Shay said.
Kopec said his signature appears on 80 to 150 checks every two weeks for everything from paying electric bills to buying a load of gravel. Most of the time, another county official uses a stamp to affix his signature. Kopec said his responsibility for ensuring the valid use of funds is limited to his own department.
While not commenting specifically on the charges against the three commissioners, Kopec said he was distressed by the widespread vitriol he’s seen on social media, which could make it difficult to seat an impartial jury.
He added, “It’s disheartening to see three guys that haven’t even actually been to their first arraignment destroyed in a community, because it seems like whatever is put on social media, people believe.”
Mat Cloak contributed to this story.
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.