WATD ELECTION POLITICAL FORUM: 6TH PLYMOUTH DISTRICT

THIS TRANSCRIPT WAS GENERATED BY YOUTUBE

ANNOUNCER: This is a WATD political forum on 959watd online at 959watd.com. Now live from studio B. Here's your moderator, WATD's Christine James.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Good evening and welcome to a WATD political forum. I'm your moderator, Christine James, and I'm joined by WATD reporter Tom Gorman and Monday Night Talk host Kevin Tocci asking questions. The race tonight is for the 6th Plymouth District. We've got the incumbent Republican Ken Sweezey in studio along with his challenger, Democrat Jessica Bradley Rushing. Good evening, folks. Now, the 6th Plymouth district includes, correct me if I'm wrong, I know you will, all of Duxbury, precinct 2 of Halifax, precincts 2 and 3 of Hanson, precincts 2A and 4 of Marshfield, precincts 1, 2, 3A, 4, and 5 of Pembroke. It's a lot to remember, so that's why I had to write that down. Timing you all tonight is Charlie Fulmer and we're joined by our media partner Local Seen/PACTV. Now the format is simple. We've asked the candidates to have prepared opening and closing statements ready. No longer than two minutes for the open and one minute for the close please. Now in between we've got a round of questions from the reporters. Those questions the answers are one minute now. Then we do a lightning round where answers are either yes or no which people can never do or two sentences tops because that's why we do it. We like people to just get to the point and we have a lot of fun with the lightning round. When we go to closing statements again, that is one minute. If I want to do a follow-up question or one of the other reporters does, we'll say we'll give you a minute. We'll give you 30 seconds. But it's always very clear about how long your timing is. Now, if you go over your minute limit, and again, Charlie is timing everything over there. Green is go. See, it's even written on there. Yellow means you've got 10 seconds, and red means stop. If you're still speaking, you get the 5-second grace countdown. And if you're still speaking after that, it's the bell. And if you're still speaking, Larry will cut your mic. So that's how we try to do things. Please cut it. Try to keep your answers around a minute. If you consistently go over, ramble, or start to repeat yourself, then you also get the bell. Now, we did choose the opening and closing order earlier out of the WATD stand-in newsroom koozie. We're going to begin with Jessica Bradley Rushing and then go to Ken Sweezey and we're going to switch that order at the end. So, good evening and let's begin with Jessica.

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: Thank you so much. Thank you for having me. My name is Jessica Bradley Rushing. I'm a mom of four, an Army veteran, a former member of the Pembroke Select Board and I'm running to be the next state rep in the 6th Plymouth. I worked for Congressman Bill Keating in his district offices in Plymouth and New Bedford on veterans and immigration services and at the US Department of State. For the last five years, my work has been focused on Afghan relocation efforts to enable our wartime allies, Afghans who served alongside the US during the course of our longest war, to come here and build new lives on immigration pathways they earned through their service to our country. I'm running for this seat in large part because of my kids, the answer for why so many mothers do so many things. But my kids, who are 16, 18, 20, and 22, look around and don't believe they will ever be able to afford to live in the community where they've grown up. The next generation needs to know that they have a pathway to be able to build lives here should they so choose. We need a state rep who will bring money back to this district. And as a state, we need to address the affordability crisis, whether that's gas, groceries, housing, child care, energy costs, healthcare, or schools. And look, in the last two years, we simply haven't had those resources coming back to this district. We have lost out on hundreds of thousands of dollars in earmarks because Representative Sweezey has voted against the budget both years. And when you vote against the budget, you lose your earmarks. Ken was one of only six members of the House to vote against the budget this year. And that vote quite literally stripped local earmarks away from first responders across the district at a time when towns are struggling to make ends meet. I want to use my 25 plus years of experience working at the local, state, and federal levels and within nonprofits to strengthen these communities and support the working families in this district. And I hope I can earn your votes.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Thank you. That was the opening statement from Jessica Bradley Rushing. Now, the opening statement from Ken Sweezey.

KEN SWEEZEY: Great. Thank you, Christine, Kevin, Tom, the rest of everybody at WATD, and of course, everybody listening. This is a really important election. Many of you have heard over the past few years, you know, who I am. I grew up in this district in Hanson. My family owns and operates a small business in adjacent Whitman that I grew up working at and learned the value of a hard day's work. I went on to get my degree in forensic science, served as a fingerprint expert for a major metro police department before joining the private sector in biotech, a huge industry here in Massachusetts, and serving as an appointed official in Hanson on economic development and capital improvements. I'll spend most of my time just talking a little bit about my record because there seems to be some confusion about that. So, I'm very proud of the work that we've done in the last couple years. I think it's absolutely critical that your state representative does just that, represent you. And that's what I've done. I'm not going up to Beacon Hill to just go along to get along like many of the members of the legislature are. Unfortunately, as far as this voting against the budget earmark situation that we've heard a lot about on social media and my opponent continues to pedal across the district. First of all, it's not true. I have gotten earmarks for the district. Some of our most important projects I've gotten money for Powder Point bridge repairs, which of course is on the top of everybody's mind nowadays. We also part of the override last year in Duxbury was for a feasibility study for the Alden Elementary School, which I also got an earmark to help fund that study. So, I just don't know where that is even coming from. As far as the budget, what I'm not going to do is go up there and vote for a budget. I know we're going to talk about the municipal finance situation that we're in here in this district. What I'm not going to do is vote to approve the very system that is underfunding Chapter 70, allowing our roads to go into disrepair, completely underfunding unrestricted government aid. It's not going to happen. It's nonsense. You talk about the average freshman gets around $100,000 in earmarks that my opponent alluded to and there's about 45,859 residents in our district. If you divide that, it's $210 each.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Thank you. Whenever you have a question or a statement and you feel like you didn't get to finish it, you can always use your closing statement to include that in there. Again, that was the opening statement from Ken Sweezey. Let's go to questions now from our panel. Kevin Tocci, questions for the candidates.

KEVIN TOCCI: Thank you. My first question is to kind of help the voters better understand where you each stand on the issues. Now, I have list I have five of the following issues that I'd ask you to stack in order of priority for your district. What they as to what they would be and why. The issues that I have and feel free to substitute one out if you feel as though there's one that's a greater priority. I have affordability, housing or the MBTA Communities Act. Sorry. Unrestricted government aid, water, securing earmarks, and funding. I'll let you choose who will answer this first.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Let's go. Let's go to Ken Sweezey.

KEN SWEEZEY: Great. Yeah, one minute. Plenty of time to talk about all those issues. I affordability is the number one issue. The two things that I heard on the doors constantly as my team and I were out there is affordability and accountability. That's the audit that needs to get done. I'd say that's a top issue for sure. People are absolutely fed up that there's no transparency. I encourage everyone to go v vote yes on number on question one because we need public records with the least transparent state in the union. But affordability is absolutely number one and a lot of that is the state's fault. It is absolutely the state's fault because that comes out in public these so-called public benefit charges. That's about 15 to 20% of your gas and electric bill. Completely unnecessary. If there were adults in the room, we could strip those away tomorrow and save people real money. The governor's proposing a suspension of the gas tax. The legislature could do that tomorrow, but they refuse. We have the stretch codes that completely make building unaffordable. That's a huge problem. We could change that tomorrow. Net zero mandates for 2050. All of this stuff is connected. So the municipal finance piece and the lack of state aid to our communities leads into that affordability piece.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Same question, Jess.

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: Thank you. So in order of priority, I would say that state resources, affordability, those are the top two for me. I think affordability crosses multiple areas, right? We're talking about affordability in terms of housing. We're talk I think the housing piece actually falls into that affordability piece. Housing, child care, education, energy costs. All of those are affordability issues that are affecting people across the district every single day. Affordability was by far the most important thing that I heard on the doors as well, and I agree with Representative Sweezey on that. I do think energy costs are going to be a major issue, especially as we're going into this winter. The cost of heating your home is going to be very expensive and we need to look at ways that the state can help reduce those energy costs across the board. Not just in an emergency situation like we're in right now where oil is costing, you know, in some cases I've seen it over $6 a gallon. School funding would be the next priority for me. Across the board, I think that our Chapter 70 funding, our circuit breaker funding, those formulas are broken and we need to reform them. So, affordability, housing, energy costs, schools, and then state resources.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Okay. Any followup with that? Okay. Tom Gorman, questions for the candidates.

TOM GORMAN: The state supreme judicial court recently rejected Marshfield's lawsuit that the MBTA communities act is an unfunded mandate. What are your thoughts on this? And do you feel the MBTA bylaw actually addresses the state's housing needs? Let's start with you, Jessica.

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: Sure. So I think the MBTA communities act was good in concept but it was implemented and communicated poorly across the board. The underlying purpose of the legislation which was passed under the Baker administration is to build additional units of housing and particularly affordable units in communities surrounding MBTA transit stations. I know that a lot of communities had a difficult time accepting the way that this was rolled out and I don't disagree with that difficulty. I think it is a good idea in theory and it's something we should do, but it was communicated so poorly that a lot of towns felt like they had to push back. I think at this point the only town in this district that is no longer compliant with the MBTA Communities Act is Halifax. As a result, they are not eligible for state grants and they have lost out on hundreds of thousands of dollars that could have potentially come into the town at a time when they sorely need it. So, while I absolutely agree that the act was not communicated well, that it was not necessarily rolled out appropriately, I do think that Halifax can't afford to continue to lose out on state money at a time when their municipal budget is so tight. So, I think it's something that we really need to work on to address to make sure that towns get into compliance.

TOM GORMAN: Same question, Ken.

KEN SWEEZEY: Yeah, the MBTA Communities Act is a horrendous piece of legislation. And what happens now in the legislature is they tuck these very consequential pieces into large bills. This was an amendment to an economic development bill that should have never been added as an amendment and it's been enforced horribly. We have our attorney general suing our communities with our state tax dollars that are then forced to defend themselves with our local tax dollars. Only in Massachusetts would that make sense. Our communities have a right to self-determination. Our constitution protects local control. The MBTA Communities Act is antithetical to all of that. It's the same thing we see with battery zones that are popping up as well that are by right and this needs to stop. I don't think that it's a situation where I need to demand that Halifax comply so that they have a right to their money. They already have a right to their money. My job is to represent Halifax go to Beacon Hill and tell them that they're wrong. That's exactly what I did when the governor took away fire safety grants. We went up there, we organized our chiefs, we wrote public letters, and they had to resend that decision and we got that money back to the district.

CHRISTINE JAMES: You're listening to a political forum. It's for the 6th Plymouth district. We've got both candidates here in studio. We've got the incumbent Republican Ken Sweezey and the Democrat challenger Jessica Bradley Rushing. Any follow-up questions to that? Okay.

KEVIN TOCCI: The backbone of the Southshore with business, it's always small business and we're hearing a lot of the same questions and concerns that we do with local homeowners. It's prohibitively expensive to do business here. Dealing with the Department of Revenue here is a nightmare worse than the IRS. It they it cost you money to just start a business even if you're not making any money. What can you do specifically that's going to help small business in the district? Ken?

KEN SWEEZEY: Yeah, there's a handful of things that we already have done. I was very proud to support legislation and economic development bills that would reduce or eliminate the filing fee for new LLC's. We're one of the most expensive states where we have a continuous running fee on that. So, we were stripping that back. There was also complete mismanagement around the unemployment excuse me the workers comp fund that when we got some money from the feds back during COVID they were misspent and now we owe the federal government quite a bit of money. Other states like New York that also has a dem democratic governor backfilled that fund so that it wasn't all thrown onto the backs of small businesses. Yet our governor administration refuses to do that and the legislature leadership team refuses to do that. That's an easy step that other states have done. I'm proud to have come from a small business family that's been around since 1969. I'm endorsed by the National Federation of Independent Business. I listen to their needs. Whether it's stuff going on in environmental bond bills, you know, concerns around plastic bags and anything else that small businesses care about, I care about. So, I will always be a champion of that on Beacon Hill.

KEVIN TOCCI: Same question, Jessica Bradley Rushing.

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: Thank you so much. So, I am previously a small business owner. When my kids were little, I took a few years away from working full-time and I owned my own small business. As a mommy and me yoga studio owner, I know the burdens that come down on small businesses and I know that we need to do more to ensure that our small businesses can thrive in these communities. And when you, you know, when you go around the communities that are in this district, the vast majority of the businesses that we're looking at are small businesses. I think that the state does have to do more to ensure that small business owners have the tools that they need to thrive. I also think that, you know, we need to look at ways that we can work with the chambers of commerce more effectively and make sure that we're listening to small business owners and taking their considerations under advisement when we make these decisions on Beacon Hill. I also think importantly that across the board the Executive Office of Economic Development has provided some opportunities, but there's more that needs to be done. And I think that as a representative on Beacon Hill, I would work with small business owners throughout the district to make sure that we are addressing their needs in the way that they feel is most appropriate.

KEVIN TOCCI: I'm going to ask you both a follow-up question. 30 seconds. Give me one example of something concrete that you feel that you could get done in the next two years that would specifically help small business. Jessica,

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: I mean, I don't have specific legislation that I would file necessarily for small businesses, but my intent is to work with the chambers of com commerce and the small business owners in each of the towns individually before I go ahead and assume that I know as someone who's no longer a small business owner in this area, what would be best for them?

KEVIN TOCCI: Okay, same question, Ken.

KEN SWEEZEY: Yeah, a long list. Like I said, it would be an absolute budget priority to make sure that we're backfilling the state responsibility in that unemployment workers comp fund that was completely mismanaged. I would make sure we're working with the mass restaurants and mass retailers if they're worried about plastic bag bans, paint taxes, mattress stewardship programs, they're trying to ban takeout containers, all these things really negatively affect small business. I've been a champion on the side of business for two years and I'm going to continue to do so.

KEVIN TOCCI: Okay, let me just I'm going to ask you both one more follow-up question, another 30 second. Anecdotally, tell me, you know, we hear people say people are leaving the state, people are not leaving the state. Do you hear from the small business owners in your district that they're leaving because they've had it, Ken?

KEN SWEEZEY: Oh, absolutely. I just when I was out knocking doors in Duxbury, there was a small train store next to Bonis and that gentleman retired because it didn't make sense for him to keep his business open in Duxbury anymore. And it's heartbreaking. And I'm sure he I know that he is far from the only one. I mean, there's people in my own family that want to close down our again almost 60-year family business because it just doesn't make sense. And of course, Massachusetts wants to tax you on the way out the door as well. So, it's not even always feasible for people to retire comfortably here. But it's a huge problem.

KEVIN TOCCI: Jessica, same question. Do you - do you - have you run into that anecdotally speaking with people that are leaving this district, your district, because of problems running a business?

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: Anecdotally, I haven't heard that. My sister is a small business owner here in Plymouth County, not in this district, but in an adjacent district, and she's doing really well. I think that, you know, the conversations that I've had with her have been eye opening about some of the challenges they've faced, but I don't think the statistics or the data bear out that there are a lot of small businesses fleeing the state. I do think there's a lot more that the state can do to support those businesses.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Okay. Thank you, Kevin. Questions for the candidates.

[PANELIST]: It was interesting this spring to watch many of the communities across the Southshore and I think specifically in respective district that you're looking to serve or be reelected for of trying to pass a budget without having to do a Prop 2½ override. I guess what I want to ask is residents are paying more locally, especially when they're dealing with inflation and rising household expenses. I'll start with Jessica. I'll ask you this question. If you're elected, what specific changes would you seek in state funding formulas, municipal revenue policy, or even service mandates to help communities balance their budgets without having to repeatedly ask taxpayers to approve Prop 2½ overrides?

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: So, you're exactly right. Every single town in this district had an override on the ballot this spring. Some of those passed and some did not. About half passed. I worked as, you know, at the municipal level on the Pembroke Select Board and I see how tight these budgets are and they're only getting tighter with rising fixed costs impacting the municipal budgets every year. I don't think that I think Prop 2½ is a safeguard for taxpayers to protect taxpayers from extreme hikes, but I do think we need to re reformulate the Chapter 70 and Chapter 90 funding for schools, for roads, and the circuit breaker funding so that we can put a little bit more relief into the municipal budgets. I also think that we need to address health care costs at the state level because the rising health care costs are going up so much faster than Prop 2½ can cover. In some cases in the state, we've seen 15, 20, even 40% increases in health care for municipal bodies and that's something that we need to address at the state level because that's just not surmountable when you have Prop 2½.

[PANELIST]: Same question, Ken.

KEN SWEEZEY: So, I've been to five of the six town meetings or fall special town meetings so far this year in all of my communities. And you will have people go to the microphone when we're talking about budgets and it's a young family who has a kid in this in the public schools and just wants their son or daughter to have a good education. And then the next person who comes up is a retired person on social security that's worried about losing their home because of their property taxes and getting run out of the town that they've lived in their entire lives. Who's wrong in that situation? The state of Massachusetts is the one causing that, not those individuals and not I feel bad for the select boards and the finance chairs. I really do in these towns because they're between a rock and a hard place. Chapter 70 is absolutely broken. Unrestricted government aid in raw dollars. Our state budget has gone up roughly 200% in the last 20 years. Since about 2006 2007 where the state budget was in the low 20s, our state budget is now over 63 billion. Yet unrestricted government aid has only gone up less than 20%. How does that make any sense? Chapter 70 is broken and I don't know how my opponent can sit here and agree with that and yet say she wants to support that budget process.

[PANELIST]: I do have a followup. Okay. So do you think that the state should provide additional reoccurring aid to communities facing structural deficits and what spending reductions or revenue sources or other trade-offs would you support to fund it, Ken?

KEN SWEEZEY: Yeah, absolutely. Like I said, Chapter 70 needs to be reworked. Our communities are at huge disadvantages whether it's the inflation cap which is 4.5% in the formula which I submitted a bill to study how we can best get rid of that cap or the wealth factors that are taken in that completely hurt our communities here that aren't don't get the advantage of the student opportunity act that was passed that's a huge problem unrestricted government aid like I said was such a big part of local funding back in 20 years ago and now it's a very small percentage that absolutely needs to change there's plenty of things we can cut mass health and other benefits are over 50% of our state budget, more than what our state budget was 20 years ago is just spent on certain government programs like mass health. We need to be able to reduce those costs. That's a huge problem. There's other things that we're spending money on. We've spent a lot of money on, you know, the migrant crisis of the last few years. We spent billions of dollars with nothing to show for it with those hotels that we paid for. So, it's reckless spending. We absolutely have things we can cut, but the money needs to be directed where it's needed most to support our towns.

[PANELIST]: Jessica?

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: Sure. So, Chapter 70 funding is broken, as is the circuit breaker funding for the schools. I think both of those need to be revamped. The way that it works right now, the schools are reimbursed a year after the money is spent for the circuit breaker, and those costs are often hard to project and really difficult to budget around. The school funding absolutely needs to be addressed and revamped from the ground up. Just fixing Chapter 70 funding and the circuit breaker. That's a short-term fix. Long-term, the entire thing needs to be revamped. I also think that the health care costs need to be addressed because in Penroke when I was on the select board, we had healthcare costs that went up 11 12 13% in a single year, which you can't you can't fix that with Prop 2½. So, we need to take those specific items, health care and education have to be incredibly important for every single town to address, but we need to fix the way that the state funds those.

[PANELIST]: I want to ask Ken: you mentioned as far as the Chapter 70 formula. I think my colleagues would agree. Every time there's an election, we hear the same things. The funding formula needs to be revamped and needs to be revamped, but yet it seems as though the can keeps getting kicked down the road. What do you think needs to be done? Who needs to lead the charge with legislation? The other thing is what needs to be done to set the bar higher when it comes to per pupil spending. It seems like every budget cycle that legislators have to go in and raise the amount per pupil because it's set so low. Let's [go to] Ken.

KEN SWEEZEY: Yeah. So the a big problem with the per pupil spending is that there's so many minimum aid communities now. Like almost all of the communities are minimum aid districts. So that 160 just gets multiplied by the student population. So, for example, Duxbury was 411,000. That was the minimum aid increase. But, you know, they get 6 million in Chapter 70. Pembroke gets 16 and then there's gateway cities that are getting loads more. I mean, there needs to be adults in the room that actually admit the student opportunity act was a failure. We need to actually be people don't want to have hard conversations. It's the same thing with the net zero because they don't want to come in and say, "Hey, we've spent all this extra money in our gateway cities. Their scores are lower than ever and yet all communities are having overrides like ours." It's a really bad situation and there needs to be somebody to say now the minority caucus has been leading the charge on this. Absolutely. We've offered recommendations. We have offered increases to UGGA and yet the majority keeps pushing us down. So if we want change on the Chapter 70, I think people should stop going along to get along with the state budget process and just say that they're blindly going to support the budget if it's not supporting our towns.

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: I'm just going to jump in here and answer that one.

[PANELIST]: I thought you just did.

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: Did I first? Okay, sorry. Thank you. Sorry. A little spacey with this. [laughter] So there is legislation that was introduced at the state house to take away the inflation cap, which is the part of Chapter 70 that is causing so much harm. There's a 4.5% cap. And when inflation rises at a rate higher than 4.5%, which we've seen several times in the last few years, that's when schools are facing these drastic shortfalls. There is already legislation that was address that was filed to get rid of that cap. I would support that legislation. There is also the circuit breaker issue. That funding is the way that it works right now is that schools expend money on out of district transportation and they get reimbursed the following fiscal year for the money that was previously spent. I would support legislation that would phase in a same-year reimbursement and raise the reimbursement rates so that instead of getting maybe 75 to 90% reimbured, they would be fully reimbured. But again, those are band-aids. Those are not solutions. We have continually seen Beacon Hill address these issues with band-aids, and it's past time for people on Beacon Hill to take meaningful action on these issues.

[PANELIST]: Now, let me ask you just a quick follow-up question since we're on this thing. Again, we've been hearing this in every single form we've done. People are talking about broken formulas like you know what should be done having legislation. What's the roadblock there? Why isn't it done if everybody realizes it's a problem? Why hasn't anything been done? Ken?

KEN SWEEZEY: Yeah. Because there's no political will to do so. Because it would be very unpopular in certain people's districts, frankly, is why is why that's happening. Because they don't want to, you know, upset the apple cart there. They refuse to have hard conversations and realize, hey, 80% of the cities and towns in Massachusetts are hurting because this formula is broken.

[PANELIST]: Is it something? Is it is this is this blocked by the Senate President, Speaker of the House? Are there certain people that don't want to see change?

KEN SWEEZEY: Yeah, the leadership, yes, the supermajority leadership in both the House and the Senate would never go along as it is right now. And that's why I don't think it makes any sense to continue to add to an 85% majority in the House when this is the supermajority is what's blocking the change. The minority party has continued to offer up common sense solutions that would fund our towns better.

[PANELIST]: Same question. Do you see it as a certain block of voters or the people that are, you know, that really control everything, Senate President, Speaker of the House, do you see are they the roadblocks to getting this done or fixed? We hear this every single forum, the same issues that come up. Jessica,

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: So I can't say from the perspective of someone who's already on Beacon Hill. That's why I'm running for this seat because I believe that the people who are in those seats right now are not doing a good job of funding our towns. When I look at the state legislature, I know that in Massachusetts, we have one of the least transparent state legislatores in the entire country. It's hard for the average person to figure out who's voting for what, who's blocking what, where bills even are. It's difficult even if you go on the Massachusetts State Legislaturator's website to figure out whether your representative has been to their committee votes, how they voted on certain pieces of legislation. So from the outside looking in, I would say that the reason why we have these broken formulas and these broken systems is because we have people on Beacon Hill who are willing to just put these band-aids on over and over again. And I'm running for this seat because that's not something I would do.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Thank you. Questions. Tom Gorman.

TOM GORMAN: There's been some discussion about creating a municipal building authority to help communities with public safety and facility upgrades so communities don't have to rely on overrides. This is similar to the Massachusetts School Building Authority that provides funding for school projects. Would you support this, Jessica?

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: I mean, I think it's a really interesting idea. I think I would need to have more details about how they would plan to implement things. When I was on the select board in Pembroke, we had a public safety building that need multiple public safety buildings that needed to be replaced. We did have to do an override for that and we also had to do an override for the community center in order to be able to replace that. There absolutely has to be more done to help towns replace these critical infrastructures without constantly having to go to the taxpayers to ask for more and more money. When we were replacing the community center, I was able to work with the federal delegation to get about $3 million to offset a small part of the cost of that building, but that's not always feasible for every town. And, you know, looking forward, I think a municipal building authority that has some sort of oversight and assistance could be one solution. But if it's not going to be implemented well and the process is difficult and it's not streamlined, then, you know, we're back at the same problem.

TOM GORMAN: Same question, Ken.

KEN SWEEZEY: Yeah. So, I've really appreciated this question throughout the forums, Tom, because I think it's absolutely necessary. I wholeheartedly agree on this. So, there were actually two different versions of the bill. One was for public safety buildings specifically. It went before my committee on public safety. I voted yes on that to try to get it out of committee because these buildings are too expensive. With the fixed cost, whether it's healthcare, staff, anything else, the huge amount that schools take up in a municipal budget, towns cannot absorb these large capital costs. They just can't. Whether it's coastal resiliency and beach nourishment on the coasts or it's bridge infrastructure like the Powder Point Bridge or a new public safety building, towns can't absorb that. So absolutely the state needs to step in because there's a bare minimum of services. We shouldn't have the state of decay that we have in DPW buildings, highway buildings, public safety buildings, even town halls that we have. I mean, we're an old state. You know, Plymouth County is, you know, America's hometown is right here. We need to make sure that we can support the infrastructure of the future. So wholeheartedly I agree on this. MSBA has shown to be successful with school buildings and I think it would be a great process going forward.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Any follow up with that? Okay, Kevin.

KEVIN TOCCI: I believe Powder Point bridge was just touched upon for half a second. I just want to see who's up next. Would that be Mr. Sweezey? Would it be next? Okay. Representative, you've made protecting Duxbury Beach access and ensuring a financially responsible Powder Point Bridge project priorities. What have you done on Beacon Hill to advance the project? And what further action would you take to ensure that Duxbury residents have a meaningful voice in choosing the bridge design of their choice, preserving its historical character with where feasibility and determining the long-term cost to taxpayers is right.

KEN SWEEZEY: Yeah, absolutely. So, I've met with Mass DOT before every single public hearing that they've attended and then I have also I'm the only one in this race that has attended every single public forum or any of the public forums for the Powder Point Bridge. This is absolutely crucial to the character of Duxbury. It's I mean people have their graduation photos and I took my own engagement photos actually right alongside the Powder Point Bridge. It is it is who Duxbury is. So besides meeting with Mass DOT, making sure that I'm raising up resident voices that it's a representative example and make sure there's as much wood involved as possible. But I'm very against the shutdowns. That's my biggest concern right now. I hear from people on both sides that want an all wooden bridge or people that don't want to pay. That's really what the debate is do you keep how much original wood there is or do you have the state pay for it because it doesn't look like both things are going to be able to happen. But when Mass DOT comes back and says there's six, seven, eightyear potential shutdown, that's a generation of high school students, families that won't be able to enjoy the bridge or the beach as it was intended. So I'm really concerned about those. I make sure that I meet with residents as often as possible and do the right thing for the town.

KEVIN TOCCI: So the follow-up question, the question to Jessica is Duxbury residents have very strong feelings about this bridge, its historical character, beach access, plus they worry about the cost of replacing it. If you're elected, how would you go about working with the town mass DOT and the state leadership to ensure that the resident's concerns are meaningfully influenced and that the final D that the final design and the funding decision that they factor into it.

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: I think actually the town's decision is the one that matters most. Right? This is a problem that's been in existence for years now. When I was in Congressman Keating's office back in either 21 or 22, we were trying to get some federal funding to help offset the cost of either replacing or repairing that bridge. This is not a new problem and frankly if there were a simple solution, we would have found it by now. I know that there are a lot of concerns about what the bridge will look like and what the character of the bridge will be. And I think that those are all wellfounded concerns. I grew up going to Duxbury Beach. My kids have grown up going to Duxbury Beach. Two of my kids had their graduation pictures done on Duxbury on Powder Point Bridge. I agree that this is an iconic part of our district and I think that really the decision that we need to concentrate is on is what is best for the town and what the town decides is best. And whatever the town decides, whether that is to repair the existing structure and keep the wooden bridge or to go with a different type of structure, I would support that decision and I would work with our federal delegation and at the state level to ensure that we have as much support possible to fund that project going forward.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Tom Gorman, questions for the candidates.

TOM GORMAN: What is your position on data centers and battery farms? Jess,

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: I am opposed to the building of data centers or battery farms in this district. I think that we have seen all across the country pauses being put on the building of these facilities. They are a huge strain on the resources for communities and I don't think that we have I don't think that we have seen the end of the debate as to whether we need to move forward with more and more data centers as have been proposed. I would not support the building of a data center. I would not support the building of a battery storage unit here in the district. And I think that across the board, everyone who I've spoken to in the district when I'm out knocking on doors agrees that is what is best for these communities.

TOM GORMAN: Same question, Ken.

KEN SWEEZEY: Yeah. So, I am opposed to data centers and largecale commercial battery energy storage facilities as well. Again, I'm the only candidate in this race who's shown up to the public meetings in both Pembroke and Duxbury about this. I met with the individual residents and the abutters of the West Street battery farm proposal in Duxbury. I've met with the people leading the charge in Pembroke as well as the Abutters where they want to put a large-scale battery facility behind the Knights of Columbus on 139. I am the boots on the ground there. I told the company in no uncertain terms in the Duxbury case that we would be fighting this directly at the state level as well as the local level and they ultimately backed down because it is too financially prohibitive to get held up in court. I find it so amusing that the administration is now the governor administration is putting this moratorum on battery excuse me on data centers if there's no local control. Well, why are we going to steamroll local control with battery farms? Why are we going to steamroll it with MBTA Communities Act? An election year ploy that I think everyone can see right through the hypocrisy. I stand for local control all the time.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Any followup? This was a question sent in from a listener about historical engagement. What steps have you taken to engage with and support local historical societies and preservation organizations in the towns that you represent or will represent? Ken?

KEN SWEEZEY: Yeah, this is a great question. Like I alluded to earlier, all the, you know, the age and the history that we have here. I'm a very proud member of the Hanson Historical Society, the Pembroke Historical Society, the Duxbury Royal and Historic Society, and a frequent attender at the Hatch Mill Open Houses as well in Marshfield. Our communities are rich with history. There never is a month that goes by that I'm not at some of the properties that are owned by these societies be. They do incredible programming for kids in our schools. They do incredible community events. I'm also a sponsor of all the largest fundraisers for these organizations, including the fish fry in Pembroke. And they're just full of some of the best people that really represent our towns well because if we allow development and don't protect the character of these towns, then we're going to be losing a lot. I mean, Duxbury is, you know, the King Caesar house. Pembroke is the old school house. You know, Hanson is the LZ Thomas school. Like these the and Marshfield's the Hatch Mill. These things are so important to remember where we come from. So I appreciate supporting these organizations.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Same question, Jessica.

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: Sure. Thank you. I think the historical charm of these towns is what draws so many people in to want to live here. No, I grew up in Pembroke. I went to the fourth grade field trip where you go to all the historic events all throughout the town of Pembroke and I went with all of my children as they went through those field trips over the course of the years that they were here in elementary school. I was a member of the Pembroke Historical Society. As a member of the Pembroke Historical Society, I and some other members actually planned some of the Halloween events for a couple years immediately following COVID to do the historical graveyard tours in Pembroke Center and we led those for every weekend in October. Two years in a row we did those maybe three years in a row we did those every weekend in October leading the historical tours through the graveyard there in Pembroke Center. I think that the rich history that we have in this part of the Commonwealth is one of the things that makes me love living here. It's why I moved back here with my kids. And I would continue to support all of those organizations.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Okay. Thank you. I want to sneeze on air. Next, questions for the candidates.

[PANELIST]: We're coming into that time of year. I'm sure some folks out there have already turned their heat on. But utility bills we saw last winter were incredible. Whether it's additional charges and fees, what policies, what can be done to help lower electricity bills, the cost of the cost of heat? What would you do or what do you feel can be done to kind of help ease this pocketbook issue with our taxpayers in the district? Jessica.

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: So, this is an issue that hits hard for homeowners and it's an issue that I experienced myself. You know, last year our home heating oil costs were incredibly high, higher than they had ever been and I anticipate that they will be higher again this year. It is something that impacts particularly difficult, particularly hard people who are on a fixed income. But re regardless of whether you're on a fixed income, most people are on a budget. And when your home heating costs are skyrocketing because of decisions that have been made at the federal level that have impacted the cost of oil and the cost of gas, there's not a lot that can be done for homeowners. Homeowners don't feel like there's a lot that they can do. I think that the state does need to step in and provide some relief. I think that there are programs that the state has run long term, but that those probably aren't enough to overcome the issues that we're seeing in a situation like this year. $6 over $6 a gallon is what I saw the last time I looked. And I'm dreading the day that I have to make the call and fill the oil tank in my house. And I think that the state absolutely has to take steps to intervene and to provide some relief to homeowners.

[PANELIST]: Same question, Ken.

KEN SWEEZEY: Yeah, completely avoidable issue. Once again, Massachusetts creating a problem and then trying to be the one that solves it. We have the second most expensive energy in the entire country. First of the contiguous 48, you know, lower states. It's I mean as I alluded to earlier on your utility bill nearly 20% of it is p these so-called public benefit charges benefiting whom? When the auditor did a report on these programs found that actually the wealthiest citizens of the commonwealth were taking advantage of Mass Save programs more and that lower income people paid a larger share into the programs. You're redistributing wealth in reverse by running these scams. It's really what it is. We need to again have people that are willing to step up and say, "Hey, this is going to be unpopular with certain advocates, but we need to uncouple ourselves from these goals that are in statute." Most states, even blue states, have climate goals, which is all well and good. I'm a conservationist and environmentalist with coastal communities, but we need to eliminate the net zero mandates for 2050 in legislation and make them goals.

[PANELIST]: Would either of you support reviewing every state mandate mandated charge on electric bills? And what role should energy efficiency, renewable generation, SMRs, natural gas or grid improvements play in lowering the cost while maintaining reliability?

KEN SWEEZEY: Yeah, sorry. Yeah, I would support just elimin I don't need to hear anymore about the charges. I would support eliminating the charges. Now, let the technology stand on its own. Like they're great. The solar panels are great. Like those are a good thing. And even really small accessory batteries in the right uses are good if they're hooked up to renewables. Offshore wind is an absolute scam. These large industrial battery farms that don't connect to renewables that just suck energy off the grid and then sell it back at a higher rate, absolute scam. We need to repeal the charges, invest in technologies that can actually stand on their own and stop propping up failed technology. We need to bring in things like clean natural gas so we don't rely on the hydroelect electric that the governor bragged about that about a week later there was a big storm in Canada and they completely shut the energy off to Massachusetts. You can go on to ISO New England. That's the energy grid that we have and it shows you live what percentage type of energy and we're just so far behind our goals that we need to revise them.

[PANELIST]: Jessica?

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: I would absolutely support the review of all of the charges on the bills. I think that there are there are absolutely hidden charges that we need to address and get rid of. I do think overall that we do need to transition our energy away from fossil fuels and to renewable energy. I don't think that I don't think in any way, shape, or form that offshore wind is a scam. I do think we need to look at every possible way that we can move toward a more green economy. We need to look at solar panels. We need to look at offshore wind. And certainly when it comes to things like nuclear power, I think that there are people who have a lot of concerns about what that would look like. But I think that we need to consider every possible option, look at the differences between different communities, and for sure take the community's decisions into consideration when we're talking about energy switches.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Tom, questions for the candidates.

TOM GORMAN: There's some recent debate over some proposed tax changes like senior tax relief and a mileage tax that would be based on miles driven. Would you favor these changes, Jess?

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: I always favor senior tax relief. I would not favor the mileage the mileage tax.

TOM GORMAN: Ken?

KEN SWEEZEY: Yeah. No, we don't need any more new taxes in the state of Massachusetts. I absolutely support relief for our seniors in our towns. I actually filed a bill that I had worked on off of a version that former Rep. Cutler had filed about local options for towns to opt into ex extended senior tax credits for local taxes as well. So absolutely a fan of that. As far as the mileage tax, absolutely ridiculous idea. That's just one of many when you have 7,000 bills filed in the legislature that we got to get through. There's a lot of crazy ideas that go on up there. That's far from the only one, but it's a bad idea. There's a lot of other things. I mean, the Senate is the state Senate is trying to push through eliminating or taxing or eliminating plastic bags, taxing paper bags, taxing through a mattress stewardship program, taxing paint through a stewardship program. I mean, they may not call them taxes. They're fees stewardship, whatever they want to call them. There's no shortage of the majority party in Massachusetts wanting to take more of your money. And that's exactly why I'm up there fighting to make sure that they don't do that.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Any followup? Okay.

TOM GORMAN: What about water? What are what needs to be done to protect water resources specifically in your district, Jess?

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: I mean, we saw issues this summer where there were water shut offs in this district specifically because of infrastructure failures. Many of these towns have very, very old water infrastructure and deferred maintenance has caught up with us. We can no longer continue to kick the can down the road when it comes to looking at what we need to do to update the infrastructure for water. As the state rep, I think that there's a lot that actually can be done in order to in order to address these needs in a way that alleviates the problems that people are seeing, right? Like when I get I when I was on the select board, I would get calls from people who would turn on their water and it would come out brown. This is not this is not a reasonable way for residents to have to deal with anything. As a state rep, I think that there is a lot that we need to do to provide more funding from the state to address these major costs because replacing the water infrastructure in these towns is very expensive. We need to do more to offset that and provide resources from the state to ensure that towns don't have to take on these major projects alone.

TOM GORMAN: Same question.

KEN SWEEZEY: Yeah. No, I absolutely agree. PFAS is going to be the biggest issue I think environmentally going forward in our communities, but across the Commonwealth, it's a huge problem. There's wells in Halifax that are shut down, Duxbury wells, I mean towns all over. My opponent on Tuesday at our other forum mentioned about funding coming back from the state and that there's an environmental bond bill that's actually out there that would provide funding for PFAS. Well, fortunately for the 6th Plymouth, I serve on the environmental bond bill conference committee which is really great. Something that we as far back as we could tell, no freshman has served on two conference committee reports. I've done one for budget, one for the environment. I'm the only Republican that was advocating for more funding to go towards our environment. I'm no partisan by any means when it comes to the environment conservation and clean drinking water. I advocated in this conference committee for more money for PFAS remediation, more money for studying how to eliminate PFAS in manufacturing and other sources as well as a whole host of coastal issues that are in that bill as well. But absolutely, this is a capital cost just like municipal buildings that towns just can't attack on their own.

[PANELIST]: Let me ask you a quick 30 second followup both of you. Are you worried in the near future and I'm talking like in the next 10 years about the towns actually running out of water, Ken?

KEN SWEEZEY: So running out of water, it would really depend on the town. Take Duxbury as an example. They're looking at potential capital cost of upwards of $80 million to create the systems, the filters, and the treatment systems to get PFAS out of the water. So running out of water, I don't know, running out of money on the way to get some water possibly. There's also the situation with Brockton essentially stealing some of the groundwater or the surface water out of Pembroke, Silver Lake, Kingston area. That's a problem that's absolutely needs to be fixed. [name unclear] And I have been working on a bill. I'm proud to co-sponsor something she filed in previous sessions to make sure we address that issue in Pembroke as well.

[PANELIST]: Same question, Jessica. Are you worried about the one of the towns running out of water? I know that is a concern that town residents often bring up that especially with something like Brockton taking water from Pembroke Ponds from Silver Lake that's something that appears to residents to be a potential problem.

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: I don't know that running out of water is something that is a genuine concern but I do think that our water infrastructure will be the issue that we have to address first in terms of excuse me in terms of PFAS. I also think that we need to put restrictions on PFAS in consumer products. And I think that you know supporting individuals who are exposed to PFAS contamination and supporting people who have been exposed to PFAS contamination would also be something that I think is critical.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Thank you very much. I think we've got time for one more question before we go to lightning round. Kevin, 

KEVIN TOCCI: Yeah, I guess I would ask where do you stand when it comes to coastal the coastal communities that are in your district and what's your understanding of their needs and what either you've been doing or what you would do if elected? Jess,

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: Sure. So, climate change is a significant issue that we are all facing and it's something that we cannot continue to push off because the problems only compound. The places where we are going to see those problems hit hardest and first are on in our coastal communities. Across the board, I think that we need to do more to talk about coastal resilience. The state did release a plan last year, the resilient coast plan. It's a 50-year forward-looking plan that addresses how to manage some of the worst impacts of that, but I think that we need to go beyond that and do more in terms of working individually with each of the towns. Right? So if Marshfield and Duxbury as our two coastal towns, they need to be the priority, but the impacts of that coastal climate change are going to be felt inland as well. Across the board, this is not something that towns can deal with on their own. A town cannot manage their coastal resilience without support from regional partners. And I think that regional partners and state input need to be part of the conversation.

KEVIN TOCCI: Same question, Ken.

KEN SWEEZEY: Yeah, absolutely correct that this is not something our towns can absorb because again just like PFAS just like municipal buildings it's unfair in a sense that our coastal communities are carrying such a big load protecting you know our barrier beach in Duxbury Green Harbor that's a huge economic output you know they do protect and supply a lot of service for our inland communities so it absolutely needs to be state directed as far as funding these resiliency efforts fortunately once again I am one of the few people in the room negotiating this environmental bond bill that has massive dollars that are coming to our coastal communities. I'm also a very proud partner with the Atlantic Resiliency Innovation Institute, which is a private workforce development program and science center that's right across the street from our district on 3A in Marshfield. Very happy that the Marshfield Chamber of Commerce has propped that up and they're doing incredible work with industry partners. It's really important that not only you know do we feel the effects here but the science and the solutions are developed here and I'm absolutely doing the work.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Okay, let's go to our lightning round now. We're going to ask either yes or no questions or one or two sentences tops for the candidates. Kevin Tocci. 

KEVIN TOCCI: We can't let the forum go by without talking about Flock cameras. Statewide standards, yes or no? Jessica?

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: Yes.

KEN SWEEZEY: Yes.

[PANELIST]: Let's turn to the ballot question repealing the sale of recreational marijuana. Would you support that, Ken?

KEN SWEEZEY: I do not support the repeal.

[PANELIST]: What about Ballot Question 3? We featured that this morning. It would put everybody, whatever their party, into one primary. Do you support that? Yes or no?

KEN SWEEZEY: No.

[Jessica's answer to Question 3 is unclear in the original transcript.]

[PANELIST]: Proposition 2½: keep it as it is, modify it, or do away with it?

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: Modify it.

KEN SWEEZEY: Keep it as it is.

[PANELIST]: No one has said that yet, by the way.

[Light banter, unclear in the original transcript.]

[PANELIST]: What was your favorite Halloween costume of all time, Ken?

KEN SWEEZEY: One that I wore? I had a racing medal and a loaf of bread, as the breadwinner.

[PANELIST]: When was this?

KEN SWEEZEY: Last year. A couple of years ago.

[PANELIST]: Jessica? Favorite costume of all time?

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: The Joker. I wore this suit.

[PANELIST]: What is your top priority when it comes to energy: lowering rates, expanding supply, or upgrading the grid?

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: Lowering rates.

KEN SWEEZEY: Eliminating public benefit charges.

[PANELIST]: Anything else you want to ask for a lightning round question? Favorite book?

KEN SWEEZEY: Profiles in Courage.

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: Little Women.

[PANELIST]: Favorite music genre?

KEN SWEEZEY: Rock.

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: Maybe country in the summer.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Okay. [Unclear: appears to be a final question about a season.] Let's go to closing statements now for the 6th Plymouth District. We're going to reverse course now and we're going to start with Ken and then go to Jessica.

KEN SWEEZEY: Thank you again to WATD and everybody listening Local Seen for being here and most of all everybody listening and my constituents in the 6th Plymouth. It's been an absolute honor these past two years to represent this district I grew up in to buy a home in Duxbury with my fiance and really make sure that our roots stay here. I believe that there's a key not only political or policy difference between my opponent and I, but a philosophical one. As you've seen over the last hour, there's one person here that wants to take representative seriously. That's me bringing your voice to Boston and not breaking bringing the mandates from Boston to you. That is hypocritical. I will never bend over backwards to, you know, appease leadership. I will never go there and blindly say I will vote for anything when I know the formulas are broken and it's not supporting our towns. I will only do things that represent your voice, protect our towns, and support our small businesses. That is the job of your state representative and that's what I have been doing for two years and I hope to continue to do so. Please get out and vote on or before November 3rd.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Thank you very much. That was a closing statement from Ken Sweezey. Now, Jessica Bradley Rushing, your closing statement.

JESSICA BRADLEY RUSHING: Thank you so much. Thank you for having us tonight and thank you for giving the voters this information. As I have in every one of the roles I've held in my 25 plus year career, I will hit the ground running as soon as I hit the state house. I fully believe that being new to the legislature, but having well-developed relationships with all of the members representing the surrounding districts as well as our federal delegation will be an asset to the towns in the 6th Plymouth. I also want to note that if I'm elected to this seat, I will be the first woman to ever represent this district in the Massachusetts State Legislature in its almost 250 year history. I am both humbled and honored by that prospect, and I think it is well past time to achieve that milestone. I will agree with Representative Sweezey that we do have a philosophical difference in how we would address serving in this role. As your state rep, my priority would be to bring back local aid to the towns in this district, address the affordability crisis, and ensure that working families have the support they need not just to survive, but to thrive. And not just today, but for future generations as well. I want to note that early voting runs October 17th to October 30th, and election day is November 3rd. And every single vote will matter in this district, and I am asking for yours.

CHRISTINE JAMES: Thank you very much. That was Jessica Bradley Rushing. You've been listening to a WATD political forum. The races for the 6th Plymouth District. Of course, WATD will put this up online. We'll have that up online by tomorrow. You hear selected cuts of this tomorrow morning during our morning drive news segment. We want to thank our media partner here, Local Seen/PACTV for providing assistance, reporters Tom Gorman from WATD, Monday night talk host Kevin Tocci, our smiling timer over there, young Charlie Fulmer, and Larry Nelson who just ran up the stairs. He is your engineer. Please excuse my coughing tonight. Bad allergy season, but got to hear from the candidates. It's great that we can do that. We always tell people, remember, November 3rd is when you vote. Make sure you tune in to WATD. We go on the air at 7:00 that night. We'll be bringing all the races and information to you. But the most important part, get out and vote. If you don't vote, you don't have a voice. I'm Christine James, 9 59 WATD. [Station ID jingle]