Republican State Rep. Candidates Square Off At Debate

The Republican candidates for the state House seat representing Melrose and four Wakefield precincts squared off in a debate at Galvin Middle School in Wakefield Tuesday night, hoping to illustrate differences between themselves and their opponents.

The debate between Eric Estevez, Monica Medeiros and David Lucas was held and broadcast live by Wakefield Community Access Television's (WCAT); the debate will start airing on MMTV this week.

The sparse audience in the school's auditorium — compared to the debate held earlier in the evening between Democratic state Senate candidates Katherine Clark and Mike Day — took in a fairly straightforward debate and answers from the candidates, except for when Estevez used several of the panel's questions as a chance to attack Lucas and, in particular, Medeiros.

Lucas and Medeiros did not mount any direct attacks themselves on each other or Estevez, nor any counterattacks to Estevez, save for when Estevez said that Medeiros "raised taxes by voting through five increased (Melrose city) budgets in a row." In response, Medeiros pointed out that the fiscal 2010 budget approved by herself and the rest of the Melrose Board of Aldermen was actually less in total dollars than the fiscal 2009 budget.

Repeal Chapter 40B?

The wide-ranging hour-long debate covered topics such as Question 2 on this fall's ballot, which asks voters to repeal the state law commonly known as Chapter 40B. That law allows developers whose residential projects include a minimum amount of affordable housing to apply for a single comprehensive permit from a city or town's Zoning Board of Appeals, instead of the normal process of requiring separate permits from each local agency or official that would normally oversee the project.

Panelist Carol Brooks Ball, Melrose Free Press editor, asked the candidates whether they themselves would vote to repeal Chapter 40B.

Estevez said that he believes more research needs to be done and "above all, it is a local issue" and that because state representatives are elected to represent the interests, ideals and views of the community, he'd meet with local officials regarding the issue.

"But how will you vote yourself?" Brooks Ball pressed.

"Again, I have to look into the issue," Estevez replied. "It's up to local jurisdictions to decide what is in their best interest."

Lucas said that as an attorney, he has experience with the state's Housing Appeals Committee (HAC), which hears appeals from developers whose Chapter 40B permit is denied or granted by the local ZBA with conditions or  requirements that make the project uneconomic to build or to operate.

"I find (HAC) to be very pro-developer," Lucas said, "when a city or town wants to put some reasonable concessions or limitations on a project."

Chapter 40B also places limits on how much profit the developer can receive from the project, but Lucas said that some developers have been using other corporate entities on the side to make additional profit on the development.

"I think right now I might vote to repeal 40B," he said. "Melrose and Wakefield have done a great job on their own seeing that we can build our affordable housing stock."

Medeiros said she has seen "all too many times" a developer fail to receive initial approval from a city or town for a reasonably sized residential project and, instead of revising the plans, decide to use Chapter 40B to bypass the various local approval process.

"Instead of having a development with a couple of townhouses, they say, 'forget that, we're going to go to 40B and override your local control ... and you now have a huge complex with 100 units," she said. "At this point I think I would vote to repeal 40B as well."

How can legislators help attract business to local downtowns?

Panelist Gail Lowe, reporter for the Melrose Weekly News and Wakefield Daily Item, asked the candidates what they could do on Beacon Hill to help communities like Melrose and Wakefield attract businesses to their commercial centers.

Lucas said that while state legislators should not involve themselves in local regulations and local property taxes, legislators can help fill empty storefronts by lowering the corporate excise tax, reforming expensive unemployment insurance and, "most importantly," tackling the cost of health insurance.

"We've got to reign in our health care costs so businesses can afford to hire employees and rent the storefronts right here in downtown Wakefield or in downtown Melrose," he said.

Medeiros said the state must work to lower the cost of doing business in Massachusetts.

"We have to lower the amount of regulation we have and the fees and taxes we charge on businesses," she said. "Small businesses employ most of the people in this commonwealth and this country."

Estevez said that "our campaign is the only campaign that released an actual job plan," which involves rolling back taxes, fees and "streamlining bureaucracy" to make it easier for businesses to plan for the future. He also said the state should promote Massachusetts and its educated workforce more in the global economy.

"Our campaign is to be the only one to have an actual job plan," he said. "People talk about ideas all the time and we have an actual plan."

Casino bill's failure — who's to blame?

Brooks Ball recounted the failure of the state to pass a casino bill after months of debate and asked the candidates where they placed the blame for that failure and whether House Speaker Robert DeLeo "played personal politics," as two of the slot machine parlors would have been located in his district.

Medeiros said that "there's a lot of blame to go around, and not just on Speaker DeLeo," and blamed the "culture" of Beacon Hill, pointing out the numerous closed-door meetings on casinos that were held in the final weeks of the legislative session.

"I'm sorry, but I'm pretty sure what was going on was the leadership offering the representatives plum things for their votes," she said.

Medeiros added that she is not in favor of casinos or slot machines at race tracks — known as "racinos" — citing social ills such as the potential for increased crime and problems with  serving of alcohol after hours, which could lead to increased costs because of the need for additional police.

"(Casinos) may be an invetiable end; I don't think it's the right choice," she said. "I think we can do better. That bill really would've created five casinos, for all practical purposes. That's a big change ... I think they missed the big point, which was the budget needed fixing and they didn't do that."

Estevez opened his response by stating Medeiros is "extremely conservative" and Lucas is "extremely liberal," which drew laughter from the audience, and that he could not speak for DeLeo.

"I know more about this subject than anyone — my parents were jockeys," he said. "I spoke with the management of Suffolk Downs so I have more knowledge ... I will support it because I think it will add jobs and revenue to the state that would otherwise go to Connecticut and surrounding states."

Lucas said that the casino bill and the last months of the legislative session "highlighted what's broken about the Legislature," noting that three months of closed-door meetings stalled actions on other bills on gun control, CORI reform and health care.

"Casinos are not going to be the be end of all of our economy," Lucas said, while noting that he would be in favor of them. "I'm pro-business and if people are going to gamble, I'd rather keep it here than have them go out of state. Also, the vast majority of residents want to see them go up."

Read all of Melrose Patch's Election 2010 coverage, including extensive Q&As with the candidates, by clicking here.