Democrat Amy Sangiolo and Republican Vladislav Yanovsky are running for the state representative seat held by Kay Khan on very different platforms. And at Tuesday’s debate hosted on Zoom by the Charles River Regional Chamber, those contrasts were clear.
Max Woolf, public policy manager for the Chamber, moderated the debate, which focused on issues important to business and economic growth in the region.
Collaboration vs. speed bump
Sangiolo is a former city councilor who has worked for the Attorney General Andrea Campbell’s office. Yanovsky is an Army veteran and director of education for a private trade school who immigrated to the United States from the Soviet Union.
“Government needs to have a lot more limiting factors in it, otherwise it becomes too pervasive,” Yanovsky said. “And since government doesn’t truly contribute anything to the growth of the economy under any circumstance—limiting private enterprise from generating more revenue and employment opportunity for others—I think that particular segment of our existence needs to be curtailed, and private enterprise needs to be expanded.”
He added that he would like to see the influence of business, particularly big tech companies, kept away from government as well.
Sangiolo was raised by a first-generation Chinese-American father who was born in a laundromat, and her mother immigrated from Japan, and Sangiolo said that upbringing molded her into a natural helper.
“I’ve always had the role of advocate to help support them, to advocate for them—my mother had limited English ability,” Sangiolo said. “I feel that really shaped my experiences and my belief in what government should do. And I believe government should be there to provide and support and uplift the residents of the United States and people who come to the United States.”
Sangiolo highlighted her experience working with state legislators to show she can help get things done.
Yanovsky, on the other hand, positioned himself as a stopper, not a helper.
“I’m not exactly sure how I’m going to get anything done, except my primary mission will be to lift up the veil of secrecy of what happens behind closed doors on Beacon Hill,” Yanovsky said. “In reality, I’d like to also be a speedbump in the way of people who are basically profligate spenders of the taxpayers’ money without any regard of where that money is going and what it’s being used for and who’s actually paying.”
Do we need more housing?
The most important issue to the Chamber for the past couple of years has been housing. Increased demand has meant low inventory and home prices are out of reach for many people.
What role should the state play in housing supply? What should state housing policy prioritize?
Yanovsky said the state doesn’t have a housing shortage and that any homelessness is caused by mental health issues, not a lack of housing options.
“We live in homes. Housing is a generic term… Every time I hear ‘housing,’ I see housing projects,” he said. “We have tried that before. It doesn’t work under any circumstances. We’ve tried Section 8 housing. There’s no investment of the person in the community or in the home they’re living in. Nobody makes a home. Everyone is a transient.”
Woolf asked Yanovsky how he would address the fact that many Newton business owners say they can’t keep staff because no one can afford to live near the city.
Yanovsky said the state should cut income taxes so workers could afford to live closer to the city.
Workers making below a certain income get tax refunds already, however. And someone making $30,000 a year would only save a couple thousand dollars a year if their state income tax liability was scrapped entirely.
Yanovsky said anyone who isn’t making enough to live in the area should work on getting a higher-paying job.
“We have a lot of working poor in the state, and this is my area of expertise,” he said. “I work with the working poor. I help them get into jobs that pay more money. Continuing education is key, and expanding horizons is also key.”
Sangiolo, who currently helps residents at risk of homelessness avoid eviction, had a different take.
“I believe housing is a human right,” Sangiolo said. “We need to increase the supply of housing for all income levels, but in particular, my focus has always been on being more intentional about affordable housing needs out there as well as middle-income and workforce housing.”
She supported the recent housing bill signed by the governor that sets money aside for affordable housing efforts and requires communities to allow accessory dwelling units, among other things. Sangiolo said that bill didn’t go far enough because it didn’t include a real estate transfer fee option in which cities and towns could adopt a fee on real estate sales as sort of a tax on real estate that could be set aside to fund affordable housing efforts in those communities.
“I think that’s really important to have a wide spectrum of different types of housing units,” she said. “But again, be more intentional about creating the deeply affordable, 3-bedroom, mixed-income units that I think we need throughout the commonwealth. And that would help, certainly, with getting the workforce we need for our businesses.”
Yanofsky called the idea of a local real estate sale fee “insanity” and said it would add tens of thousands of dollars to people’s moving costs.
“I also want to know what exactly ‘workforce housing’ is,” Yanovsky said. “Back where I come from, they call that ‘barracks,’” he said. “I come from the Soviet Union. We had this. It wasn’t pretty.”
Woolf clarified that “workforce housing” in the way it’s being used by local businesses refers to housing that is affordable to the working class.
“How about we let them pay less for gas while we’re at it?” Yanovsky replied. “There are plenty of places for people to live. Framingham is plenty affordable. Natick is plenty affordable. It’s not that far away. I don’t think it’s an issue.”
The average rent for a 2-bedroom apartment in both Framingham and Natick is around $2,500 a month. And while that is lower than Newton’s average of around $3,700 a month, it’s still more than minimum wage workers can afford.
What about wages?
Speaking of wages, the candidates were asked for their stances on the ballot question that seeks to raise tipped employees’ pay up to standard minimum wage ($15 an hour instead of $6.75 an hour, phased in over five years).
Sangiolo said she supports the initiative while conceding that it would place a burden on businesses.
“Based on my experience working at the Attorney General’s Office, I know that our Fair Labor Division has had a number of wage theft complaints come in, and I think we owe it to our earners, particularly our tipped wage earners,” she said. “I think we owe it to them to make sure they get at least the minimum wage.”
Yanovsky opposes the ballot question and said he doesn’t support any minimum wage for anyone.
“Minimum wage is a discriminatory practice which discriminates against kids who are trying to get ahead in life and get a job and work their way up,” Yanovsky said. “Nobody’s looking to be a food service employee or a waitstaff member for the rest of their lives. This is crazy.”
Yanovsky said if a vote came up to repeal all minimum wages, he would support that.
“Absolutely,” he said.
You can watch the entire debate here.