District 66 Assembly candidates talk education, housing and environment

April 27, 2026 - 03:38

The League of Women Voters convened a critical forum on Monday, April 20, bringing together the candidates vying for the Assembly District 66 seat. The event provided a platform for a robust discussion on the three pillars of the campaign: education funding, housing affordability, and environmental protection.

On education, candidates presented sharply contrasting visions. One contender advocated for a significant increase in per-pupil spending and expanded early childhood programs, arguing that the current funding formula leaves lower-income neighborhoods at a disadvantage. Another candidate countered by emphasizing the need for school choice and vocational training, suggesting that traditional public school models are failing to prepare students for the modern workforce. The debate grew heated when discussing the role of standardized testing, with one candidate calling for its outright elimination and another defending it as a necessary accountability measure.

Housing emerged as the most contentious topic. With District 66 facing a severe shortage of affordable units, candidates were pressed on specific solutions. Proposals ranged from strict rent control measures and public housing investments to zoning deregulation aimed at increasing supply. One candidate warned against "overdevelopment," arguing that unchecked construction would strain infrastructure and displace long-term residents. Another insisted that only aggressive market intervention could solve the crisis, calling for state-funded subsidies for first-time homebuyers.

Environmental policy also drew a clear divide. While all candidates acknowledged the reality of climate change, their approaches differed. One platform called for a rapid transition to 100% renewable energy by 2035, including a ban on new fossil fuel permits. A rival candidate urged a more measured approach, prioritizing "energy independence" and investment in nuclear power as a bridge technology. The forum concluded with a tense exchange over the proposed expansion of a local landfill, with residents in the audience voicing strong opposition to the project. The candidates offered no clear consensus, leaving voters to weigh the competing visions ahead of the primary.