- [Announcer] This is a KSPS PBS Vote 2026 special, featuring candidates running for election to the Washington State Legislature from District 6.

- Hello, and thank you for joining us for this second debate of the evening.

I'm Dana Haynes.

We are pleased to feature the candidates running for state representative in Washington's 6th Legislative District.

The district represents voters in the northwest corner of Spokane County, including parts of North Spokane, Airway Heights, and the West Plains.

There is no incumbent in this race, after Mike Volz was appointed Spokane County treasurer last year.

Now let's meet the newcomers running for Position 1.

A coin flip determined that we'll start with Alan Nolan.

And Alan, you have 30 seconds to introduce yourself.

- Thanks, Dana, appreciate being here, and I'm grateful to have the opportunity to speak with public.

So my name is Alan Nolan.

I moved here in 2015 along with my wife and three children after I retired out of the Air Force.

I spent 23 years in the Air Force, where I flew helicopters, fighters, and ultimately commanded a pilot train squadron.

Since then, my wife and I, we opened a construction business, so we've got a small business here.

In 2023, I was elected to the Mead School Board, which serves 10,000 students on the north side of town, and I'm currently the vice president of the board.

- [Dana] All right.

And Michaela, we'll turn it over to you for a 30-second introduction.

- Yeah, and thank you as well from me for having us here.

This is pretty exciting.

I'm Michaela Kelso.

I am a third-time candidate.

I ran twice before against Jenny Graham in Position 2.

I am running because I believe everyone deserves representation, and I don't know that Republicans will ever do that, not for Democrats and not for Republicans in this area.

I am a 23-year army veteran.

I was enlisted, so I'd like to say I worked for a living, and I want to bring that service back to this area.

- All right.

Thank you so much.

Welcome to you both.

The candidates will answer questions from two Spokane journalists, Ember Braun from Spokane Public Radio and Amanda Sullender from the Spokesman Review.

Thank you both for joining us.

Before we begin, here's a quick look at the debate rules.

The panel can ask the same question to both candidates or can direct the question to just one.

The panelists may also do a follow-up to an answer.

Candidates will have one minute for answers and are allowed two rebuttals for the entire debate.

Those rebuttal lengths are limited to 30 seconds.

With that, let's get started.

The first question will come from Amanda.

- Alan, Democrats, in all likelihood, will retain control of the State House this November.

How do you plan to work with your colleagues if you're elected?

What would be some of the bipartisan work that you'd wanna get done in your first term, and what will you most strongly oppose?

- Sure.

I'm gonna start off with the last part of your question, and one of the things that I've been running on is fiscal responsibility.

The state has a spending problem, not a revenue problem, although we end up demanding more and more revenue, so I think fiscal responsibility is the first thing I'm going to stand for, meaning that I would be opposed to new taxes and limiting spending.

And it's a great point, yes, I will absolutely be in the minority, but throughout my career, I've been able to work with others even if they don't necessarily share my views or share my goals, because a lot of times, we may share the same goal.

For example, I was at the Climate Forum for Gonzaga just recently, and I spoke with the audience there about how I'm happy to see fossil fuel reduction, reduction in the use of fossil fuels.

My reasons may be different for it, but if we share the same goals, we can achieve that.

One example of where we can make some common ground and progress is on easing certification for military family members who are teachers to be able to credential in the State of Washington.

Thank you.

- Thank you, Alan.

Michaela, in this reliably Republican district, you'll have to convince a lot of conservative voters to vote for you to get elected.

What is one thing that sets you apart from the West Side Democrats in control of the state?

Where might you buck your party?

- Well, one of the things is it's in the job description, representative.

That's literally what I will be there to do.

I was always known during my military career for my high levels of integrity, so when I say I will listen to everyone and I will represent everyone fairly, that is what I'm going to do.

I see that there are a lot of rules that are good for the West Side, they're not good for here.

We have a lot of farmers, we have a lot of rural areas, people drive farther, and we just have different needs from the West Side.

Let's look at our Waste to Energy Plant.

We are the only ones in the state, and it's gonna take some fundraising to get our Waste to Energy Plant up to the Climate Commitment Act standards.

That is something that Spokane County might need help with.

No one on the West Side is interested about that, but I am.

- All right.

Ember?

For both of you.

Governor Bob Ferguson recently submitted a major disaster declaration to President Donald Trump, another effort to help with wildfire recovery.

How would you support your district's wildfire recovery efforts while in office?

And Nolan, you can start.

- Yeah, sure.

So, I'd like to, first off, thank Governor Ferguson because I think that his response and then assigning the lieutenant governor to specifically follow and make sure that we have appropriate action is great.

I actually was not aware of the federal declaration, but I also wanna highlight what's being done by our Spokane County commissioners.

They've done a great job of identifying specific areas where we can help homeowners who have been harmed during the wildfire.

And a good example of this is looking at the energy code rollback, where a lot of the houses now, if we build them, it costs tens of thousands of dollars.

In fact, according to the National Association of Home Builders, there's approximately 30 to 40% of the cost of a home is now driven by new regulation.

So by allowing them to build under the energy codes where they may have originally built in or a later energy code for all of them, we still have a highly efficient home, but we're able to do so in a more affordable manner.

So I think that's a great example of how both the county, the state, and the federal government can work together to help wildfire victims.

- Ember?

- Same question to me?

- Yes.

- Okay.

So, the declaration is great.

I'm so happy it went through.

It's the least the government can do for our people.

I do believe we should learn from our mistakes, and having regulations in place to ensure that people build more fire-resistant homes, build better is the better thing to do.

We have, I like to say that the, sorry, drawing a blank, the cheapest energy you can buy is the energy you don't have to buy.

So rolling back energy efficiency standards is not something that I'm actually supporting of.

But it's the same, we now build much more fire-resistant homes, so rolling back building codes for that is not something that I would support.

What we should be doing is making sure that when disaster strikes, our citizens have a way to escape, and we need to be able to fight those fires.

And we were severely lacking in those abilities up on Five Mile Prairie.

- All right.

Thank you, Michaela.

And Alan, you have a rebuttal?

- Yeah, I do.

Thank you.

So, I first wanna point out the statement that it's the least the government can do for our people.

I think that's the exact wrong mentality.

I think that what the government needs to do is free people to be able to act on their own and create a good structure to act reasonably.

The other part is I have actual expertise.

I sat on the 2018 Energy Code and wrote that.

And I can tell you that this code forces people to spend dollars to save pennies.

So it's not an economical savings, and there are better ways that we can do it by reducing the code.

- [Dana] All right, Amanda?

- Michaela, Washington's constitution says K through 12 education is the state's paramount responsibility.

Do you think that our educational system is fully funded?

Do you think there should be more funding?

Is the money being spent in the right way right now?

- First answer, no.

I mean, we have a lot of unfunded mandates that come from the states that then the school districts have to find funding for.

And unfortunately in our county, we've seen a lot of, for example, school bonds that have gone not passing.

One of the problems is that the passing percentage has to be 60%, and I would like to lower that to 50% because our schools are growing, our population is growing.

We need more schools.

Eventually, schools need to get replaced.

The other thing is that we have a potential influx of funds through the Millionaires Tax.

And if people are voting on the initiative covering that, then we are going to lose all that money and it's going to be even harder for schools to find the appropriate funding.

I am definitely in favor of a Millionaires Tax because tax the rich, right?

- Alan, of course you have a background in education on the Mead School Board.

What would you do to try and change Washington State's educational system?

- I see you've done your homework, so I'm glad for that.

All right, I will tell you that from firsthand experience, one, our school age population is not growing.

And part of the reason for that is because parents lack trust in it.

And it's not necessarily there are fewer kids, although that is in fact a factor too.

A lot of it is lack of trust in the public school system based on some of these mandates, not only for what schools have to do but what they have to teach and how they have to teach it.

So, we need to remove a lot of those.

Local control is the basis for American education, and it needs to be restored here in Washington.

As far as being more effective with our dollars, and that's really what it comes down to, because we're spending an incredible amount of money.

I looked earlier, and our average spending is about 18 to $20,000, depending on school district, per pupil.

We're not getting good results.

In fact, we're getting declining results.

The constitution says the paramount duty is to educate the student, but it doesn't say that it has to be through the public schools.

And that money should belong to and follow the student, and I would like to see a system where parents have the ability to choose.

- [Dana] All right.

- Should state funds go into charter and private schools to make that option more available?

How should the state interact with those institutions?

- The devil's always in the details, so that's a great question.

And I don't think it should be all of the funds, but there should be a portion of that for perhaps, and I think a good benchmark would be 80% of the money that would be otherwise allocated to a public school, is maybe available for other educational purposes.

So that's an example, and, I don't know, did I answer your question clearly?

- [Amanda] I believe so.

- Okay, thanks.

- Thank you, Alan.

- And Michaela, you had a rebuttal.

- Yes.

So, I know charter schools fulfill very specific needs for a lot of students, but I do not believe that our public school funds should go to charter schools.

The way most charter schools are set up, they are private schools and they get to choose which students they take.

So some of the students that might need their services the most, they can reject, and I'm not for that.

The schools that are required to accept everyone are public schools, and that's where our funding should go, not to private schools.

- [Dana] Thank you.

Ember.

- Okay, let's stick with education.

So voters will see Initiative 001, which would reenact the original Washington Parents' Bill of Rights if it's passed.

This would give parents access to their child's school records.

They would be notified when their child is offered medical services, among other things.

How do you propose the state balance parents' responsibility to decision making with student privacy?

- Is that for me?

- Yeah.

- Okay, perfect.

So, I think the key part of your question is it restores the original Parents' Bill of Rights and realize that that was a bipartisan passed bill.

I don't think it was universal, but it passed with a strong majority in both the House and the Senate.

And it wasn't until a year later that, without input from school districts or parents, that suddenly the legislature decided that there's a problem.

So, I have to tell you, I think that the legislature acted in bad faith when they passed it.

I think that it was done intentionally with the intent of delaying it through legislation and then eventually getting it, which is what they did.

As a matter of fact, I was there for the final vote when it unfortunately was changed by the House of Representatives.

So, this is something that people have spoken pretty clearly on and I'm glad that they're gonna have the opportunity to make their voice heard again through the initiative process.

- [Ember] Michaela.

- Well, I am against the initiative, and for a few simple reasons.

For one thing, there was already the possibility for parents to receive records.

The schools had 45 days to comply.

Now that it's being shortened to 10 days, and I honestly do not know if that is enough time for schools, but I know if 45 days is not what they need.

Then there's nothing stopping them from providing these records faster.

The other thing is that this initiative will actually remove some immediate notification requirements from the current active law, including the immediate notification if your child has been a victim or alleges that it has been a victim of sexual assault by a school staff or contractor or an immediate notification if there is an active school shooter.

This is being replaced by a watered-down paragraph that says if a crime has deemed to have been committed against your child and deemed is at the end of the process, someone made that determination, and it isn't your child.

- All right.

Thank you, Michaela.

Amanda.

- A data center is being built in Spokane's backyard.

The project has been put on hold amid community pushback.

A lot of those community members are your would-be constituents.

What do you think of data center development?

What role should the state have in regulating them, and should a moratorium be put in place while those issues are being debated?

Alan, we'll start with you.

- All right, so let's first off look at why are they looking to build data centers, more data centers.

I mean, there are 4,100 in the United States, so this isn't exactly something new.

It's just new to our area.

Well, the reason is it's because of us.

They're responding to the demand signal, and there are going to be data centers built.

And this is actually a pretty good location to build it in terms of climate where it's cooler, so it's easier to achieve the cooling that's required for these computers.

There's also less expensive and cleaner power.

So there are good reasons for that.

Now, I certainly understand people's concerns about their water bills spiking, their power bills spiking.

There is a process in place for that.

So you asked about legislation.

I think that the current rules do a pretty good job.

I, as a contractor, am familiar with the review process, and it's fairly extensive.

You have to go through to get approval for large projects such as this.

And it does take into consideration things like, is the power available?

Is the water available?

So yes, we absolutely have to protect our resources, but realize the reason they're looking to build it is based on the demand that they see.

- Michaela, same question to you.

How should the state approach these data centers and the one happening right here?

- So I worked in military intelligence for 15 and a half years.

I know a little bit about national security.

I am not against data centers because U.S.

information needs to be managed on U.S.

soil.

But at the same time, they are such a massive impact on the communities they are built in.

We need to make sure that if they're built, they are built without harm to the surrounding communities.

Polluted water, excess or higher electricity rates, all of these things are not the individual's faults that live there.

So when I make it into Olympia, I plan on introducing a data center moratorium to allow the legislature to craft some common sense protections.

For example, I would like to require baseline studies of the environmental factors in the area so that we know what has happened.

I would like to look at potentially requiring remediation bonds so that if there is pollution that can be fixed.

Things like that, that's what I would like to work on.

- Ember, next question is yours.

- Okay.

This is for both of you.

And you both touched on this a little bit ago, but Washington State's Climate Commitment Act sets a limit on greenhouse gas emissions by utilizing a Cap-and-Invest program, but critics argue that it drives up costs for consumers.

So where do you fall on the state's Climate Commitment Act?

Nolan, you can start.

- I fall on the data, and the data is pretty clear.

And I think the state, we talked about this at the Climate Forum that I mentioned earlier, where the Climate Commitment Act has set certain goals.

Washington State has failed across the board to achieve those.

And even some of its own reporting where they identified greenhouse gas emission reductions, when you look more closely, it appears that about 80% of that is not even accurate.

Moreover, a lot of the money that's come on in is not being used specifically for reduction in greenhouse gases.

But the biggest issue with the Climate Commitment Act is the cost to consumers.

We have the second most expensive gas in the state, and I'll tell you, I know people who go out of their way to drive to Idaho.

How is that in terms of helping our emissions if we're driving an extra 20 miles in order to save 50 cents on gas?

That money is also coming out of the state.

We also have the fifth highest grocery because that's tied to energy costs as well.

The Climate Commitment Act is hurting people across the board and it's not achieving its goals.

It should be modified.

- Michaela, same to you.

- I honestly don't know enough about the expenditures and the overall goals that were set when the Climate Commitment Act was built, so I'm not going to comment on that because I don't have the data.

But I have looked into fuel taxes, and I know that since April our fuel costs have gone up, I don't know, 25% or more.

And our fuel taxes have only gone up like a cent and a half per gallon.

So I know that the rising fuel cost is not the fault of the Climate Commitment Act.

Can we do better?

I'm sure we can.

I'd be looking into that.

The environment, extremely important to us, because I like to breathe and I like to drink clean water.

Those things are very important.

We cannot leave this country, our state, to our children in worse condition than we find it.

We have a responsibility to our children, grandchildren to do everything we can to mitigate climate change effects.

- Amanda, you're next.

- Alan, while on Mead's school board, you helped draft a letter in opposition to state policies regarding transgender students' access to school bathrooms and participation in school sports.

What is wrong with the state standards, and how big of a priority will this issue be to you in the legislature?

- All right.

So, let's back up.

We draft a letter based on violations of the state law for specifically Title IX, and also there's some FERPA issues.

That's one of the main other areas.

So, when we had drafted this, it was because we were caught in a difficult position where the majority of our funds come from the state and the state is requiring us to do a certain thing in this particular area.

3210, which is the policy that schools have governing transgender students, is essentially mandated by the state, although the law only requires that you meet a certain number, four very different points.

We were complying with all of those.

However, if we didn't adopt, and the OSPI, the public instruction agency, was forcing us to adopt their new version, which went well beyond the law and also violated Title IX.

That's a priority to me as a school board member because it affected the kids.

This is not the burning issue, but I am glad that the voters are gonna have a chance to talk about this issue when they look at our initiatives.

- If that initiative fails, is there anything you plan to do about this issue while in the legislature to change those requirements?

- Honestly, I hadn't thought about it.

- Okay.

Michaela, same question to you.

You now, what do you think of the initiative here on the ballot regarding transgender participation?

Does the current state rules have it right?

- So, I am against that initiative because it is about less than 10 children in the entire state, and as a result, it will force tens of thousands of girls to undergo some form of an examination.

And I know there are three different ways of proving your gender in the initiative, but genetic testing, that's expensive, takes time, unreliable.

Blood testing.

Expensive, takes time, unreliable.

What is left?

Genital exams.

So who as a parent would force their child to go through this type of testing?

Which child wants to go through that type of testing?

So is this really an initiative to protect girls, but it totally ignores trans girls in boy sports, right?

Or is it an initiative to keep girls out of school sports?

- And Alan, you have a rebuttal.

- Thank you.

I would have to say that it appears that this is a issue you haven't studied very closely either because what the initiative says is, yes, there are three different ways to do it, but it doesn't say that as part of the sports, physical has to be done.

It just says that the medical provider, I think it's primary care physician, has to ascertain or affirm.

And there's ways to do that, because throughout well visits as a child is growing up, there are times where there are general examinations based on the health of the child.

So that's in the medical records, that's available.

There isn't a supplemental check that's required.

- All right, and that was your final rebuttal.

And for your final rebuttal, Michaela, go ahead.

- So, sure, it's in the medical records, but I hate to say, that's not what it says in the initiative.

The initiative is clear that it either has to be one of those other tests or an examination of the reproductive anatomy of the child.

And, you know, it doesn't say you can look at older records.

It doesn't say that at all.

So how are doctors, physicians supposed to interpret that?

Unless that was changed, I'm not believing it.

I just don't.

- [Dana] All right.

Ember, you have the next question.

- Okay.

This one's for both of you.

The cost of gas, groceries, housing, everyday essentials has people here in Washington and across the nation looking for relief.

So what do you think you can do to provide relief to your constituents, and how will you advocate for them in Olympia?

Alan, you can go first.

- Sure.

We already talked a little bit about that on the Climate Commitment Act.

Fuel is a significant cost driver in almost everything that we buy.

You know, it takes trucks with diesel in order to get produce, meat, other goods to a grocery store.

So reducing the cost of that, and there is clear evidence that the Climate Commitment Act has driven cost up, and it's estimated between 40 to 45 cents.

Some have estimated as high as 50 cents.

That's a significant impact on grocery stores, which have very small margins.

So they have to in turn raise costs for consumers.

If we roll back the Climate Commitment Act and the Cap-and-Trade, which is not achieving its goals, and look for more effective ways to achieve that aim, then we can also make Washington a more affordable place.

That's gonna help us at the pump, it's gonna help us at the grocery store.

And the other thing we can do is we can honor the voter's request over multiple times to actually have $30 car tabs.

- Michaela, same to you.

- Well, I looked into fuel taxes this morning, and I know that our fuel taxes over the last four years have gone up very little, the Washington State portion of it.

And like less than five cents cumulative, so I'm not entirely sure what 40% we're speaking of right here.

If we reduced the fuel taxes that we are currently paying on diesel and gasoline by 40%, that would not make a recognizable difference in the cost of gasoline or diesel.

It simply wouldn't, the math isn't there.

And to blame everything on the Climate Commitment Act, I'm sorry, that doesn't sound right, because it's, I mean, I just don't see it.

If we're talking about just fuel, then it's not there.

So, I know he lost his rebuttal, but I would like to hear what else might be the cause for that.

Now, the state doesn't have a whole lot of ways of actually working on affordability, but if we got rid of the tariffs.

Thank you, Michaela.

- Thank you.

- If there's not a follow-up, that was our last question.

We are gonna go ahead and move on to closing statements now.

And Alan, you get to go first.

- Well, first off, I wanna thank you guys for your thoughtful and, you know, provocative questions and also for the opportunity to drive issues out that are important to voters.

I really liked the fact that this had included the opportunity for some follow-up questions.

You don't often get that.

All right, now, as far as why you should vote for me for the 6th Legislative District state representative, it comes down to two things, and this is what we should look for in any of our elected officials.

We need to look for character and we need to look for competence.

I went to school at the Air Force Academy, where the motto was, "I will not lie, steal, or cheat, or tolerate among us anyone who does."

Throughout the military, I was entrusted with millions of dollars worth of equipment and, more importantly, the lives of our service members.

I made good on those promises.

Throughout the military, my business time, and the Mead School District, I've been very successful in the Mead School, we balanced the budget, we've refocused on education, we've done what a government is supposed to do.

Those are the reasons why you should vote Alan Nolan on November 3.

- All right, Michaela, you also have one minute for your closing statement.

- Yes, and I also wanna thank you.

But I would like to say, what Mr.

Nolan said is actually almost 100% correct why you should vote for me.

I also served in the military.

I upheld the constitution for 23 and a half years.

I have combat deployments.

I was recognized throughout my career for my hard work, dedication, my proficiency, and my integrity.

Now, one thing that we didn't touch on is I'm very concerned about Mr.

Nolan's failure to hold the school administrators, coaches, and teachers in his school district accountable for the $17 million judgment that was just passed against his school district, stemming from sexual abuse and hazing against students.

I mean, it didn't happen under his watch, I know that, he was just been running for that office at the time, but everything else since then has been.

And so you can talk about your character and your professionalism and your solutions, but this $17 million in taxpayer money, that has to get paid.

- All right.

Thank you, Michaela.

That's gonna do it for this debate for Washington's 6th Legislative District.

Our thanks to the candidates, Michaela Kelso, Alan Nolan, as well as our journalists, Ember Braun and Amanda Sullender.

This and other KSPS debates are available for viewing any time at ksps.org, on the PBS app, and on the KSPS PBS YouTube channel.

For all of us here at KSPS PBS, thank you for watching.

(dramatic music)