North Carolina

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Data centers must be responsibly regulated so that economic development does not come at the expense of the people who already live in our communities. I support clear standards governing where data centers can be located, including adequate distance from residential neighborhoods, schools, and environmentally sensitive areas.

Before approving new data centers, communities should evaluate their impact on electricity demand, water usage, air quality, noise, infrastructure, and public health. Residents should not be forced to absorb higher utility costs because a large data center requires significantly more electricity or water.

I also believe data center developers should be required to pay their fair share of the infrastructure and energy costs created by their projects. If their operations require expanded electrical capacity, water systems, roads, or other public infrastructure, those costs should not simply be passed along to residential customers and taxpayers.

Economic development is important, but it must be responsible development. Any data center approval should include strong environmental protections, meaningful community input, transparency about projected water and energy consumption, and enforceable requirements that protect nearby residents from increased costs and environmental harm.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

With the rising cost of water and electricity, understanding the strain on current responsibilities of those who take the responsibility of paying their electric bill every month. I believe, the factor as to why the energy cost to consumers has been a shocker to businesses and consumers, is because the electric circuit has too much output. Rezoning the lines of electric current flow amongst the two other electric companies will help to alleviate cost for consumers. To cut costs for citizens, I would collaborate with Duke Energy to give a yearly subsidy to customers that will help when they choose to use it at their convenience. Realistically the data centers we have will allow our city to run more efficiently, dividing some of the allocation of energy re-zone to be drawn out, producing less strain on supply sources. This zone equation will ultimately help to cut costs. When trying to consolidate the cost of electric plants and producing solar equipment that will be more efficient to consumers and corporations cooperation is necessary.

I believe that our AI companies, with the appropriate coding will be able to regulate moderately the current electric circuit. Trafficking the water supply to be regulated at specific water pressure not to exceed a specific amount. Coded by AI as well, will keep cost streamlined and water supply leveled as much as possible. Transport of generators for EV car voltage zoning will be pretty effective, with taking a look at more populated areas utilizing EV and giving recommendations for other outlets that have not been accessible to consumers who plug in. Old fashion, but also looking more into our water supply as an avenue, helping aid in producing electricity.

All factors of these are major variables when considering, manipulating the equations, as part of the remedy for controls. Remembering in cutting the cost of electricity and water, we risk the chance of creating more pollution and hurting our ecosystem, for a brief moment. Weighing the facts and upgrading technology will be my focus. With giving relief benefits in form of a subsidy stipend, this will help some as we reconfigure the circuit for more efficient flow. Our public transportation although upgrades have not been as eco friendly as I would like. Upgrading transportation with less pollution is a plan.

Medicare and Medicaid plans also need to be network serviceable. I would like to work in conjunction with the auditors to find out why major network providers are declining the benefits and if it is due to the lack of payment. Then I would like to use other insurance companies that are more resourceful.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Across the country, we have seen data centers being built in rural or underprivileged communities, ostensibly to drive economic opportunity, but ultimately raising concerns about physical and noise pollution, increased demands on our energy and water infrastructure, and higher costs for consumers. I am not inherently opposed to data centers, but only when the community has a seat at the table and can help dictate the terms under which a data center is built and operates within that community.

As a state representative, I would support legislation that requires data centers to pay their fair share of the infrastructure and energy costs they create, rather than shifting those costs onto residential customers. We also need to enact appropriate safety and environmental protections to protect our communities and water supply. Economic development should directly benefit the people who live in a community, not leave them to shoulder the costs.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

North Carolina is one of the top data center destinations in the country right now, and Duke Energy has been asking regulators for double-digit rate hikes — as high as 18% at one point — while projecting billions in new grid investment driven largely by data center demand. Families in this district are being asked to subsidize infrastructure for companies that can well afford to pay their own way. Complicating the issue is that we don’t fully understand the long term impacts to the health of those living in the vicinity of data centers, but the possibilities - which include impacts on cardiac health, breathing issues, cognitive difficulties and more - are too extreme to be acceptable. Finally, we are fortunate to live in a beautiful state, but data centers pose real threats to our water systems, our air quality, our wildlife and our land.

Any new data center permitted should have to clear three tests: What’s the water impact on local systems, especially in counties already managing supply constraints? What’s the actual net job and tax benefit to the community versus the infrastructure and health costs it imposes? So far, data center developers have had trouble accurately and in some cases honestly answering those questions, and I think individual counties should impose strict requirements for these answers before even considering a data center proposal. I also support moratoriums on new data center construction as needed in order to prevent corners from being cut and to allow local residents to voice concerns.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

I think the most important aspect of approaching data center build outs and development is to remember that these data centers are an industry that relies on speed and secrecy. With more and more hyperscalers pushing for quick land sales, requiring NDAs from local governments and officials, and attempting to limit public comment and feedback we need to take a moment to ask why those tactics are needed. I’m well aware that “data center” can actually mean a myriad of things, from small centers that act as support to local fiber networks or nodes in larger systems, all the way to multiple acre facilities that use large amounts of land, water, and cause both noise and air pollution. As a legislator a goal I would set would be to ensure that any data center not only pays for its own infrastructure, but the larger the center and the more power use, the more it will be required to pay back into the community where it will be built. That can be done by increasing energy rates for large energy users to then reduce energy rates for residential customers, or setting up data center specific zoning to increase property taxes to higher levels for data centers that once built will not actually employ many members of the community.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

North Carolina should welcome technological investment, including data centers and the infrastructure supporting artificial intelligence, but economic development should not depend upon transferring infrastructure costs to families and small businesses.

Data centers can bring investment, tax revenue, construction, and technology jobs to communities. They can also consume substantial electricity and water and place additional demands on transmission, generation, and local infrastructure. Those costs and benefits need to be evaluated transparently.

Before major projects receive public incentives or special consideration, communities should have access to credible estimates of electricity demand, water consumption, infrastructure requirements, environmental impacts, and the expected public costs and benefits.

Where a project creates extraordinary new infrastructure requirements, the entity creating that demand should bear an appropriate share of those costs rather than quietly shifting them onto existing ratepayers.

I also support encouraging technologies that reduce the resource footprint of computing, including advanced cooling systems, water reuse, energy-efficient hardware, waste-heat recovery where practical, distributed energy resources, and new generation technologies.

The objective should not be to stop innovation. It should be to make sure North Carolina can support innovation sustainably while protecting residents, natural resources, and the reliability and affordability of essential services.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Data Centers can be an important part of our scientific and economic system. However, they should not be subsidized by government, or be allowed to have priority of resources, nor should they be allowed to circumnavigate building codes or local ordinances. Our power grid has been underinvested and our communal water resources are in danger with drought, pollution and other challenges.

In the scope of the position of joining the NC House I would ensure that Raleigh does not pick and choose winners and losers, and allows local oversight of zoning, restrictions, and other issues. Duke Power should not be allowed to pass on cost to rate-payers (either individual or business) to enhance power generation or costs to build out access. Also, using liquid or solid dinosaur remnant power generation to boil water for power has to stop.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

North Carolina should compete for this investment. We should not pay for it twice.

My standard is simple: large users pay their own freight. If a data center needs new generation and new transmission to operate, that company should build it, bring it, or buy it — not shift the cost onto the families and small businesses who were already here. I support establishing a large-load rate structure at the Utilities Commission that puts those costs where they belong, and I would apply the same principle to water and wastewater capacity.

Second, siting is a local decision. Cabarrus County and its towns understand their own water systems and their own neighborhoods better than Raleigh does. I would protect local zoning authority rather than preempt it, and I would expect an honest accounting up front — projected power draw, projected water use, and what happens to a site if the project never materializes.

Third, we have to add supply. You cannot serve growth by rationing it. That means reliable baseload generation, including nuclear, and a permitting process that does not take a decade. Done right, this is investment and good jobs. Done carelessly, it is a bill that lands on a retiree in Concord who never had a say in it.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

I’m against data centers in general because I have received overwhelming responses from the people in the 50th Senate district who don’t want data centers anywhere near them. Counties are already modifying their Universal Development Ordinances (or creating them in the first place) or to put a temporary moratorium in place. The General Assembly should step up and require data centers to pay for all extra utility costs that they create; require that they limit sound that travels past their property lines; capture their stormwater runoff; and make them pay into a fund if the land they build upon could have been used for housing instead of the data center.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Economic development should be welcome but not at the expense of families and small businesses. There needs to be a transparent review of all projects to ensure that all parties benefit from this very useful investment. It should be a priority to ensure that families are not subsidizing private businesses through higher utility bills or less access to resources. Economic growth is important and should benefit the business and the community, not a one way street.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

I would first demand to know how AI datacenters will self-support their enormous energy and cooling (water) demands, and the environmental impacts of these huge datacenters. It seems fitting to encourage their use of sustainable energy options, and limit their use of water resources. First do no harm would be a guiding principle in assessing any request to build in NC. Further, I would require they pay their fair share of property and income taxes. Any permissions granted would be contingent on their compliance with these conditions, and a commitment to the complete restoration of the site and its environment should they close or abandon such facilities.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

I would like to impact studies on all areas affected.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

As a reminder, data centers do not take up a dangerous amount of water. Even in a drought, I do not support punishing data centers more than anyone else. Nevertheless, their presence is growing rather fast, and they take up a meaningful amount of electricity. Data centers, when deciding a place to be built, ought to have lots that are considered for environmental significance and for health in scale with the amount of quality time people spend there, whether construction workers or long-term jobs. My understanding is that newer centers tend to be, already, more efficient typically, but that data centers are better suited in cooler climates in contrast with places like Florida. I believe North Carolina should neither resist nor attract data centers but should instead go out of its way to produce abundant, varied, cutting-edge energy. That might sound like a thoughtless answer, but keep in mind I am deeply aware of efforts in my state to at-once attack and promote data centers and I oppose both groups on principle. The science community is making great strides with nuclear power lately but has major challenges to overcome with solar and wind power, which I suspect will be achieved eventually but in the short-term limit viability. I speak as someone with a computer science bachelor’s degree.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Data centers can bring investment and economic activity to a community, but those benefits should not come at the expense of residents through higher utility bills, strained water supplies, or environmental and public-health impacts.

When considering new data centers, I would follow a simple principle: growth should pay for growth. Before approving a project, we should have a transparent accounting of its expected electricity and water demand, the infrastructure required to serve it, its environmental and public-health impacts, and who will ultimately pay those costs. Data centers should be responsible for the infrastructure and resource costs attributable to their operations rather than shifting those expenses onto residential customers and small businesses.

I would support requiring applicants to disclose projected energy and water consumption, demonstrate water- and energy-efficiency measures, and provide financial assurances for infrastructure built specifically to serve their facilities. Where appropriate, large-load utility rates, impact fees, or other cost-recovery mechanisms should ensure that these exceptionally large users pay their fair share.

I am also interested in examining whether companies that derive significant economic value from collecting, storing, processing, or monetizing data should contribute additional revenue to the communities that host the physical infrastructure making that activity possible. Any such policy would need to be carefully designed so that it is enforceable and does not simply pass costs back to consumers.

My goal would not be to prohibit data-center development, but to make sure development is responsible, transparent, and economically beneficial to the community as a whole while protecting affordable electricity, clean and reliable water, public health, and our natural resources.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Rising costs are the chief concern of nearly all of our residents. Measures to prevent these rises and promote lowering costs are the kitchen table issues that will drive voters out to the polls far more than the nebulous goal of “AI advancement,” or the desires of data center investors. With that, the deleterious effects of resource hungry data centers will have serious consequences to the people in my district with none of the benefits. It is my position that a moratorium on data centers be enacted in both the 52nd district and North Carolina as a whole for a minimum of one year, until all of the ecological studies can be completed, and the reviews of other communities outside of our state have been studied. However, I am not opposed to progress. If it can be proven that the data centers will not negatively impact the health of our residents and wildlife, the costs not be prohibitive, and iron clad protections for the residents be agreed upon when, not if, situations arise in the future that injury to persons or property are the fault of the data centers, I will consider the possibility of their installation and employment. This region has a very contentious history with big monied interests, most notably the Hamlet chicken processing plant fire, NC’s second worst industrial disaster in history resulting in 25 deaths in 1991, and the GenX pollution of the Cape Fear river basin. The people of this area are past the promises of outside organizations that inevitably make huge profits but disappear when people get sick, and their concerns lead me to err on the side of caution.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

In general, I believe Raleigh should welcome innovation and the economic investment that comes with new technology, but growth cannot come at the expense of affordability, public health, or our natural resources. Before approving major data center development, local government should evaluate its full impact on our electricity and water systems and then still proceed cautiously as we investigate all of the details surrounding these projects, including who pays for necessary infrastructure upgrades and whether those costs could ultimately be passed on to residents.

I would support clear, transparent standards with accountability for large-scale developments, including responsible water use, energy efficiency, environmental protections, and meaningful community engagement. We should also work with Duke Energy, Raleigh Water, regional governments, and state regulators to ensure that infrastructure keeps pace with growth.

My approach is simple: if a development creates jobs and investment, that’s good for Raleighites — but it should also make a fair contribution toward the infrastructure and resources it requires and not pass costs downstream nor irreversibly deplete important resources and pollute the environment.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Large AI companies have been bullying state and local governments into approving large data centers and granting huge tax benefits, with little or no protections against their harmful impacts. A single data center can consume resources equivalent to 100,000 households, straining essential resources such as water and power, which hurts affordability through increased energy and water costs. Data centers cause environmental harm by damaging water and air quality, and adding heat and noise. They contribute few jobs once the construction is done. Wake County is a growing metropolitan area and, therefore, no place for a data center. I will insist that Wake County’s environmental resources be protected for use by residents.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Data centers must be responsibly regulated so that economic development does not come at the expense of the people who already live in our communities. I support clear standards governing where data centers can be located, including adequate distance from residential neighborhoods, schools, and environmentally sensitive areas.

Before approving new data centers, communities should evaluate their impact on electricity demand, water usage, air quality, noise, infrastructure, and public health. Residents should not be forced to absorb higher utility costs because a large data center requires significantly more electricity or water.

I also believe data center developers should be required to pay their fair share of the infrastructure and energy costs created by their projects. If their operations require expanded electrical capacity, water systems, roads, or other public infrastructure, those costs should not simply be passed along to residential customers and taxpayers.

Economic development is important, but it must be responsible development. Any data center approval should include strong environmental protections, meaningful community input, transparency about projected water and energy consumption, and enforceable requirements that protect nearby residents from increased costs and environmental harm.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

With the rising cost of water and electricity, understanding the strain on current responsibilities of those who take the responsibility of paying their electric bill every month. I believe, the factor as to why the energy cost to consumers has been a shocker to businesses and consumers, is because the electric circuit has too much output. Rezoning the lines of electric current flow amongst the two other electric companies will help to alleviate cost for consumers. To cut costs for citizens, I would collaborate with Duke Energy to give a yearly subsidy to customers that will help when they choose to use it at their convenience. Realistically the data centers we have will allow our city to run more efficiently, dividing some of the allocation of energy re-zone to be drawn out, producing less strain on supply sources. This zone equation will ultimately help to cut costs. When trying to consolidate the cost of electric plants and producing solar equipment that will be more efficient to consumers and corporations cooperation is necessary.

I believe that our AI companies, with the appropriate coding will be able to regulate moderately the current electric circuit. Trafficking the water supply to be regulated at specific water pressure not to exceed a specific amount. Coded by AI as well, will keep cost streamlined and water supply leveled as much as possible. Transport of generators for EV car voltage zoning will be pretty effective, with taking a look at more populated areas utilizing EV and giving recommendations for other outlets that have not been accessible to consumers who plug in. Old fashion, but also looking more into our water supply as an avenue, helping aid in producing electricity.

All factors of these are major variables when considering, manipulating the equations, as part of the remedy for controls. Remembering in cutting the cost of electricity and water, we risk the chance of creating more pollution and hurting our ecosystem, for a brief moment. Weighing the facts and upgrading technology will be my focus. With giving relief benefits in form of a subsidy stipend, this will help some as we reconfigure the circuit for more efficient flow. Our public transportation although upgrades have not been as eco friendly as I would like. Upgrading transportation with less pollution is a plan.

Medicare and Medicaid plans also need to be network serviceable. I would like to work in conjunction with the auditors to find out why major network providers are declining the benefits and if it is due to the lack of payment. Then I would like to use other insurance companies that are more resourceful.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Across the country, we have seen data centers being built in rural or underprivileged communities, ostensibly to drive economic opportunity, but ultimately raising concerns about physical and noise pollution, increased demands on our energy and water infrastructure, and higher costs for consumers. I am not inherently opposed to data centers, but only when the community has a seat at the table and can help dictate the terms under which a data center is built and operates within that community.

As a state representative, I would support legislation that requires data centers to pay their fair share of the infrastructure and energy costs they create, rather than shifting those costs onto residential customers. We also need to enact appropriate safety and environmental protections to protect our communities and water supply. Economic development should directly benefit the people who live in a community, not leave them to shoulder the costs.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

North Carolina is one of the top data center destinations in the country right now, and Duke Energy has been asking regulators for double-digit rate hikes — as high as 18% at one point — while projecting billions in new grid investment driven largely by data center demand. Families in this district are being asked to subsidize infrastructure for companies that can well afford to pay their own way. Complicating the issue is that we don’t fully understand the long term impacts to the health of those living in the vicinity of data centers, but the possibilities - which include impacts on cardiac health, breathing issues, cognitive difficulties and more - are too extreme to be acceptable. Finally, we are fortunate to live in a beautiful state, but data centers pose real threats to our water systems, our air quality, our wildlife and our land.

Any new data center permitted should have to clear three tests: What’s the water impact on local systems, especially in counties already managing supply constraints? What’s the actual net job and tax benefit to the community versus the infrastructure and health costs it imposes? So far, data center developers have had trouble accurately and in some cases honestly answering those questions, and I think individual counties should impose strict requirements for these answers before even considering a data center proposal. I also support moratoriums on new data center construction as needed in order to prevent corners from being cut and to allow local residents to voice concerns.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

I think the most important aspect of approaching data center build outs and development is to remember that these data centers are an industry that relies on speed and secrecy. With more and more hyperscalers pushing for quick land sales, requiring NDAs from local governments and officials, and attempting to limit public comment and feedback we need to take a moment to ask why those tactics are needed. I’m well aware that “data center” can actually mean a myriad of things, from small centers that act as support to local fiber networks or nodes in larger systems, all the way to multiple acre facilities that use large amounts of land, water, and cause both noise and air pollution. As a legislator a goal I would set would be to ensure that any data center not only pays for its own infrastructure, but the larger the center and the more power use, the more it will be required to pay back into the community where it will be built. That can be done by increasing energy rates for large energy users to then reduce energy rates for residential customers, or setting up data center specific zoning to increase property taxes to higher levels for data centers that once built will not actually employ many members of the community.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

North Carolina should welcome technological investment, including data centers and the infrastructure supporting artificial intelligence, but economic development should not depend upon transferring infrastructure costs to families and small businesses.

Data centers can bring investment, tax revenue, construction, and technology jobs to communities. They can also consume substantial electricity and water and place additional demands on transmission, generation, and local infrastructure. Those costs and benefits need to be evaluated transparently.

Before major projects receive public incentives or special consideration, communities should have access to credible estimates of electricity demand, water consumption, infrastructure requirements, environmental impacts, and the expected public costs and benefits.

Where a project creates extraordinary new infrastructure requirements, the entity creating that demand should bear an appropriate share of those costs rather than quietly shifting them onto existing ratepayers.

I also support encouraging technologies that reduce the resource footprint of computing, including advanced cooling systems, water reuse, energy-efficient hardware, waste-heat recovery where practical, distributed energy resources, and new generation technologies.

The objective should not be to stop innovation. It should be to make sure North Carolina can support innovation sustainably while protecting residents, natural resources, and the reliability and affordability of essential services.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Data Centers can be an important part of our scientific and economic system. However, they should not be subsidized by government, or be allowed to have priority of resources, nor should they be allowed to circumnavigate building codes or local ordinances. Our power grid has been underinvested and our communal water resources are in danger with drought, pollution and other challenges.

In the scope of the position of joining the NC House I would ensure that Raleigh does not pick and choose winners and losers, and allows local oversight of zoning, restrictions, and other issues. Duke Power should not be allowed to pass on cost to rate-payers (either individual or business) to enhance power generation or costs to build out access. Also, using liquid or solid dinosaur remnant power generation to boil water for power has to stop.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

North Carolina should compete for this investment. We should not pay for it twice.

My standard is simple: large users pay their own freight. If a data center needs new generation and new transmission to operate, that company should build it, bring it, or buy it — not shift the cost onto the families and small businesses who were already here. I support establishing a large-load rate structure at the Utilities Commission that puts those costs where they belong, and I would apply the same principle to water and wastewater capacity.

Second, siting is a local decision. Cabarrus County and its towns understand their own water systems and their own neighborhoods better than Raleigh does. I would protect local zoning authority rather than preempt it, and I would expect an honest accounting up front — projected power draw, projected water use, and what happens to a site if the project never materializes.

Third, we have to add supply. You cannot serve growth by rationing it. That means reliable baseload generation, including nuclear, and a permitting process that does not take a decade. Done right, this is investment and good jobs. Done carelessly, it is a bill that lands on a retiree in Concord who never had a say in it.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

I’m against data centers in general because I have received overwhelming responses from the people in the 50th Senate district who don’t want data centers anywhere near them. Counties are already modifying their Universal Development Ordinances (or creating them in the first place) or to put a temporary moratorium in place. The General Assembly should step up and require data centers to pay for all extra utility costs that they create; require that they limit sound that travels past their property lines; capture their stormwater runoff; and make them pay into a fund if the land they build upon could have been used for housing instead of the data center.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Economic development should be welcome but not at the expense of families and small businesses. There needs to be a transparent review of all projects to ensure that all parties benefit from this very useful investment. It should be a priority to ensure that families are not subsidizing private businesses through higher utility bills or less access to resources. Economic growth is important and should benefit the business and the community, not a one way street.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

I would first demand to know how AI datacenters will self-support their enormous energy and cooling (water) demands, and the environmental impacts of these huge datacenters. It seems fitting to encourage their use of sustainable energy options, and limit their use of water resources. First do no harm would be a guiding principle in assessing any request to build in NC. Further, I would require they pay their fair share of property and income taxes. Any permissions granted would be contingent on their compliance with these conditions, and a commitment to the complete restoration of the site and its environment should they close or abandon such facilities.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

I would like to impact studies on all areas affected.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

As a reminder, data centers do not take up a dangerous amount of water. Even in a drought, I do not support punishing data centers more than anyone else. Nevertheless, their presence is growing rather fast, and they take up a meaningful amount of electricity. Data centers, when deciding a place to be built, ought to have lots that are considered for environmental significance and for health in scale with the amount of quality time people spend there, whether construction workers or long-term jobs. My understanding is that newer centers tend to be, already, more efficient typically, but that data centers are better suited in cooler climates in contrast with places like Florida. I believe North Carolina should neither resist nor attract data centers but should instead go out of its way to produce abundant, varied, cutting-edge energy. That might sound like a thoughtless answer, but keep in mind I am deeply aware of efforts in my state to at-once attack and promote data centers and I oppose both groups on principle. The science community is making great strides with nuclear power lately but has major challenges to overcome with solar and wind power, which I suspect will be achieved eventually but in the short-term limit viability. I speak as someone with a computer science bachelor’s degree.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Data centers can bring investment and economic activity to a community, but those benefits should not come at the expense of residents through higher utility bills, strained water supplies, or environmental and public-health impacts.

When considering new data centers, I would follow a simple principle: growth should pay for growth. Before approving a project, we should have a transparent accounting of its expected electricity and water demand, the infrastructure required to serve it, its environmental and public-health impacts, and who will ultimately pay those costs. Data centers should be responsible for the infrastructure and resource costs attributable to their operations rather than shifting those expenses onto residential customers and small businesses.

I would support requiring applicants to disclose projected energy and water consumption, demonstrate water- and energy-efficiency measures, and provide financial assurances for infrastructure built specifically to serve their facilities. Where appropriate, large-load utility rates, impact fees, or other cost-recovery mechanisms should ensure that these exceptionally large users pay their fair share.

I am also interested in examining whether companies that derive significant economic value from collecting, storing, processing, or monetizing data should contribute additional revenue to the communities that host the physical infrastructure making that activity possible. Any such policy would need to be carefully designed so that it is enforceable and does not simply pass costs back to consumers.

My goal would not be to prohibit data-center development, but to make sure development is responsible, transparent, and economically beneficial to the community as a whole while protecting affordable electricity, clean and reliable water, public health, and our natural resources.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Rising costs are the chief concern of nearly all of our residents. Measures to prevent these rises and promote lowering costs are the kitchen table issues that will drive voters out to the polls far more than the nebulous goal of “AI advancement,” or the desires of data center investors. With that, the deleterious effects of resource hungry data centers will have serious consequences to the people in my district with none of the benefits. It is my position that a moratorium on data centers be enacted in both the 52nd district and North Carolina as a whole for a minimum of one year, until all of the ecological studies can be completed, and the reviews of other communities outside of our state have been studied. However, I am not opposed to progress. If it can be proven that the data centers will not negatively impact the health of our residents and wildlife, the costs not be prohibitive, and iron clad protections for the residents be agreed upon when, not if, situations arise in the future that injury to persons or property are the fault of the data centers, I will consider the possibility of their installation and employment. This region has a very contentious history with big monied interests, most notably the Hamlet chicken processing plant fire, NC’s second worst industrial disaster in history resulting in 25 deaths in 1991, and the GenX pollution of the Cape Fear river basin. The people of this area are past the promises of outside organizations that inevitably make huge profits but disappear when people get sick, and their concerns lead me to err on the side of caution.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

In general, I believe Raleigh should welcome innovation and the economic investment that comes with new technology, but growth cannot come at the expense of affordability, public health, or our natural resources. Before approving major data center development, local government should evaluate its full impact on our electricity and water systems and then still proceed cautiously as we investigate all of the details surrounding these projects, including who pays for necessary infrastructure upgrades and whether those costs could ultimately be passed on to residents.

I would support clear, transparent standards with accountability for large-scale developments, including responsible water use, energy efficiency, environmental protections, and meaningful community engagement. We should also work with Duke Energy, Raleigh Water, regional governments, and state regulators to ensure that infrastructure keeps pace with growth.

My approach is simple: if a development creates jobs and investment, that’s good for Raleighites — but it should also make a fair contribution toward the infrastructure and resources it requires and not pass costs downstream nor irreversibly deplete important resources and pollute the environment.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Large AI companies have been bullying state and local governments into approving large data centers and granting huge tax benefits, with little or no protections against their harmful impacts. A single data center can consume resources equivalent to 100,000 households, straining essential resources such as water and power, which hurts affordability through increased energy and water costs. Data centers cause environmental harm by damaging water and air quality, and adding heat and noise. They contribute few jobs once the construction is done. Wake County is a growing metropolitan area and, therefore, no place for a data center. I will insist that Wake County’s environmental resources be protected for use by residents.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Data centers must be responsibly regulated so that economic development does not come at the expense of the people who already live in our communities. I support clear standards governing where data centers can be located, including adequate distance from residential neighborhoods, schools, and environmentally sensitive areas.

Before approving new data centers, communities should evaluate their impact on electricity demand, water usage, air quality, noise, infrastructure, and public health. Residents should not be forced to absorb higher utility costs because a large data center requires significantly more electricity or water.

I also believe data center developers should be required to pay their fair share of the infrastructure and energy costs created by their projects. If their operations require expanded electrical capacity, water systems, roads, or other public infrastructure, those costs should not simply be passed along to residential customers and taxpayers.

Economic development is important, but it must be responsible development. Any data center approval should include strong environmental protections, meaningful community input, transparency about projected water and energy consumption, and enforceable requirements that protect nearby residents from increased costs and environmental harm.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

Government has a responsibility to protect public health, particularly when individuals and communities are exposed to risks they cannot reasonably control on their own. Environmental health is a major part of that responsibility.

I support strong laws and enforcement standards that protect communities from PFAS contamination, asbestos exposure, unsafe drinking water, air pollution, and other environmental hazards. Economic development should never come at the expense of the health and safety of the people who live nearby. Businesses and developers should be held accountable for preventing environmental harm, addressing contamination they cause, and helping cover the cost of remediation rather than shifting those costs to taxpayers.

I also support maintaining access to vaccines, disease-prevention programs, public-health education, and emergency-preparedness resources so families can make informed decisions and communities are prepared to respond to outbreaks, natural disasters, and other public-health emergencies.

At the legislative level, I would support stronger environmental safeguards, routine testing and public disclosure of health risks, adequate funding for state and local public-health agencies, and meaningful penalties when businesses violate health or environmental standards. Protecting public health and supporting economic growth should not be competing priorities. We can encourage development while still requiring companies to operate responsibly and protect the communities in which they do business.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

With the rising cost of water and electricity, understanding the strain on current responsibilities of those who take the responsibility of paying their electric bill every month. I believe, the factor as to why the energy cost to consumers has been a shocker to businesses and consumers, is because the electric circuit has too much output. Rezoning the lines of electric current flow amongst the two other electric companies will help to alleviate cost for consumers. To cut costs for citizens, I would collaborate with Duke Energy to give a yearly subsidy to customers that will help when they choose to use it at their convenience. Realistically the data centers we have will allow our city to run more efficiently, dividing some of the allocation of energy re-zone to be drawn out, producing less strain on supply sources. This zone equation will ultimately help to cut costs. When trying to consolidate the cost of electric plants and producing solar equipment that will be more efficient to consumers and corporations cooperation is necessary.

I believe that our AI companies, with the appropriate coding will be able to regulate moderately the current electric circuit. Trafficking the water supply to be regulated at specific water pressure not to exceed a specific amount. Coded by AI as well, will keep cost streamlined and water supply leveled as much as possible. Transport of generators for EV car voltage zoning will be pretty effective, with taking a look at more populated areas utilizing EV and giving recommendations for other outlets that have not been accessible to consumers who plug in. Old fashion, but also looking more into our water supply as an avenue, helping aid in producing electricity.

All factors of these are major variables when considering, manipulating the equations, as part of the remedy for controls. Remembering in cutting the cost of electricity and water, we risk the chance of creating more pollution and hurting our ecosystem, for a brief moment. Weighing the facts and upgrading technology will be my focus. With giving relief benefits in form of a subsidy stipend, this will help some as we reconfigure the circuit for more efficient flow. Our public transportation although upgrades have not been as eco friendly as I would like. Upgrading transportation with less pollution is a plan.

Medicare and Medicaid plans also need to be network serviceable. I would like to work in conjunction with the auditors to find out why major network providers are declining the benefits and if it is due to the lack of payment. Then I would like to use other insurance companies that are more resourceful.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

In my previous mentions, I believe my entire stance aligns the resolution to take action in protecting public health and community wellbeing. Ensuring quality insurance for all demographics, making sure that school nurses are present in schools so they are able to relay information to parents that will keep their parents aware of any checkups that need to be made abruptly in addition to basic reminders. Relying on the Federal Drug Administration located in our city, “ The City of Medicine” encourages our doctors and hospitals in this area to begin producing vaccines that are safe and preferably organic ingredients, as much as possible. Making our residents feel comfortable in knowing that we have doctors and clinics that we can trust and are credible. Having vaccines more spread out as an option to bundle shots.

With our food supply being approved and tested in our city, our farmers will be able to produce, produce that is free of harmful chemicals, used to preserve during transport of vegetables and meat imported from other cities, states, and countries.

Continuing the extension of the Sun Benefit program for our students. Throughout the school year, will hopefully prevent parents having to pick up fast food as opposed to a healthy snack because they think it’s cheaper to grab. Testing the apples in the McDonalds Happy meal to see if it is actually an apple. We know sometimes those apples have a funny smell.

Our First responders are always punctual and with that create a city where our citizens understand that we are creating, cultivating, and continuing to ensure access to networks are available without hassle. Will ease the citizens’ minds. Less stress because everything is here, in the city of Durham, NC.

As I push to build these structures, as an elected official. This work with scientists is going to build the general public’s trust in science, in food, and in our education system. Assurance that we have modern upgrades to the way our water and electricity is disbursed, along with sub stipends. The citizens will be honored. As they vote me as their Senator of District 22. Visit www.lakeshiamalstonsenate.net for more information.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Across the country, we have seen data centers being built in rural or underprivileged communities, ostensibly to drive economic opportunity, but ultimately raising concerns about physical and noise pollution, increased demands on our energy and water infrastructure, and higher costs for consumers. I am not inherently opposed to data centers, but only when the community has a seat at the table and can help dictate the terms under which a data center is built and operates within that community.

As a state representative, I would support legislation that requires data centers to pay their fair share of the infrastructure and energy costs they create, rather than shifting those costs onto residential customers. We also need to enact appropriate safety and environmental protections to protect our communities and water supply. Economic development should directly benefit the people who live in a community, not leave them to shoulder the costs.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

I believe that investing in public health is investing in our communities, our economy, and much more. Resources such as vaccines and other preventive health care should be available to residents regardless of their ability to afford them, because herd immunity is not based upon income or tax brackets.

I also believe that government has an important role to play in ensuring that our environment is safe by cleaning up old hazardous waste sites. Look at what is currently happening with Western Electric in Burlington. By tapping into both public resources and private investment when appropriate, we can not only clean up life-altering hazards but truly revitalize parts of my district that have been neglected for far too long.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

North Carolina is one of the top data center destinations in the country right now, and Duke Energy has been asking regulators for double-digit rate hikes — as high as 18% at one point — while projecting billions in new grid investment driven largely by data center demand. Families in this district are being asked to subsidize infrastructure for companies that can well afford to pay their own way. Complicating the issue is that we don’t fully understand the long term impacts to the health of those living in the vicinity of data centers, but the possibilities - which include impacts on cardiac health, breathing issues, cognitive difficulties and more - are too extreme to be acceptable. Finally, we are fortunate to live in a beautiful state, but data centers pose real threats to our water systems, our air quality, our wildlife and our land.

Any new data center permitted should have to clear three tests: What’s the water impact on local systems, especially in counties already managing supply constraints? What’s the actual net job and tax benefit to the community versus the infrastructure and health costs it imposes? So far, data center developers have had trouble accurately and in some cases honestly answering those questions, and I think individual counties should impose strict requirements for these answers before even considering a data center proposal. I also support moratoriums on new data center construction as needed in order to prevent corners from being cut and to allow local residents to voice concerns.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

Government has a basic obligation to protect public health, and that includes making sure people have access to vaccines without cost or misinformation being the barrier, and making sure environmental health risks are actually regulated rather than negotiated away.

On PFAS specifically — this is not hypothetical for North Carolina; we’ve already lived through a statewide PFAS contamination crisis. I support enforceable federal drinking water standards, funded remediation for affected communities, and real accountability for the industrial polluters, not the taxpayers, footing the cleanup bill. On emergency preparedness, rural hospital closures are a public health emergency in slow motion in this district. You cannot have community disaster response, let alone routine emergency care, without a functioning hospital within a reasonable drive. I’ll fight federal policy that lets private equity strip rural hospitals for parts, and I’ll push for funding models that keep rural facilities open rather than subsidizing their closure.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

I think the most important aspect of approaching data center build outs and development is to remember that these data centers are an industry that relies on speed and secrecy. With more and more hyperscalers pushing for quick land sales, requiring NDAs from local governments and officials, and attempting to limit public comment and feedback we need to take a moment to ask why those tactics are needed. I’m well aware that “data center” can actually mean a myriad of things, from small centers that act as support to local fiber networks or nodes in larger systems, all the way to multiple acre facilities that use large amounts of land, water, and cause both noise and air pollution. As a legislator a goal I would set would be to ensure that any data center not only pays for its own infrastructure, but the larger the center and the more power use, the more it will be required to pay back into the community where it will be built. That can be done by increasing energy rates for large energy users to then reduce energy rates for residential customers, or setting up data center specific zoning to increase property taxes to higher levels for data centers that once built will not actually employ many members of the community.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

I believe the government should be the first line of defense when it comes to public health. Government has the power and the resources to set guidelines regarding water quality, building codes, vaccine schedules and emergency response and if elected officials actually care about the constituents they represent then they will take all of those tasks seriously. The best government is one that ensures that it’s citizens are able to easily learn about requirements or other regulations to keep them safe but otherwise can feel confident that they are going about their day in a city, county, or state that is enforcing those requirements equally and with resources, allowing citizens to not have to worry if they may be making an unsafe choice whether at a park or in a restaurant. Clear communication can also go a long way to explaining why something has been done and the benefits of that choice to ensure everyone is on the same page.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

North Carolina should welcome technological investment, including data centers and the infrastructure supporting artificial intelligence, but economic development should not depend upon transferring infrastructure costs to families and small businesses.

Data centers can bring investment, tax revenue, construction, and technology jobs to communities. They can also consume substantial electricity and water and place additional demands on transmission, generation, and local infrastructure. Those costs and benefits need to be evaluated transparently.

Before major projects receive public incentives or special consideration, communities should have access to credible estimates of electricity demand, water consumption, infrastructure requirements, environmental impacts, and the expected public costs and benefits.

Where a project creates extraordinary new infrastructure requirements, the entity creating that demand should bear an appropriate share of those costs rather than quietly shifting them onto existing ratepayers.

I also support encouraging technologies that reduce the resource footprint of computing, including advanced cooling systems, water reuse, energy-efficient hardware, waste-heat recovery where practical, distributed energy resources, and new generation technologies.

The objective should not be to stop innovation. It should be to make sure North Carolina can support innovation sustainably while protecting residents, natural resources, and the reliability and affordability of essential services.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

Government has a legitimate responsibility to protect people from hazards they cannot reasonably evaluate or mitigate individually, particularly contamination of shared resources, infectious disease threats, unsafe public infrastructure, and environmental hazards.

That responsibility should be exercised through evidence, transparency, and proportionality.

For environmental risks such as PFAS, asbestos, or contaminated drinking water, government should support rigorous testing, make results readily accessible to affected communities, identify responsible parties where possible, and establish remediation priorities based on measurable health risks.

For infectious diseases, government should work to maintain access to vaccines, diagnostics, treatment, and reliable public-health information. Individuals should have access to credible information about benefits, risks, and uncertainties so that they can make informed healthcare decisions with their medical providers.

Emergency preparedness is equally important. North Carolina faces hurricanes, flooding, emerging diseases, infrastructure failures, cybersecurity incidents, and other hazards. Preparedness should include resilient communications, healthcare capacity, interoperable emergency systems, supply-chain planning, and regular exercises involving state, local, private-sector, and community organizations.

Public-health authority carries significant responsibility. Policies should therefore be evidence-based, transparent about their rationale, periodically reassessed as evidence changes, and subject to appropriate public and legislative oversight.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Data Centers can be an important part of our scientific and economic system. However, they should not be subsidized by government, or be allowed to have priority of resources, nor should they be allowed to circumnavigate building codes or local ordinances. Our power grid has been underinvested and our communal water resources are in danger with drought, pollution and other challenges.

In the scope of the position of joining the NC House I would ensure that Raleigh does not pick and choose winners and losers, and allows local oversight of zoning, restrictions, and other issues. Duke Power should not be allowed to pass on cost to rate-payers (either individual or business) to enhance power generation or costs to build out access. Also, using liquid or solid dinosaur remnant power generation to boil water for power has to stop.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

Government should help to coordinate and fund research to improve public health and keep that funding away from the bipartisan whim to cut or add depending upon political goals.

The residents of North Carolina should be protected and their access to safe drinking water, clean air safeguarded by the court system and regulatory bodies.

The recent PFAS ‘settlement’ that the State of North Carolina ‘accepted’ is a corporate sell out of the damages caused by Chemors across the state. Also the coal ash debate, and the hog lagoon debates are also examples of government picking and choosing winners and losers - with the losers being the residents affected by the malfeasance of Duke Power and Smithfields as examples.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

North Carolina should compete for this investment. We should not pay for it twice.

My standard is simple: large users pay their own freight. If a data center needs new generation and new transmission to operate, that company should build it, bring it, or buy it — not shift the cost onto the families and small businesses who were already here. I support establishing a large-load rate structure at the Utilities Commission that puts those costs where they belong, and I would apply the same principle to water and wastewater capacity.

Second, siting is a local decision. Cabarrus County and its towns understand their own water systems and their own neighborhoods better than Raleigh does. I would protect local zoning authority rather than preempt it, and I would expect an honest accounting up front — projected power draw, projected water use, and what happens to a site if the project never materializes.

Third, we have to add supply. You cannot serve growth by rationing it. That means reliable baseload generation, including nuclear, and a permitting process that does not take a decade. Done right, this is investment and good jobs. Done carelessly, it is a bill that lands on a retiree in Concord who never had a say in it.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

Government’s core job here is the physical infrastructure: clean water, safe food, hospitals that stay open, and the capacity to respond when something goes wrong.

On contamination, I am direct. The company that put a chemical in the water should pay to take it out — not the ratepayer. PFAS testing and treatment are expensive, and smaller water systems cannot absorb that cost alone. I support state cost-share for treatment upgrades paired with real financial responsibility for the manufacturers. The same principle applies to asbestos and lead remediation in older schools and housing.

On preparedness, I speak from some experience. I serve on the board of Patriot Relief, a Cabarrus County-based nonprofit founded in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene to move volunteers and supplies into western North Carolina — and to keep showing up long after the news trucks left. What that work taught me is that the failure point is almost never good intentions. It is local capacity: water systems, communications, road access, and the ability to move people and material in the first seventy-two hours. That deserves standing investment and agreements signed before the storm, not a scramble afterward.

On vaccines, my position is that they should be available and affordable to every family that wants them, and that the decision belongs to parents in consultation with their own doctor rather than to a mandate from Raleigh. Access, yes. Coercion, no.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

I’m against data centers in general because I have received overwhelming responses from the people in the 50th Senate district who don’t want data centers anywhere near them. Counties are already modifying their Universal Development Ordinances (or creating them in the first place) or to put a temporary moratorium in place. The General Assembly should step up and require data centers to pay for all extra utility costs that they create; require that they limit sound that travels past their property lines; capture their stormwater runoff; and make them pay into a fund if the land they build upon could have been used for housing instead of the data center.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

My feeling is that the North Carolina general assembly and specifically the state senate has a key role to play in working with local jurisdictions not only through statutes, but through ensuring that local communities have the resources that they need to make good decisions for their communities and they understand what that stake with something like PFAS So they can make the kinds of unified development, ordinance decisions that protect everyone’s well-being. Did we not learn from asbestos and beryllium and other harmful substances?

Once a toxic building material is entered into the environment. It stays there forever. It’s up to government institutions to lead the way to help educate the folks to understand this. Yes, materials may be cheaper and thereby provide a higher level of profit for the company that’s building the building, but that doesn’t mean we should just let anything happen because it’s cheaper.

Regarding emergency preparedness: we tend to be completely reactive to anything besides hurricanes because we have a long history of hurricanes hitting the coastal areas. We have not been proactive regarding wildland fires, earthquakes, landslides, tornadoes, and ice storms.

Even after hurricane Helene became tropical storm Helene and devastated so much of Western North Carolina the general assembly led by the Republicans chose to play a political football game instead of working to build back better with resilience and work toward ensuring that all North Carolina and understand what the plan is when we have the next natural disaster.

Not to mention other dangers like radiological and biological threats, electromagnetic pulses, and cyber attack attacks. It seems to me we’d rather bury our heads in the sand and hope it doesn’t happen then actually work to make sure every single person understands what they’re supposed to do when something happens.

For example, out here in Western North Carolina there are people that do not have access to a cell phone or even a landline phone in their home. They have to get in their car and travel a certain distance to when they can get reception from their phone or a public Wi-Fi Spot. These same people frequently do not have access to a radio station that could broadcast important information. In short, these people are hanging out to dry with absolutely no connection to the outside world when something like tropical storm Helene happens because many roads were closed or impassable due to the storm.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Economic development should be welcome but not at the expense of families and small businesses. There needs to be a transparent review of all projects to ensure that all parties benefit from this very useful investment. It should be a priority to ensure that families are not subsidizing private businesses through higher utility bills or less access to resources. Economic growth is important and should benefit the business and the community, not a one way street.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

The government has great responsibility in protecting public health, but it should do so in a way that respects our liberties, personal rights, religious decision making, and transparency.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

I would first demand to know how AI datacenters will self-support their enormous energy and cooling (water) demands, and the environmental impacts of these huge datacenters. It seems fitting to encourage their use of sustainable energy options, and limit their use of water resources. First do no harm would be a guiding principle in assessing any request to build in NC. Further, I would require they pay their fair share of property and income taxes. Any permissions granted would be contingent on their compliance with these conditions, and a commitment to the complete restoration of the site and its environment should they close or abandon such facilities.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

Institutions that have designed, developed, and refined our ability to address (and eliminate!) these threats are under attack and being dismantled at an incredible pace. This must stop. Fact-based monitoring, historical and empirical evidence, and sound planning policies should be prioritized and identified in parallel to deal with these challenges, with a cost and remediation/cleanup approach that places the majority of weight on the industries having benefitted from the sale/use of hazardous chemicals/products. On the other hand, companies or agencies investigating disease prevention and emergency preparedness should be financially supported by national and state agency funding (e.g., NIH).

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

I would like to impact studies on all areas affected.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

The city should be responsible to enforce best building practices for new building when issuing building permits. Our building inspectors should be skilled enough to fully understand building code.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

As a reminder, data centers do not take up a dangerous amount of water. Even in a drought, I do not support punishing data centers more than anyone else. Nevertheless, their presence is growing rather fast, and they take up a meaningful amount of electricity. Data centers, when deciding a place to be built, ought to have lots that are considered for environmental significance and for health in scale with the amount of quality time people spend there, whether construction workers or long-term jobs. My understanding is that newer centers tend to be, already, more efficient typically, but that data centers are better suited in cooler climates in contrast with places like Florida. I believe North Carolina should neither resist nor attract data centers but should instead go out of its way to produce abundant, varied, cutting-edge energy. That might sound like a thoughtless answer, but keep in mind I am deeply aware of efforts in my state to at-once attack and promote data centers and I oppose both groups on principle. The science community is making great strides with nuclear power lately but has major challenges to overcome with solar and wind power, which I suspect will be achieved eventually but in the short-term limit viability. I speak as someone with a computer science bachelor’s degree.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

I must disclose before answering that, as of this Summer, I work as a paralegal in asbestos lawsuits. In the Environmental Stewardship plank I added to my Party’s state platform (prior to getting or even knowing about my new job), I spoke about how harm to health and life are grounds for tort lawsuits. Keeping these laws and our courts is sufficient to ensure corporations and the government alike are held accountable for not taking health seriously. Parents need greater discretion to decide what vaccines to introduce into their children, but on the other hand, institutions, even some public ones, within reason, should likewise have the discretion to set rules about health requires for customers and visitors. I tend to believe firmly in rights of association in which a group has the right to exclude more than an individual has a right to interfere in the sense that property can be collectively owned and operated by a group. This allows for peer pressure to get a vaccine and wash your hands, et cetera. I sometimes joke that I am a 1990s politician out of time; I think Bill Clinton had the right idea when he became sincerely concerned about having a reserve of vaccines as a social program in case of natural disaster, as well as for the country to take measures again bio-terrorism. But since the 1990s, we have largely gone too far with getting the government involved with our health; we may be more advanced in the field of science than we were in the 1990s, but our ability to govern has gotten no better, and in fact has gotten worse since then, and I therefore believe we cannot trust the government with controlling our health; the details of the COVID-19 Pandemic response demonstrate what I mean. Ultimately, well-being is the responsibility of the citizens in their communities with their local and (sometimes) state governments except in the narrow cases within true, major emergencies.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Data centers can bring investment and economic activity to a community, but those benefits should not come at the expense of residents through higher utility bills, strained water supplies, or environmental and public-health impacts.

When considering new data centers, I would follow a simple principle: growth should pay for growth. Before approving a project, we should have a transparent accounting of its expected electricity and water demand, the infrastructure required to serve it, its environmental and public-health impacts, and who will ultimately pay those costs. Data centers should be responsible for the infrastructure and resource costs attributable to their operations rather than shifting those expenses onto residential customers and small businesses.

I would support requiring applicants to disclose projected energy and water consumption, demonstrate water- and energy-efficiency measures, and provide financial assurances for infrastructure built specifically to serve their facilities. Where appropriate, large-load utility rates, impact fees, or other cost-recovery mechanisms should ensure that these exceptionally large users pay their fair share.

I am also interested in examining whether companies that derive significant economic value from collecting, storing, processing, or monetizing data should contribute additional revenue to the communities that host the physical infrastructure making that activity possible. Any such policy would need to be carefully designed so that it is enforceable and does not simply pass costs back to consumers.

My goal would not be to prohibit data-center development, but to make sure development is responsible, transparent, and economically beneficial to the community as a whole while protecting affordable electricity, clean and reliable water, public health, and our natural resources.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

Government has a fundamental responsibility to protect public health and ensure access to clean water and safe communities. Our region knows firsthand the consequences of PFAS contamination in drinking water. Government must act quickly to ensure residents have clean, safe water while holding polluters accountable for the cost of cleanup not leaving taxpayers and families to foot the bill.

We also live in a hurricane-prone region, making emergency preparedness essential. State and local governments must plan and coordinate before disasters occur, strengthen critical infrastructure, and ensure emergency services and resources are ready when communities need them most. Whether addressing contaminated water or preparing for the next storm, protecting public health requires preparation, accountability, and a government capable of responding when people need it.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Rising costs are the chief concern of nearly all of our residents. Measures to prevent these rises and promote lowering costs are the kitchen table issues that will drive voters out to the polls far more than the nebulous goal of “AI advancement,” or the desires of data center investors. With that, the deleterious effects of resource hungry data centers will have serious consequences to the people in my district with none of the benefits. It is my position that a moratorium on data centers be enacted in both the 52nd district and North Carolina as a whole for a minimum of one year, until all of the ecological studies can be completed, and the reviews of other communities outside of our state have been studied. However, I am not opposed to progress. If it can be proven that the data centers will not negatively impact the health of our residents and wildlife, the costs not be prohibitive, and iron clad protections for the residents be agreed upon when, not if, situations arise in the future that injury to persons or property are the fault of the data centers, I will consider the possibility of their installation and employment. This region has a very contentious history with big monied interests, most notably the Hamlet chicken processing plant fire, NC’s second worst industrial disaster in history resulting in 25 deaths in 1991, and the GenX pollution of the Cape Fear river basin. The people of this area are past the promises of outside organizations that inevitably make huge profits but disappear when people get sick, and their concerns lead me to err on the side of caution.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

As many as we can. It is the duty of our elected officials to protect the public. There are known health risks that currently are either not being addressed, or are sorely underfunded. In Richmond County PFAS waste from another county is dumped in the landfill. Spreading forever chemicals from Chemours from one county to the next sorely misses the mark of the idiom “dilution is the solution to pollution,”. This is but one example. The proposed Amazon Data center will have 600 diesel generators which will harm the air quality of the region, result in a severe disruption of our endemic flora and fauna species, and likely lead to health issues. This too should not be allowed. The situation is not that the residents are okay with these detriments, but with our current elected officials being complicit with these actions, and in some cases directly benefiting, financially from them. We need selfless service, especially in our leadership to make the best decisions moving forward that will create a healthy, productive environment for our children.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

In general, I believe Raleigh should welcome innovation and the economic investment that comes with new technology, but growth cannot come at the expense of affordability, public health, or our natural resources. Before approving major data center development, local government should evaluate its full impact on our electricity and water systems and then still proceed cautiously as we investigate all of the details surrounding these projects, including who pays for necessary infrastructure upgrades and whether those costs could ultimately be passed on to residents.

I would support clear, transparent standards with accountability for large-scale developments, including responsible water use, energy efficiency, environmental protections, and meaningful community engagement. We should also work with Duke Energy, Raleigh Water, regional governments, and state regulators to ensure that infrastructure keeps pace with growth.

My approach is simple: if a development creates jobs and investment, that’s good for Raleighites — but it should also make a fair contribution toward the infrastructure and resources it requires and not pass costs downstream nor irreversibly deplete important resources and pollute the environment.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

Government has a fundamental responsibility to protect public health and make sure people can live, work, and raise their families in safe communities. That means taking evidence-based action on issues ranging from vaccine access and disease prevention to environmental hazards such as PFAS, asbestos, contaminated water, and air pollution.

I believe government should focus on three things: prevention, preparedness, and access. We should invest in public health infrastructure before a crisis occurs, make essential health resources accessible to people regardless of income or neighborhood, and communicate clearly during emergencies.

At the same time, public policy should be grounded in the best available scientific evidence and implemented in a practical, transparent way. Local government cannot solve every public health challenge alone, but Raleigh can be a strong partner with Wake County, healthcare providers, schools, and state and federal agencies.

Protecting public health isn’t about government telling people how to live; it’s about making sure everyone has a fair opportunity to live in a safe, healthy community.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Large AI companies have been bullying state and local governments into approving large data centers and granting huge tax benefits, with little or no protections against their harmful impacts. A single data center can consume resources equivalent to 100,000 households, straining essential resources such as water and power, which hurts affordability through increased energy and water costs. Data centers cause environmental harm by damaging water and air quality, and adding heat and noise. They contribute few jobs once the construction is done. Wake County is a growing metropolitan area and, therefore, no place for a data center. I will insist that Wake County’s environmental resources be protected for use by residents.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

I will advocate for adequate funding for County Health and Human Services, emphasizing disease prevention (free immunizations, needle exchanges, public education about hygiene and available programs) and early intervention (improved access to health clinics) to reduce costs. I will evaluate if we can increase the number of regional clinics and expand telehealth options so that a sick person doesn’t suffer unnecessarily or infect others at work, school, or in a bus. Further, I will ensure that appropriate funds are allocated to services such as maternal and child health, and immunizations, with a focus on helping those in greatest need, such as low-income residents. For immigrant communities, I will ensure that there is adequate language support and that these services are suitably advertised (e.g., through radio and social media, partnerships with ethnic stores and places of worship) so that everyone receives public health information and partakes of the available services. I will institute data gathering and analysis protocols to continually track demand for health services to enable dynamic reallocation of resources across the County.

I will advocate setting up a network of social workers (and volunteers) in each community. This network can help spread the word about the available public health services and encourage participation in them, while also helping individuals with their specific needs, including administrative help in signing up for programs such as Medicaid and CHIP. Federal cuts have made qualification harder but if we can make sure that all who qualify are enrolled, that will benefit them and produce revenue for the County.

Mental health and substance abuse crises are social work and community challenges rather than police challenges. I will advocate for instituting a system of community social workers. People who need mental health and substance abuse help often need it more than once. Thus, we can acquire data about their specific case along with the social worker adding social knowledge, e.g., about whether they are going through job loss or a divorce. This knowledge can help improve targeting of the services for each incident, including routing mobile crisis calls better, and before an incident occurs, bringing up softer interventions such as alerting a peer volunteer to chat with an at-risk person to ease their anxiety or remind them to take their medication. The idea is to support a 24x7 service while minimizing the involvement of traditional police and healthcare.

I will support County programs such as One Water that seek to ensure sustainable and safe water options (including PFAS testing). I will work with County Soil and Water supervisors to make sure they have the resources they need and maintain transparency about water quality and supply.

We need better preparedness for the variety of emergencies that might arise. Hurricanes and tornados can mess with transportation, power, and water, and overwhelm the healthcare system. Heat emergencies are increasingly common; we have cooling stations for people who need them but they may not be adequate and our public communication leaves room for improvement. In addition, the Harris nuclear power station is based in Wake, and we need to be ready for any emergency there.

I will make sure our emergency services are well-equipped and well-staffed. County services need to adequately coordinate with the services provided by the constituent municipalities.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

North Carolina cannot build a strong science and biotechnology workforce without first making the necessary public investments in education. As a legislator, I would support fully funding our public schools, strengthening STEM instruction, and ensuring that schools have the teachers, laboratory equipment, technology, and instructional resources needed to prepare students for careers in science, biotechnology, health care, and advanced manufacturing.

I would also support increased state investment in community colleges so they can offer affordable, industry-aligned science and technical programs without shifting additional costs onto students. That includes funding for updated curriculum, modern equipment, faculty recruitment and retention, and short-term credential programs that respond directly to regional workforce needs.

The state should also expand dual-enrollment opportunities, apprenticeships, internships, and partnerships among K–12 schools, community colleges, universities, and biotechnology employers. These programs should be available in rural communities as well as our larger metropolitan areas.

Finally, I would support workforce-development incentives that require companies receiving state economic-development assistance to invest in local training, internships, and employment pipelines. If North Carolina is using public resources to attract science and biotechnology companies, those investments should also create clear educational and career opportunities for North Carolina residents

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

I love science. As a former educator and aesthetician, this is one reason why I decided to run as Senator of District 22. I wanted to ensure that science is at the forefront of our students’ minds. Science and math along with our basic language arts and foreign languages. I plan to collaborate with the General Assembly to access a suitable curriculum structure that will allow our k-12 academia to begin to understand the basic factors of how we composite and modernize our seemingly mundane, daily functions of science used every day.

My motto on this journey is that we are “Revolutionizing methods for the care and renewal of the human body and our ecosystem’s natural resources. Through Knowledge of transformative treatment methods, products and equipment, in a working environment that fosters success and pathways to careers.” The Aesthetic Cosmetic Industrial Research Sanction will help students and employers begin to produce breakthrough technologies. Along with The FDA office and Laboratories here in the city of Durham, NC. Students will begin to expand their horizons, and have tangible constructs that allow for them to attain their dreams and goals.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

As a public school teacher, I am a firm believer in a robust education for every child in my district, regardless of ZIP code. That means our state must do better than the bottom fifth in the country when it comes to public school funding and teacher pay.

We have also allowed politicians to interfere with what teachers are able to teach, all in the name of removing anything that is arbitrarily deemed to be “DEI.” I would advocate for greater investment in STEM education and support initiatives around scholarships and academic funding for young people from underprivileged backgrounds. Every child should have the opportunity to succeed, regardless of their family’s income, and investing in those students will allow North Carolina to continue growing our reputation as a great place to do business and build a talented workforce.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

North Carolina’s biotech and life sciences growth is real, but it doesn’t do our communities much good if the workforce pipeline doesn’t reach past the Research Triangle. As someone who spent eight years in PA program leadership and national accreditation work, I’ve seen firsthand what it takes to build a credible STEM-to-career pipeline — and what it takes is investment at the K–12 and community college level, not just at flagship universities.

Concretely: fully funding STEM and lab-based coursework in public schools, including in districts like ours where school funding disparities are already a live issue; expanding dual-enrollment and early-college partnerships between high schools and community colleges so students can earn credentials before they graduate; and treating community colleges as the workforce backbone they are, with direct federal support for biotech, lab tech, and advanced manufacturing certificate programs tied to real regional employer demand.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

We do that by fully funding our public schools in every single county. We increase teacher pay to not only pay the teachers we have what they deserve, but to encourage new teachers to enter the profession whether from here in NC or from neighboring states. North Carolina has some of the greatest public, private, and community colleges in the entire country and partnerships between those institutions and our K-12 schools is the way we prepare for the future and ensure that every single kid in North Carolina is given the opportunity to learn about any number of subjects, find what they love, and then excel at it and follow it into their dream job.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

North Carolina has an extraordinary combination of universities, community colleges, research institutions, biotechnology companies, technology companies, agriculture, healthcare systems, and advanced manufacturing. Our education system should connect students much more directly to that ecosystem.

I support strengthening STEM education while expanding practical pathways into science and technology careers.

That includes partnerships between employers, community colleges, universities, and K–12 schools; apprenticeships and internships; dual-enrollment programs; laboratory and technical education; cybersecurity; biotechnology; advanced manufacturing; artificial intelligence; data science; and industry-recognized credentials.

Community colleges are particularly important because they can respond quickly to regional workforce requirements without requiring every student to pursue a traditional four-year degree.

We should also recognize that scientific literacy is becoming important outside traditional scientific occupations. Students entering healthcare, agriculture, manufacturing, information technology, public safety, cybersecurity, or government increasingly need to understand data, statistics, scientific reasoning, and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence.

The goal should be multiple pathways to meaningful careers and lifelong learning rather than a single educational model.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

The State of North Carolina has a Constitutional promise of a sound basic education for children. We are failing them on this promise. We need to have STEM programs, vocational education, as well as increasing civics and home economics to prepare our future leaders and workforce for success.

I’d propose to have 100% of the NC Education Lottery to be a supplemental addition to education, instead of the current shell game of reallocating budget to other projects with the proceeds from the regressive voluntary tax on those who cannot realize that the math of the lottery is never in their favor.

Community Colleges, secondary Vocational Programs should have a public-private partnership for mentoring and apprenticeship for science, trades, and vocations that is affordable if not completely funded by the state and corporate partners.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

Cabarrus County is already doing this well, and the model is a few miles from my front door. The North Carolina Research Campus in Kannapolis and Rowan-Cabarrus Community College’s biotechnology and advanced technology programs train people for jobs that exist right now, at wages a family can live on. This county lost thousands of textile jobs when Pillowtex closed, and the way back was retraining people for the economy that came next. That is not theory here. It is living memory.

So my answer is to fund what works and get out of its way. Expand Career and College Promise so a high school student can walk across the stage with a credential already in hand. Keep investing in community college lab space and equipment — that is the expensive part, and it is the part that goes obsolete. Pay instructors enough that a working lab technician will consider teaching. And build employer-run apprenticeships, because industry knows what it needs faster than any curriculum committee does.

I would also say plainly that the young person who becomes a lab technician, an electrician, or a maintenance technician on that campus has a real career in front of them. We ought to stop treating a four-year degree as the only respectable path.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

First of all, we must stop redistributing public funds from public schools and giving those funds to private schools. We must fully fund our public schools as required by the state constitution and appropriately compensate our teachers and other school staff with salary and benefits (including increased pay for degrees beyond the bachelors degree) so that we can fill all of our open teaching positions, Including teaching positions in science, technology and math.

Schools need adequate facilities and the counties that lack the resources to provide those facilities need assistance in paying for them from the state.

As a former teacher for 12 years in the public schools, I fully understand that the classrooms, the equipment, and the in-service training necessary for science education can be expensive, but it is a cost that we must pay if we want our students to excel in science. The same thing is true for all subjects.

For our community colleges, they must continue to be responsive to the needs of industry and universities. If any partnerships are created with industry they need to ensure that academic freedom is protected. We need all of our students to be scientifically literate to participate in our society so community college students should have access to remedial programs if they have gaps in their knowledge and understanding.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

That starts with improving reading, math, science, and tech skills K-Tech and apprenticeship opportunities. Our community college system is robust and a proven asset to our people. A path to a successful career without enormous debt is becoming the chosen path for many. Goals must include responsiveness in emergencies, clear communication of facts, and public trust.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

We have an imbalance of “community” education and funding disparities that can no longer be ignored. Reference: the Leandro Remediation Plan. I would significantly and equally increase NC funding/pupil to the national average at a minimum, and propose that the State provide a bond funding resolution for new public school construction and existing school update/renovation to encourage STEM-enabled facilities.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

This is not a city level issue, but I would support local education in Wake County and like to see more trades education to meet the demand for labor and small business ownership.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

To address that, I have two options. I can demand our state Constitution be amended to stop requiring “uniform” education, or I would need to ensure every school in the state prepares kids for the career relevant to Wake/ Durham Counties and only those two. The latter is preposterous, and hopefully I made clear the reason why! It is funny how easy it is to point people to the draconian way we do not allow nuanced, localized differences in our education system. I lament that my preferred solution of decentralizing education and allowing alternatives to public school is a very uphill battle to implement. It is a common-sense solution: give locals the tools to prepare students for the industries nearby to them. Non-locals do not need those same tools and that is for the locals to decide for themselves. If we had 100 school systems instead of one central system, and if higher-ed was not funded through equity bonds that typically reduce their specialization trajectory, we would absolutely have plenty of institutions from Kindergarten to graduate school preparing students for science, biology, and whatever else. It took me no time at all to type up this answer because “freedom” is shockingly often the simplest and most ignored solution to our problems in a circumstance of ever-consolidating power. Hence, our need for freedom (the pendulum swinging back where it came from) is, in this case, the direct and most effective solution.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

As a school board member, I understand that a strong school-to-career pipeline begins well before graduation. North Carolina should expand opportunities for students to explore science and biotechnology careers through strong STEM and CTE programs, dual enrollment, internships, apprenticeships, and partnerships with our community colleges. I would especially encourage greater private-sector investment in public schools. Companies that benefit from North Carolina’s workforce can help build the next generation of that workforce by providing equipment, expertise, teacher training, internships, and other hands-on learning opportunities. These partnerships should strengthen not replace public investment and should reach rural and underserved communities as well. Our goal should be clear pathways from the classroom to an affordable credential or degree and, ultimately, a good-paying career in North Carolina.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

NC colleges and universities are among the best in the nation. NC public schools are the poorest funded. If we are to create a population of young people interested in progress through science, we need to adopt a more education friendly outlook in our legislature. For sixteen years the legislature has repeatedly defunded our public schools in favor of using taxes to bolster private schools with less oversight and more opportunities for discrimination against students. This must be reversed. Our community colleges are an ideal stepping stone for our young people to receive higher education, either to lead to future STEM degrees, or to meet the need of our trade professions. Further promotion and funding of these community colleges are the way to foster local higher education that pays dividends to the community.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

North Carolina’s greatest economic asset is its people. If we want to remain a national leader in biotechnology, life sciences, and technology, we need to start preparing students for those opportunities well before they reach college.

I would support stronger partnerships between K–12 schools, community colleges, universities, and local employers to expand STEM education, career and technical education, internships, apprenticeships, and hands-on learning. Community colleges, in particular, can serve as a bridge between students and the high-demand jobs being created across our state. I believe they will play a vital role in workforce preparedness for our younger generations.

At the local level, Raleigh can help bring schools, employers, nonprofits, and higher education institutions to the same table and make sure students from every neighborhood — including students who may not see themselves as future scientists or technologists — have access to these opportunities.

We should make sure that North Carolina’s innovation economy creates pathways to the middle class and robust opportunities for North Carolinians who are growing up here.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

Our federal and state governments are cutting support for education. Wake County schools are already suffering from abysmal infrastructure, including leaking roofs, broken HVAC, and suspected mold. I will ensure that public schools get the funding they need to provide quality education to our students, including those with special needs. I will work to find ways to provide the necessary funds for all aspects of our schools, including buildings and equipment, support (salaries, benefits, training) for WCPSS teachers and other staff.

Besides additional funding, one way to improve workforce preparedness is by engaging the community. Wake County has a phenomenal pool of educated people and especially retirees who want to give back to the community. I will work to advance community participation in education through programs such as Communities in Schools for mentoring students so that students whose families may lack college-educated adults can benefit from the experience and expertise of retirees, especially to enhance STEAM offerings across our schools.

As I know from my own career, new technologies and business practices emerge in surprising ways. Therefore, I will ensure not only that Wake Tech has the resources, both staff and infrastructure, to keep its curricula up-to-date with new technology but also that it has offerings for adults to upskill themselves, especially in industries that are gaining prominence in the County. Even people who are currently employed may future-proof their employability by preparing for upcoming careers.

A big challenge for Wake Tech students with children is child care and especially so for working adults, especially women and single parents. I will examine how to expand options for all, including childcare grants and universal preschool.

I will seek to expand Wake Tech’s partnerships with public schools. For example, the Cooperative Innovative High Schools program enables students to earn a high school diploma while earning credits for an associate degree. I will seek to expand it from four schools currently by finding ways to support staff (for teaching and coordinating with outside stakeholders) and transportation solutions so they are viable for students without personal cars.

I will seek to expand apprenticeship opportunities for students at local companies. I will foster closer relationships with leading employers of Wake Tech graduates, where they contribute financially, hire student interns, and provide experienced employees as adjunct teaching staff to bring real-world experience to guide students. Given the cost to a company of recruiting qualified employees, such support by them would be beneficial to them, not just to students.

Broadband access for all and County libraries are crucial to workforce development. Not only do libraries level access to knowledge, they also provide computers for learning and job search and facilities to use for job interviews. I will try to ensure that libraries across the County have modern resources and new libraries are architected for all these essential purposes with agility in meeting future community needs.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

North Carolina cannot build a strong science and biotechnology workforce without first making the necessary public investments in education. As a legislator, I would support fully funding our public schools, strengthening STEM instruction, and ensuring that schools have the teachers, laboratory equipment, technology, and instructional resources needed to prepare students for careers in science, biotechnology, health care, and advanced manufacturing.

I would also support increased state investment in community colleges so they can offer affordable, industry-aligned science and technical programs without shifting additional costs onto students. That includes funding for updated curriculum, modern equipment, faculty recruitment and retention, and short-term credential programs that respond directly to regional workforce needs.

The state should also expand dual-enrollment opportunities, apprenticeships, internships, and partnerships among K–12 schools, community colleges, universities, and biotechnology employers. These programs should be available in rural communities as well as our larger metropolitan areas.

Finally, I would support workforce-development incentives that require companies receiving state economic-development assistance to invest in local training, internships, and employment pipelines. If North Carolina is using public resources to attract science and biotechnology companies, those investments should also create clear educational and career opportunities for North Carolina residents

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

I love science. As a former educator and aesthetician, this is one reason why I decided to run as Senator of District 22. I wanted to ensure that science is at the forefront of our students’ minds. Science and math along with our basic language arts and foreign languages. I plan to collaborate with the General Assembly to access a suitable curriculum structure that will allow our k-12 academia to begin to understand the basic factors of how we composite and modernize our seemingly mundane, daily functions of science used every day.

My motto on this journey is that we are “Revolutionizing methods for the care and renewal of the human body and our ecosystem’s natural resources. Through Knowledge of transformative treatment methods, products and equipment, in a working environment that fosters success and pathways to careers.” The Aesthetic Cosmetic Industrial Research Sanction will help students and employers begin to produce breakthrough technologies. Along with The FDA office and Laboratories here in the city of Durham, NC. Students will begin to expand their horizons, and have tangible constructs that allow for them to attain their dreams and goals.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

As a public school teacher, I am a firm believer in a robust education for every child in my district, regardless of ZIP code. That means our state must do better than the bottom fifth in the country when it comes to public school funding and teacher pay.

We have also allowed politicians to interfere with what teachers are able to teach, all in the name of removing anything that is arbitrarily deemed to be “DEI.” I would advocate for greater investment in STEM education and support initiatives around scholarships and academic funding for young people from underprivileged backgrounds. Every child should have the opportunity to succeed, regardless of their family’s income, and investing in those students will allow North Carolina to continue growing our reputation as a great place to do business and build a talented workforce.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

North Carolina’s biotech and life sciences growth is real, but it doesn’t do our communities much good if the workforce pipeline doesn’t reach past the Research Triangle. As someone who spent eight years in PA program leadership and national accreditation work, I’ve seen firsthand what it takes to build a credible STEM-to-career pipeline — and what it takes is investment at the K–12 and community college level, not just at flagship universities.

Concretely: fully funding STEM and lab-based coursework in public schools, including in districts like ours where school funding disparities are already a live issue; expanding dual-enrollment and early-college partnerships between high schools and community colleges so students can earn credentials before they graduate; and treating community colleges as the workforce backbone they are, with direct federal support for biotech, lab tech, and advanced manufacturing certificate programs tied to real regional employer demand.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

We do that by fully funding our public schools in every single county. We increase teacher pay to not only pay the teachers we have what they deserve, but to encourage new teachers to enter the profession whether from here in NC or from neighboring states. North Carolina has some of the greatest public, private, and community colleges in the entire country and partnerships between those institutions and our K-12 schools is the way we prepare for the future and ensure that every single kid in North Carolina is given the opportunity to learn about any number of subjects, find what they love, and then excel at it and follow it into their dream job.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

North Carolina has an extraordinary combination of universities, community colleges, research institutions, biotechnology companies, technology companies, agriculture, healthcare systems, and advanced manufacturing. Our education system should connect students much more directly to that ecosystem.

I support strengthening STEM education while expanding practical pathways into science and technology careers.

That includes partnerships between employers, community colleges, universities, and K–12 schools; apprenticeships and internships; dual-enrollment programs; laboratory and technical education; cybersecurity; biotechnology; advanced manufacturing; artificial intelligence; data science; and industry-recognized credentials.

Community colleges are particularly important because they can respond quickly to regional workforce requirements without requiring every student to pursue a traditional four-year degree.

We should also recognize that scientific literacy is becoming important outside traditional scientific occupations. Students entering healthcare, agriculture, manufacturing, information technology, public safety, cybersecurity, or government increasingly need to understand data, statistics, scientific reasoning, and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence.

The goal should be multiple pathways to meaningful careers and lifelong learning rather than a single educational model.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

The State of North Carolina has a Constitutional promise of a sound basic education for children. We are failing them on this promise. We need to have STEM programs, vocational education, as well as increasing civics and home economics to prepare our future leaders and workforce for success.

I’d propose to have 100% of the NC Education Lottery to be a supplemental addition to education, instead of the current shell game of reallocating budget to other projects with the proceeds from the regressive voluntary tax on those who cannot realize that the math of the lottery is never in their favor.

Community Colleges, secondary Vocational Programs should have a public-private partnership for mentoring and apprenticeship for science, trades, and vocations that is affordable if not completely funded by the state and corporate partners.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

Cabarrus County is already doing this well, and the model is a few miles from my front door. The North Carolina Research Campus in Kannapolis and Rowan-Cabarrus Community College’s biotechnology and advanced technology programs train people for jobs that exist right now, at wages a family can live on. This county lost thousands of textile jobs when Pillowtex closed, and the way back was retraining people for the economy that came next. That is not theory here. It is living memory.

So my answer is to fund what works and get out of its way. Expand Career and College Promise so a high school student can walk across the stage with a credential already in hand. Keep investing in community college lab space and equipment — that is the expensive part, and it is the part that goes obsolete. Pay instructors enough that a working lab technician will consider teaching. And build employer-run apprenticeships, because industry knows what it needs faster than any curriculum committee does.

I would also say plainly that the young person who becomes a lab technician, an electrician, or a maintenance technician on that campus has a real career in front of them. We ought to stop treating a four-year degree as the only respectable path.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

First of all, we must stop redistributing public funds from public schools and giving those funds to private schools. We must fully fund our public schools as required by the state constitution and appropriately compensate our teachers and other school staff with salary and benefits (including increased pay for degrees beyond the bachelors degree) so that we can fill all of our open teaching positions, Including teaching positions in science, technology and math.

Schools need adequate facilities and the counties that lack the resources to provide those facilities need assistance in paying for them from the state.

As a former teacher for 12 years in the public schools, I fully understand that the classrooms, the equipment, and the in-service training necessary for science education can be expensive, but it is a cost that we must pay if we want our students to excel in science. The same thing is true for all subjects.

For our community colleges, they must continue to be responsive to the needs of industry and universities. If any partnerships are created with industry they need to ensure that academic freedom is protected. We need all of our students to be scientifically literate to participate in our society so community college students should have access to remedial programs if they have gaps in their knowledge and understanding.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

That starts with improving reading, math, science, and tech skills K-Tech and apprenticeship opportunities. Our community college system is robust and a proven asset to our people. A path to a successful career without enormous debt is becoming the chosen path for many. Goals must include responsiveness in emergencies, clear communication of facts, and public trust.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

We have an imbalance of “community” education and funding disparities that can no longer be ignored. Reference: the Leandro Remediation Plan. I would significantly and equally increase NC funding/pupil to the national average at a minimum, and propose that the State provide a bond funding resolution for new public school construction and existing school update/renovation to encourage STEM-enabled facilities.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

This is not a city level issue, but I would support local education in Wake County and like to see more trades education to meet the demand for labor and small business ownership.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

To address that, I have two options. I can demand our state Constitution be amended to stop requiring “uniform” education, or I would need to ensure every school in the state prepares kids for the career relevant to Wake/ Durham Counties and only those two. The latter is preposterous, and hopefully I made clear the reason why! It is funny how easy it is to point people to the draconian way we do not allow nuanced, localized differences in our education system. I lament that my preferred solution of decentralizing education and allowing alternatives to public school is a very uphill battle to implement. It is a common-sense solution: give locals the tools to prepare students for the industries nearby to them. Non-locals do not need those same tools and that is for the locals to decide for themselves. If we had 100 school systems instead of one central system, and if higher-ed was not funded through equity bonds that typically reduce their specialization trajectory, we would absolutely have plenty of institutions from Kindergarten to graduate school preparing students for science, biology, and whatever else. It took me no time at all to type up this answer because “freedom” is shockingly often the simplest and most ignored solution to our problems in a circumstance of ever-consolidating power. Hence, our need for freedom (the pendulum swinging back where it came from) is, in this case, the direct and most effective solution.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

As a school board member, I understand that a strong school-to-career pipeline begins well before graduation. North Carolina should expand opportunities for students to explore science and biotechnology careers through strong STEM and CTE programs, dual enrollment, internships, apprenticeships, and partnerships with our community colleges. I would especially encourage greater private-sector investment in public schools. Companies that benefit from North Carolina’s workforce can help build the next generation of that workforce by providing equipment, expertise, teacher training, internships, and other hands-on learning opportunities. These partnerships should strengthen not replace public investment and should reach rural and underserved communities as well. Our goal should be clear pathways from the classroom to an affordable credential or degree and, ultimately, a good-paying career in North Carolina.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

NC colleges and universities are among the best in the nation. NC public schools are the poorest funded. If we are to create a population of young people interested in progress through science, we need to adopt a more education friendly outlook in our legislature. For sixteen years the legislature has repeatedly defunded our public schools in favor of using taxes to bolster private schools with less oversight and more opportunities for discrimination against students. This must be reversed. Our community colleges are an ideal stepping stone for our young people to receive higher education, either to lead to future STEM degrees, or to meet the need of our trade professions. Further promotion and funding of these community colleges are the way to foster local higher education that pays dividends to the community.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

North Carolina’s greatest economic asset is its people. If we want to remain a national leader in biotechnology, life sciences, and technology, we need to start preparing students for those opportunities well before they reach college.

I would support stronger partnerships between K–12 schools, community colleges, universities, and local employers to expand STEM education, career and technical education, internships, apprenticeships, and hands-on learning. Community colleges, in particular, can serve as a bridge between students and the high-demand jobs being created across our state. I believe they will play a vital role in workforce preparedness for our younger generations.

At the local level, Raleigh can help bring schools, employers, nonprofits, and higher education institutions to the same table and make sure students from every neighborhood — including students who may not see themselves as future scientists or technologists — have access to these opportunities.

We should make sure that North Carolina’s innovation economy creates pathways to the middle class and robust opportunities for North Carolinians who are growing up here.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

Our federal and state governments are cutting support for education. Wake County schools are already suffering from abysmal infrastructure, including leaking roofs, broken HVAC, and suspected mold. I will ensure that public schools get the funding they need to provide quality education to our students, including those with special needs. I will work to find ways to provide the necessary funds for all aspects of our schools, including buildings and equipment, support (salaries, benefits, training) for WCPSS teachers and other staff.

Besides additional funding, one way to improve workforce preparedness is by engaging the community. Wake County has a phenomenal pool of educated people and especially retirees who want to give back to the community. I will work to advance community participation in education through programs such as Communities in Schools for mentoring students so that students whose families may lack college-educated adults can benefit from the experience and expertise of retirees, especially to enhance STEAM offerings across our schools.

As I know from my own career, new technologies and business practices emerge in surprising ways. Therefore, I will ensure not only that Wake Tech has the resources, both staff and infrastructure, to keep its curricula up-to-date with new technology but also that it has offerings for adults to upskill themselves, especially in industries that are gaining prominence in the County. Even people who are currently employed may future-proof their employability by preparing for upcoming careers.

A big challenge for Wake Tech students with children is child care and especially so for working adults, especially women and single parents. I will examine how to expand options for all, including childcare grants and universal preschool.

I will seek to expand Wake Tech’s partnerships with public schools. For example, the Cooperative Innovative High Schools program enables students to earn a high school diploma while earning credits for an associate degree. I will seek to expand it from four schools currently by finding ways to support staff (for teaching and coordinating with outside stakeholders) and transportation solutions so they are viable for students without personal cars.

I will seek to expand apprenticeship opportunities for students at local companies. I will foster closer relationships with leading employers of Wake Tech graduates, where they contribute financially, hire student interns, and provide experienced employees as adjunct teaching staff to bring real-world experience to guide students. Given the cost to a company of recruiting qualified employees, such support by them would be beneficial to them, not just to students.

Broadband access for all and County libraries are crucial to workforce development. Not only do libraries level access to knowledge, they also provide computers for learning and job search and facilities to use for job interviews. I will try to ensure that libraries across the County have modern resources and new libraries are architected for all these essential purposes with agility in meeting future community needs.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

North Carolina cannot build a strong science and biotechnology workforce without first making the necessary public investments in education. As a legislator, I would support fully funding our public schools, strengthening STEM instruction, and ensuring that schools have the teachers, laboratory equipment, technology, and instructional resources needed to prepare students for careers in science, biotechnology, health care, and advanced manufacturing.

I would also support increased state investment in community colleges so they can offer affordable, industry-aligned science and technical programs without shifting additional costs onto students. That includes funding for updated curriculum, modern equipment, faculty recruitment and retention, and short-term credential programs that respond directly to regional workforce needs.

The state should also expand dual-enrollment opportunities, apprenticeships, internships, and partnerships among K–12 schools, community colleges, universities, and biotechnology employers. These programs should be available in rural communities as well as our larger metropolitan areas.

Finally, I would support workforce-development incentives that require companies receiving state economic-development assistance to invest in local training, internships, and employment pipelines. If North Carolina is using public resources to attract science and biotechnology companies, those investments should also create clear educational and career opportunities for North Carolina residents

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

I love science. As a former educator and aesthetician, this is one reason why I decided to run as Senator of District 22. I wanted to ensure that science is at the forefront of our students’ minds. Science and math along with our basic language arts and foreign languages. I plan to collaborate with the General Assembly to access a suitable curriculum structure that will allow our k-12 academia to begin to understand the basic factors of how we composite and modernize our seemingly mundane, daily functions of science used every day.

My motto on this journey is that we are “Revolutionizing methods for the care and renewal of the human body and our ecosystem’s natural resources. Through Knowledge of transformative treatment methods, products and equipment, in a working environment that fosters success and pathways to careers.” The Aesthetic Cosmetic Industrial Research Sanction will help students and employers begin to produce breakthrough technologies. Along with The FDA office and Laboratories here in the city of Durham, NC. Students will begin to expand their horizons, and have tangible constructs that allow for them to attain their dreams and goals.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

As a public school teacher, I am a firm believer in a robust education for every child in my district, regardless of ZIP code. That means our state must do better than the bottom fifth in the country when it comes to public school funding and teacher pay.

We have also allowed politicians to interfere with what teachers are able to teach, all in the name of removing anything that is arbitrarily deemed to be “DEI.” I would advocate for greater investment in STEM education and support initiatives around scholarships and academic funding for young people from underprivileged backgrounds. Every child should have the opportunity to succeed, regardless of their family’s income, and investing in those students will allow North Carolina to continue growing our reputation as a great place to do business and build a talented workforce.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

North Carolina’s biotech and life sciences growth is real, but it doesn’t do our communities much good if the workforce pipeline doesn’t reach past the Research Triangle. As someone who spent eight years in PA program leadership and national accreditation work, I’ve seen firsthand what it takes to build a credible STEM-to-career pipeline — and what it takes is investment at the K–12 and community college level, not just at flagship universities.

Concretely: fully funding STEM and lab-based coursework in public schools, including in districts like ours where school funding disparities are already a live issue; expanding dual-enrollment and early-college partnerships between high schools and community colleges so students can earn credentials before they graduate; and treating community colleges as the workforce backbone they are, with direct federal support for biotech, lab tech, and advanced manufacturing certificate programs tied to real regional employer demand.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

We do that by fully funding our public schools in every single county. We increase teacher pay to not only pay the teachers we have what they deserve, but to encourage new teachers to enter the profession whether from here in NC or from neighboring states. North Carolina has some of the greatest public, private, and community colleges in the entire country and partnerships between those institutions and our K-12 schools is the way we prepare for the future and ensure that every single kid in North Carolina is given the opportunity to learn about any number of subjects, find what they love, and then excel at it and follow it into their dream job.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

North Carolina has an extraordinary combination of universities, community colleges, research institutions, biotechnology companies, technology companies, agriculture, healthcare systems, and advanced manufacturing. Our education system should connect students much more directly to that ecosystem.

I support strengthening STEM education while expanding practical pathways into science and technology careers.

That includes partnerships between employers, community colleges, universities, and K–12 schools; apprenticeships and internships; dual-enrollment programs; laboratory and technical education; cybersecurity; biotechnology; advanced manufacturing; artificial intelligence; data science; and industry-recognized credentials.

Community colleges are particularly important because they can respond quickly to regional workforce requirements without requiring every student to pursue a traditional four-year degree.

We should also recognize that scientific literacy is becoming important outside traditional scientific occupations. Students entering healthcare, agriculture, manufacturing, information technology, public safety, cybersecurity, or government increasingly need to understand data, statistics, scientific reasoning, and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence.

The goal should be multiple pathways to meaningful careers and lifelong learning rather than a single educational model.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

The State of North Carolina has a Constitutional promise of a sound basic education for children. We are failing them on this promise. We need to have STEM programs, vocational education, as well as increasing civics and home economics to prepare our future leaders and workforce for success.

I’d propose to have 100% of the NC Education Lottery to be a supplemental addition to education, instead of the current shell game of reallocating budget to other projects with the proceeds from the regressive voluntary tax on those who cannot realize that the math of the lottery is never in their favor.

Community Colleges, secondary Vocational Programs should have a public-private partnership for mentoring and apprenticeship for science, trades, and vocations that is affordable if not completely funded by the state and corporate partners.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

Cabarrus County is already doing this well, and the model is a few miles from my front door. The North Carolina Research Campus in Kannapolis and Rowan-Cabarrus Community College’s biotechnology and advanced technology programs train people for jobs that exist right now, at wages a family can live on. This county lost thousands of textile jobs when Pillowtex closed, and the way back was retraining people for the economy that came next. That is not theory here. It is living memory.

So my answer is to fund what works and get out of its way. Expand Career and College Promise so a high school student can walk across the stage with a credential already in hand. Keep investing in community college lab space and equipment — that is the expensive part, and it is the part that goes obsolete. Pay instructors enough that a working lab technician will consider teaching. And build employer-run apprenticeships, because industry knows what it needs faster than any curriculum committee does.

I would also say plainly that the young person who becomes a lab technician, an electrician, or a maintenance technician on that campus has a real career in front of them. We ought to stop treating a four-year degree as the only respectable path.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

First of all, we must stop redistributing public funds from public schools and giving those funds to private schools. We must fully fund our public schools as required by the state constitution and appropriately compensate our teachers and other school staff with salary and benefits (including increased pay for degrees beyond the bachelors degree) so that we can fill all of our open teaching positions, Including teaching positions in science, technology and math.

Schools need adequate facilities and the counties that lack the resources to provide those facilities need assistance in paying for them from the state.

As a former teacher for 12 years in the public schools, I fully understand that the classrooms, the equipment, and the in-service training necessary for science education can be expensive, but it is a cost that we must pay if we want our students to excel in science. The same thing is true for all subjects.

For our community colleges, they must continue to be responsive to the needs of industry and universities. If any partnerships are created with industry they need to ensure that academic freedom is protected. We need all of our students to be scientifically literate to participate in our society so community college students should have access to remedial programs if they have gaps in their knowledge and understanding.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

That starts with improving reading, math, science, and tech skills K-Tech and apprenticeship opportunities. Our community college system is robust and a proven asset to our people. A path to a successful career without enormous debt is becoming the chosen path for many. Goals must include responsiveness in emergencies, clear communication of facts, and public trust.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

We have an imbalance of “community” education and funding disparities that can no longer be ignored. Reference: the Leandro Remediation Plan. I would significantly and equally increase NC funding/pupil to the national average at a minimum, and propose that the State provide a bond funding resolution for new public school construction and existing school update/renovation to encourage STEM-enabled facilities.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

This is not a city level issue, but I would support local education in Wake County and like to see more trades education to meet the demand for labor and small business ownership.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

To address that, I have two options. I can demand our state Constitution be amended to stop requiring “uniform” education, or I would need to ensure every school in the state prepares kids for the career relevant to Wake/ Durham Counties and only those two. The latter is preposterous, and hopefully I made clear the reason why! It is funny how easy it is to point people to the draconian way we do not allow nuanced, localized differences in our education system. I lament that my preferred solution of decentralizing education and allowing alternatives to public school is a very uphill battle to implement. It is a common-sense solution: give locals the tools to prepare students for the industries nearby to them. Non-locals do not need those same tools and that is for the locals to decide for themselves. If we had 100 school systems instead of one central system, and if higher-ed was not funded through equity bonds that typically reduce their specialization trajectory, we would absolutely have plenty of institutions from Kindergarten to graduate school preparing students for science, biology, and whatever else. It took me no time at all to type up this answer because “freedom” is shockingly often the simplest and most ignored solution to our problems in a circumstance of ever-consolidating power. Hence, our need for freedom (the pendulum swinging back where it came from) is, in this case, the direct and most effective solution.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

As a school board member, I understand that a strong school-to-career pipeline begins well before graduation. North Carolina should expand opportunities for students to explore science and biotechnology careers through strong STEM and CTE programs, dual enrollment, internships, apprenticeships, and partnerships with our community colleges. I would especially encourage greater private-sector investment in public schools. Companies that benefit from North Carolina’s workforce can help build the next generation of that workforce by providing equipment, expertise, teacher training, internships, and other hands-on learning opportunities. These partnerships should strengthen not replace public investment and should reach rural and underserved communities as well. Our goal should be clear pathways from the classroom to an affordable credential or degree and, ultimately, a good-paying career in North Carolina.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

NC colleges and universities are among the best in the nation. NC public schools are the poorest funded. If we are to create a population of young people interested in progress through science, we need to adopt a more education friendly outlook in our legislature. For sixteen years the legislature has repeatedly defunded our public schools in favor of using taxes to bolster private schools with less oversight and more opportunities for discrimination against students. This must be reversed. Our community colleges are an ideal stepping stone for our young people to receive higher education, either to lead to future STEM degrees, or to meet the need of our trade professions. Further promotion and funding of these community colleges are the way to foster local higher education that pays dividends to the community.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

North Carolina’s greatest economic asset is its people. If we want to remain a national leader in biotechnology, life sciences, and technology, we need to start preparing students for those opportunities well before they reach college.

I would support stronger partnerships between K–12 schools, community colleges, universities, and local employers to expand STEM education, career and technical education, internships, apprenticeships, and hands-on learning. Community colleges, in particular, can serve as a bridge between students and the high-demand jobs being created across our state. I believe they will play a vital role in workforce preparedness for our younger generations.

At the local level, Raleigh can help bring schools, employers, nonprofits, and higher education institutions to the same table and make sure students from every neighborhood — including students who may not see themselves as future scientists or technologists — have access to these opportunities.

We should make sure that North Carolina’s innovation economy creates pathways to the middle class and robust opportunities for North Carolinians who are growing up here.

Q2 North Carolina is a growing hub for science and biotechnology industry and education. How will you ensure science workforce preparedness in community-based institutions like K–12 schools and community colleges across our state?

Our federal and state governments are cutting support for education. Wake County schools are already suffering from abysmal infrastructure, including leaking roofs, broken HVAC, and suspected mold. I will ensure that public schools get the funding they need to provide quality education to our students, including those with special needs. I will work to find ways to provide the necessary funds for all aspects of our schools, including buildings and equipment, support (salaries, benefits, training) for WCPSS teachers and other staff.

Besides additional funding, one way to improve workforce preparedness is by engaging the community. Wake County has a phenomenal pool of educated people and especially retirees who want to give back to the community. I will work to advance community participation in education through programs such as Communities in Schools for mentoring students so that students whose families may lack college-educated adults can benefit from the experience and expertise of retirees, especially to enhance STEAM offerings across our schools.

As I know from my own career, new technologies and business practices emerge in surprising ways. Therefore, I will ensure not only that Wake Tech has the resources, both staff and infrastructure, to keep its curricula up-to-date with new technology but also that it has offerings for adults to upskill themselves, especially in industries that are gaining prominence in the County. Even people who are currently employed may future-proof their employability by preparing for upcoming careers.

A big challenge for Wake Tech students with children is child care and especially so for working adults, especially women and single parents. I will examine how to expand options for all, including childcare grants and universal preschool.

I will seek to expand Wake Tech’s partnerships with public schools. For example, the Cooperative Innovative High Schools program enables students to earn a high school diploma while earning credits for an associate degree. I will seek to expand it from four schools currently by finding ways to support staff (for teaching and coordinating with outside stakeholders) and transportation solutions so they are viable for students without personal cars.

I will seek to expand apprenticeship opportunities for students at local companies. I will foster closer relationships with leading employers of Wake Tech graduates, where they contribute financially, hire student interns, and provide experienced employees as adjunct teaching staff to bring real-world experience to guide students. Given the cost to a company of recruiting qualified employees, such support by them would be beneficial to them, not just to students.

Broadband access for all and County libraries are crucial to workforce development. Not only do libraries level access to knowledge, they also provide computers for learning and job search and facilities to use for job interviews. I will try to ensure that libraries across the County have modern resources and new libraries are architected for all these essential purposes with agility in meeting future community needs.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Elected officials can help rebuild trust in science by making accurate information easier to access, more transparent, and easier for the public to understand. One area that increasingly requires attention is artificial intelligence. AI can be a valuable tool, but it can also be used to spread false or misleading information. I support reasonable regulations and transparency standards for AI-generated content, especially when it involves public health, science, elections, or other information that can significantly affect people’s lives.

Government leaders should also work directly with scientists, educators, health professionals, and trusted community organizations to communicate scientific information in plain language and explain not only what we know, but also what we do not yet know. Transparency helps build credibility.

We should also strengthen science education and media literacy so people have the tools to evaluate sources and recognize misinformation.

Science matters because decisions involving our health, environment, water, food, technology, and public safety can have lifelong consequences. Elected officials should not politicize scientific information. Our responsibility should be to ensure that the public receives reliable information, understands how conclusions are reached, and can make informed decisions based on credible evidence.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Even as a millennial, I remember a time when government officials didn’t run away from the science when it politically benefitted them. I cannot in good conscience support disinformation because I know the harmful impact that it can have on my community, my family and my loved ones.

In a social media-dominated world, visibility matters. I would work to build trust by promoting scientific and medical breakthroughs, speaking publicly with doctors, scientists, and other professionals, and generally playing into the overarching theme of both my campaign and my method of coaching: delegating tasks to fit each person’s strengths.

I may not be a scientist, but I am capable of recognizing when it is best for me to defer to scientists and their knowledge regarding a certain issue. As an elected official, my job will not be to pretend that I am the smartest person in the room. My job will be to listen to people with the expertise to understand an issue, evaluate the evidence, and use that knowledge to make the best decisions possible for the people I represent.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

As a clinician, I don’t get to hide behind jargon with a patient who’s scared; I have to explain what’s actually going on, including the parts I’m not sure about. Elected officials should be doing the same thing: showing up in communities, not just issuing statements: local town halls with actual scientists and clinicians, funding science communication and public health literacy at the community level rather than only at the federal messaging level, and being honest when the evidence changes instead of pretending it never does. Trust is rebuilt person to person and question by question, not with a slogan. That’s the only way I know how to do it, and it’s how I intend to represent this district.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

I think you have to be upfront and honest about how science is not only a discipline, but it’s a process, it takes time, and it takes resources. Just this past week there are stories about recent MRNA vaccine trials that have found there may be a treatment for skin cancer. That type of breakthrough came not only through amazing scientists doing years and years of work, but it comes from the government providing the resources, support, and funding to allow that research to happen. I believe in science and the amazing things it can accomplish and as a legislator I would be working every day to help build trust in the public in science. There is an information environment that rewards headlines and ragebait articles, but if leaders speak up and set an example and communicate to the public how advances in science and technology can truly affect their lives I think we can turn the tide.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Trust cannot be demanded. It has to be earned.

One of the most important things elected officials and scientists can do is distinguish scientific evidence from political authority.

Science is a process for investigating questions. It develops through observation, experimentation, replication, criticism, and revision. Changing a conclusion when better evidence becomes available is not a weakness of science; it is one of its strengths.

Public officials should communicate that process honestly.

That means distinguishing what we know from what we believe is likely, acknowledging uncertainty, explaining competing interpretations when legitimate disagreements exist, and correcting mistakes openly.

Whenever practical, the evidence underlying important public decisions should also be accessible. Data, methodology, assumptions, models, conflicts of interest, and limitations should be available for independent examination while appropriately protecting personal information and legitimate security concerns.

I am particularly interested in the broader problem of evidence architecture: how modern systems can preserve provenance, integrity, and context so people can independently examine the evidence behind important claims and decisions.

In an era of artificial intelligence, synthetic media, misinformation, and enormous volumes of information, simply telling citizens which sources they should trust will become increasingly ineffective. We need systems that make important claims more verifiable.

Scientists can contribute by explaining their work in understandable language and engaging directly with communities. Elected officials can contribute by resisting the temptation to selectively invoke science only when it supports a preferred political outcome.

The objective should not be unquestioning trust in government, politicians, institutions, or even scientists.

It should be a society in which evidence is accessible, claims can be examined, institutions are accountable, and people have good reasons to trust the processes used to reach important conclusions.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Government should empower science to help our society advance. Politicians should provide funding and get out of the way of researchers and organizations working on advancing our common knowledge. The damages that the DOGE program did to grants and funding should never be repeated.

We can waste billions of dollars fighting an imaginary war on terror or drugs, and quander our opportunities for a better future. We have to do better for the future of our communities, the state of North Carolina and the United States.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Trust was not lost. It was spent.

During COVID, guidance changed without anyone explaining why it changed, disagreement got treated as heresy, and value judgments about tradeoffs were announced as though they were scientific findings. People noticed. You do not win that back with a better communications strategy.

You win it back three ways. First, honesty about uncertainty. “This is our best estimate, and here is what would change it” holds up over time. “The science is settled” does not, and when it turns out it was not, you have spent credibility you needed later.

Second, a clean line between what the evidence shows and what we ought to do about it. The first is the researcher’s work. The second is a political judgment belonging to officials who answer to voters. In my experience, scientists are more persuasive, not less, when they respect that line.

Third, local messengers. People in Cabarrus County trust their family doctor, their county extension agent, and the researcher who lives down the road far more than they trust a federal agency. I would rather fund ten of those relationships than one more national campaign.

And I would be glad to sit down with the researchers in Kannapolis. Showing up is most of it.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Besides electing people who believe in science and have the courage to call out elected officials who are anti-science, I think it starts with fully funding science education starting in pre-K programs and that includes summer camps and enrichment programs, science clubs, hands-on science, activities, and all of this being coordinated with the very best of science education pedagogy. Notice I did not say new textbooks and watching videos or online experiences— I said the very best of hands-on science education.

This also means training science teachers and all teachers to integrate science, math, and technology into as many lessons as possible across the curriculum.

I think mistrust of science has grown because certain people have been allowed to propagate bald-faced lies, and there has not been any specific authority to call them out on it.

I don’t have the solution to this. I just know that we need to stop letting people spread false information. For one issue as an example: The climate has changed — past tense. Continuing to deny it and continuing to vilify anyone who doesn’t follow a party line when a person in power decrees something that is anti-science is extremely dangerous and we will pay the price eventually if this type of behavior is not stopped.

In a way it completely blows my mind that we have to have this questionnaire in the first place. It shows how unbelievably far we have fallen as a society when we can’t even agree on scientific principles and concepts.

I’m trying to do everything I can do as a candidate to bring people together to find common ground so we can listen to each other and do the work we need to do instead of pointing fingers and finding fault and laying blame.

How can we deal with creating good public policy for clean air, clean water, and public health if we can’t have a basic understanding of scientific principles?

How can we even get started with the conversation if nobody’s really listening?

How can we move forward if the world is so partisan that every single thing ends up being seen as good or bad depending on what political party is creating the message?

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

The dangerous and terrible reality is that Dr. Fauci and the COVID response set us back decades in public trust. We need to rebuild that trust with honesty, humility, respect for personal decisions, and transparency. Government can easily dismiss legitimate questions and treat concerned citizens as uninformed. That creates suspicion and skepticism. Our scientific experts should communicate in easily understood language and avoid exaggeration and censorship so our neighbors are more willing to hear them out. It is a very human thing.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Density of information does not reflect its quality or accuracy. Knowledge among NGO and policy leadership should “trump” the conspiracy theories and crackpot assumptions of causality that mislead the public. Peer review, data and methods transparency, and the ability to replicate results are academic guardrails that the public knows too little about. It’s time we honor science and scientists instead of “influencers” trying to make a buck, or build their list of “followers” on social media. Science has been a prime mover in accelerating America’s economy and world leadership. We can’t afford to go “back”, but we must measure and acknowledge the risks and the rewards of the solutions we invent and unleash on the public.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Education with events is the best way.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

The hard-to-swallow truth of how we got into this mess is that scientists competed with each other to win the favoritism of corrupt politicians who then gave said scientists nice, powerful jobs on the payroll of taxpayers as technocrats. We learned the hard way that we were placing too much trust in said people to have our best interests at heart and a willingness to pursue truth above all else. More often than not, they meant well, but even so, the public came around to realizing that the road to hell can be paved with good intentions and started resenting scientists and others bossing them around for their safety’s sake as though that was more important than the trade-offs. Nothing short of humility is going to fix this: fewer powerful technocrats in government, less elite hierarchy within the scientific community, oaths to fight misinformation/ our own assumptions, less politically correct speech on matters of fact, and a willingness to cautiously engage fringe views and questionable science. Meanwhile, elected officials can do the same, fighting misinformation as role models, which would be more reliable to expect out of my peers if getting elected was not so tantalizing that a person would lie and cheat their way to victory. For that, we would need to limit the government and treat the Constitution as the ultimate law of the land, not like a living, unimportant, flimsy document that has no restraints on elected officials.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Elected officials have a responsibility to seek out and respect scientific expertise when making decisions that affect the public. Scientists should have a meaningful seat at the table, and their findings should be communicated to the public clearly and transparently. While elected officials must weigh many factors when making policy, disregarding scientific evidence or choosing only the evidence that supports a predetermined position undermines public trust in both science and government. We should encourage scientists to engage directly with communities, explain not only what the evidence shows but also where uncertainty exists, and make scientific information accessible to everyone. Good public policy should be informed by evidence, open debate, and a willingness to change course when new evidence demands it.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

This is an issue that is directly linked to the misinformation spread through our various forms of media either by malign actors or monied interests. No one in our communities is a Luddite. I have yet to meet a person without a cellphone or an automobile (if they can afford it). The answer to this issue is the same as the answer to the second question asked. Through quality, well-funded education that gives students the tools to make informed decisions by eschewing logical fallacies and personal biases in order to built trust in the institutions that add to the body of knowledge through rigorous scientific processes and by emphasizing critical thinking we will be able to build a capacity in our population that is able to separate fact from fiction.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Elected officials should not expect the public to trust science simply because we say, “the experts agree.” Trust is earned through transparency, honesty, and consistency.

I believe elected officials should work directly with scientists and public health professionals to explain not only what we know, but how we know it along what we still don’t know. We should communicate uncertainty honestly rather than pretending every question has a simple answer.

Just as importantly, scientists and government need to meet people where they are. That means listening to community concerns, engaging trusted local institutions, making information understandable, and being willing to correct mistakes when new evidence emerges.

My role as an elected official would not be to be the scientist in the room. It would be to make sure scientists are heard, evidence is respected, and residents have clear, honest information they can use to make informed decisions.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

I have noticed that too many elected officials avoid taking clear positions. When forced to do so, they may express concern (about water quality, privacy, …) without endorsing any specific course of action. Some politicians can get away with boasting that they are not scientists.

Elected officials owe it to their constituents to make an effort to understand societal problems and the trade-offs between alternative solutions, and to take public positions for which they would hold themselves accountable. If they were to do so, they would need to be virtually forced to bring forth evidence and not rely on magical thinking or vague platitudes.

Many real situations don’t provide immediate and personal rewards or harms. And, science is not a one-and-done enterprise, so what to scientists is the best feature of science (its ability to self-correct) appears to lay people as a weakness because of its lack of immutability. Thus, interventions such as vaccines or face masks or even Pasteurization can appear unnecessary and this uncertainty can be exploited by anti-science social media personalities to promote snake oil solutions. Public officials can help combat nonsense by highlighting the scientific evidence behind their proposals, while indicating the gaps in current knowledge and how additional knowledge may lead them to withdraw current recommendations.

A scientific attitude with its emphasis on evidence can apply even to everyday decisions. I am an advocate of people-driven governance and of community engagement. I will investigate online tools that the County can host to help neighborhood communities to deliberate on problems that matter to them and exchange ideas about alternative solutions. When these problems and solutions affect larger regions within the County, they can provide a good starting point for further discussion, e.g., in public meetings. An important component here would be the involvement of scientists with the relevant expertise to provide advice based on the underlying science and help the public understand the consequences of various proposals. This would be a bottom-up approach of rebuilding public trust in science.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Data centers must be responsibly regulated so that economic development does not come at the expense of the people who already live in our communities. I support clear standards governing where data centers can be located, including adequate distance from residential neighborhoods, schools, and environmentally sensitive areas.

Before approving new data centers, communities should evaluate their impact on electricity demand, water usage, air quality, noise, infrastructure, and public health. Residents should not be forced to absorb higher utility costs because a large data center requires significantly more electricity or water.

I also believe data center developers should be required to pay their fair share of the infrastructure and energy costs created by their projects. If their operations require expanded electrical capacity, water systems, roads, or other public infrastructure, those costs should not simply be passed along to residential customers and taxpayers.

Economic development is important, but it must be responsible development. Any data center approval should include strong environmental protections, meaningful community input, transparency about projected water and energy consumption, and enforceable requirements that protect nearby residents from increased costs and environmental harm.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

Government has a responsibility to protect public health, particularly when individuals and communities are exposed to risks they cannot reasonably control on their own. Environmental health is a major part of that responsibility.

I support strong laws and enforcement standards that protect communities from PFAS contamination, asbestos exposure, unsafe drinking water, air pollution, and other environmental hazards. Economic development should never come at the expense of the health and safety of the people who live nearby. Businesses and developers should be held accountable for preventing environmental harm, addressing contamination they cause, and helping cover the cost of remediation rather than shifting those costs to taxpayers.

I also support maintaining access to vaccines, disease-prevention programs, public-health education, and emergency-preparedness resources so families can make informed decisions and communities are prepared to respond to outbreaks, natural disasters, and other public-health emergencies.

At the legislative level, I would support stronger environmental safeguards, routine testing and public disclosure of health risks, adequate funding for state and local public-health agencies, and meaningful penalties when businesses violate health or environmental standards. Protecting public health and supporting economic growth should not be competing priorities. We can encourage development while still requiring companies to operate responsibly and protect the communities in which they do business.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

With the rising cost of water and electricity, understanding the strain on current responsibilities of those who take the responsibility of paying their electric bill every month. I believe, the factor as to why the energy cost to consumers has been a shocker to businesses and consumers, is because the electric circuit has too much output. Rezoning the lines of electric current flow amongst the two other electric companies will help to alleviate cost for consumers. To cut costs for citizens, I would collaborate with Duke Energy to give a yearly subsidy to customers that will help when they choose to use it at their convenience. Realistically the data centers we have will allow our city to run more efficiently, dividing some of the allocation of energy re-zone to be drawn out, producing less strain on supply sources. This zone equation will ultimately help to cut costs. When trying to consolidate the cost of electric plants and producing solar equipment that will be more efficient to consumers and corporations cooperation is necessary.

I believe that our AI companies, with the appropriate coding will be able to regulate moderately the current electric circuit. Trafficking the water supply to be regulated at specific water pressure not to exceed a specific amount. Coded by AI as well, will keep cost streamlined and water supply leveled as much as possible. Transport of generators for EV car voltage zoning will be pretty effective, with taking a look at more populated areas utilizing EV and giving recommendations for other outlets that have not been accessible to consumers who plug in. Old fashion, but also looking more into our water supply as an avenue, helping aid in producing electricity.

All factors of these are major variables when considering, manipulating the equations, as part of the remedy for controls. Remembering in cutting the cost of electricity and water, we risk the chance of creating more pollution and hurting our ecosystem, for a brief moment. Weighing the facts and upgrading technology will be my focus. With giving relief benefits in form of a subsidy stipend, this will help some as we reconfigure the circuit for more efficient flow. Our public transportation although upgrades have not been as eco friendly as I would like. Upgrading transportation with less pollution is a plan.

Medicare and Medicaid plans also need to be network serviceable. I would like to work in conjunction with the auditors to find out why major network providers are declining the benefits and if it is due to the lack of payment. Then I would like to use other insurance companies that are more resourceful.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

In my previous mentions, I believe my entire stance aligns the resolution to take action in protecting public health and community wellbeing. Ensuring quality insurance for all demographics, making sure that school nurses are present in schools so they are able to relay information to parents that will keep their parents aware of any checkups that need to be made abruptly in addition to basic reminders. Relying on the Federal Drug Administration located in our city, “ The City of Medicine” encourages our doctors and hospitals in this area to begin producing vaccines that are safe and preferably organic ingredients, as much as possible. Making our residents feel comfortable in knowing that we have doctors and clinics that we can trust and are credible. Having vaccines more spread out as an option to bundle shots.

With our food supply being approved and tested in our city, our farmers will be able to produce, produce that is free of harmful chemicals, used to preserve during transport of vegetables and meat imported from other cities, states, and countries.

Continuing the extension of the Sun Benefit program for our students. Throughout the school year, will hopefully prevent parents having to pick up fast food as opposed to a healthy snack because they think it’s cheaper to grab. Testing the apples in the McDonalds Happy meal to see if it is actually an apple. We know sometimes those apples have a funny smell.

Our First responders are always punctual and with that create a city where our citizens understand that we are creating, cultivating, and continuing to ensure access to networks are available without hassle. Will ease the citizens’ minds. Less stress because everything is here, in the city of Durham, NC.

As I push to build these structures, as an elected official. This work with scientists is going to build the general public’s trust in science, in food, and in our education system. Assurance that we have modern upgrades to the way our water and electricity is disbursed, along with sub stipends. The citizens will be honored. As they vote me as their Senator of District 22. Visit www.lakeshiamalstonsenate.net for more information.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Across the country, we have seen data centers being built in rural or underprivileged communities, ostensibly to drive economic opportunity, but ultimately raising concerns about physical and noise pollution, increased demands on our energy and water infrastructure, and higher costs for consumers. I am not inherently opposed to data centers, but only when the community has a seat at the table and can help dictate the terms under which a data center is built and operates within that community.

As a state representative, I would support legislation that requires data centers to pay their fair share of the infrastructure and energy costs they create, rather than shifting those costs onto residential customers. We also need to enact appropriate safety and environmental protections to protect our communities and water supply. Economic development should directly benefit the people who live in a community, not leave them to shoulder the costs.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

I believe that investing in public health is investing in our communities, our economy, and much more. Resources such as vaccines and other preventive health care should be available to residents regardless of their ability to afford them, because herd immunity is not based upon income or tax brackets.

I also believe that government has an important role to play in ensuring that our environment is safe by cleaning up old hazardous waste sites. Look at what is currently happening with Western Electric in Burlington. By tapping into both public resources and private investment when appropriate, we can not only clean up life-altering hazards but truly revitalize parts of my district that have been neglected for far too long.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

North Carolina is one of the top data center destinations in the country right now, and Duke Energy has been asking regulators for double-digit rate hikes — as high as 18% at one point — while projecting billions in new grid investment driven largely by data center demand. Families in this district are being asked to subsidize infrastructure for companies that can well afford to pay their own way. Complicating the issue is that we don’t fully understand the long term impacts to the health of those living in the vicinity of data centers, but the possibilities - which include impacts on cardiac health, breathing issues, cognitive difficulties and more - are too extreme to be acceptable. Finally, we are fortunate to live in a beautiful state, but data centers pose real threats to our water systems, our air quality, our wildlife and our land.

Any new data center permitted should have to clear three tests: What’s the water impact on local systems, especially in counties already managing supply constraints? What’s the actual net job and tax benefit to the community versus the infrastructure and health costs it imposes? So far, data center developers have had trouble accurately and in some cases honestly answering those questions, and I think individual counties should impose strict requirements for these answers before even considering a data center proposal. I also support moratoriums on new data center construction as needed in order to prevent corners from being cut and to allow local residents to voice concerns.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

Government has a basic obligation to protect public health, and that includes making sure people have access to vaccines without cost or misinformation being the barrier, and making sure environmental health risks are actually regulated rather than negotiated away.

On PFAS specifically — this is not hypothetical for North Carolina; we’ve already lived through a statewide PFAS contamination crisis. I support enforceable federal drinking water standards, funded remediation for affected communities, and real accountability for the industrial polluters, not the taxpayers, footing the cleanup bill. On emergency preparedness, rural hospital closures are a public health emergency in slow motion in this district. You cannot have community disaster response, let alone routine emergency care, without a functioning hospital within a reasonable drive. I’ll fight federal policy that lets private equity strip rural hospitals for parts, and I’ll push for funding models that keep rural facilities open rather than subsidizing their closure.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

I think the most important aspect of approaching data center build outs and development is to remember that these data centers are an industry that relies on speed and secrecy. With more and more hyperscalers pushing for quick land sales, requiring NDAs from local governments and officials, and attempting to limit public comment and feedback we need to take a moment to ask why those tactics are needed. I’m well aware that “data center” can actually mean a myriad of things, from small centers that act as support to local fiber networks or nodes in larger systems, all the way to multiple acre facilities that use large amounts of land, water, and cause both noise and air pollution. As a legislator a goal I would set would be to ensure that any data center not only pays for its own infrastructure, but the larger the center and the more power use, the more it will be required to pay back into the community where it will be built. That can be done by increasing energy rates for large energy users to then reduce energy rates for residential customers, or setting up data center specific zoning to increase property taxes to higher levels for data centers that once built will not actually employ many members of the community.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

I believe the government should be the first line of defense when it comes to public health. Government has the power and the resources to set guidelines regarding water quality, building codes, vaccine schedules and emergency response and if elected officials actually care about the constituents they represent then they will take all of those tasks seriously. The best government is one that ensures that it’s citizens are able to easily learn about requirements or other regulations to keep them safe but otherwise can feel confident that they are going about their day in a city, county, or state that is enforcing those requirements equally and with resources, allowing citizens to not have to worry if they may be making an unsafe choice whether at a park or in a restaurant. Clear communication can also go a long way to explaining why something has been done and the benefits of that choice to ensure everyone is on the same page.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

North Carolina should welcome technological investment, including data centers and the infrastructure supporting artificial intelligence, but economic development should not depend upon transferring infrastructure costs to families and small businesses.

Data centers can bring investment, tax revenue, construction, and technology jobs to communities. They can also consume substantial electricity and water and place additional demands on transmission, generation, and local infrastructure. Those costs and benefits need to be evaluated transparently.

Before major projects receive public incentives or special consideration, communities should have access to credible estimates of electricity demand, water consumption, infrastructure requirements, environmental impacts, and the expected public costs and benefits.

Where a project creates extraordinary new infrastructure requirements, the entity creating that demand should bear an appropriate share of those costs rather than quietly shifting them onto existing ratepayers.

I also support encouraging technologies that reduce the resource footprint of computing, including advanced cooling systems, water reuse, energy-efficient hardware, waste-heat recovery where practical, distributed energy resources, and new generation technologies.

The objective should not be to stop innovation. It should be to make sure North Carolina can support innovation sustainably while protecting residents, natural resources, and the reliability and affordability of essential services.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

Government has a legitimate responsibility to protect people from hazards they cannot reasonably evaluate or mitigate individually, particularly contamination of shared resources, infectious disease threats, unsafe public infrastructure, and environmental hazards.

That responsibility should be exercised through evidence, transparency, and proportionality.

For environmental risks such as PFAS, asbestos, or contaminated drinking water, government should support rigorous testing, make results readily accessible to affected communities, identify responsible parties where possible, and establish remediation priorities based on measurable health risks.

For infectious diseases, government should work to maintain access to vaccines, diagnostics, treatment, and reliable public-health information. Individuals should have access to credible information about benefits, risks, and uncertainties so that they can make informed healthcare decisions with their medical providers.

Emergency preparedness is equally important. North Carolina faces hurricanes, flooding, emerging diseases, infrastructure failures, cybersecurity incidents, and other hazards. Preparedness should include resilient communications, healthcare capacity, interoperable emergency systems, supply-chain planning, and regular exercises involving state, local, private-sector, and community organizations.

Public-health authority carries significant responsibility. Policies should therefore be evidence-based, transparent about their rationale, periodically reassessed as evidence changes, and subject to appropriate public and legislative oversight.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Data Centers can be an important part of our scientific and economic system. However, they should not be subsidized by government, or be allowed to have priority of resources, nor should they be allowed to circumnavigate building codes or local ordinances. Our power grid has been underinvested and our communal water resources are in danger with drought, pollution and other challenges.

In the scope of the position of joining the NC House I would ensure that Raleigh does not pick and choose winners and losers, and allows local oversight of zoning, restrictions, and other issues. Duke Power should not be allowed to pass on cost to rate-payers (either individual or business) to enhance power generation or costs to build out access. Also, using liquid or solid dinosaur remnant power generation to boil water for power has to stop.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

Government should help to coordinate and fund research to improve public health and keep that funding away from the bipartisan whim to cut or add depending upon political goals.

The residents of North Carolina should be protected and their access to safe drinking water, clean air safeguarded by the court system and regulatory bodies.

The recent PFAS ‘settlement’ that the State of North Carolina ‘accepted’ is a corporate sell out of the damages caused by Chemors across the state. Also the coal ash debate, and the hog lagoon debates are also examples of government picking and choosing winners and losers - with the losers being the residents affected by the malfeasance of Duke Power and Smithfields as examples.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

North Carolina should compete for this investment. We should not pay for it twice.

My standard is simple: large users pay their own freight. If a data center needs new generation and new transmission to operate, that company should build it, bring it, or buy it — not shift the cost onto the families and small businesses who were already here. I support establishing a large-load rate structure at the Utilities Commission that puts those costs where they belong, and I would apply the same principle to water and wastewater capacity.

Second, siting is a local decision. Cabarrus County and its towns understand their own water systems and their own neighborhoods better than Raleigh does. I would protect local zoning authority rather than preempt it, and I would expect an honest accounting up front — projected power draw, projected water use, and what happens to a site if the project never materializes.

Third, we have to add supply. You cannot serve growth by rationing it. That means reliable baseload generation, including nuclear, and a permitting process that does not take a decade. Done right, this is investment and good jobs. Done carelessly, it is a bill that lands on a retiree in Concord who never had a say in it.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

Government’s core job here is the physical infrastructure: clean water, safe food, hospitals that stay open, and the capacity to respond when something goes wrong.

On contamination, I am direct. The company that put a chemical in the water should pay to take it out — not the ratepayer. PFAS testing and treatment are expensive, and smaller water systems cannot absorb that cost alone. I support state cost-share for treatment upgrades paired with real financial responsibility for the manufacturers. The same principle applies to asbestos and lead remediation in older schools and housing.

On preparedness, I speak from some experience. I serve on the board of Patriot Relief, a Cabarrus County-based nonprofit founded in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene to move volunteers and supplies into western North Carolina — and to keep showing up long after the news trucks left. What that work taught me is that the failure point is almost never good intentions. It is local capacity: water systems, communications, road access, and the ability to move people and material in the first seventy-two hours. That deserves standing investment and agreements signed before the storm, not a scramble afterward.

On vaccines, my position is that they should be available and affordable to every family that wants them, and that the decision belongs to parents in consultation with their own doctor rather than to a mandate from Raleigh. Access, yes. Coercion, no.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

I’m against data centers in general because I have received overwhelming responses from the people in the 50th Senate district who don’t want data centers anywhere near them. Counties are already modifying their Universal Development Ordinances (or creating them in the first place) or to put a temporary moratorium in place. The General Assembly should step up and require data centers to pay for all extra utility costs that they create; require that they limit sound that travels past their property lines; capture their stormwater runoff; and make them pay into a fund if the land they build upon could have been used for housing instead of the data center.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

My feeling is that the North Carolina general assembly and specifically the state senate has a key role to play in working with local jurisdictions not only through statutes, but through ensuring that local communities have the resources that they need to make good decisions for their communities and they understand what that stake with something like PFAS So they can make the kinds of unified development, ordinance decisions that protect everyone’s well-being. Did we not learn from asbestos and beryllium and other harmful substances?

Once a toxic building material is entered into the environment. It stays there forever. It’s up to government institutions to lead the way to help educate the folks to understand this. Yes, materials may be cheaper and thereby provide a higher level of profit for the company that’s building the building, but that doesn’t mean we should just let anything happen because it’s cheaper.

Regarding emergency preparedness: we tend to be completely reactive to anything besides hurricanes because we have a long history of hurricanes hitting the coastal areas. We have not been proactive regarding wildland fires, earthquakes, landslides, tornadoes, and ice storms.

Even after hurricane Helene became tropical storm Helene and devastated so much of Western North Carolina the general assembly led by the Republicans chose to play a political football game instead of working to build back better with resilience and work toward ensuring that all North Carolina and understand what the plan is when we have the next natural disaster.

Not to mention other dangers like radiological and biological threats, electromagnetic pulses, and cyber attack attacks. It seems to me we’d rather bury our heads in the sand and hope it doesn’t happen then actually work to make sure every single person understands what they’re supposed to do when something happens.

For example, out here in Western North Carolina there are people that do not have access to a cell phone or even a landline phone in their home. They have to get in their car and travel a certain distance to when they can get reception from their phone or a public Wi-Fi Spot. These same people frequently do not have access to a radio station that could broadcast important information. In short, these people are hanging out to dry with absolutely no connection to the outside world when something like tropical storm Helene happens because many roads were closed or impassable due to the storm.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Economic development should be welcome but not at the expense of families and small businesses. There needs to be a transparent review of all projects to ensure that all parties benefit from this very useful investment. It should be a priority to ensure that families are not subsidizing private businesses through higher utility bills or less access to resources. Economic growth is important and should benefit the business and the community, not a one way street.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

The government has great responsibility in protecting public health, but it should do so in a way that respects our liberties, personal rights, religious decision making, and transparency.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

I would first demand to know how AI datacenters will self-support their enormous energy and cooling (water) demands, and the environmental impacts of these huge datacenters. It seems fitting to encourage their use of sustainable energy options, and limit their use of water resources. First do no harm would be a guiding principle in assessing any request to build in NC. Further, I would require they pay their fair share of property and income taxes. Any permissions granted would be contingent on their compliance with these conditions, and a commitment to the complete restoration of the site and its environment should they close or abandon such facilities.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

Institutions that have designed, developed, and refined our ability to address (and eliminate!) these threats are under attack and being dismantled at an incredible pace. This must stop. Fact-based monitoring, historical and empirical evidence, and sound planning policies should be prioritized and identified in parallel to deal with these challenges, with a cost and remediation/cleanup approach that places the majority of weight on the industries having benefitted from the sale/use of hazardous chemicals/products. On the other hand, companies or agencies investigating disease prevention and emergency preparedness should be financially supported by national and state agency funding (e.g., NIH).

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

I would like to impact studies on all areas affected.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

The city should be responsible to enforce best building practices for new building when issuing building permits. Our building inspectors should be skilled enough to fully understand building code.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

As a reminder, data centers do not take up a dangerous amount of water. Even in a drought, I do not support punishing data centers more than anyone else. Nevertheless, their presence is growing rather fast, and they take up a meaningful amount of electricity. Data centers, when deciding a place to be built, ought to have lots that are considered for environmental significance and for health in scale with the amount of quality time people spend there, whether construction workers or long-term jobs. My understanding is that newer centers tend to be, already, more efficient typically, but that data centers are better suited in cooler climates in contrast with places like Florida. I believe North Carolina should neither resist nor attract data centers but should instead go out of its way to produce abundant, varied, cutting-edge energy. That might sound like a thoughtless answer, but keep in mind I am deeply aware of efforts in my state to at-once attack and promote data centers and I oppose both groups on principle. The science community is making great strides with nuclear power lately but has major challenges to overcome with solar and wind power, which I suspect will be achieved eventually but in the short-term limit viability. I speak as someone with a computer science bachelor’s degree.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

I must disclose before answering that, as of this Summer, I work as a paralegal in asbestos lawsuits. In the Environmental Stewardship plank I added to my Party’s state platform (prior to getting or even knowing about my new job), I spoke about how harm to health and life are grounds for tort lawsuits. Keeping these laws and our courts is sufficient to ensure corporations and the government alike are held accountable for not taking health seriously. Parents need greater discretion to decide what vaccines to introduce into their children, but on the other hand, institutions, even some public ones, within reason, should likewise have the discretion to set rules about health requires for customers and visitors. I tend to believe firmly in rights of association in which a group has the right to exclude more than an individual has a right to interfere in the sense that property can be collectively owned and operated by a group. This allows for peer pressure to get a vaccine and wash your hands, et cetera. I sometimes joke that I am a 1990s politician out of time; I think Bill Clinton had the right idea when he became sincerely concerned about having a reserve of vaccines as a social program in case of natural disaster, as well as for the country to take measures again bio-terrorism. But since the 1990s, we have largely gone too far with getting the government involved with our health; we may be more advanced in the field of science than we were in the 1990s, but our ability to govern has gotten no better, and in fact has gotten worse since then, and I therefore believe we cannot trust the government with controlling our health; the details of the COVID-19 Pandemic response demonstrate what I mean. Ultimately, well-being is the responsibility of the citizens in their communities with their local and (sometimes) state governments except in the narrow cases within true, major emergencies.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Data centers can bring investment and economic activity to a community, but those benefits should not come at the expense of residents through higher utility bills, strained water supplies, or environmental and public-health impacts.

When considering new data centers, I would follow a simple principle: growth should pay for growth. Before approving a project, we should have a transparent accounting of its expected electricity and water demand, the infrastructure required to serve it, its environmental and public-health impacts, and who will ultimately pay those costs. Data centers should be responsible for the infrastructure and resource costs attributable to their operations rather than shifting those expenses onto residential customers and small businesses.

I would support requiring applicants to disclose projected energy and water consumption, demonstrate water- and energy-efficiency measures, and provide financial assurances for infrastructure built specifically to serve their facilities. Where appropriate, large-load utility rates, impact fees, or other cost-recovery mechanisms should ensure that these exceptionally large users pay their fair share.

I am also interested in examining whether companies that derive significant economic value from collecting, storing, processing, or monetizing data should contribute additional revenue to the communities that host the physical infrastructure making that activity possible. Any such policy would need to be carefully designed so that it is enforceable and does not simply pass costs back to consumers.

My goal would not be to prohibit data-center development, but to make sure development is responsible, transparent, and economically beneficial to the community as a whole while protecting affordable electricity, clean and reliable water, public health, and our natural resources.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

Government has a fundamental responsibility to protect public health and ensure access to clean water and safe communities. Our region knows firsthand the consequences of PFAS contamination in drinking water. Government must act quickly to ensure residents have clean, safe water while holding polluters accountable for the cost of cleanup not leaving taxpayers and families to foot the bill.

We also live in a hurricane-prone region, making emergency preparedness essential. State and local governments must plan and coordinate before disasters occur, strengthen critical infrastructure, and ensure emergency services and resources are ready when communities need them most. Whether addressing contaminated water or preparing for the next storm, protecting public health requires preparation, accountability, and a government capable of responding when people need it.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Rising costs are the chief concern of nearly all of our residents. Measures to prevent these rises and promote lowering costs are the kitchen table issues that will drive voters out to the polls far more than the nebulous goal of “AI advancement,” or the desires of data center investors. With that, the deleterious effects of resource hungry data centers will have serious consequences to the people in my district with none of the benefits. It is my position that a moratorium on data centers be enacted in both the 52nd district and North Carolina as a whole for a minimum of one year, until all of the ecological studies can be completed, and the reviews of other communities outside of our state have been studied. However, I am not opposed to progress. If it can be proven that the data centers will not negatively impact the health of our residents and wildlife, the costs not be prohibitive, and iron clad protections for the residents be agreed upon when, not if, situations arise in the future that injury to persons or property are the fault of the data centers, I will consider the possibility of their installation and employment. This region has a very contentious history with big monied interests, most notably the Hamlet chicken processing plant fire, NC’s second worst industrial disaster in history resulting in 25 deaths in 1991, and the GenX pollution of the Cape Fear river basin. The people of this area are past the promises of outside organizations that inevitably make huge profits but disappear when people get sick, and their concerns lead me to err on the side of caution.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

As many as we can. It is the duty of our elected officials to protect the public. There are known health risks that currently are either not being addressed, or are sorely underfunded. In Richmond County PFAS waste from another county is dumped in the landfill. Spreading forever chemicals from Chemours from one county to the next sorely misses the mark of the idiom “dilution is the solution to pollution,”. This is but one example. The proposed Amazon Data center will have 600 diesel generators which will harm the air quality of the region, result in a severe disruption of our endemic flora and fauna species, and likely lead to health issues. This too should not be allowed. The situation is not that the residents are okay with these detriments, but with our current elected officials being complicit with these actions, and in some cases directly benefiting, financially from them. We need selfless service, especially in our leadership to make the best decisions moving forward that will create a healthy, productive environment for our children.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

In general, I believe Raleigh should welcome innovation and the economic investment that comes with new technology, but growth cannot come at the expense of affordability, public health, or our natural resources. Before approving major data center development, local government should evaluate its full impact on our electricity and water systems and then still proceed cautiously as we investigate all of the details surrounding these projects, including who pays for necessary infrastructure upgrades and whether those costs could ultimately be passed on to residents.

I would support clear, transparent standards with accountability for large-scale developments, including responsible water use, energy efficiency, environmental protections, and meaningful community engagement. We should also work with Duke Energy, Raleigh Water, regional governments, and state regulators to ensure that infrastructure keeps pace with growth.

My approach is simple: if a development creates jobs and investment, that’s good for Raleighites — but it should also make a fair contribution toward the infrastructure and resources it requires and not pass costs downstream nor irreversibly deplete important resources and pollute the environment.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

Government has a fundamental responsibility to protect public health and make sure people can live, work, and raise their families in safe communities. That means taking evidence-based action on issues ranging from vaccine access and disease prevention to environmental hazards such as PFAS, asbestos, contaminated water, and air pollution.

I believe government should focus on three things: prevention, preparedness, and access. We should invest in public health infrastructure before a crisis occurs, make essential health resources accessible to people regardless of income or neighborhood, and communicate clearly during emergencies.

At the same time, public policy should be grounded in the best available scientific evidence and implemented in a practical, transparent way. Local government cannot solve every public health challenge alone, but Raleigh can be a strong partner with Wake County, healthcare providers, schools, and state and federal agencies.

Protecting public health isn’t about government telling people how to live; it’s about making sure everyone has a fair opportunity to live in a safe, healthy community.

Q1 The cost of electricity and water are on the rise with nearby data centers straining current resources in combination with increased energy costs to consumers. How will you navigate the economic, public health, and environmental impacts when considering new data centers and data center permissions, in general?

Large AI companies have been bullying state and local governments into approving large data centers and granting huge tax benefits, with little or no protections against their harmful impacts. A single data center can consume resources equivalent to 100,000 households, straining essential resources such as water and power, which hurts affordability through increased energy and water costs. Data centers cause environmental harm by damaging water and air quality, and adding heat and noise. They contribute few jobs once the construction is done. Wake County is a growing metropolitan area and, therefore, no place for a data center. I will insist that Wake County’s environmental resources be protected for use by residents.

Q3 What steps, if any, do you believe government should take to protect public health and community wellbeing (e.g., vaccine access, environmental health risks such as PFAS or asbestos, disease prevention, or emergency preparedness)?

I will advocate for adequate funding for County Health and Human Services, emphasizing disease prevention (free immunizations, needle exchanges, public education about hygiene and available programs) and early intervention (improved access to health clinics) to reduce costs. I will evaluate if we can increase the number of regional clinics and expand telehealth options so that a sick person doesn’t suffer unnecessarily or infect others at work, school, or in a bus. Further, I will ensure that appropriate funds are allocated to services such as maternal and child health, and immunizations, with a focus on helping those in greatest need, such as low-income residents. For immigrant communities, I will ensure that there is adequate language support and that these services are suitably advertised (e.g., through radio and social media, partnerships with ethnic stores and places of worship) so that everyone receives public health information and partakes of the available services. I will institute data gathering and analysis protocols to continually track demand for health services to enable dynamic reallocation of resources across the County.

I will advocate setting up a network of social workers (and volunteers) in each community. This network can help spread the word about the available public health services and encourage participation in them, while also helping individuals with their specific needs, including administrative help in signing up for programs such as Medicaid and CHIP. Federal cuts have made qualification harder but if we can make sure that all who qualify are enrolled, that will benefit them and produce revenue for the County.

Mental health and substance abuse crises are social work and community challenges rather than police challenges. I will advocate for instituting a system of community social workers. People who need mental health and substance abuse help often need it more than once. Thus, we can acquire data about their specific case along with the social worker adding social knowledge, e.g., about whether they are going through job loss or a divorce. This knowledge can help improve targeting of the services for each incident, including routing mobile crisis calls better, and before an incident occurs, bringing up softer interventions such as alerting a peer volunteer to chat with an at-risk person to ease their anxiety or remind them to take their medication. The idea is to support a 24x7 service while minimizing the involvement of traditional police and healthcare.

I will support County programs such as One Water that seek to ensure sustainable and safe water options (including PFAS testing). I will work with County Soil and Water supervisors to make sure they have the resources they need and maintain transparency about water quality and supply.

We need better preparedness for the variety of emergencies that might arise. Hurricanes and tornados can mess with transportation, power, and water, and overwhelm the healthcare system. Heat emergencies are increasingly common; we have cooling stations for people who need them but they may not be adequate and our public communication leaves room for improvement. In addition, the Harris nuclear power station is based in Wake, and we need to be ready for any emergency there.

I will make sure our emergency services are well-equipped and well-staffed. County services need to adequately coordinate with the services provided by the constituent municipalities.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Elected officials can help rebuild trust in science by making accurate information easier to access, more transparent, and easier for the public to understand. One area that increasingly requires attention is artificial intelligence. AI can be a valuable tool, but it can also be used to spread false or misleading information. I support reasonable regulations and transparency standards for AI-generated content, especially when it involves public health, science, elections, or other information that can significantly affect people’s lives.

Government leaders should also work directly with scientists, educators, health professionals, and trusted community organizations to communicate scientific information in plain language and explain not only what we know, but also what we do not yet know. Transparency helps build credibility.

We should also strengthen science education and media literacy so people have the tools to evaluate sources and recognize misinformation.

Science matters because decisions involving our health, environment, water, food, technology, and public safety can have lifelong consequences. Elected officials should not politicize scientific information. Our responsibility should be to ensure that the public receives reliable information, understands how conclusions are reached, and can make informed decisions based on credible evidence.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Even as a millennial, I remember a time when government officials didn’t run away from the science when it politically benefitted them. I cannot in good conscience support disinformation because I know the harmful impact that it can have on my community, my family and my loved ones.

In a social media-dominated world, visibility matters. I would work to build trust by promoting scientific and medical breakthroughs, speaking publicly with doctors, scientists, and other professionals, and generally playing into the overarching theme of both my campaign and my method of coaching: delegating tasks to fit each person’s strengths.

I may not be a scientist, but I am capable of recognizing when it is best for me to defer to scientists and their knowledge regarding a certain issue. As an elected official, my job will not be to pretend that I am the smartest person in the room. My job will be to listen to people with the expertise to understand an issue, evaluate the evidence, and use that knowledge to make the best decisions possible for the people I represent.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

As a clinician, I don’t get to hide behind jargon with a patient who’s scared; I have to explain what’s actually going on, including the parts I’m not sure about. Elected officials should be doing the same thing: showing up in communities, not just issuing statements: local town halls with actual scientists and clinicians, funding science communication and public health literacy at the community level rather than only at the federal messaging level, and being honest when the evidence changes instead of pretending it never does. Trust is rebuilt person to person and question by question, not with a slogan. That’s the only way I know how to do it, and it’s how I intend to represent this district.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

I think you have to be upfront and honest about how science is not only a discipline, but it’s a process, it takes time, and it takes resources. Just this past week there are stories about recent MRNA vaccine trials that have found there may be a treatment for skin cancer. That type of breakthrough came not only through amazing scientists doing years and years of work, but it comes from the government providing the resources, support, and funding to allow that research to happen. I believe in science and the amazing things it can accomplish and as a legislator I would be working every day to help build trust in the public in science. There is an information environment that rewards headlines and ragebait articles, but if leaders speak up and set an example and communicate to the public how advances in science and technology can truly affect their lives I think we can turn the tide.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Trust cannot be demanded. It has to be earned.

One of the most important things elected officials and scientists can do is distinguish scientific evidence from political authority.

Science is a process for investigating questions. It develops through observation, experimentation, replication, criticism, and revision. Changing a conclusion when better evidence becomes available is not a weakness of science; it is one of its strengths.

Public officials should communicate that process honestly.

That means distinguishing what we know from what we believe is likely, acknowledging uncertainty, explaining competing interpretations when legitimate disagreements exist, and correcting mistakes openly.

Whenever practical, the evidence underlying important public decisions should also be accessible. Data, methodology, assumptions, models, conflicts of interest, and limitations should be available for independent examination while appropriately protecting personal information and legitimate security concerns.

I am particularly interested in the broader problem of evidence architecture: how modern systems can preserve provenance, integrity, and context so people can independently examine the evidence behind important claims and decisions.

In an era of artificial intelligence, synthetic media, misinformation, and enormous volumes of information, simply telling citizens which sources they should trust will become increasingly ineffective. We need systems that make important claims more verifiable.

Scientists can contribute by explaining their work in understandable language and engaging directly with communities. Elected officials can contribute by resisting the temptation to selectively invoke science only when it supports a preferred political outcome.

The objective should not be unquestioning trust in government, politicians, institutions, or even scientists.

It should be a society in which evidence is accessible, claims can be examined, institutions are accountable, and people have good reasons to trust the processes used to reach important conclusions.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Government should empower science to help our society advance. Politicians should provide funding and get out of the way of researchers and organizations working on advancing our common knowledge. The damages that the DOGE program did to grants and funding should never be repeated.

We can waste billions of dollars fighting an imaginary war on terror or drugs, and quander our opportunities for a better future. We have to do better for the future of our communities, the state of North Carolina and the United States.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Trust was not lost. It was spent.

During COVID, guidance changed without anyone explaining why it changed, disagreement got treated as heresy, and value judgments about tradeoffs were announced as though they were scientific findings. People noticed. You do not win that back with a better communications strategy.

You win it back three ways. First, honesty about uncertainty. “This is our best estimate, and here is what would change it” holds up over time. “The science is settled” does not, and when it turns out it was not, you have spent credibility you needed later.

Second, a clean line between what the evidence shows and what we ought to do about it. The first is the researcher’s work. The second is a political judgment belonging to officials who answer to voters. In my experience, scientists are more persuasive, not less, when they respect that line.

Third, local messengers. People in Cabarrus County trust their family doctor, their county extension agent, and the researcher who lives down the road far more than they trust a federal agency. I would rather fund ten of those relationships than one more national campaign.

And I would be glad to sit down with the researchers in Kannapolis. Showing up is most of it.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Besides electing people who believe in science and have the courage to call out elected officials who are anti-science, I think it starts with fully funding science education starting in pre-K programs and that includes summer camps and enrichment programs, science clubs, hands-on science, activities, and all of this being coordinated with the very best of science education pedagogy. Notice I did not say new textbooks and watching videos or online experiences— I said the very best of hands-on science education.

This also means training science teachers and all teachers to integrate science, math, and technology into as many lessons as possible across the curriculum.

I think mistrust of science has grown because certain people have been allowed to propagate bald-faced lies, and there has not been any specific authority to call them out on it.

I don’t have the solution to this. I just know that we need to stop letting people spread false information. For one issue as an example: The climate has changed — past tense. Continuing to deny it and continuing to vilify anyone who doesn’t follow a party line when a person in power decrees something that is anti-science is extremely dangerous and we will pay the price eventually if this type of behavior is not stopped.

In a way it completely blows my mind that we have to have this questionnaire in the first place. It shows how unbelievably far we have fallen as a society when we can’t even agree on scientific principles and concepts.

I’m trying to do everything I can do as a candidate to bring people together to find common ground so we can listen to each other and do the work we need to do instead of pointing fingers and finding fault and laying blame.

How can we deal with creating good public policy for clean air, clean water, and public health if we can’t have a basic understanding of scientific principles?

How can we even get started with the conversation if nobody’s really listening?

How can we move forward if the world is so partisan that every single thing ends up being seen as good or bad depending on what political party is creating the message?

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

The dangerous and terrible reality is that Dr. Fauci and the COVID response set us back decades in public trust. We need to rebuild that trust with honesty, humility, respect for personal decisions, and transparency. Government can easily dismiss legitimate questions and treat concerned citizens as uninformed. That creates suspicion and skepticism. Our scientific experts should communicate in easily understood language and avoid exaggeration and censorship so our neighbors are more willing to hear them out. It is a very human thing.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Density of information does not reflect its quality or accuracy. Knowledge among NGO and policy leadership should “trump” the conspiracy theories and crackpot assumptions of causality that mislead the public. Peer review, data and methods transparency, and the ability to replicate results are academic guardrails that the public knows too little about. It’s time we honor science and scientists instead of “influencers” trying to make a buck, or build their list of “followers” on social media. Science has been a prime mover in accelerating America’s economy and world leadership. We can’t afford to go “back”, but we must measure and acknowledge the risks and the rewards of the solutions we invent and unleash on the public.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Education with events is the best way.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

The hard-to-swallow truth of how we got into this mess is that scientists competed with each other to win the favoritism of corrupt politicians who then gave said scientists nice, powerful jobs on the payroll of taxpayers as technocrats. We learned the hard way that we were placing too much trust in said people to have our best interests at heart and a willingness to pursue truth above all else. More often than not, they meant well, but even so, the public came around to realizing that the road to hell can be paved with good intentions and started resenting scientists and others bossing them around for their safety’s sake as though that was more important than the trade-offs. Nothing short of humility is going to fix this: fewer powerful technocrats in government, less elite hierarchy within the scientific community, oaths to fight misinformation/ our own assumptions, less politically correct speech on matters of fact, and a willingness to cautiously engage fringe views and questionable science. Meanwhile, elected officials can do the same, fighting misinformation as role models, which would be more reliable to expect out of my peers if getting elected was not so tantalizing that a person would lie and cheat their way to victory. For that, we would need to limit the government and treat the Constitution as the ultimate law of the land, not like a living, unimportant, flimsy document that has no restraints on elected officials.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Elected officials have a responsibility to seek out and respect scientific expertise when making decisions that affect the public. Scientists should have a meaningful seat at the table, and their findings should be communicated to the public clearly and transparently. While elected officials must weigh many factors when making policy, disregarding scientific evidence or choosing only the evidence that supports a predetermined position undermines public trust in both science and government. We should encourage scientists to engage directly with communities, explain not only what the evidence shows but also where uncertainty exists, and make scientific information accessible to everyone. Good public policy should be informed by evidence, open debate, and a willingness to change course when new evidence demands it.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

This is an issue that is directly linked to the misinformation spread through our various forms of media either by malign actors or monied interests. No one in our communities is a Luddite. I have yet to meet a person without a cellphone or an automobile (if they can afford it). The answer to this issue is the same as the answer to the second question asked. Through quality, well-funded education that gives students the tools to make informed decisions by eschewing logical fallacies and personal biases in order to built trust in the institutions that add to the body of knowledge through rigorous scientific processes and by emphasizing critical thinking we will be able to build a capacity in our population that is able to separate fact from fiction.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

Elected officials should not expect the public to trust science simply because we say, “the experts agree.” Trust is earned through transparency, honesty, and consistency.

I believe elected officials should work directly with scientists and public health professionals to explain not only what we know, but how we know it along what we still don’t know. We should communicate uncertainty honestly rather than pretending every question has a simple answer.

Just as importantly, scientists and government need to meet people where they are. That means listening to community concerns, engaging trusted local institutions, making information understandable, and being willing to correct mistakes when new evidence emerges.

My role as an elected official would not be to be the scientist in the room. It would be to make sure scientists are heard, evidence is respected, and residents have clear, honest information they can use to make informed decisions.

Q4 As the world is becoming more information dense, science mistrust has grown. How do you think elected officials can work with scientists to build the general public’s trust in science?

I have noticed that too many elected officials avoid taking clear positions. When forced to do so, they may express concern (about water quality, privacy, …) without endorsing any specific course of action. Some politicians can get away with boasting that they are not scientists.

Elected officials owe it to their constituents to make an effort to understand societal problems and the trade-offs between alternative solutions, and to take public positions for which they would hold themselves accountable. If they were to do so, they would need to be virtually forced to bring forth evidence and not rely on magical thinking or vague platitudes.

Many real situations don’t provide immediate and personal rewards or harms. And, science is not a one-and-done enterprise, so what to scientists is the best feature of science (its ability to self-correct) appears to lay people as a weakness because of its lack of immutability. Thus, interventions such as vaccines or face masks or even Pasteurization can appear unnecessary and this uncertainty can be exploited by anti-science social media personalities to promote snake oil solutions. Public officials can help combat nonsense by highlighting the scientific evidence behind their proposals, while indicating the gaps in current knowledge and how additional knowledge may lead them to withdraw current recommendations.

A scientific attitude with its emphasis on evidence can apply even to everyday decisions. I am an advocate of people-driven governance and of community engagement. I will investigate online tools that the County can host to help neighborhood communities to deliberate on problems that matter to them and exchange ideas about alternative solutions. When these problems and solutions affect larger regions within the County, they can provide a good starting point for further discussion, e.g., in public meetings. An important component here would be the involvement of scientists with the relevant expertise to provide advice based on the underlying science and help the public understand the consequences of various proposals. This would be a bottom-up approach of rebuilding public trust in science.