The Spire

Olivia Hernandez ‘29

Guest Writer

As Worcester residents prepare for the upcoming city elections, District 4 candidates Luis Ojeda and Ted Kostas faced off in a heated debate last Sunday at local club, Cafe Neo. Hosted by local radio show Talk of the Commonwealth’s Hank Stolz, the two candidates discussed issues plaguing District 4, and how they would improve conditions for residents not only in their area, but also within the greater Worcester community. 

As a Worcester native, I attended this debate in hopes of discovering how these two differing political views could propose positive change for our city. While I may not reside in District 4, I am a proud member of this community, and would like to see how our elected officials will improve our city and ensure the prosperity of all who reside here. 

Beginning with two-minute opening statements, current City Councilman Ojeda started off the discussion with his background as a Worcester native, stating his experience within the public school system and his 25-year career in education has influenced his decision to pursue local politics. The WPS assistant principal ultimately stressed how he believes in the potential of the city, and, if re-elected, would continue on his political agenda of making both District 4 and Worcester a better community. 

Kostas then fired back in a heated attack, detailing his qualms with Ojeda’s term and how the current councilman has failed in addressing the ongoing drug epidemic, growing homelessness, and housing affordability within the district. Reading off a piece of paper (in an interesting contrast to Ojeda’s on-the-spot statement), the Republican hopeful ultimately complained about the pressing issues within the district/city rather than proposing solutions to these city-wide struggles.

With the debate officially started, the two candidates responded to prepared questions as well as an audience-based Q&A. Throughout the discussion, Ojeda made references to his current work within the district, stating how he has worked with local non-profits such as 508 Forever Young and Worcester Latino Scholars for Dollars, as well as participating in neighborhood cleanups and attending grand openings of small businesses and local restaurants. 

Conversely, Kostas stated his disappointment with Ojeda’s term as District 4 City Councilman, complaining about city-wide issues rather than proposing solutions. The Republican hopeful remained vague about his professional background, insisting that his return to work after a brief period of retirement demonstrates how his determination in the professional sphere will transfer to his role as City Councilman. 

Despite this position, Kostas failed to mention programs or effective proposals that would help with his main areas of concern – homelessness, housing, and drugs. The candidate sought answers to his rhetorical questions from his crowd of supporters, those of whom dominated the audience and influenced the club to appear one-sided towards Kostas’ campaign. 

As well, the attitude of the audience mirrored that of a rapid decline in political decorum; a decline not only plaguing politicians, but also their supporters. Their behavior during the debate was quite disrespectful, with some of Kostas’ supporters shouting during Ojeda’s responses to hot-button issues, most notably when discussing the local ICE raids from earlier this year as well as misgendering City Councilman Thu Nguyen, who identifies as non-binary. 

Interestingly enough, Kostas remained silent towards his supporters’ problematic and unnecessary heckling, lacking the respect for his opponent to quiet down the crowd’s shouts. In addition, Councilman Ojeda was approached post-debate by an audience member (whose political affiliation is unknown), who proceeded to crudely state his dissatisfaction with Ojeda’s term. Ultimately, the clientele at Cafe Neo was disappointing, showing how the political climate is worsening on both sides of the politicians-at-large as well as their firm supporters. 

While incumbent City Councilman Ojeda remained respectful of Kostas throughout the discussion, the latter was quite crass – and admittedly so. The Republican hopeful’s remarks during his closing statements included his admittance of “having the balls” to advocate for residents of District 4, emphasizing how his lack of fear and fierce individuality pose him as the most suitable candidate for City Councilmanship. 

I strongly disagree. 

After observing this debate, I’ve come to the conclusion that both candidates lack the full political spirit of a City Councilman. While I admire and believe in Ojeda’s desire to implement change within his district, I question the efficiency of his term in eradicating/improving community conditions. As I do not reside in the same area as Councilman Ojeda, I cannot say I’ve experienced the results of his programming in enhancing the district community, but I also cannot say I’ve heard about the grandiose change that these projects have implemented.

Candidate Kostas appears to be more complaint rather than initiative about these problems within the community, remaining vague on what measures need to be taken and instead addressing his personal qualms with Ojeda’s term to gather support. I am also dissuaded by Kostas’ unprofessional manner during the debate. Cursing and alleged “bluntness” does not gather support nor votes, which Candidate Kostas appears to misunderstand. 

I ultimately didn’t feel particularly empowered by this debate and its candidates – neither candidate proposed a firm stance on the main topics circulating during the debate, specifically solutions to the growing homeless population and the ongoing drug epidemic. One could argue that due to the candidates’ lack of a set position on these political issues, both Kostas and Ojeda could be running to nominally hold a seat on the Council rather than be the voice for the community they purport to represent. 

While I do not believe this to be the case for Ojeda, I didn’t feel particularly persuaded by his political agenda; his repeated references of projects he participated in did not clearly outline his position on the major issues facing the community, leaving a potential voter questioning the exact stance the Incumbent City Councilman holds on these topics. The same can be said for Kostas, as his broad engagement with these hot-button topics was a glaring issue in developing support for his candidacy. 

What District 4 ultimately needs is a representative advocate in public office to bring local issues to the attention of the City Council, and get the fixes they need to improve their community. As November approaches, I wish both candidates the best of luck in the upcoming election. 

Featured image courtesy of Collin Turner of Spectrum News 1