District 14 candidates Q&A

Posted October 22, 2024

With the November 5 general election fast approaching, candidates are making their final pitch to voters.

Here in District 14, long-time Republican legislators Jerry Klein, Robin Weisz and Jon Nelson are asking voters to re-elect them to the state legislature, while Democratic-NPL candidates Mark Nelson, Jessica Hawkes and Catherine Jelsing are looking to unseat them.

More specifically, Jerry Klein and Mark Nelson are competing for the district's single N.D. Senate seat, while Jon Nelson, Robin Weisz, Cathy Jelsing and Jessica Hawkes are competing for the two available N.D. House seats.

In an effort to better inform voters about the choices in front of them this election, the Transcript reached out to each candidate and asked them to participate in a Questions & Answers article.

The same five questions were asked of each candidate, and here are their responses:

Q: For voters who might not know you very well, can you tell us a little about yourself and why you want to represent District 14?

Jerry Klein: My wife and I moved to Fessenden in 1978 and owned and operated the local grocery store for 35 years before selling it back in 2013. I have been active in my community since moving here, serving on the local civic and commerce organization, being active in Jaycees, Kiwanis, Knights of Columbus, St. Augustine's Catholic Church, the local development group and the county job development authority. I have also served as a volunteer fireman for the last 46 years.

Mark Nelson: I'm a retired farmer who has lived in N.D. most of my life.

Robin Weisz: I currently farm by Hurdsfield and have farmed my whole life. I also ran a grain elevator for almost 20 years. I am married to Lori and have two sons. One is a naval officer on a submarine and the other is on the farm with me. I have been involved in township government for almost 50 years and have been in the legislature since 1997.

Jon Nelson: I grew up on a farm in the Wolford community and farmed our family farm following my parents' retirement. My wife Shirley and I have three grown children and we currently live in Rugby. I believe very strongly that as a community member, it is important to be involved in the community to make it as good a place as possible. That is why I served on my local school board and township board when we lived on the farm. I also served on our hospital board in Rugby as well as city council. It is that involvement that I take to the state to build a stronger rural voice for those of us in District 14 and the entire state.

Jessica Hawkes: I bring a career background of economic and community development, city and county government, small business and nonprofit management, and K-12 and higher education. I live on my family's fifth-generation farm outside of New Rockford and am currently working in the Advancement office at Lake Region State College. I earned bachelor's degrees in Spanish and French from NDSU and am now completing a master's degree in Global Cultures through King's College London. I am seeking a N.D. House seat in District 14 because I have seen the damage caused by a long-term unchecked supermajority in the state legislature, and I believe more balanced representation in Bismarck will bring fresh ideas, renewed integrity and the potential to improve the quality of life for all North Dakotans.

Cathy Jelsing: I am a veteran newspaper journalist, public relations writer and nonprofit executive. I retired as Foundation Director for Rugby's Heart of America Medical Center in 2021, but remain active as a volunteer and board member of the International Peace Garden, Dunseith, and the Prairie Village Museum in Rugby, where I make my home with my husband, Terry.

I want to represent District 14 because I believe it is time to rebalance the North Dakota Legislature. Diversity is an essential component of democracy. When there are supermajorities, no matter what the party, there will be citizens who are not being heard and not being served. I am eager to listen, learn and act on issues important to the people of District 14. From education and agriculture, to economic development and healthcare access.

Q: If elected, what are the values you intend to fight for in the legislature?

Jerry Klein: I think most of the voters in District 14 know that I am very pro-life and very family value oriented. I have consistently received the endorsement of the NRA and the North Dakota Family Alliance. I have always been a strong small business proponent hoping to cut regulation and create some sort of consistency in government regulation. I have been an advocate for keeping our taxes low for all our citizens.

Mark Nelson: We can't make any progress in our state legislature by voting same old, same old. The citizens are facing many challenges and the Nonpartisan League (NPL) was right about everything as it stood against the big money interests and always aimed to give the little guy a fair shake.

Robin Weisz: My values in the legislature have always been to be honest and fair and to look at both sides of an issue and try to make the best decision I can that will benefit my district and the state. I firmly believe in less regulation and low taxes as this allows everyone to prosper. I also believe that we do have an obligation to help those who are not able to help themselves.

Jon Nelson: As Chairman of the Human Resources Division of the House Appropriations Committee, my main focus will be on elements of the human service budget that affect nearly every individual in North Dakota. Increasing access to healthcare, home and community based care, long term care, aging services, childcare, developmental disabilities, behavior healthcare all need to be balanced in the funding of the human service budget.

Jessica Hawkes: The values I will fight for come directly from what we have heard from our constituents. I am a strong advocate for:

• Bodily autonomy, medical privacy and women's reproductive rights.

• Funding and support for child care, K-12 education and higher education.

• Family farms and ranches, locally-owned businesses and entrepreneurs.

• Ethics, anti-corruption measures and transparency in government at all levels.

• Respect, dignity and opportunity for all North Dakotans.

Cathy Jelsing: If elected to the N.D. House of Representatives I would fight for:

• Reproductive Freedom: Women have a right to reproductive healthcare. Polls show more than half the women in North Dakota are pro-choice, but that view has not been represented by District 14 legislators. Thankfully, the North Dakota Supreme Court has ruled the trigger ban on abortion unconstitutional. I would fight to place women in charge of their own bodies.

• Freedom from interference in public schools: Our nation was founded on the principle of separation of church and state and nowhere is it more important to practice and teach that principle than in our public schools. It's dangerous for a minority of highly vocal parents to dictate what educators in our public schools and universities are or are not allowed to teach. Our public schools deserve our support.

• Economic support for middle class families: Improving the quality of life for our workers is essential to our state's economy. Paying workers a living wage, providing incentives to small businesses, increasing access to quality childcare and supporting rural healthcare are crucial to North Dakota's families and to our state.

Q: If Measure 4 passes this November and valuation-based property taxes are eliminated, how should the legislature go about replacing the lost tax revenue for local governments?

Jerry Klein: If Measure 4 passes, I am not sure how the state will replace half of our current general fund. Many have said that the state has the money. If we remove the federal dollars and the special fund dollars, which couldn't be used, we are down to $6 billion. Reducing that down to $3 billion will provide significant changes to the programs that currently benefit all our citizens. It will be a monumental challenge with programs reduced and other taxes raised.

Mark Nelson: Measure 1 is a Yes. Measure 2 is the legislature's supermajority trying to punish the voters for passing an Initiated Measure so I say absolutely NO. Measure 4 is a disaster but would be good for large corporations that hold a lot of property. Does anyone think our regressive supermajority can deal with such a disaster? And why should we give up all local control? Do we think that about 1,300 governmental units can show up in Bismarck and beg for operating funds? Measure 3 I have to vote NO as I don't want to take any flexibility away from the legislature in case Measure 4 happens to pass. I also don't see Measure 3 as necessary if the legislature is financially responsible. Measure 5 is a Yes.

Robin Weisz: If Measure 4 passes this will cause huge reductions in all other state spending. While I certainly can't say where all the cuts will come from, certainly prairie dog funding will be on the table, social services funding, possibly education funding, as to cut over $3 billion can not come from small cuts here or there. If we were to raid the Legacy Fund as some suggest we would be out of money there in three sessions and then would really be struggling to find money.

Jon Nelson: The $3.15 billion that will be needed to replace property tax in Measure 4 if passed will have major consequences in the funding of programs that I just mentioned in the previous question and in every area of the budget. From the standpoint of the state budget, nearly half of the general fund will be needed to replace the revenue needed to fund the property tax revenue. That will affect state funding to roads, infrastructure, essential services and other forms of tax relief that the state has offered across the board. I believe that rural North Dakota will suffer more than any other sector if this measure passes.

Jessica Hawkes: The passage of Measure 4 would have a devastating impact on vital programs and infrastructure for communities of all sizes in the state. Emergency services, year-round road maintenance, public education and public works and services are just some of the critical areas endangered by this measure, which are for the use and benefit of all citizens. I have not seen a single viable option to replace the funding for local governments, but it seems likely the decision would fall to the state as to which communities deserve how much money from whatever replacement method is selected. This is a dangerous situation where political jockeying can withhold necessary, life-saving services from tens of thousands of residents with no regard for local expertise on the needs of each community. Keep funding local to keep decisions in the hands of the people.

Cathy Jelsing: Let's hope Measure 4 fails. Eliminating North Dakota property tax would strip local governments of essential funding sources for maintaining public services, including emergency services and education. There is not a well-vetted plan on how to replace $3.15 billion per biennium in local revenue that will be lost if it passes.

Q: Measure 3 would limit how much the legislature can spend from the Legacy Fund, if it passes. Do you believe such limits would be positive, and how do you believe the Legacy Fund should be utilized to benefit North Dakotans?

Jerry Klein: The Legacy Fund was initiated and passed by the people back in 2010. The idea was to save some money from oil revenue because someday reliance on our fossil fuel income might be jeopardized. Spending 15% of the principal was based on the thought that the fund might someday be a billion dollars. Well it is over $10 billion. Currently the state is spending the realized earnings which were nearly $500 million last session. That money went to roads, tax relief and infrastructure projects. Reducing the number from 15% to 5% will allow our investors to create more earnings, helping us with additional tax relief and continued work on our infrastructure. We have taken $600 million to invest in North Dakota companies. We also have a low interest infrastructure revolving loan fund to help communities with local projects. We are investing in North Dakota.

Mark Nelson: We could invest some of our money into North Dakota instead of communist China. I know the financial people always want to invest in grand projects that promise hundreds of jobs but it is the small businessmen who are the real job creators. But many small projects are more work than one grand project, so that is a fault with our financial people.

Robin Weisz: I think Measure 3 would be a positive. When the voters passed it they were clear that it was intended to be there as a resource when the oil revenue dried up. It was intended to be a long term investment and not to be used for short term funding. Sooner or later the oil gravy train will dry up and having a robust Legacy Fund will be critical to keep critical services without raising taxes.

Jon Nelson: Measure 3 would limit the amount the legislature could fund from the principle of the Legacy Fund to 5% of the balance in any session with a two-thirds vote of both chambers. The current limit is 15%. The reason I believe it makes sense to support this measure is that the Legacy Fund has grown to $11 billion, so if the legislature would consider drawing down any principle, 5% would amount to $550 million. To date, the legislature has never drawn any amount from the Legacy Fund since its inception and I don't believe there is any desire to begin to change that. It should also be noted that the 10% difference that would not be available to the legislature would be able to be invested, which would add additional earnings to the fund.

Jessica Hawkes: I am in support of Measure 3 as a starting point for guardrails and guidelines on how to utilize what belongs to all North Dakotans. The Legacy Fund should absolutely be used to benefit the people of our state, and not for elite tax breaks, normal operations or personal vanity projects. Windfalls are rare in personal and business finance and must be stewarded with an eye on the long-term impact of each investment, and Measure 3 helps to ensure that the body of the fund will remain intact for future needs we cannot even begin to anticipate.

Cathy Jelsing: If passed, Measure 3 will limit Legacy Fund spending to increase investment earnings. That is a positive. I do not think the Legacy Fund should be used to pay the state's day-to-day bills nor to eliminate property taxes. Rather, the Legacy Fund should be used to build infrastructure, support community services, fund research and stimulate economic growth. Qualified Legacy Fund projects should have lasting, positive impacts on our state.

Q: At a time when people's confidence in the government is low, how do you intend to build faith that North Dakota's legislature can be effective?

Jerry Klein: I believe that North Dakotans still have faith in their local elected leaders. I believe what is happening at the national level gives our state leaders a black eye. In North Dakota we must balance the budget, there is no spending beyond our means. As legislators we live at home with our neighbors, drive our local highways and live with the laws we have passed. We are open and accessible to our constituents. We are here to serve our communities and the state and I believe do a good job.

Mark Nelson: We can rebuild confidence in our state government by using common sense and working for the people. No more time wasted trying to figure out the best way to jail our librarians for the crime of lending books, or time spent obsessing about bathrooms. We can aim to have a functioning government, wouldn't that be like the good old days?

Robin Weisz: Frankly from a legislative perspective, for the most part keep doing what we have been doing. We have lowered income taxes, helped to shore up our critical public safety providers like our volunteer EMS providers. We are addressing the behavioral health crisis, improving our infrastructure such as broadband, roads, water supply, etc. We do need to look at how we can better deal with the property tax issue and continue to look at making North Dakota a place where you want to do business and live.

Jon Nelson: I believe that we add confidence in the system by working with our local, state, federal and community leaders, creating and building on partnerships to accomplish our shared vision. As an elected leader, I will work as hard as possible to bring the state government back to our communities and your home if needed to understand and provide the services that are offered. That has been my main focus since I was first elected and I will continue to do that if I am honored with your vote in this election.

Jessica Hawkes: North Dakotans are tired of the nonsense, acrimony and corruption in government, at both the state and federal levels. The amount of time and resources wasted on so-called "hot button" social issues has severely detracted from the actual work we send representatives to do. A more balanced state legislature will bring focus to the issues that matter to all of us, from the economy and workforce development to housing and health care to education and child care to benefits for veterans and seniors. If elected, I would strive to bring respectful attention to the critical matters of governance and call out the media-seeking antics for what they are: wasteful nonsense. The only way to build faith in government is for those in government to do their duty for the people they serve.

Cathy Jelsing: During the last legislative session, the GOP supermajority succeeded in distracting attention from the most pressing issues in North Dakota. In contrast, our Democratic lawmakers – just 12 representatives and four senators – led the passage of more than 50 laws and resolutions addressing things like workforce development and retention, the childcare crisis, domestic violence prevention and support for public school educators and their families. Effective lawmakers do exist. We just need more of them in office.