[Music] - Hi everyone, welcome to Both Sides of the Story.

I am your host Alan Gionet from CBS 4, thanks for joining us.

Well it all comes down to this.

Eight students entered our tournament 12 weeks ago, and tonight is the 2021 championship match.

Students from Cherry Creek high school in Greenwood Village, and George Washington high school in Denver battle for the crown tonight.

So let's be our participants who have earned their way here.

First up is Masha Osovskaya, a senior at Cherry Creek high school.

Let's hear your story.

- Hi my name is Masha Osovskaya and I go to Cherry Creek high school and I'm a senior.

Debate just seemed like a really interesting class, I really wanted the opportunity to express what I have to say on a variety of issues and I also wanted to gain public speaking skills because I feel like that is very applicable to basically any field you go into.

The most interesting topics for me are the ones that go beyond the US and you can look at them internationally so for example we had one on West African urbanization and just because I had not been exposed to something like that I learned something new as I was preparing for it.

- Masha is a phenomenal student, a kind compassionate soul who is great at mentoring younger students.

Masha does an excellent job at staying calm under pressure, and she is able to process multiple arguments.

It really helps her to convey her ideas.

- Outside of school and debate, I dance and play the piano.

I've been doing that for a really long time.

I think for the future I want to go into engineering, specifically medical engineering because I find medicine really interesting and biology and I want to make a difference in people's lives by creating new technologies and discovering new things to help make the jobs of doctors easier.

- Next up is Kalina Kulig, a senior from George Washington high school in Denver.

Let's meet Kalina.

- My name is Kalina Kulig and I go to George Washington high school where I'm a senior.

I'm very passionate about what is going on in the world, so that inspires me to keep debating and that is part of what inspires me to research every resolution to, because I like finding out how the world works and I like exploring different ideas.

I am also very involved in local politics.

I love researching that, and then attending different events that are related to that.

- Kalina is a really hard worker on her team, she is always thinking about the bigger picture, and the kind of debate that she does is focused on the world, the way it ought to be, so they often use different philosophical concepts in order to support that.

Kalina has done a great deal of reading and exploring and she is really able to break that down so that it is understandable, and also really help support her debate argument.

- One of my favorite things to do is talk to people from other schools in tournaments, and meet them and hear what their lives are like.

That's been something I have enjoyed.

- Two of the best debaters in the state are here with us tonight, also joining our illustrious panel of experts who will offer their analysis of our debate.

They are Dominic Dezutti, host of Colorado Inside Out, the weekly roundtable program here on PBS 12.

He is joined by Marianne Goodmln, chief legislative reporter with Colorado Politics, and Eric Sondermann, political analyst and columnist for the Gazette and Colorado politics.

Okay, time to set the ground rules.

Each side will present their case and ask each other questions and then have a chance to offer rebuttals.

Both students have prepared a pro and con case for tonight's debate, they do not know which side they will defend until we have a coin flip right here in our studio.

When it is finished, we'll go to our illustrious panel for questions and find out who they felt offered the best arguments.

So let's get started, the issue up for debate today is this.

During a pandemic, health crisis, local control through a city or county is better than statewide control.

So let's do our coin flip and find out who gets the pro and who gets the con.

So Masha I'm going to let you make the call.

Do you want heads or tails?

- I'll take tails.

- I'm afraid it is heads, so we will go over to Kalina.

Which would you like, proponent or negative?

- I will take the negative.

- Negative means you go second, that means Masha as a proponent, the round is yours to begin.

Three minutes to give your opening statements go for it.

- I affirm that resolve, during a pandemic health crisis, local control through a city or county is better than statewide control.

My main point in this debate is that local control allows for a result that is better tailored to people's needs.

According to Dumont 21, local control means policies can be tailored to the needs and limitations of each community.

Local governments deliver the most used public services including public health, as a result they are perhaps the most important in people's lives.

Davey 11 corroborates this finding that given the great diversity of situations, there is no one-size-fits-all solution and policy responses must be tailor-made to reflect that different regions are facing different challenges and have different assets.

Specifically during pandemics, Loganson 20 writes that organizational challenges of epidemic control are always dependent on meaningful local involvement.

OECD 20 expressed a similar idea as some national governments are at the frontline of crisis management and recovery, for example the health of populations in some regions is more affected than others.

Large urban areas have been hard-hit, but within them, deprived areas are more strongly affected than less deprived ones.

This trend is visible in Colorado as Davey finds in 2021 that a neighborhood that has highest concentrations of COVID diagnosis may be separated by just a 10 minute drive from one largely untouched by the virus.

The trend holds true outside of Denver.

There are neighborhoods where more people are engaged in essential work, and more people live in crowded housing conditions.

Local governments can address these differences while specific solutions are simply impossible to achieve on the state level.

The impacts are critical.

Most importantly, local solutions save lives because of quick response times due to better communication and funding.

According to the UN, office for disaster risk reduction in 2020, a key role for local governments during an outbreak is to ensure that information reaches residents.

This includes locally approved risk information that people can take to keep themselves safe.

[indiscernible] 21 corroberates this, local governments are the actor's closest to which makes them particularly prominent for communication tasks.

The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Society claims that information saves lives.

In the pandemic, there has been an excess of information and false rumors.

Local governments also allow for quicker and better distribution of funding.

For instance, US news 2021 expresses this specific aid plan where the guidelines give governments leeway to choose from more than 60 categories for spending the money.

Including COVID vaccinations, pay for workers, housing aid, grants to businesses and improvements to the water.

The plan gives governments the resources and flexibility they need to avoid cuts and provide essential services and come out of the pandemic stronger.

It is highly unlikely that the state government would receive such flexible conditions.

Secondly, local response allows for more innovation.

DeMont 21 writes that local governments often innovate to address community needs.

That freedom to innovate helps local governments to generate policies that can work their way up and across the federal system, meaning that local control results in more and better solutions that can be implemented on a larger scale.

Because local governments are in a unique position to appropriately address the needs of their constituents, I urge you to vote affirmative.

- Masha thank you very much, championship round on both sides of the story.

Kalina now, two minutes for questions and cross-examination go ahead.

- Thank you, without a statewide push, how can you guarantee that public health measures will be implemented at all?

- I think they will because again we have these differences in areas of how one area can be experiencing large surges in cases, and then one that is not affected.

So I think that allows for those areas to focus on those specific areas direct finding and funding other resources there.

- Okay so there will definitely be areas that are more effective, but can you guarantee that those local governments will be responsive to their citizens' needs?

- Yes because the citizens will push that, they will see that that is happening.

- What about citizens who do not want a mask mandate or lockdown?

- I do not think that is necessarily, there will always be citizens that do not want a mask mandate or lockdown.

So I don't think you can address that on a state level.

- Okay are you concerned that mayors do not have the power to implement these restrictions?

Even if they wanted to?

- No I do not think that is concerning because again we have local governments and remember we can still have the state backup, we just focus on the local governments because there is such a difference in how the pandemic is like being how the pandemic plays out in different areas.

- Great, moving to your second argument here, you talk about local innovation, can you give an example of this about Covid?

- So basically what happens is that specific areas have different measures that they try to implement and that is allowing for better measures.

I do not have a specific example, but there are different measures and they try to address the pandemic in different ways and we can actually see that implemented on a larger scale.

- Okay but what about those measures, makes it so that they can only be implemented by local governments and not states?

- I'm not saying necessarily only by local governments, I'm just saying that with local governments you have a wider diversity of these different solutions and the chance of you attaining the right and the best solution is greater, whereas you can only have like 50 states where yes there are different policies that can be implement it, but again with local you have more diversity in that.

- Okay we have to wrap up the questions right there.

Kalina, three minutes in the negative, go ahead.

- I negate today's topic, that during a pandemic health crisis, local control through a city or county is better than statewide control.

I will demonstrate that statewide control has been more effective in three main areas.

First statewide mask mandates are effective and ensure universal implementation.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, mask mandates are an effective tool to combat the spread of Covid 19, furthermore most Americans support their use according to the Washington Post.

Unfortunately, many cities have refused to implement them.

Research done by Pew found that cities may be unlikely to implement mask requirements without a push from the state.

When appropriate, these mandates save lives, and passing them at the state level is the only way to guarantee universal implementation.

An example of this can be seen with Douglas County.

Where officials remove the mask requirement in schools, something that would have been prevented by statewide control.

Second, statewide vaccination pushes are more effective.

With control, comes influence.

Power that states can leverage to get more people vaccinated.

Encouraging vaccination is incredibly important, so it should be done by all levels of government.

However, the resources that local governments have are nothing compared to that of the state.

Realistically, stay should be leading the charge and the pandemic because in the end they have more sway than counties or cities.

Thus states have the power to encourage responsible reopening.

Finally, statewide control still has enough flexibility to be adaptable.

Control from the state does not mean one-size-fits-all, in fact it gets the best of both worlds.

Because it can vary by region, but it can also be universal.

For example, Colorado can implement a statewide mask mandate, or a mask mandate that only kicks in when a county passes a certain number of cases.

When Colorado shifted from state to local control, we lost the mask mandate and other key Covid protections.

According to Blackwell in 2021.

Now we have some of the highest rates in the country, statewide control is what got us through the height of the pandemic, but now that Colorado has turned over power to local governments, things are rapidly going sideways.

With only 4/64 counties with mask mandates.

Therefore, it is clear that during a pandemic health crisis, local control through a county or city is better than statewide control, because of mask mandates, vaccine pushes, and adaptability.

- Kalina thanks very much, the question of course is local control better than statewide control?

In the affirmative, we have Masha, two minutes for questions begins now.

- Thank you for your speech, see talk about mask mandates but who says we need to implement those across the whole state?

- The key is we have to affluent them at a high level, because that is what ensures universal implementation.

Colorado is a great example here, when we had statewide control there was a statewide mask mandate.

But when Gov.

Polis turned the power over to the counties, now only four out of the 64 counties have a mask mandate but cases are higher than they ever were.

- Why do we need universal implementation when we see such different responses to the pandemic in different regions?

- Universal implementation is key here, because we know that some counties will not implement mask mandates without first a push from the state government.

- Okay and then you talk about saving lives, but how can we save lives when we cannot get resources and funding distributed quickly enough to make a difference in local regions?

- I'm glad you brought up the point of resources and funding because I think it actually is the other way around.

In fact, states have so much more resources and so much more funding than local governments so they should really be at the head of the pandemic response here.

- The fact that it is not really going to matter that they have so many resources if we cannot get them out quick enough?

- So I am not arguing that the state should do something unilaterally, but it's very clear that the state has not only the money but actually the power to implement these, unfortunately mayors do not always have the power to implement these policies even if they wanted to.

- In your third part you talk about how we can still have flexibility.

What is an example of that and how can we vary by region?

- A great example of this was Polis's policy during the first wave of color where he had different restrictions for different regions, and those were based on how many cases they had in each region.

It is still a statewide policy but it allows for local differentiation.

- All right we will have to wrap up the question right there.

But Masha, two minutes for rebuttal, go ahead.

- So I'm going to go over my opponent's case, in her first point she talks about mass mandates but remember the differences between different regions and how they experience the pandemic, I read your card that specifically said you can have two areas 10 minutes that are experiencing completely different outcomes from the pandemic.

That is why we should focus on the local level because you can still have mask mandates on the local level, you do not need to implement them statewide.

For example in a rural area, you don't necessarily need to have those people masked if they are not interacting with other people, and that is why we should focus on the local level.

Then she talks about how we can save lives, but remember that we are not going to save lives until we see innovation and until we see effective distribution of resources and that is not happening under statewide control and have that funding go to the people that need it, whereas local is much more effective because they have specific communication.

They have specific plans and the example I read from the US news, it allows flexibility and they can address these challenges effectively just because they have an abundance of money, does not mean it will go to the correct people and in the local government it will.

Then she talks about vaccine pushes but remember, once again this can be achieved on the local level, you do not necessarily need to implement the statewide, and yes vaccines are important, but you can have a government that is closer to the people that knows the people so much better and that's going to be more effective in getting people out to vaccinate because they feel closer local government rather than their state just telling them that they need to go get vaccinated.

Then on her third point, that there is enough flexibility, yes there can be flexibility but we are able to see maximum flexibility under local government and not state because you have a government that knows what it's people need, and it actually implements those solutions specifically on the local level, whereas with statewide, those policies can be confusing if you're trying to address all the different issues and writing legislation that addresses specific areas it's much easier to leave that up to local people.

And they also are more likely to know what is better, the government is more likely to know what is better for the people because they're actually communicating and contacting those people.

- Masha thank you very much for that rebuttal, Kalina you are arguing against the idea of local control being better during a pandemic.

You now have three minutes to respond and close, go ahead.

- The biggest problem with my opponent's case is that local governments have neither the resources nor the control to effectively respond to a pandemic.

Georgetown writes that mayors have far less power than governors and states have more options available to them to respond to the pandemic.

According to the CDC, state governors have the most power to put people in quarantine, and governors have unique emergency powers that make them the best tool for pandemic response.

Let's address some of my opponents' more specific points.

My opponent begins by talking about how local control is important, and it would be great if this local control worked.

But as you can see, unfortunately it does not.

I've shown you that when Colorado lifted the statewide mask mandate, now only 4/64 counties have one in place.

That is a big problem especially considering the cases are on the rise.

Next my opponent talks about how local control is more adaptable, and I agree that adaptability is a good thing.

But state control can also be adaptable.

A key part of Gov.

Polis's path strategy was to apply different strategies to different regions based on the COVID rates.

And that is ultimately what got Colorado through the hardest part of the pandemic.

Next my opponent talks about local innovation, but unfortunately cannot provide a single example of when this has occurred.

Furthermore, if local governments are able to innovate, their policies can be adopted by states, because my opponent also tells you in cross that she cannot guarantee that any of this innovation is unique to the local level.

With that, let's look at the case that I just read, my opponent says that mask mandates can differ by different regions because they will experience it differently.

But we cannot leave it up to the counties because frankly they have dropped the ball.

Right now, covert cases are terrible and yet we have so few counties with mask mandates in place.

My opponent response to vaccination pushes by telling you that this can be achieved on the local level, but that is not the case.

Even if mayors wanted to put some of these restrictions or even encouragements for vaccines in place, many do not have the power or the resources or have significantly less funding than the state level and finally, adaptability.

My opponent tells you that maximum flexibility is achieved on the local level.

But I will argue that maximum flexibility isn't desirable if it means that we have to sacrifice these essential measures.

We have maximal flexibility right now, and it has resulted in cases skyrocketing.

Thus to end the pandemic, Colorado should return to local control.

- Kalina thank you very much, Masha as a proponent during this proposing the idea that local control is better during a pandemic, than statewide control, one minute to close go ahead.

- Okay I'm going to quickly respond to my opponents attack on my case.

So remember she tells you that the local government does not have the resources in order to respond, but remember that the example I read you from the US news 21 that gave local governments 60 categories to choose from and those included specifically vaccination which goes against her point about vaccine pushes and those governments it has allowed them to come out of the pandemic stronger and those regions have actually seen a decline in cases, contrary to what my opponent says.

Again, quickly on innovative, yes I do not have a specific example, just think about it you have such a wide variety of governments that are all trying different strategies and eventually they work up to the state level.

She said that herself and that's exactly what I'm saying, you're going to have these policies move up to the state and federal level to find the most effective one.

Yes you can have states finding different strategies, but imagine how many more different strategies you can have with the different local regions.

So remember there's a greater flexibility in the local government that allows them to actually address the issues at hand.

- Masha, Kalina, thank you very much for that fantastic debate.

This is the championship round.

Let's go now to our illustrious panel and get their thoughts on what they saw.

Dominic?

- Alan thank you very much, Masha, Kalina, when we designed the 2021 tournament, we crossed our fingers that it was going to turn out well and that it's going to come to a great culmination championship and you have delivered.

This has been a fantastic debate, one that is literally happening all over the state of Colorado, but I'm not sure if it has ever happened this eloquently.

Both of you did a fantastic job.

But as you know it is not over, time for some questions.

Eric let's start with you, your first question for Masha.

- Sure thanks Dominic, and just wow.

How impressive.

Masha since you argued the affirmative, the Denver Metro area as an example.

There are seven counties here, and people move back and forth, on a daily, hourly basis at will.

How would it work in a metropolitan area such as where we live and to have seven different sets of policies, seven different standards?

- Well I think it is possible to achieve that because like I said in my case, there are areas that are like 10 minutes apart and they have a large surge in cases, whereas on the other hand, you do not have that.

We still see that trend in searches even when people are moving back and forth and I think it is realistic to allocate more resources to the areas that actually need it because that allows for better distribution and we can actually begin to address that specifically the areas that are suffering worse from the pandemic.

- Marianne your turn for your question for Masha.

- Thank you, great job the both of you, really really enjoyed it.

Masha, what about counties that refused to implement any kind of mandate of their own?

Do we just tell them that thanks a lot, you are on your own?

And we do have a lot of counties that are not following these mandates.

- Yeah I do think yes there will be counties that do not follow those mandates but remember we are not saying that we are completely letting go state control, we are just saying that local is much more important it needs to begin at the local level and to the point that we do not see that working, we can begin to turn to the state for that.

Local is just where we should start because there is such a variety of situations and one size does not fit all.

- Kalina your turn for some questions, Eric your question for Kalina?

- Yes Kalina, let's for the sake of this discussion, pretend that we were sitting in Texas instead of in Colorado.

Where instead of having an aggressive state response, and more mixed local response, the situation is reversed in major cities there, Dallas, Harris County, Houston, Austin have taken aggressive measures while the state has been very much hands off.

How does that translate to your theory that state control is superior?

- The case of Texas here is certainly unfortunate, where the state has taken a hands-off approach but fortunately, we can see that states, according to education, are actually four times more likely to implement these masked mandates than to pursue policies like Texas where they are banned or not implemented at all.

- Marianne, your question for Kalina.

- Thanks very much, Kalina, you talk a lot about universal compliance.

But, mask mandates, vaccine mandates do not ensure universal compliance.

So, in many rural counties, even some urban ones we are seeing this.

How do you address that as a statewide issue?

- So universal compliance is a really key issue in today's round.

Because unfortunately when power is turned over to the county from the state level, we lose a lot of the essential reforms that we need right now and a lot of the restrictions that can really only be implemented at the state level because of the power the governor has compared to the mayor are lost.

- Masha, Kalina, you have done a lot of work over this entire season, especially for this debate, it is now time for the three of us to do some hard work to figure out who won this fantastic debate.

Alan, give us as much time as you possibly can.

- I will go slowly.

We will give our illustrious panel a moment to figure out who won this debate, who is our champion.

That gives us a moment to let you know that while our 2021 tournament ends tonight, you can catch up on any past episodes on PBS 12.org and maybe learn something.

If you miss any of these episodes, you get to see them and meet our debaters.

Do yourself a favor and check them out.

You will not regret it.

It has been a terrific year on this program.

All right Dominic, who is this year's 2021 both sides winner?

- There is no hyperbole here folks.

This is a very difficult job for us, but I just first want to begin with what an honor it has been to watch both of you on the season and to have it culminate in this debate.

This is why we do the show and the two of you have shown that while both of you did a fantastic job, it is our job to pick a winner and to name a champion of the 2021 season.

Kalina we decided that you are the champion based on a couple of things, one very effective question, both answering and giving them during your cross-examination.

Your answers during rebuttal and just really great work.

Both of you did a fantastic job, but Kalina congratulations.

- And I fully enjoyed debating over the issue without the color of political commentary to go with it.

But good factual debate.

Well done by the both of you, Kalina, Masha, I appreciate it very much.

Now you are the champion of our 2021 tournament.

What a wonderful debate we both had, really just all of us in this room had a terrific time watching and listening and learning from all of you.

You should both be very proud.

It's all the time we have for our program tonight, I want to thank our excellent students and our esteemed illustrious panel and I want to thank you for tuning in.

It is the support of viewers like you and our sponsors that helps to make this show a reality.

You can catch up on past episodes of this program on PBS 12.org and you can catch me on CBS4all of the latest news and information impacting Colorado as well.

For everyone here at PBS, I am Alan Gionet thank you for watching and that is Both Sides of the Story.

[Music]