City Inside/Out: Council Edition - August 2018

Hello, I'm your host, Brian Calinan.

What's next for the Showbox Theater after a city council vote to save it temporarily from the wrecking ball?

Can Seattle DOT come through on the council's request for a bike lane network downtown in the next two years?

And is the Key Arena renovation plan on track with a big vote coming up in September?

Council members Deborah Juarez and Mike O'Brien answer these questions and the ones you're sending in, too, next on Council Edition.

Who decides what's cultural?

Who decides what is the soul of our city?

Public investment in sports facilities needs to be minimal.

All that and more, coming up next on City Inside Out, Council Edition.

And here we are with Councilmember Debra Juarez, Councilmember Mike O'Brien.

Thank you very much for joining me here.

I want to jump right into this.

A big vote not long before we are taping the show regarding the Showbox Theater at First and Pike.

And Mike, I'll start with you here.

The council voted unanimously to temporarily make this part of the Pike Place Historic District as a way to preserve it.

So, Ani Group, the developers who bought this property, had plans to tear it down, part of a high-rise housing development they're working on.

I want to start the discussion by asking why you voted the way you did.

Then we'll dive into some of the issues.

Mike?

Well, Seattle's growing and changing rapidly.

And one of the things that we have to balance as a council or as a city is the policy of how much change is OK and what are the things we need to preserve.

And it's not an easy decision to make.

And frankly, this is an issue that comes up all the time.

Every time a building, a home or whatever is being torn down, we often hear from folks that are struggling with it.

The Showbox has a unique history in the city of Seattle.

And it's certainly, you know, obviously the music industry is a huge part of our city and our reputation nationally and internationally.

And much broader than that, though, it united the community in a way that we hadn't seen in a while.

It said, hey, what can we do about this?

Oftentimes, when it comes to preservation, there's not a lot we can do.

Someone can nominate for landmarks, which happened.

But in this case, being adjacent to Historic District, there was an opportunity for us to make a pretty swift decision that we still don't know what the long-term result will be, but it gives us some time and some leverage to work with the property owner, developer, others to say, hey, we really want to preserve this, and we have some tools to do that.

Let's see what we can come up with.

Debra, your thoughts on this.

Why did you vote the way you did?

Well, and I said a lot of this on the dais yesterday, and I want to thank Council Member O'Brien for supporting me on my words and my comments.

Mine was more of an overall philosophical point of view, whether we're talking about the Historical Commission, the Pike Place Market PDA, whether we're talking about OPCD, SDCI, the Design Commission, all these groups.

But I think what I was getting at is who decides what's cultural?

Who decides what is the soul of our city?

Who decides what's worth preserving?

And I would say that those boards and those commissions were made and kept out people of voices, particularly indigenous people.

And the point I was making was that this is indigenous land.

And we have been intently and inherently and deliberately scrubbed from the city's history, if not the state, and we fought hard to come back.

And I guess my kind of feeling was, it's nice that you're all here for the show box.

That's great.

I'm not for or against it.

I think it's great that the community got together, and I understand that.

But it comes down to a value system, and who we are as Seattle, Chief Seattle.

And, you know, we have the emblem of the chief, which, by the way, is a Plains Indian, not a coastal Indian.

We have the poles down at Steinberg Park, which are not traditional coastal salvage poles.

So I was getting at a bigger picture.

And so I was asking those same people out there that when you value culture, when you value history, you need to look at the indigenous people that were here since time immemorial.

I was just struck by people saying, oh, I remember my first concert here, or I was here 20 years ago.

And I think all that's fine, but imagine a whole group of people where this is indigenous land where that is not represented.

Yeah, that's a much larger historical perspective, and it's very important.

Yes, thank you.

Mike, I want to try to dive into the what happens next piece here if we can, and it gets a little complicated.

I want to draw on your work as vice chair of the Planning, Land Use, and Zoning Committee.

I know this property has been approved for upzoning for a taller building twice by the city council since 2006. Erica C. Barnett wrote about this in her column and what she sees as a precedent being set here.

I'm going to read this piece.

The council has shown that they will overturn major land use policy decisions that took years to develop in response to concerted public pressure from vocal interest groups without regard for whether doing so violates the spirit of prior land use policies that resulted from lengthy and often hard-fought public processes.

I think we can all agree the Showbox is a great venue.

I've been to shows there.

I've played at shows there, too.

But are you sacrificing the city's agenda to add more density in our growing city and trying to save it?

You know, it's a fair question, and I think Erica raises some good points there.

we're, we're developing a lot of properties in the city.

And if on every single property that was being done, something was being torn down and we said, no, we can't do this.

We got to revisit it.

Um, then I would say, yeah, the, you know, that would be totally counter to our objective.

But again, it's pretty rare that there's both the outpouring of support to preserve, um, not necessarily a building, but a, a, a business and an interior that's been so special.

Yeah.

Cause it's unreinforced masonry building too.

Right.

There's some other dangerous.

Yeah.

And so an outpouring and something that we can do.

Generally, when a property is zoned to do something, someone goes in and gets a permit, we change the zoning, it's too late.

Because of the historical district and the nature of what was adjacent to it, it gave us some flexibility we typically don't have.

So it's a fair criticism.

I think on a one-off of this, that one building that may or may not get developed now in the overall scheme of things, it really doesn't change the long-term trajectory of the city.

You know, another point to raise, too, is, you know, in an ideal world, we would go out and inventory all of the great cultural icons we want to keep, have that debate in advance, and then, you know, mark them.

And we've done that in part.

We've done different inventories of properties.

But it's hard to tell.

And until something's threatened, you don't know if folks are going to come together and say, no way.

This is one step too much at this moment in time.

And that's what we heard, and we responded to that.

And I think that's a fair thing to respond to.

10-month period in motion to study the historical preservation of this building.

But I'm trying to look at this idea of trying to keep it as a music venue.

My worry is that Ani, the buyer, could pull out of the deal.

They don't like it.

Then the property owner sues the city.

That happens sometimes.

And then two years from now, the show box could shut down anyway when the lease doesn't get renewed.

Help me out with this part because trying to convince someone to keep a business use a certain thing, that's difficult for a council to do.

And that's the thing, is the landmark will protect the brick and mortar.

The historical will protect what's, doesn't necessarily protect what's going on inside.

So while we have the spirit and the soul of the showbox, we are gonna have to grapple with this issue, not just the brick and mortar, but the music activity inside.

Can it really physically stay there, number one?

And number two, how do we protect it to keep what you heard all of the people in the community saying yesterday in public comment?

And that is something why I am thankful for Councilmember Bagshaw and some of my other colleagues that, like, let's just slow this down a bit.

Let's try to work with this group, this developer group.

Let's try to see how we can do this right.

This is what's great about democracy in the legislative branch, is that we have that community come to us and say, this is important to us.

And we, as a governing body, said we will do something about it.

It was never a us or them, like you're against the showbox or you're for the showbox.

It was how do we protect these type of venues and how does it really reflect Seattle?

OK, very important point.

Mike, yeah.

I agree with what Councilmember Juarez said there, and I think the reality is it may be that, you know, whether this deal goes forward or not is hard to tell.

We'll see.

But long-term, to preserve the showbox, you know, we may need additional resources, and we may need to see the community come together to essentially fund what it's going to take to keep the showbox operating and do the improvements that that building needs.

And the existing property owner may decide that that's not what I want to invest in.

And at that point, we're in a tough position.

But we also know that the music community does have resources.

And if this is the top priority to preserve music forever in Seattle at that venue, then we have some time to figure that out.

Great point.

Councilmember Juarez, I'm going to switch gears a little bit to another affordable housing issue, if I may, brought up in your district, D5.

You're trying to get some housing built near the Northgate light rail station.

There's been a delay in this process involving King County.

I know the county rejected a couple proposals that it studied.

The hope now is to donate land to a nonprofit developer, which is now allowed under state law.

I know the hope was to have housing in place when light rail opens at Northgate in 2021. Help me out with this.

Is this going to happen?

Well, I'm going to pivot a bit, and I'm not going to focus on what King County is going to do, but I will come back to that, and I'll tell you why in a minute.

Light Rail has transformed District 5. It has transformed Northgate.

We, I can count on at least five or six, what I would call beacons of development, where we're really into the density, but we're also deep in working with the community about what D5 means at Northgate, which is Northgate Urban Center.

And I think this is something Michael Bryan has been working on for years, Council Member Bryan, is where we want to be the poster child for what transit-oriented development, transit-oriented housing, transit-oriented childcare.

I've been working closely with Simon Properties about how they're doing this redevelopment.

you know, 1,200 new units.

Then we have 1,200 units supposedly with the county.

And when I say five or six of my beacons in my ecosystem of D5, I'm talking about Northgate Mall.

I'm talking about Thornton Creek.

I'm talking about working with the Simon folks, working with the Wallace folks.

All these units coming together.

So what we have in this ecosystem and what we're trying to show is this kind of hub and spoke.

We have these hot spots of growth because light rail's coming in.

And so that is the shape of things to come.

Community is now involved.

It isn't like the old days.

Like last night, we had one of the first meetings where the developers, private and nonprofit, are hearing from the community what they want.

So what we know, and this is to Simon's credit, the hotel, the park, 1,200 units, green space.

Pools, all sorts of stuff.

different modes of transportation and a grocery store.

So what we're saying in, besides density and D5, which is my new hashtag, is that we want people to be able to live and work right where they're at.

And I don't know if you heard KUOW this morning, but one of the lines I heard that I absolutely love is that we're bringing the city to the North End, where you can go there, you can drop your kids off, you can get on light rail, you can get downtown in 12 minutes, you can come home, You can go pick up your groceries, you can pick up your kid, and you can go home.

So we want to be that poster child.

We have other groups looking.

We're going to do it right.

And so when we have that second stop, 130th, we've already started those charrettes.

So people are starting to see that we are committed to sitting down with the community and telling the developer, this is what, you're looking at the demographic of a D-5.

This is what we need.

Mike, just your observations of this from your land use perspective about what's happening on the north end right now.

Councilmember Juarez is absolutely right and we've known for a number of years that Northgate was going to be a critical investment.

Way back when Sound Transit was getting federal grant money for it, I think it was the best scoring transit project in the country because the ridership projections showed what will happen there and we are now just a few years away from that becoming a reality and it's great.

Everything we see so far is that we're right on.

In an ideal world, we would have that housing up and running in advance, and a lot of the other things happening.

I think that the specifics around the affordable housing we want to see, it's as close as we can get it to opening as possible.

Capitol Hill, that station opened a couple years ago, and we're just getting off the ground on the affordable housing.

And so, you know, that's gonna be ultimately a four or five year delay.

And hopefully at Northgate, we're talking months instead of years.

Because we need the affordable housing and right next to light rail is the absolute right place to do it.

And if I could just follow up, because I know Councilman O'Brien has been working on these different modes of transportation.

That's what you've been dedicating yourself to.

One of the things is we're getting people to start thinking that, you know, transportation is part and parcel of housing.

which is part and parcel of having all the good things in a neighborhood, sidewalks, green space, parks, all of those things, so that we're just not limiting to people to a particular zip code where only the good stuff is there.

And that I also like, too, that we have this whole generation of people that don't want cars.

And I think that that's great.

And as far as the 12, so we'll have 1,200 units at Northgate.

They're moving away from the mall model, if you will.

We're doing the 1,200 units, hopefully, with the county.

I know that they pulled back the RFP.

As you know, I'm not happy about that, but I'm going to work with the county and make that happen because we want to look at 60% AMI to get affordable homes in there, two and three bedrooms.

The RFP that went out, I got to look at the executive summaries and the responses and they were phenomenal.

I spent a whole day with Speaker Chopp and other elected leaders and everyone you can imagine.

up at Northgate with the community to say this is who we are, this is what we want if you're going to build 1,200 units.

Okay, thank you for that.

Mike, I'm going to jump back to you and talk about some of the transportation issues that Councilmember Juarez was mentioning here, specifically a bike issue.

The council unanimously approved a resolution calling on SDOT to complete a connected bike work downtown by the end of 2019. I know this is non-binding, but I think you're trying to send a message of sorts to SDOT.

Tell me about that.

You know, we made a commitment as a city to make sure that all road users are safe.

You know, whether you drive, take transit, walk, or bike.

We've committed to what's called Vision Zero.

It's a national movement.

By the year 2030, we want no fatalities of any road user and no serious injuries.

We're not there.

We're one of the safer cities in the country, but we still have way too many serious accidents and fatalities.

And so to get there, we have to make safety investments throughout the city.

We've done a lot of investments in bike infrastructure out in the neighborhoods and a few downtown.

But what I hear too often from folks who want to get from one place to another is, I can't get safely from where I live to where I work or where I'm going to school.

And the biggest constraint is downtown because it's downtown, right?

The roads are packed.

There's a ton of transit on it.

The sidewalks are full.

I mean, there's just not a lot of space.

But if we can't make that commitment to make those connections for bike users, then we will fail the entire network.

And we hear from the community is we've missed the mark too many times.

And so hopefully with this resolution and the work of SDOT, we'll see significant improvements in the next 18 months.

Debra, let me bring in here because I think a big issue underlying the spike network that Mike's talking about is the fact that a majority of people in our city voted for the Move Seattle levy in 2015. Sure did.

$930 million over nine years.

Right.

It's the biggest one we've ever had.

The plan was to build infrastructure like these bike lanes, more sidewalks, up in D5 for that matter.

I'm just trying to figure out your message to SDOT, to the public, as the city continues to really grapple with these transportation issues, and your district too.

well you know we have the the we pass move seattle is nine hundred thirty million over nine years and customer herbal yesterday along with you uh...

did customer o'brien uh...

do you do the amendment to add some accountability rest on on those funds which i was happy to see because um...

it it isn't just bike lanes and it isn't just sidewalks uh...

it is about what uh...

move seattle stood for a walkable city pedestrian friendly not only for people who are on bikes or who are able, but also for the disabled and the elderly and around schools.

So for me, I think that there was an accountability issue about how we spend the Move Seattle money with SDOT.

So I commend what Councilmember Herbold and Councilmember O'Brien were pushing, that those systems have to be complementary of each other.

We have to know what's going on.

And if it were up to me in a different universe, I would also have SPU in there and a few other city agencies because when SNOT takes on all these projects and they have, as Councilmember Herbold told us, $150 million, I can see where a lot of that would, we would need that in my district.

And I mean, it's citywide, it isn't just about D5, but that's where I would like to see more community involvement worth that kind of money, particularly around community centers, malls, stores and schools.

Well, let's switch gears if I can, Councilmember Juarez, to Key Arena.

New estimate from the developer, Oakview Group, the renovation project is now going to cost $700 million.

It's up about $100 million, but I want to make sure I'm clear with this.

That cost is the developer's responsibility, not taxpayers.

I am trying to figure out what's next here, and I'm going to read this from Kevin Schofield at SEC Insight.

He writes this.

OVG, Oakview Group, and the city have been working diligently on the community benefits packages to build support for the project and reduce the groups likely to try to block it.

Nevertheless, it would be surprising if there were no appeals at all.

I know the hope is to have a vote this September on this project.

I'm trying to figure out if that timeline is still accurate, knowing there's a big environmental impact statement coming out in just a few weeks here.

Yes, we are online to be in committee on September 14th, hopefully get it out to a vote on September 17th.

We will be looking at, as I've been looking at, as you know, the transaction documents, the lease agreement, development agreement, and the integration agreement.

And we anticipate a SEPA thing, and they should.

And that's how systems work.

And I'm fine with that.

That's okay.

The $700 million by OVG, that's their burden, that's their responsibility.

They are also responsible for the cost overruns.

As you know, they put $40 million into a transportation fund.

They have voluntarily agreed to participate in MHA, mandatory housing affordability, at the tune of $2.5 million.

And I think it's important to note that in the development zone, the redevelopment zone, there are 10 tenants we have.

But OVG has also been working with the people who are outside of the development zone, I believe 11 entities.

And that's Seattle Children's Theater, Seattle Science Center, KXEP, SIF, and all these groups.

So we have two bandwidths going here where they're trying to work with all of these community groups to see what they need.

So my focus has been this, and it continues to be this.

I want to make sure that my colleagues, Council Member O'Brien, is okay with the transportation plan.

That the integration agreement comes out and talks about the public benefits.

The public benefits are in all three documents.

And there's my understanding from the negotiation piece of why they did that is they wanted to be specific to each one of them.

because there's different responsibilities.

But my big mantra has been, and I will continue to be, and I was kind of building off what Councilmember O'Brien did in one of your groups when you went over the public benefits and redoing what that means for street vacations.

Because in 2018, it's a lot different than what it looked 10 years ago.

That public benefits have to be shared citywide.

I think it's great that OVG put out $40 million and 20 of it will go to youth care.

But I think it's really, really important.

I'm sorry, if they put out 20 million, 10 will go to youth care.

We have another 10 there.

Putting together a giving council.

But my point is this, that this is a regional asset, and the public benefit should be spread far and wide, not, I mean, in the city of Seattle.

Yes, we're going to look at those transportation impacts.

We've got to move 22,000 people in and out.

We've got to look at the mobility action plan.

We've got to look at how we work with the monorail, how we work with Metro, how we're going to use different apps for parking.

And I keep saying this and some people think that I'm being really frank here.

It's not OVG's job to take care of every transportation issue there.

That's just not their job.

Yes, are they going to mitigate all that?

Absolutely.

Are we going to push for the hardest deal to make sure we get all those people in and out?

Absolutely.

But they really want to nail down what it is to have a world-class arena at no taxpayer where we handle the transportation piece.

And that's what my focus has been.

Mike, let me have you weigh in here.

The public benefits are a huge piece of this.

You mentioned how the developer is going to be helping with mitigating transportation projects.

I want to bring this up because the transportation committee you chair, that's one of them, and also you voted no when the initial memorandum of understanding was produced for this project last year.

Looking at the benefits, what's happened over the past few months here, are you feeling more supportive of this project?

I am.

And I think there's a lot we don't know yet.

And as you mentioned in your question, there's going to be a final EIS issued in the coming weeks, and followed upon that, other mitigation efforts, and then a vote in September.

So it's moving pretty swiftly.

But I want to work towards getting on board.

The two concerns I have and had last fall were concerns about transportation, a lot of work being done on that, and then concerns about the music industry, which gets back to the show box.

And it goes a little bit beyond this project, but just the reality in the music industry in our country right now is there's two major players that are monopolizing a lot of the shows.

And I heard from a lot of local artists, especially smaller ones who aren't big enough to sign up to the big guys, that they're really concerned about will they ever have access to just making a living being a musician.

I think there's been some good work done to support that.

There's a lot to be seen yet on the transportation issue, and I'll be really plugged in on that.

And specifically, the world's changing how we get around.

And as I want to see that this project and all the other projects from the city are trying to anticipate a kind of whole new transportation hierarchy that's coming.

And I don't even know what it looks like.

But you know, the change we've seen in the last few years have been dramatic, and I imagine we're gonna see a lot more.

If I can just follow up because I wanted people to know that I really appreciated Councilmember O'Brien's concerns because he is more of an expert on the transportation piece than myself and we worked hard to make we incorporated that in the MOU and focused hard with Councilmember Bagshaw and my co-chair, Council President Harrell.

But getting back to the, I have two columns, the inside people that are in the redevelopment zone and the outside groups.

And so my conversations with the executive, the people who are negotiating, and some of the OVG folks are, and we've said this and they have delivered, is that, and I've been saying this for the last 10 or 11 months, is that you need to work with KXAP, and they are.

You need to work with the Vera Project, and they are.

You need to work with SIF, and you need to work with the school district, and the Pacific Science Center, and even some of the neighboring apartments that they've worked with.

And I'll just be frank.

It's basically cutting deals.

It's like, what do we need to do to alleviate your concerns and your issues about parking, transportation, and when we have these events?

Because the long game is, if they can nail an NHL team, the long game is, then they can bring in another

Right.

Team.

Another franchise.

Yeah.

She's not saying the Sonics word.

I'll say it.

I just said it.

All right.

Well, thank you for that.

A lot still happening there.

I'm going to try to pick up the pace a little bit here.

Mike, another arena or maybe a stadium issue here.

King County is considering spending $180 million in lodging tax revenue on improvements at Safeco Field.

You and some other council members are saying, wait a minute, time to invest more in affordable housing.

What's going on here?

You know, I think the model of what we're doing at KeyArena and what we're considering down in Soto too, public investment in sports facilities needs to be minimal.

So public resources right now, we have a lot of priorities and frankly, You know, owner's suites and concession stands are not the top priority, and I really want to see the county use public resources.

If they have $180 million of tax revenue they can get, that should go towards affordable housing, and the baseball team and whoever's running Safeco Field should pay the other parts.

I should say that I agree with Councilmember O'Brien and when I had started this job and I had an opportunity to read the first report on ArenaCo and I went and read other studies in my former life, arenas don't make money for taxpayers.

They lose money.

And so, you know, if you're going to put out $180 million, then we need to we need to have what our priorities straight.

But again, I don't want to finger wag at the county.

Council Member O'Brien and some others sent a letter over on August 6 to the county and I did not sign that letter as did four of my other colleagues.

And it wasn't that I'm against it, it's just that I found it redundant.

We've been saying this for how long?

Mayor Murray declared a state of emergency with homelessness in 2015. That letter didn't really add any more.

They know that 75% of the homeless people in King County live in the city of Seattle.

It's what we are harking back to.

Help us take care of our people because they're your people as well.

I think that letter will spur some discussion at the very least for the King County Council.

So thank you very much for that back and forth.

Council Member Juarez, I want to talk a little bit about Tiny House Village up in Licton Springs, low barrier shelter for the homeless.

It's going to see some changes, including some increased security there.

What's happening there?

What do you want neighbors to know?

Well, we've been working really closely before the project started, during the project, low barrier, working very closely with Sharon Lehigh.

One thing I loved about what Licton Spring folks came to us with a list of concerns.

They had eight of them.

We dealt with seven of them.

We have 24-hour surveillance.

We have a social worker there now.

And the main thing was is we wanted to focus on the people that are actually homeless on Aurora, which is a perennial issue.

That's not brand new.

That's been going on since the 60s and 70s, and it's gotten worse.

So our hope is, as we build density and we look at what developers are doing, that money goes to taking care of Aurora-Licton Springs and other tiny house villages.

I'm not gonna let go of the fact that the District 5 does not have year-round housing for men.

We only have Mary's Place, which is fine, but we have a whole population of people that are living in the North End, and we're gonna get the LEAD program in there.

We got that in the budget last year, which is great, but we're trying to build that in the budget again for brick and mortar to actually have staff in there for the LEAD program, working with Lisa Dugard in the Public Defender's Office.

But my point was this, and this goes back to why I ran for office.

The North End has not been represented, and they needed a voice to say, we have homelessness, we have drug issues, we have opioid overdoses, we have all of these issues, and these social issues need to be addressed.

And so what I've been pushing for with the last, I don't know, five mayors, is that we need brick and mortar in D5 where you have people there who are part of LEAD and part of the group to go out to work with our homeless population.

We don't have that.

that.

Mike Curveball for you.

A tweet from one of our viewers.

Joe asked this.

How can the council keep order with Alex Zimmerman running amok spewing racism during public comment, thought he was banned.

Furthermore, if Seattle has cures for this, will they push for statewide reforms to the OPMA, the open public meetings act.

I know the council has seen plenty of disruptions.

How do you deal with that?

I just wanted to ask.

I'll tell you how I deal with it.

When you have just one or two repeat that and he's not just at city council meetings, he's at all the meetings we're at throughout the region.

My approach is, you know, just keep your head down.

He gets his one minute or two minutes and move on and when he crosses a line we ban him and it escalates.

Last time I think it was nine months and now he's back.

Fair enough.

I wanted to make sure I asked that.

It's a trade-off for the right to free speech.

It is.

A ten second version to wrap up the show because we're right here.

What are your budget priorities for this fall?

I know you're going to be thinking about it while you're on recess the next couple weeks.

Debra, you first.

Try to make it short, please.

First of all, let me just say this.

I've kicked Mr. Zimmerman out three times, and I will continue to do that when he is misogynistic, racist.

anti-semitic.

That is no place in the civil discourse.

I'm an attorney.

That is not what the First Amendment says.

So I'll just leave that there.

Fair enough.

Leave it there.

My budget priorities are this.

We're building our Lake City Community Center.

We've been working with the state on the money, so we're excited about that.

We are doing something really exciting right now, working with South Seattle Community College and North Seattle Community College.

We want to replicate an apprenticeship program, and we're working with the trades and the unions.

We've been down there working with them.

so we can get our kids, Nathan Hale and Ingram, into the Promise Program that the mayor put together so they can go to North Seattle College.

It's about trades, it's about building, construction, welding, building stuff with your hands.

That's what's happening, that's my next big thing.

Briefly, if you can, budget priorities.

Ten seconds.

Housing, homelessness.

Okay.

We need to see something bold in this budget from the mayor's office.

I look forward to her reveal in about six weeks because we need more investments, we need smart investments, and we gotta solve this crisis.

Thank you very much, both of you, for your time here.

We'll see you next time on Council Edition.