Hi, good evening.

It's Mayor Gaskin.

Hi, Mayor Gaskins.

Good evening.

Do we?

So I am still in the car, unfortunately.

I can't see everyone.

Do we uh have Councilman Kirk McPike?

He's absolutely here.

Wonderful.

Well, then I am going to turn it over to Councilman McPyke to uh kick us off and to facilitate the meeting.

Thank you, uh Mayor Gaskins for this uh confidence in me.

I will try not to train wreck the entire meeting.

Um don't mess it up before you leave us.

But I will I will take that.

Uh if I'm facilitating the meeting, does that mean the mayor needs to move the minutes approval?

Probably.

Yeah.

So could I get a motion to approve the minutes of the uh last meeting of the legislative subcommittee?

So moved.

Second.

Um all in favor.

Aye.

Aye.

All right.

The meetings are approved.

Uh uh, Dr.

Ginsberg, would you like to give us your um uh update on the events of the last week?

Sure.

Um thanks, Councilwoman McPike and Mayor Gaskins.

Um I just want to start by saying thank you to everybody on this call for doing lots of work as I send you rush requests for information on bills.

I really appreciate it.

Um just so you know some of the things that have been going on in Richmond this past week.

I wanted to give you an update on a couple of bills.

One is the Faith in Housing Bill.

Um, and we've been doing a lot of work negotiating with our uh with other stakeholders and the patron on this bill.

This bill would allow for basically the the buyright development of housing on um certain uh on uh property that's owned by religious organizations or certain qualifying nonprofit entities.

Um we've worked closely with patrons in both the House and Senate on this bill as well as stakeholders.

Um and so uh we got our amendments in there and uh both version or uh it was considered in cities or county cities and towns subcommittee this week on Thursday morning, and we testified in support of the bill.

And ultimately the bill was amended to add an enactment clause, which means that the House and Senate versions are not gonna match in the end.

It's gonna slow down whether this bill can actually get enacted.

Um I talked with one of the stakeholder groups today.

They're gonna send us potentially uh follow-up language on this to see if we can come to a deal and keep moving forward on this faith in housing bill.

Um, but it looks like it might be hitting a little bit of a bumpy road right now.

Um the second thing I wanna pick up on is the mask related bills.

Now, these are the bills related to whether um immigration enforcement can wear masks um when they're performing their duties.

Uh the city testified in support of Senator Salim's bill, SB 352.

Um, after the patron worked with us really hard to make sure that APD and the rest of the city were comfortable with some of the uh prescriptive restrictions that have been placed on them.

So one of the things we might want to do this meeting is change from officially change our position from uh watch to support uh to make sure that we do support this bill because of all the amendments that have been made to it.

Um so we we did already testify in support of this bill because they made amendments that allowed for undercover officers to wear masks when they were needing to wear masks.

Um they made it so that if it's really cold below 32 degrees, you could wear a mask, and they made other amendments as well.

And they also struck a sovereign immunity clause that was problematic for other uh other um cities and localities as well.

So that bill um actually got out of uh out of committee, and uh we're watching that bill and its uh House counterparts as well.

And the House and Senate counterparts are cognates, so they're gonna make sure that they match up as they move through um between the chambers and they go to crossover when the House bills go to the Senate and the Senate bills go to the House.

Uh the next one I want to talk about is uh skill games.

Uh there's House and Senate bills on skill games.

Now, these bills actually would regulate skill games in the state.

So we outright oppose them and we made that clear to the patrons because our legislative direction is that we we just oppose skill games altogether.

Uh on the House side, the bill hasn't moved yet, but on the Senate side, SB661 was amended this week, but not in a way that would satisfy the fact that we just don't want skill games going on in the Commonwealth.

Um when SB661 was considered in uh the Senate General Laws and Technology Committee, uh the city provided written testimony to the members from um Councilman uh Guray, who talked about uh a member of the city who was actually using these skill games, and he found he wasn't even making money when he was he was a business owner and he had these skill games in his business, wasn't making any money, and he actually got arrested for using the illegal skill games, even though he thought he was using the the legal ones.

So the confusing uh schema and the confusing laws actually ensnared him and he wasn't making any money anyway.

It was a very compelling written testimony.

I also brought it up um orally that day as well.

Um the bill did the bill has since been re-referred to finance and appropriations.

I want to say that Senator Evan did ask a lot of really pointed questions, and the bill did not get out of committee uh unscathed.

There was actually more votes against it, but it did get re-referred to finance and appropriations.

We'll continue watching that bill.

Um the next one I want to talk about is uh the bicycle safety legislation.

Uh Vice Mayor Bagley actually testified virtually in support of HB uh of the bicycle safety omnibus legislation.

Um she did a fabulous job on the safety bill on January 28th.

Her testimony underscored the city's strong support for policies that improve safety for cyclists and advance multimodal transportation.

Um then, oh, the last one I actually want to point out is HB 806, which is um industrial development authorities, which would authorize industrial development authorities like our own AEDP to exercise powers uh to uh work on multifamily residences and promote safe and affordable housing across the commonwealth.

Um this bill was reported out of uh county cities and towns subcommittee on Wednesday and passed full committee today.

So those are the like big ones that we've been tracking and working on.

Oh, I forgot about speed cameras.

Um I do want to uh update you on speed cameras.

Now, February 10th is going to be a big day where they're gonna uh work on automated uh automated safety or automated speed enforcement.

So last bills, last week two bills that would have outright banned safety uh automated speed enforcement got through in the Senate Transportation Committee by a one vote margin.

But we've been actively working with the House side legislators to make sure that we have a bill that would move forward that would put guardrails on the use of these automated speed enforcement mechanisms, so that we can demonstrate that we are good stewards of this authority and that uh these actually do benefit our efforts to um manifest vision zero, make our community safer, make our sidewalk safer, make it safer to walk to schools.

Um so we are working to make sure that we are getting the patrons uh on board with the fact that we are great stewards.

What data do they want to see from us to show that we are good stewards of this um technology?

Uh we know that uh the patron of the bills that were have outright banned speed cameras has decided that he is making amendments to those bills.

Um we remain res remain focused on resolving the remaining issues of those bills, working across different localities, and we're hoping to come to some sort of um agreement as soon as we can, definitely before February 10th.

Um so we have a little bit of time and runway to get that done.

I think those are the updates that I have on bills, unless you have questions, Mayor Gaskins or Councilman McPike.

No, I mean, the the Yigby bill is definitely one we wanted to hear about, um, as well as the the skill game.

So I appreciate you uh highlighting those.

Um let's see here.

Um I do have a quick question, Councilman McCain, before you move forward.

Yeah.

Um, I guess I just wanted to follow up on the comment about Senator Selim's bill.

I would be in support of moving us from watch to support.

So just wanted to make sure we moved on that.

I also would be interested in, I think we have a very strong, like active transportation um council.

And so once we know the schedule for February 10th, I think we should see if there's a member of the council who could speak to those bills and you know, really speak to and provide examples of some of the ways that we have been good stewards of funds.

But I think that's that that's an easy one for us to testify on.

And I think any member of the council would probably be a good speaker on that.

Agreed.

Um, that's a really big one for us to make sure that we're vocal on because we are such a good steward.

We have great data, and we can demonstrate the improvements that we made that have really contributed to uh making vision zero reality.

So, yes, definitely.

And then the only other question I had, so I know primarily in um on our Friday nights, we track specific pieces of legislation, but there are a lot of um budget uh things that are going on and things that we have people that are putting in for for the city.

I'm just curious if you could speak to like how is that process working as you guys are down in Richmond and sort of what are their key milestones or dates that we should know about the budget and be tracking.

So the budget, both the House and Senate budget and the budget amendments are out.

Uh, we have uh budget amendments from both Senator Evan and from uh delegate Elizabeth Bennett Parker.

Both of them are carrying a work group that would look at the locally subsidized state employees question.

Uh and both of them have a Freedom House uh ask for $2 million uh for the biennium.

And then uh delegate Bennett Parker is also carrying our ask for uh UASI funding, which is the um national security funding as well.

I think that's 24.2 million dollars over the biennial or 24 20 24.2 or 24.4, but I think it's actually 12.2 over each year or so.

Um so uh we have been starting our negotiations on those bills, working across the our different localities uh to make sure that they are on board, they are aware.

I will say that work groups are huge for uh huge for localities across the commonwealth.

So um I did outreach today to make sure that everybody's aware of our work group effort so that we're all on board and we're all uh working toward the same goal.

Um in terms of the calendar for those budget budget requests, uh Sarah, do you know when the dates are?

I could pull up the calendar for the uh the year, but do you know when the dates are for when the uh the budget actually moves through?

Yeah, so budget Sunday, which is not like Super Bowl Sunday, but sort of is for us, um, is actually hang on, I'm looking at my calendar.

Budget Sunday is February 8th, I believe.

Um that is what oh, maybe it's the 15th.

Um But yeah, it's the it's one of the it's kind of in that in that time frame.

Um that is the Sunday when each of the bodies um produces their um their version of the budget.

So right now what you see as HB30, HB 29 and HB 30 and SB29 and SB30, those are still the governor's budget.

Um and the budget amendments will then be laid upon that sort of base budget.

Things will be taken out, new things will be put in to get to the sort of you know, to where the math maths.

Um, and that is where we are negotiating on either side in both bodies to hopefully get these things that we have flagged as budget amendments put into the um the Senate's version and the Senate's amended version and the House's amended version um of each of the um of the um of the bills.

So the budget season is a little bit staggered from um from uh policy season.

It's a little more delayed.

So we have a little bit more time.

J now is really when they start thinking about and looking at and um and sort of you know discussing amongst themselves as subcommittee members how they are going to prioritize the pot of money that is sort of in front of them based on um on the sort of basic framing of the budget.

Um so now is when we start the work to um you know find other friends to talk about the things that we care about, meet with the subcommittee members who are on the subcommittees um that are addressing our particular issues because the the first round of budget recommendations come from the subcommittees.

Um that's a really critical touch um for us to make to keep in touch with staff because a lot of the budget process is staff driven um and sort of work out from there to the general um you know money committees and um and uh to hopefully have our thing, our items um included and captured in the um in the budget process.

Um so I think one of the next things for us is to um is to work on our um our budget amendment uh lobbying.

Agreed.

And budget looks like budget Sunday is actually the February 22nd this year.

That's what I was saying.

Like I, as I said it, I was like budget Sunday is after crossover.

So like I said, it's it's slightly staggered from the the policy um schedule.

So yes, uh thank you for looking at that.

My brain was not braining.

Thanks, Sarah.

All right.

Um Mayor Gassons, anything else to discuss before we go into the spreadsheet for this week?

No, not at this time.

Okay.

Excellent.

Thank you.

So um I'm just gonna roll us through the spreadsheet.

Uh we've obviously passed uh the bill filing deadline because there's only 118 uh bills uh for us discuss this week.

So we'll probably go through most of them individually.

Um stragglers that came in from the new members who just came in and there might be some more new members who get some dispensation to introduce bills, so there will be a few more.

But yeah, there's a there's a handful of stragglers here at the end.

So I would just be real um conscious of making sure that we catch those last ones.

Um because they could be they could be weird.

So um just a flag for um for all of our that for all of our efforts.

Yep.

All right.

So um start out we had a couple of bills, uh three of them with no position um from the staff.

Do we have any uh any discussion about those from staff?

I did not have any questions uh about them, and I don't know if the mayor did either.

Most of those just had no direct impact on the city itself.

So that's why there's no position.

Great.

Then moving past them into the opposed bills.

Uh there's a handful here.

Mayor Gaston's did you have any um questions about any of the opposed bills.

Um I did not have any on the opposed.

I do just flag one.

I know I know we're all in conversation about this that seems to be flipping from watch to oppose to watch to oppose, but let's just keep making sure we're checking in on um the Marston bill.

And you know, as we get closer to whenever that's going to be heard, really um be clear about whatever our final position is.

But other than that, I didn't have questions on the opposed.

For calendaring purposes, I would expect that to be docketed for next Friday morning and rehab.

Yeah.

So um, you know, we're sort of at a a week out from whatever it looks like.

Um certainly be um be uh prepared to be um engaged um and thoughtful this week with a an eye towards what it looks like on Friday and what we want to do about it.

Okay, that sounds good.

Appreciate that.

There's also VML has a meeting on Tuesday as well on that bill.

Um, and I'll fill you in on what happens with those negotiations as well.

Mayor Gaskins.

Great.

Um so I was just a little curious.

I think I know what the the question is here, but HB 547 by Helmer.

Um it's related to private companies providing public transportation services, employee protections.

And uh I imagine Dash uh flags something on that one for us.

They they did.

I don't think Dash is on the call tonight.

Both Josh and Ray are both out of town, so they are not on the call tonight.

Um, but I think this is the cognate for the one that they discussed that Josh discussed last week.

Yeah, the Selene bill.

Okay.

Yeah.

Great.

Um does staff have any amongst the opposed bills that they would like to highlight for us.

All right.

Hearing none.

Um rolling down to the support bills.

Uh I let's see here.

Did I have any that I wanted to pull out specifically on the support bill?

Um yeah, I had I had one bill that I uh would would like to chat about on the on the supports.

Um, but just generally I wanted to note that we received a lot of public questions and comments regarding uh the package and people always want to see us lining up behind good legislation.

And I just want to highlight for the topics that are included in the bills that we were supporting this week.

Uh we have a lot of immigration um related bills that have been added to our support list this week uh in response to the bills that were dropped at the press conference uh two days ago.

We have bills in here about pedestrian bicycle safety.

We have bills in here about early childhood education services, uh, and there's bills in here about housing.

So the topics that you hear us talking about as we debate the legislative package, uh those broad uh thematic areas, those are definitely reflected uh in the bills that we are moving to support.

There's such obvious supports I don't personally feel the need to highlight any of them for discussion.

And I didn't know Mayor if you had any uh specific topics or bills here that you wanted to call out.

No, I would just say, I mean, I think it was interesting.

There were some even like early childhood related bills that earlier I think were in the watch and now are firmly in the support.

Um I think some of the things around like leave and um worker rights and some of our values around prevailing wage.

So I know I know the public alleged doesn't see kind of this massive spreadsheet and doesn't have a chance to go through all of them, but there are a lot of things in our legislative package that are moving over and are firmly in the support um bucket.

So thank you for raising that.

Yep.

Thank you.

The only bill I wanted to sort of pull out was SB 554.

I think it looks like a great bill.

Uh a reasonable.

I'm just curious.

It's about um basically local entities being able to uh have authority regarding high energy users coming into their um their their their locality.

I know what this bill is targeting and the uh issues in other parts of the Virginia that uh are are at play here.

Is there anything in Alexandria in terms of a high energy use sort of facility that we are thinking of?

Or are we just supporting this because it's a pervit permissive local authority?

I I think and I defer to um anyone else in the call who knows more about high energy use, but this we we do know what this is targeting, and this is more about the permissive authority.

Okay.

There were a lot of data, there were a lot of bills on this issue, and um some of some of them we tagged and some of them we didn't, but we always like permissive authority.

And um some of them we tagged and some of them we didn't, but we always like permissive authority.

No, I mean that that makes sense here.

Um that was the only thing I had.

Did staff have anything they wanted to make sure to highlight for the public that might be watching or each other uh regarding the support list of bills that we have here.

All right.

Not hearing anybody uh jumping up and up and down to to be called on here.

So let's move to the uh actually there was a there was one other bill that I wanted to pull up, which actually isn't on the list.

I think um Wendy, you and I talked about HB 912 earlier.

Where where were we on that one?

Yes.

So if you tell everybody what which one that is.

Yeah, HB 912 is a uh delegate Lopez bill.

It's a right to free public elementary and secondary education, uh, regardless of your immigration status.

And while that um that that is definitely under the penumbra and the umbrella of what what Alexandrians might uh want to endorse, uh it's not on your spreadsheet yet because I I hadn't clicked it because it wasn't specifically um noted in our legislative package.

It might was more toward the schools, but um I thought we would highlight it and consider putting it in, especially because it's a Lopez bill and um for consideration.

I mean Delegate Lopez filed a lot of really good uh bills this week related to immigration related topics in general.

Uh this one, I think ensuring that we're stating in law that uh immigration status is not something we're gonna use to determine uh access to public education in Virginia.

Uh I would be relatively supportive of adding that as a support uh position, but obviously I'd want to hear the mayor's thoughts.

Um no, I agree with moving that to support.

Okay.

Great.

So so and there was a lot of.

So Al Ponzo, he's got another one from us.

Yeah, sorry.

There's another bill, HB 1144, which we had some concerns about.

It's about water and sewer connection fees for first-time home buyers.

Um today in committee, that was moved from a shall to a May.

Um, and I recommend that we move from opposed to support on that because it's now permissive.

So changing the position.

Did we have any underlying concerns with the policy?

Was it simply the the imperative nature of it that was raising our our our hackles?

It was more about the um the cost of the of the bill than anything else.

And now that it's a uh it's a May, it should be fine.

I'm also happy to bring on Bonnie who helped me work through what language would make us okay with this bill.

Yeah, I'd be interested in hearing that.

Can you Bonnie?

Yeah.

What what exact bill numbers that I can pull that mine notes?

I'm sorry, I'm 1144.

It's HB 1144.

It's the one we talked about today where they moved it from a May to a shell or a shall to a May.

Okay.

Yes.

This was a great fix.

Um let me just unpull it up right now.

Sorry, there are so many bills to think about.

Um this bill basically said that we have now optional authority to provide for a reimbursement or waiver of sewer connection fees.

Some localities, including us and Fairfax had consternation originally because it had originally said that if any locality had already adopted an affordable dwelling unit ordinance, that we were required to waive those fees, and that would have had a pretty substantial financial impact for some localities.

So now that it's we may do that, we're comfortable.

Um the council could make that decision to do that if if this bill passes rather than being required to and lose potentially a substantial amount of of fees from that.

So that's the shortest explanation.

They just went and took the shallow into a May.

So we love that.

Um Madam Mayor, do you have any thoughts on on this one?

I guess I'm curious a little bit more, given like our existing ADU policy.

I guess is our position we're changing it so that it's more permissive for others, even though it doesn't affect us directly.

Or even with the change in language, we might see some impact.

I think it's that go ahead, Bonnie.

You want to take it?

Well, I would have to defer to step vote.

I don't know that we currently have such a waiver in place as part of our affordable dwelling unit policy.

I I'd have to defer.

So I think it it really is just the new authority that would clearly allow the council to decide to do that if they wanted to as part of that affordable dwelling unit policy.

It's not required to do anything anymore.

Okay.

I mean, I'm, I guess, given that I'm comfortable moving to support, recognizing that if we want to take up the authority, we'll have a full uh discussion at that time.

Yeah.

I think as long as it's clear that we're we're not committing the city to acting on any authority granted.

Um that's reasonable.

Sorry, chiming in from the side.

Just wanted to say this is Paul Stotterd, sorry.

Um it, Bonnie, it might be worth just taking another look at the exact language of the bill uh and how that might interact with some of our affordable housing code.

Um I want to make sure I'm looking at the right version, but um it looks like it might be optional for first-time home buyers, but but mandatory for anything that is using affordable housing densities.

That was the original version, Paul.

You're right.

But as of today, um Wendy sent around an amendment that maybe isn't on LIS yet that has line 46 where you may be reading the shall and turning it into a May.

So it's permissive for both first time and for affordable housing.

Yes.

Okay.

But yes, the line 46, which was the problematic shall became a May along with the first time home buyer section.

Yes.

That was sorry for catching up in real time.

No, that's good.

That's exactly we had the same reaction initially.

And it's so it's news that they changed that.

And and the only other one was HB 888, which we actually testified on today.

Um this one is about parking uh mandatory parking minimums.

And um, I don't know why, but we had it uh as a watch, but it should definitely be a support.

It's it's in line with uh all the values that we have in the city.

It it helps Vision Zero, it helps with climate.

Uh, we testified in support of it today, and I just want to make sure that it's official that we go from um watch to support on that one.

Well, I mean, I'm I'm uh uh a repeat of you know, referencer of this topic uh from the dais.

So I think it's obvious that I think that's trivia support.

But uh if the mayor concurs, then I think that's fine.

I think she might have had an op ed about this bill today, in fact.

Yeah.

I was gonna say I would 100% support.

Okay.

All right.

Great.

So we are in alignment with ourselves uh on that one then.

I gave a warning last week that I would be speaking in my personal capacity.

Those were all the ones on my list, councilman.

Okay, excellent.

Um moving down to the watch uh bills.

Um I had uh I had one, it's the Marcus Simon bill on uh local government or board of zoning appeals land use decisions, uh HB447.

Um have we had communication with him and about what concerns we might have uh regarding this bill.

Before four seven, let's put it up here.

HB.

We have not spoken with delegate Simon on this bill.

So what what what where are we?

Yeah.

Yeah, what's holding us at watch is yeah, and is it something that we should reference should speak to them about is I guess where I'm at.

This one is I can maybe speak to that Wendy.

It's a legal um we had um, as everyone knows, we've had some litigation related to zoning decisions, um like zoning for housing being appealed.

And we had discussed um, if anything, being really careful about bills around standing.

Um this bill we have on watch, and I have it out to um Travis, one of our litigators and our land use attorney to take a look at it in a little more detail.

Um I right now it appears that the bill is taking the standing test from this Supreme Court case called Friends of Rappahannock and putting it into text in the code.

Um so it may be that it's just codifying what we think is a a workable, not problematic test for standing.

Um, but there's really specific language in that case.

This is maybe more information than you all need, but it's so it's it's it's affecting standing.

At my first glance, I thought that it um may just be codifying that's already existing um legal standard.

So it's not tightening it um or making it harder to um potentially sue local governments who are making uh zoning changes.

So it's maybe not a it's on watch because it's not like it's necessarily going to help us with progressive zoning reform, but it also looks like it maybe is not hurting us.

Um so we're doing a deep dive into that, and I can certainly follow up to get you more information or an analysis on that if the mayor or councilman you would like to see that.

But it at first glance to me it looks like the friends of Rappahannock test, and it may just be with their putting law on statute.

Yeah.

I just like if we have any comment or or thought on it, I'd I'd love to see us like communicate with the delegate if there is anything that needs to be done because Simon's a thoughtful guy.

He also is somebody whose bills tend to move.

So we'll make sure we do that.

I'd want us to be you know engaged if it's actually something we're concerned about.

Okay.

That was the that bill also is re-referred to the courts courts of justice uh committee today.

Okay.

Um Madam Mayor, do you have anything on the watch list that you'd like to discuss?

Um, so I did have a question about the vending, I think the vending machine.

Yes, excellent one, too.

Yeah, I guess I just wanted a little more information on uh what is the intent of this bill and what is actually being proposed.

So that is uh HB 1362.

This is Kevin.

Yeah.

Um that's simply um it doesn't affect local revenue, it only exempt the state sales tax, and it's on basically food and personal hygiene that's sold from a vending machine.

So it mirrors this state exemption elsewhere on food and hygiene personal hygiene.

So it extends it to vending machines now.

But again, it does not affect the local one percent.

Okay.

So is this kind of a companion to the one that we discussed a couple weeks ago?

Related to food or something complete.

Oh no, go ahead.

That one was was a local tax.

Why this is watch is because it doesn't directly affect the city because it's a um is a state level tax.

Okay, got it.

And do we have an update on how the other one that does impact us, how that one's moving?

That one I think got passed by uh.

Let me see.

Okay.

That was referred to the committee.

HB 13 was referred to the committee on finance.

And then I I think it was passed by I can get you an update on that, but I don't think it moved.

Okay.

Yeah, I I'd be curious to see where that one is down.

Other than that, Councilman McPeck, I don't have any more on this list.

Okay.

Are there any that staff would like to highlight on the list?

Okay.

Hearing none.

Um is there any other uh any other topics or uh relevant things from Sarah or Wendy or any staff uh for the subcommittee consider before we wrap up this evening?

Um Wendy, Sarah, I know you guys mentioned making sure we leave some space for the stragglers that are coming in.

Any key ones you want to flag right now.

Um the one that was on my mind most was the 912 one that we that wasn't quite a straggler, but that one um came in a little bit late.

I can't think of any off the top of my head that I would flag right now.

Um, but I can I will definitely send some during the week to make sure that you're aware before any action is taken.

Okay.

Um and then I guess the next step, um, so on February 10th, we will prepare to like formally adopt all of our positions.

Is there any additional steps we need to take before um before that meeting to get ready?

Yeah, we will send you a full spreadsheet um early next week and then spend send uh the rest of council the spreadsheet after that.

Um and that is those are the only actions, just making sure that uh you have access to the spreadsheets and we give council enough time to go through the vast amount of bills we have in our spreadsheets.

That's the plan.

Okay, and then I assume if we send it early next week, then we also meet on the six.

And so if we need to make any updates or adjustments, we can do that.

Okay, absolutely.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Okay.

All right.

Well, with that, I guess uh I I would accept a motion to adjourn.

Hmm.

Let me think of that.

It's just kind of so move.

All right.

Uh second.

Uh all in favor.

Hi.

Hi.

All right.

Well, thank you, everybody.

Uh stay warm this weekend and hopefully we'll avoid more snowfall.

Have a good weekend, everyone.

Thank you.

Thanks for having me, councilman.

Yep.

Bye.