Reporting started right at the beginning.

All right.

Welcome to the Civil Service Commission meeting.

I am Commissioner President Nico Porcillo.

We are going to do roll call to confirm commissioner attendance.

When I call your name, please say present.

Commissioner Freeman.

Present.

Commissioner Mayor.

Commissioner Moore.

Present.

And Commissioner Phan.

Present.

Right.

Thank you.

Also joining us today.

Our personnel director.

Damn Dallagar, Assistant Personnel Director and Lamin Avan.

Deputy City Attorney Valerie Silverman Nassi and assistant to the personnel director, Saba O'Neal.

There are two items on this afternoon's closest set closed section agenda.

Public employment appeal of disciplinary appeal pursuant to the California government code section uh 54957 v1.

Stephen Glover appealing their termination from the position of San State Sanitation Driver 2 and Derek Whip appealing their termination from the position of associate department human resource analyst.

Is there anyone who wishes to make public comment on an item on the closed session agenda?

We will take in-person public comment first and move to public comments via Zoom seconds.

Anything on Zoom?

No public comment on Zoom.

All right, we will now adjourn the public session and go into closed session.

The regular business meeting will begin at 1 p.m.

Thank you.

Like three degrees off.

Okay.

Okay.

All right, Brandon.

Are we recording?

Recording started, ready to begin.

All right.

Welcome to the Civil Service Commission meeting.

I am Commissioner President Nico Portillo.

We are going to do a quick roll call to confirm commissioner attendance.

When I call your name, please state present.

Commissioner Freeman.

Commissioner Merrill.

Brandon.

Commissioner Moore.

Pardon.

Commissioner Pan.

Present.

Thank you.

Your attendance has been noticed, been noted.

Also joining us today our personnel director David Dallagar, Assistant Personnel Director and Mamena Man, Deputy City Attorney Valerie Silverman Massey, and assistant assistant to the personnel director, Saban Leal.

Item number two is the report from closed session.

Public employment disciplinary appeals pursuant to California government code section 54957B1.

Number one, Stephen Glover, appealing their termination from the position of sanitation driver two.

Motion to suspend a pallet without pay for March 18th, 2024 and be reinstated pending medical clearance and verification of minimum qualifications.

Motion to uphold the termination, passed three to two with Commissioner Freeman and Commissioner Merrill voting no.

Thank you, Sava.

We will now move on to non-agenda public comment.

Is there anyone who wishes to make a public comment on an item not on the agenda that is within the purview of the civil service commission?

Anyone on Zoom?

Um no public comment on Zoom.

Okay.

I mean no public comment.

Okay.

We'll go ahead and move uh to the consent agenda.

Would anyone like to make a motion to approve the consent agenda item three through 13, which includes the March 5th commission meeting?

Second.

All right, we have a motion and the second.

We'll go ahead and take a vote.

Commissioner Freeman.

Yes.

Commissioner Mayor.

Yes.

Commissioner Moore.

Yes.

Commissioner Fan.

Yes.

All right.

And I am a yes.

The motion passes uh unanimously.

Uh we will now move on to our discussion items.

Next is number 14.

Staff, go ahead, please.

Good afternoon, commissioners.

Carissa Rosemore for staff.

Item 14 is a request from Nicholas Minx, police sergeant for a one-year specialty pay ending March 5th, 2027 with this job to be saved.

Mr.

Minx is requesting this leave for child care and outside employment.

The police department recommends modification of this request to name on eligible list.

Mr.

Minx has been employed with the city since October 22nd 2004.

His most recent performance evaluation was meet standards.

Mr.

Minx and the department are available to answer any questions you may have.

Any of anybody want to hear from Mr.

Minks or the department?

The outside employment.

Yeah.

Mr.

Minks, are you are you there?

I am.

Yes, I am.

Okay.

It says here you want uh special leave without pay.

Um for next year uh for outside employment.

What is that employment?

Uh that's correct.

It's for uh uh company called Flock Safety.

And what would your position there be?

Um what they call a technical account manager, it's a position that allows me to work fully remote while I uh sort through the child care, and then actually the the correction on that is uh is to help my uh both my mother-in-law and my parents who've been experiencing medical issues also not just child care, correct?

Any other questions?

Is this the first one-year request?

Has there been any other uh yes sir?

Okay, thank you.

If you anybody wants to make a motion, I make a motion to approve the one-year special leave uh without pay with job with a job to be changed second okay.

We have a motion and a second um for uh uh special leave without pay for the job to be saved.

Um commission will go ahead and vote.

Commissioner Freeman.

Yes, Commissioner Merrill, yes, commissioner more, yes, commissioner Phan.

Yes.

I am a yes, so the motion passes unanimously.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Commissioner.

Sorry.

Item 15.

Item 15 is a request from Commissioner Merrill for an update on the civil service commission equal employment opportunity report.

Currently, we're working on gathering the data and reference material for the 2025 civil service report.

Once that data is collected and validated, we can generate the report, analyze the data, and provide an update to the civil service commission.

As a note for the future report, the city has added a new demographic category, Middle Eastern or North African to the report.

City has begun to offer this option to employees, but we will not have comparisons or reference data as it is a new addition.

As the commission's prior discussed prior, we have started to gather and analyze some of our data to determine patterns or areas where we could improve.

An initial review of the data for the past five years seems to show that the number of applicants and new hires are representative of the city's population availability in almost all categories.

We will keep gathering and analyzing the data to identify trends or issues and work to address them.

We've also completed an RFP for an applicant tracking system.

NeoGov has been selected, and we will be expanding the modules we use to engage to include uh the attract and onboarding modules.

The attract module will help us engage with candidates more effectively, automate some of our communications to them, and cast a wider net, as well as give us access to more robust recruitment analytics.

As you're aware, this past year we were also very fortunate to partner with the division of race and equity to help improve community representation of the city workforce.

We will get input from the commission and continue to work with the division of race and equity as we repair prepare this report.

That is my update.

I'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you for your report.

I appreciate that.

Um I just found out you told me there's going to be a new back to pay for the uh Middle Eastern or North African.

Yes, how does this come about?

Would it become from federal or how does that come out?

Uh it is going to be added to the census.

It is not something that's captured currently in the 2020 census.

Going forward, that information is going to be captured.

I'm I believe I'm not 100% certain where the initiated party came, but the city has agreed to adopt it.

Uh, I think it was uh was it a law a year or two ago?

I can find out the details.

I was curious how that happened.

Um if you're able to answer, how do departments get flagged where they're going to be required to get the memo for underrepresentation in three weeks?

Typically, we look to see if they are the majority of classified employees in some departments are heavily unclassified, so we do typically do not send memos to that.

But going forward, we can send memos to everybody if that's uh the commission's direction.

Well, what I was trying to find out was the department is flagged to get that memo, see and the department is under has underrepresentation.

The actual report shows classifications and it shows like by ethnicity, and it's compared to the county county population.

County workforce availability, yes, and the city workforce, right?

The city availability, yes.

So my question is does it is it one or both that flags in and say, okay, you're gonna represent it in county and city, so you're gonna get the memo or just for the city?

Well, is that just to figure the memo?

It's by category.

So if there's a change and we are uh not improving in areas, then typically that would indicate that we need to notify the departments.

Um we do see some departments that go from not meeting both to meeting one or meeting neither.

Um, but typically we would notify those if they if we see changes in the different categories across um negative changes, which means that they're not meeting those city population availability or the county workforce availability.

That's when we would notify them.

So if we see changes there that are negative in the sense that they're not meeting those anymore, that's what we notify.

But in the future, we can, like I said, we can notify all departments uh as an informational item.

Okay, I appreciate that.

Uh I looked at the some of the number the years that you gave me in 2020, 2022, 2023, and 2024, just on the surface, just doing basic math.

It looks like the number of departments that had underrepresentation and received the memo, started off like at 67%.

So it was 30 departments in 2020.

2022, it went down to 62 percent.

So there was less departments, 28 departments.

We see the memo.

2023, it was 58%, which is 26 departments, and the input you gave me for 2024 was uh 44.

So it's trending in a positive way, right?

So I'm just wondering, you know, you guys might want to highlight that or at least dig into what's is something going on that's causing that or not?

Maybe it's not.

And part of our years, you said there were 45 departments for our years.

Correct.

It's not always the same 45, but 45 departments.

And going forward, ideally, uh, after having the discussions here with the commission, we do want to be able to address the data more and have more of a granular understanding of where the issues are.

Uh, I know we had mentioned the application through higher uh numbers, and for us that that does show that we are fairly comparable to what we are taking in as applicants and what we are putting out uh in new hires, but there are still discrepancies, and that's where we need to dig a little further into the data and figure out at what point uh because we do break out by the different categories um of types of employments is not necessarily classification, so they are groupings, but we break those out, and we can once we start gathering and analyzing the data, uh, ideally with the attract module as well.

We'll be able to find pinpoint more specifically where those issues are right now.

It's it's a big picture look at it, but we are starting to focus more narrowly going forward.

Thank you.

Yeah, I appreciate more analysis on this.

You guys have a lot of good information here.

It was disappointing to see that for all those years, as far as departments reaching back out to you to get assistance that you're offering to help them help in those issues.

There's only two departments for three of those years and uh three departments for one of the years.

Right.

Yeah, that's the best of my recollection.

We have said that wasn't completely.

Yeah, we haven't been tracking that, but there are certain departments that regularly reach out uh once they get this memo.

So for me moving forward, I have interest in seeing maybe also what race and equity would uh part they'll play uh because now they're gonna they're now they're here, they weren't in the memos earlier, but now they're in your memo, saying you can also reach out to race and equity division to see what they can offer.

So I'd like to maybe talk to talk to them, maybe come here.

Absolutely.

You guys can together tell us what they're gonna do to help.

Wait, how is that?

What the race and equity division?

Okay, yeah, we can start uh meeting with them.

Well, we will start meeting with them and then uh they're still trying to figure out and determine their role in a larger sense, but we will work with them and then uh we can come back to the commission, uh have them present as well.

Race in equity, is that a department or is it an auditor in the IBM?

Auditor or IBA I basically get a commitment for I'm gonna get the talking down first.

The commitments maybe the next meeting to come.

Yeah, we have to answer.

Yeah, we'll definitely reach out.

Kim's been a great partner, um, both when she was here the first time and since she's been back.

Um, so I don't think there'll be any problem getting them to come to the commission.

Uh just it may or may not work for the next meeting, but we will we'll put it out there.

And I know they'd love to talk to you guys, and I've spoken to them extensively about some of the items we want to work on.

They have access to data or to tools to look into the data.

So I've had extensive conversations with Ms.

Desmond over that, and um spoke to her about even having commission members be a part of those conversations going forward.

So for my conversation, she's fully on board with coming down here being a big part of this.

We achieve that yeah, I definitely have answers in participating possible.

And then I want to go back.

Um you made a comment about um reporting all I would like to see all because I want to know if there's reputation head representation heavy on certain positions, but then not when we get into unrepresented.

So I know it's just informational, we can't push that, but knowing if it's a consistent effort or being there, the channels are a little bit different in unrepresentative.

It's a little bit easier to get fixed.

So I think having that um it will be would be good, and then um tuning personnel's horn.

Um I think the numbers were probably very good, and I would like to see it.

Hopefully, they don't decline, but having the dedicated recruitment team that was going out, we were in communities, we could see them out in public, we had them on social media, like they were very active in the community.

Where what are we doing to fill that gap?

So currently we don't have uh a new or a standalone recruitment division.

We are filling that gap with um analysts and one of our supervisors that go out to these events when we can.

We definitely don't do as many community direct community outreach events as we used to because we just don't have the bandwidth for it right now, but we do still attend uh events and we are trying to identify the most effective events to attend.

Um not necessarily cost effective, but more effective in in outreach and who we're going to be able to reach out to.

I believe we may have talked about this the last time we had this.

And are we sending the jobs linked when we're not when we're actively hiring?

Do we share the jobs linked with all the district representatives to be able to push and they can at least share and get into their communities?

Whereas maybe we're not having the events, but at least if they had other with the council members, yeah.

Yeah, they're um they all send emails out and monthly newsletters and something.

Are we making sure that we have some type of representation or sharing from personnel to them?

Uh we can confirm that they do.

We do send out citywide um that we have what our opening this week uh because every week we open, but some more direct contact.

We can definitely reach out and I know um our recruiter or people who have been out in recruiting, do have contact with the council member staff, typically sometimes the council members are at the events, so there is that interaction, but on a more regular basis, we can make sure we send it to them.

Just intentionally for this is the so they choose to make it cute if we can something where they'd say they can almost cut and paste and put it in the newsletter to make it easy for them to support those efforts, especially if we're not going to be actively in the yeah, we'll we'll start uh we'll get contacts and we'll start making sure they get that every week.

Um, and um, as far as uh the hiring events or the recruitment events or the events you go to to it, is they are there like personnel department hiring events aside from just regular currently no, we are not doing uh hiring events, but we have in the past had different types of events with public utilities and different departments specifically for their types of positions that they're trying to fill.

Uh we do have uh we have done uh career career advancement or uh promotional training out to city employees, current city employees at the libraries or different uh locations that um that's kind of the extent of it.

We don't have larger job fairs like we have had in the past.

Okay, and and uh the events that you that you have a recruiter present, is it just within the city of San Diego, or do you go out to other communities or it's generally within the larger San Diego County?

Most of our events are within the city, but uh you know, sometimes we are a little farther out from there.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um, any other questions?

Yep.

Um go ahead.

Uh thank you, Commissioners.

Okay, thank you.

Go ahead, Mr.

Gallagher.

How are you team?

Uh good afternoon, commissioners.

David Alagar for staff.

Item 16 is a request uh to inform on the internal fact-finding process of the personnel department.

Uh although personnel is an independent department, it's fact-finding process aligned with citywide procedures, including those outlined in disciplinary frameworks and applicable MOUs.

Under this process, the pointing authority convenes a panel to investigate allegations, and the panel returns its findings upon completion.

The appointing authority then reviews those findings consistent with the dimensions and discipline.

Within the personnel department, there are four appointing authorities, two deputy directors, one assistant director, and then the director.

There are two primary ways the commission becomes involved with a department fact-finding process, both involving matters related to the director.

First, if the director is subject of an investigation, the commission president would generally receive the complaint and determine how the investigation would be conducted.

This would not necessarily be done without impact input from the other commissioners.

Second, if the director serves on a fact-finding panel for the personnel department, the resulting report would be sent to the commission president to review in a manner similar to that of an appointing authority.

Other commissioners could also be given a copy of that report for their awareness.

Outside of these two scenarios, the commission is not necessarily it's not directly related in the department's fact-finding process.

However, as with all other departments under mayor's purview, significant findings would still be communicated up the chain to all the commissioners for their awareness.

With that, I'm happy to answer any questions or hear any comments.

Yeah, thank you for your report out of the what prompted me to ask for this discussion was when I saw the last fact-binding court that you did.

And um when I read that that you chaired, you chair the fact finding the own department.

I raised my eyebrows that I'm not sure that that's best practice or not.

Uh, because when that happens, then somebody has to receive them for it.

It's supposed to be an appointment authority.

When I thought that commissioner Pachil was the point of authority, I really had major concerns because I see a definite, I saw a conflict of interest potentially there because it could uh lead to an appeal discipline, of course.

And the commissioner would be voting on, and he's already been part of the uh investigation process.

Yeah.

So I thought that I thought that is crossing the line, you know, going from uh adjudication to investigation.

So I wanted to make sure that all of us commissioners are on the same page have the same level of understanding moving forward, so that I think we should avoid those facts of the situation if we can if possible.

Yeah, issues I just said 100% spot on, and I just so the commission is clear.

Um unfortunately, sometimes I will be on a panel.

Yeah.

Um it's not my goal.

That's not my dream in life.

Um I I will even go as far as say like one of my pet peeves at the city is it takes a long time to impanel and do investigations.

So I will say in this particular case, as a little gung-ho wanted to get it done right away, and it wasn't until it was time for me to write the memo to the appointing authority that I realized maybe I got a little ahead of my skis, and then obviously I then have to move it up the chain to to the president.

Uh, but yeah, I that was not something um it was my first fact finding in this role.

I've you know, so it's I wasn't I didn't think of the you know 10 yards down the road when the memo would come out.

Uh thankfully there were no facts found or no substantiation, but I had no problem with the container of the outcome.

It was just that new process that I had issues with.

And I'm hoping that I would like to know exhaust with that.

We don't always see eye to eye, of course, on every issue, but that being said, with questions like these arise, uh representative value opportunity for us to communicate, around on expectations, and Smith and I checked on standing.

So encourage open dialogue so that moving forward, we're in the same page.

There's no nobody's sort of there about what road is both the blame.

So I appreciate what you read up.

I'm hoping you can give us a guideline maybe for separation or delineation of the rules and responsibilities with commissioners when you late to the fact line.

With uh city attorneys, UG.

Okay.

And is that possible?

And when that's a request with a with a commission request of fact finding.

Well, and this isn't informational item.

Right, so we can't take any votes on the right.

No, no, that was again.

Anything is possible as long as you aren't breaking the law.

I will even go as far as to say I will happily take the commission's direction to never sit on a fact finding for anybody ever again.

I will do that for this.

Yeah, you say, hey, I'm about to do this.

I'm gonna raise my hand and say, Are you sure you want to do it at the very least?

So we'll hear it because we're weakness.

Well, yeah, absolutely.

So my colleagues, I would second um change.

I'd like to identify, I think.

Um so yeah, that is to be avoided.

I would spinning out if we were in this exact situation, the particular incident uh did result in appeal.

I think it would be uh appropriate for whatever commissioner or commissioners receive huge from that.

Um otherwise, you can hold it.

It is uh a unique fact pattern that's a cell off that it's not good.

Um so yeah, I appreciate that.

Yeah, I was I was actually wondering like what would be the what would be the um the fix, so to speak, to the you know if we did that did happen.

The situation did happen, what would we do?

Yeah, I guess we would yeah, I think the virtual commissioners probably in this case would be huge wrong.

I'm just trying to avoid that because you seem sometimes we don't have a full panel, so when you guys are gone, you have people that only point of order would be at too many commissioners.

Well, if it was just yeah, you just that's why um so let's avoid it if we can.

That's not one.

Yeah, I think that's I I didn't hire the new result.

Well that well good.

Yes.

Thanks.

Any other thoughts from my colleagues?

Shouldn't have happened, I guess I can't say never again, but yeah, as much as we can to avoid that type of complicated, and also put in the president and claim that we are having to recuse them.

We don't have that consistency, so anything we can do to make sure that's a weighted clear technical city as well, so we don't put in a independent which exhibit.

Yeah, no, a hundred percent.

And I will say, generally speaking, fact findings, I would only be on unclassified fact findings, which obviously would not come to the commission, but sometimes they are intermingled with both classified and unclassified.

Yes, thank you.

We'll put that in the little guide.

Thank you.

All right, uh 17.

It's me again.

Uh good afternoon again, everybody.

David Gallagher for staff.

Item 17 is request for me to update the commission on various personnel department related items.

Today I'll be providing an update on the pilot of electronic workflows for organizational reassignments, pay changes, the electronic receipt of pre-employment medical results, and updates to the pointing authority interview package.

As a follow-up to a report I presented to the commission earlier this fiscal year, personnel has been building and testing new SAP workflows for organizational reassignments and pay changes.

Uh, this work builds on earlier automation of the new hires and rehire workflows, uh, which have now been in place for more than a year.

Since that time, we have continued advancing our efforts to modernize and streamline the way we use SAP and now transition into the pilot phase for the personnel change requests for PCRs related to the organizational reassignments and pay changes.

Uh the pilot is designed to evaluate real real world functionality, usability, and efficiency across the departments involved by transitioning these transactions to electronic workflow workflow.

We aim to reduce manual processing, improve consistency, and shorten turnaround times.

The departments participating in the pilot can now submit PCRs directly through the system, track approvals in real time, and receive notifications when transactions are completed.

Feedback gathered during this phase will inform the refinements prior to citywide implementation.

Uh progress on the eventual rollout is also tracked through our departmental KPIs.

Personnel has also recently begun receiving pre-employment medical results electronically.

This documentation was sent via US mail, which added several days to the hiring timeline.

With the transition to an electronic receipt, uh results are now available immediately and can be processed sooner than would have been possible under the previous system.

This change also provides an operational benefit in the near future, as the documents can now be attached directly within the NeoGov onboarding workflow once we have that new module up and running.

Eliminating the need for manual handling and further streamlining the future process.

Finally, in an item I'm looking forward to bringing to the commission at the next meeting for your considerations.

Personnel has been piloting changes to the appointing authority interview process for more than one year.

And we've taken feedback from the pilot and incorporated into our initial updates to the appointment authority interview packet and the associated processes.

The material changes include a reduction in the number of required documents from 27 to less than 10, which lowers the administrative burden while maintaining flexibility through access to additional materials on an ad as needed basis.

Interview evaluations have also been simplified.

Previously, panel members would have would be required to produce more than 15 separate written paragraph ratings for each candidate.

Under the new model model, the writing portion of the evaluation are condensed to as little as a single written paragraph for the overall candidate rating, allowing panels to focus on meaningful assessment rather than repetitive restatements of the notes the panel wrote down during the interviews.

In addition, the one cert one interview model will now require departments to fully utilize NeoGov as it is intended to be used, improving data quality and enabling more proactive data-driven decisions.

This update, um, these updates were piloted successfully in collaboration with partnering departments and are now ready for citywide rollout.

Together, these changes represent a significant step forward in making personnel processes more efficient, consistent, and focused.

I look forward to presenting these changes to the commission for consideration and beginning the process to move them citywide.

With that, I'm happy to hear any questions or comments.

Um SAP would set.

Yeah, and PTR quiz.

Uh personal change requests, so that is the way people are changed in the system from one classification to another, from one position to another, they're paying a certain process by which the service record is updated.

Okay.

Go ahead and share.

No, we like that off the record.

Okay.

So often.

Are we putting secondary contacts?

So if or individuals that should be receiving those PCRs to keep it moving along, if I will leave or the person that should be receiving it, it's not there.

Are we putting a secondary or default so that it can keep moving and not get stuck in someone's queue?

Yeah, I don't know.

And do you are you aware?

Are they they put in who they want it to go to outside of this department, like which appointing authority or the PCRs?

I believe they can assign it to um there's multiple like appointing authorities that have access to a personnel area so they can assign it.

So multiple people would have access to a bucket.

Yeah.

And then looking to bring us feedback on the AAIT.

When is that being implemented?

So it has to go through to closed session for the commission first, uh to then ask or request HR to meet and confer.

So that's the that's what we're that's what those are the processes we need to go to.

Obviously, we need to meet and confirm good faith, so I don't know.

Our goal is as soon as possible, but they have to meet confer with all the REOs that are impacted.

When will we when will we be submitting the request to each one?

Uh they they should be at our next meeting at closed session when we present this.

The only the only caveat to that is why I say I want to present next meeting is they're unavailable to contract negotiations, but they are aware and have agreed to come to is what signature still required on AIT documents, or can't they be filed or yeah, there's the whole um what signature thing does not exist in this department.

All right.

There's a quick question.

Uh has there been any need to look at the second interview process?

I assume we still have an option to go to one round of interviews and then hold a informal interview process.

Is that we didn't have any guidelines that hasn't been looked at at all?

We've not looked at that in our we haven't looked at that in our um our analysis or the changes we're bringing forward.

That's something we'd be happy to know.

Um, because that process is not a requirement, we were focusing on the processes that were a requirement and that needed changes or updating to make it easier.

So we kind of left the the stuff that they didn't have to do, we left on the sidelines so we could focus on the things that we actually needed to change rules or regs so that they could do them across the city.

Okay, I'm just wondering if there's gonna be an opportunity if there's a need to formalize what's now an informed interview process because in the past, you know, I have every complaints about what the second interview process is informal, so we do.

So it just gets to decide and then went higher pretty much, and some people just get off in that have uh concerns about that process.

Yes, and we definitely do have guidelines, but it's just not something that we've um like looked at.

I understand.

So are you are you saying like the the second interview?

So they can make a hiring decision after the first interview, and then right after the first interview process, they can have another process.

Really?

Informal.

So if it's like down to two, like okay, like yeah, generates an appointing authority, right?

Looking but late, but like if they're excited about one person in the first batch, they can hire that person without a second interview.

Correct.

Okay.

And I'm all for informal as a secondary because you're kind of we on it, and especially if you have a large pool.

My concern is when that's impacting personnel's numbers, because now you've decided to go a second round, and that's now stacking the numbers because you have gotten around to it.

What's the second one?

We don't necessarily so now such such not available, such as that.

That I think that's where my concern lies, and this is more so than in the secondary interview, the timeline.

Yeah.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

That's for classified.

Is this work too?

I'm only talking about the class by classes.

Okay, all right.

Uh that's it.

All right, word here.

Thank you.

Thank you, everybody.