 Well hello everyone as we just saw in the chat we're going to give folks a minute to jump on but thank you for joining us we'll get started in just a minute we'll give it just one more minute and then we'll get started okay we've we've hit a good number so with that why don't we begin today's webinar good afternoon my name is Shaw Sprague I am the Vice President of Government Relations for the National Trust and I'm pleased to welcome you all here to today's webinar in which we'll be covering historic preservation priorities for the remainder of the 117th Congress and and what we might expect from from this calendar year and we have some great panelists to discuss those priorities and forecast with you today before we get started however a few notes about our presentation today we will take questions from the audience and the way that we're going to do this is if you would submit your questions via the zoom Q&A function you're welcome to submit at any point during the webinar but we do have designated portions of the webinar one will be answering those questions two Q&A answer sessions during the webinar I'd also encourage you to use the chat function to communicate with one another for all of the participants closed caption functioning is enabled for this webinar you can enable it and disable it either through your the controls at the bottom of your zoom screen or through your audio settings and following the program we will send out a recording of today's webinar as well as any of the shared resources that are communicated through the webinar to the email that you used for this registration and finally the preservation leadership forum webinars are all archived on the forum webinar library so you can find them there take a look back at some of the previous webinars as well next slide please so as the roadmap for today we'll hear from our first two speakers and then you'll have an opportunity to ask questions after that we'll have two other panelists including myself as one of those panelists followed by another opportunity to ask questions I'll start by saying the preservation movement is fortunate to have many dedicated leaders in Congress and today we'll hear from Tucker Johnson in Congressman Blumenauer's office Earl Blumenauer of Oregon who we are excited to be working with on a number of issues so we look forward to that unfortunately our other panelists from Senator Cardin's office won't be able to join us today but we do appreciate Senator Cardin's support in the Senate for historic preservation priorities so I do want to acknowledge that to set the stage a little bit look I'll note that the nation is quickly approaching its semi-quincentennial in 2026 and we're seeing Congress increasingly focus on investing in historic preservation and the number of key ways that we wanted to touch on today so as you may have heard from previous communications the House and Senate have proposed noteworthy funding increases for the historic preservation fund in FY22 we'll hear more about the FY22 process during the webinar and what that means for the fiscal year 23 as well we've also seen legislation reauthorizing the historic preservation fund which has been introduced in the House setting the stage for much needed future growth for the program that we're all very excited by that leadership so thanks to Congressman Blumenauer and also Congresswoman Theresa Fernandez and for the first time in many many years we're seeing important progress and efforts to strengthen the historic tax credit despite the build back better legislation stalling we saw a really important progress that's that's noteworthy that the preservation community needs to be aware of and helping to to continue to build momentum there so with that we'll have an opportunity here from from staff behind these efforts and how we can continue to support this positive direction for historic preservation next slide please so with that I have the pleasure of introducing Tucker Johnson Tucker is a legislative assistant in Congressman Blumenauer's office whose portfolio among many other things includes historic preservation fund and appropriations so Tucker it's a pleasure to have you with us thank you thank you for all you do thank you for Congressman Blumenauer and his leadership we look forward to hearing from you today thank you for being with us yeah thanks shy appreciate you all invite me to join today this is a really exciting time for for historic preservation for the historic preservation fund as as Shaw mentioned I handle the historic preservation portfolio for Congressman Blumenauer who chairs the historic preservation caucus here in congress and we're still still working on finalizing the the funds appropriations and all of the government's appropriations for fiscal year 2022 the the current fiscal year so we don't quite know how it's all going to shake out yet but the house and senate versions of that legislation that they're working on reconciling right now both have funding above the authorized level so the historic preservation fund has an authorization for 150 million dollars a year but we're looking at maybe as much as 180 or 186 million dollars for fiscal year 2022 once that legislation gets finalized and that should be coming up really soon the the current funding legislation runs out on March 11th so next week we should have a final deal hopefully finally that'll let us know where that number is and I I know that process is a little confusing for folks on the outside especially when we look at something like this where there's a authorization for one number in appropriation for another that's higher and normally you you don't often see accounts getting funded above their authorized level but I think that's a that's a great testament to where historic preservation is and the support it has in congress the analogy I'd like to use to explain that difference is that an authorization it's like when you want to go to the movies and you go to your dad and you say my friends want to go to the movies can I have some money to go to the movies with them your dad says sure go ask your mom for 20 dollars and your dad telling you you can ask for 20 dollars is the authorization but your mom might give you 15 dollars or if you might give you 25 it all depends and that's the appropriation so that's where we are with this process but the the appropriations by the authorized amount is super exciting for the historic preservation fund and is also an opportunity to look back and create a new authorization so I know there's some legislation right now they think we'll have folks talking about later to to lift that number which is really exciting the big the big risk of an appropriation being above the authorized level this year is that folks will go back to just the authorized level a year later or won't increase the appropriate level in future years which you know you always want some growth there and the lower authorization can be a can be a threat to that when you're looking at it I certainly you know don't need to tell you all why we need more funding there going forward I'm sure you all know there's immense growing demands on shippos and tippos I am new to the portfolio but was really surprised when I learned that there are more tippos than there were when they first spun up the historic preservation fund but the funding for for that appropriation has stayed exactly the same over the past 25 or 30 years which is which is a disappointing and something we can hopefully fix going forward the big upside though with these conversations when we're working to to get funding in congress is that this characterization funds money doesn't come out of the general fund it's not tax revenues at work it's funded by a trust fund that comes from oil and gas these money and there's a couple billion dollars in there so increasing the authorization or the higher appropriations this this year you know isn't going to take money away from other things and it certainly isn't going to that that funding won't run out anytime soon I will say though a you know word of caution that eventually that oil and gas leasing revenue probably isn't going to be sustainable I have been working I also handle transportation for congress in blooming hour and been working on well turn of transportation funding options as gas tax revenue from gas purchases at the pump shrinks and that's been a really hard lift to find those new funding options as folks shift to more fuel efficient cars and other cars the the needs for that funding are rising but the source of it is not but certainly for the historic preservation fund that's a couple decades away I think for as folks are starting to look at making FY 2023 requests I you know I know your advocacy week is coming up soon but it's really hard to make those requests right now it the the the goal of getting more funding for the historic preservation fund I know we could we could ask for any any number we could dream up and we definitely want us for the highest possible number but the goal is to pick a number that people see as serious that you're asking for and doesn't get you laughed out of the room and until we know what fiscal year 2022 actually comes down at it's hard to hard to settle on a specific number I know some folks have been talking about 200 million dollars a year and it would be really great if if we got to a spot where that was a small increase to task for and I think we are likely to get there but we'll know for sure next week I will definitely be sticking around for the Q&A portion but think now I'm turning it back over to Shah great thank you Tucker and here are is a chart that highlights that 200 million request that Tucker referenced and as you can see you know again a key point here is that the both the president and the house of representatives have passed a president recommended above the authorized level and the house passed his interior appropriations bill recommending over the authorized amount so that is a great signal to the preservation community that this fund does need reauthorization and should be authorized at a higher number and that there is the interest and support and need for more funding so as as Tucker noted hopefully we'll we'll see that next week when the the continuing resolution is up and hopefully negotiations will yield the FY22 budget with with some numbers that we can stick to so with that thank you Tucker thank you for sticking around we appreciate it I'll turn it over to my colleague Lauren Cohen Lauren is the associate director of government relations for the national trust she previously served as the government affairs and grassroots manager at Americans for the arts so I am pleased to welcome her to the trust and to all of you today to discuss the historic preservation enhancement act and implications for for that which are very exciting so with that I'll turn it over to you Lauren. Thank you Shaw. Hi everyone I'm Lauren Cohen and I'm thrilled to be here with you today I started at the national trust at the beginning of the year and I have just absolutely learned so much about what this amazing sector and community are doing I personally have a background in history and museum so it in historic places so it feels like a homecoming to me in many ways to be with the trust so I want to talk to you today about the historic preservation enhancement act so in February representative Teresa Legger Fernandez of New Mexico and representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon introduced this new legislation in the U.S. House and you see the bill number right there and right now I just want to take a minute to thank Tucker for those wonderful remarks just now but also for his work on this legislation with his boss representative Blumenauer representative Blumenauer has shown dedicated leadership to advancing historic preservation priorities on the hill as the co-chair of the historic preservation caucus and we know that we have a champion in him and in Tucker so thank you very much we've also working been working with partners and we're very optimistic that a companion bill will be soon introduced in the United States Senate so be on the lookout for that when that happens we'll go ahead and drop a link in the chat right now to the press release from representative Legger Fernandez and a link where you can view the bill text so you can look at that for yourself but essentially this legislation would permanently authorize funding for the historic preservation fund it would increase its authorization from $150 million to $300 million annually and it would ensure that that $300 million is appropriated each year and that last part is really key and I'll get into that more in a moment in these ways though the historic preservation enhancement act would guarantee federal support for preservation activities and offer financial security to states tribes and communities as they work to preserve our past plus if enacted this legislation would represent the first increase in the HPF's authorized funding level since its inception in 1976 and provide much needed updates to the program so you know with that introduction to what this bill is let's talk about why we need it I'm sure many of you can can think of many reasons why we need this legislation but just to give a little bit of background and to build on what Tucker already said so it's modeled after the land and water conservation fund the HPF is funded by revenues generated from oil and gas leases on the outer continental shelf which are non-tax dollars that's that's a key component here in 1980 congress authorized $150 million in annual outer continental shelf OCS revenue for deposit into the HPF for the exclusive use of historic preservation activities including identifying protecting and utilizing historic resources I want to take a moment here to just note that adjusted for inflation $150 million in 1980 is the equivalent of more than $537 million today so just think about that huge difference $537 million today sounds a lot more than the $300 million than what this bill is proposing so I think that is a feather in our cap as we talk to legislators about this about this legislation so every year since 1980 $150 million has been deposited into the HPF account at the federal treasury yet congress has historically appropriated only a fraction of that amount one of our colleagues at the national trust calculated that since 1980 $6.3 billion has been authorized for the HPF which only $2.5 billion was actually appropriated so that leaves an unappropriated balance of $3.4 billion so that's $3.4 billion sitting there in that historic preservation fund account at the treasury so congress though has appropriated increasing amounts for the for the fund for more than five years including in FY 2022 so we just saw that chart that Tucker and Shaw walked us through President Biden for fiscal year 2022 recommended $151.8 million the mark that came out of the US House was $155.8 million and then we saw a really huge amount coming out of the US Senate of $180 million so you know as Tucker mentioned we're very hopeful that fiscal year 2022 appropriations will wrap up next week and we will see that final number that final appropriated number for the historic preservation fund and for many many other things that we're waiting on but I just want to note this because this is the first time that it's marked it's been marked above that that authorized $150 million mark so however though as you know demand for preservation services far exceeds that $150 million authorized funding level so with the passage of the 2021 infrastructure law states and tribes face unprecedented strains in balancing the ability to move projects forward while preserving our heritage the HPF facilitates the completion of infrastructure projects in an efficient manner by supporting timely preservation reviews and the public engagement process before projects are underway and that helps to avoid unnecessary and costly delays but you know with that infrastructure law extra dollars did not go to the HPF to facilitate that so how does it work this bill would permanently authorize the fund the HPF currently it has to be reauthorized every few years to avoid expiration in December 2016 Congress reauthorized the HPF for seven years so reauthorization is coming up again in 2023 so having to get this reauthorized every several years you know takes a strain and takes an advocacy burden so this legislation would permanently authorize the HPF it would also increase that authorization to 300 million dollars as I mentioned annually while ensuring that the fund receives that amount every year it provides a budgetary backstop to ensure that full funding is available but it also maintains Congress's ability to allocate the funding to specific programs I know that appropriators really enjoy being able to to learn more about the programs that are being funded and so this would allow appropriators to allocate this funding to specific programs in different ways but always totaling that 300 million dollars now why are we talking about this now well the HPF's authorization as I mentioned it expires in 2023 that's very very soon and we now have an opportunity to support long-term certainty to the planning efforts of states tribes and local communities to preserve our historic resources America 250 celebration is coming up in 2026 as Shaw mentioned at the beginning of the webinar and having a robustly funded and permanently authorized HPF would go hand-in-hand with this momentous occasion so you know we ask you to contact your members of Congress get them to cosponsor this legislation join representatives Legger Fernandez and Blumenauer as they led the way on this bipartisan momentum is key and I see that we've already dropped in the chat the link where you can take action take two minutes contact your member of Congress let them know why this is important to you and your communities and the work that you do and we'll we'll build momentum for this and I'm get this legislation moving thank you so much I'll I'll turn it back to Shaw for some Q&A great thank you Lauren thanks for that the recap and and getting us ready for Q&A let's see what sort of questions we have Tucker we have a question about that the the surplus funding the unobligated funding at Treasury and sometimes it it can be a bit confusing there isn't actually money just sitting there but it is a more on the books than than actual funding account there but but you both you and Lauren both mentioned this this funding at Treasury could you speak to whether this funding could be tapped into to appropriate more than the authorized level of 150 million annually yeah I think Lauren kind of answered this question but but to try and insert more explicitly the that funding is all of the funding that is tapped into for the historic preservation appropriations annually so that's a trust fund designed to make sure there's there's always dollars available for the historic preservation fund and so you know definitely when we increase the the appropriations for the fund those dollars are coming out of that trust fund but we we don't want to use the whole thing you know all at once we we want that three and a half billion dollars to be there and available for for next year and for the year after that for 10 years down the road so it's a it's a long-term game of balancing what we're using this year and and making sure we have some available for next year too thank you another question on a topic that you you did touch on Tucker which was the the the funding source and offshore oil and gas lease revenue being a finite source shouldn't we convert to a more sustainable funding source I believe you've you've both touched on this but it is something that we hear about frequently and I think warrants just repeating and even more discussion around that concept perhaps you can you can touch on Tucker this this idea of offshore renewable energy as a as a potential source yeah I think you know offshore renewable energy is a great option it's the it's the same source of funding that we're using now is offshore non-renewable energy so that transition makes sense I think I haven't taken a look at in great detail to you know know what what future federal revenues from say wind farm leasing offshore would look like versus what the oil and gas leasing revenues look like now but I also think I you know like like folks said there's three and a half billion dollars in the trust fund now so we have another 10 years even if the money stops coming in today before we have to we we run out of that funding so this is a this is a conversation I think folks should think about and be prepared for but it's still more than a decade away to to drill down and find the exact right source of new funding going forward we received another question a very timely question in advance of preservation advocacy week and the 15 second elevator pitch yeah how do you how do you sell this to your member of congress maybe setting aside the permanent funding for a second but how would you pitch the permanent authorization and I can I can tease it out a little bit by saying this is 40 years in the making and coming back every five six seven years is sort of an inefficient way to uphold a long-standing policy priority but let me pause there for a more articulate answer to that question Tucker then Lauren if you want to chime in please feel free yeah sorry I missed half of that question is it um elevator pitch for the permanent mandatory funding or for animal appropriations how about the authorization a permanent permanent reauthorization and then and then also funding yeah I think I think I guess I would approach those similarly in either case you know the best way to do it is to understand what the members members priorities are you know so for congress in bloom now or he comes to this as a former local elected official and saw firsthand in in the city of Portland the development impacts historic preservation had but every member of congress has their own background and their own focus and their own reason why historic preservation is a good fit for them I would also say you know for some members of congress it's very easy when you ask them about you know appropriations to say yeah we'll spend 200 million dollars on this and some other folks are more reticent to have those conversations around specific numbers or around you know the idea of more spending and so it's always good to come in prepared with that and then also prepared to to explain where this funding comes from and that you're not taking away from other things and and that you are you know using dollars that are already there so yeah I I absolutely agree with that and I would just add you know Shaw your your elevator pitch of this is a this is an inefficient way to keep these national federal priorities funded to have to come back every five to seven years and and make the case again it's clearly high time to get a permanent authorization here for the historic preservation fund and I would also add to you know a good argument for you know why 300 million why why double the authorized level I you know I think I go back to that inflation number you know if we were to look at 150 million dollars from 1980 right now in 2022 that looks that's over 500 million dollars today so you know arguing that this 300 million dollars is is still even less than what that inflation looks like from what was decided on in 1980 I think that's a solid argument and I think that you know many members of congress who might be reticent as as Tucker mentioned you know to you know put a finger on on that dollar amount I think they might listen to that inflation argument as well so we have a question about the african-american bail grounds preservation act which is also very timely I think it probably makes sense to answer that question in the second Q&A so we'll we'll come back to that one but thank you for that inquiry we also there's a question about how HPF permanent authorization and funding would relate to funding that's available via the great American Outdoors Act and and perhaps you Tucker could comment on the relationship between great American Outdoors Act and LWCF specifically and and how the reauthorization bill is modeled yeah I wish my my colleague James from Congressman Leher Fernandez's office was here to to help answer that because he's really the expert there but they borrowed a lot from at the great American Outdoors Act's precedents to to design the reauthorization here they they worked on that on the natural resources committee and so had had a lot of great things to teach me about it but the the basic idea is using that same mandatory funding mechanism legislatively to to make sure historic preservation funds are available but not the not the same pool of dollars as I understand it so well it's certainly nice to have that precedent there for how to take a program and make it permanent and make it mandatory especially one that's so closely related to the HPF in terms of how it was conceived and and when it was conceived so hopefully Congress will also see the logic in that as well so with that I I think we're ready to move on to our the second panel so I have the pleasure of introducing my colleague Pam Bowman our Senior Director of Public Lands Policy at the National Trust. Pam has tremendous experience 16 years of experience working in Congress as a lobbyist federal appropriations work federal policy issues providing advocacy training and just generally a delightful person and a wonderful person to work with so Pam thank you for jumping on and describing some of the the great piece of legislation that you're working on we look forward to those updates and questions from the audience. Thanks Shaw, thank you for the great introduction. I wanted to share with all of you an update on three bills that the National Trust and the preservation community have been working on and advocating for in some cases for several years and some some very recent developments. The first as you'll see here is the big win and exciting news regarding the Imache National Historic Site Act as many of you might have seen this legislation led by Senators Michael Bennett, John Hickenlooper and representatives Joe Ngoose and Ken Buck in the house this legislation passed the Senate by unanimous consent just a few days ago and what this legislation would do would establish the Imache National Historic Site as part of the National Park System. This is a former Japanese-American incarceration facility located just outside of Granada, Colorado and this site offers honors over 7,500 individuals of Japanese descent who are unjustly and forcibly incarcerated there during World War II so we were very excited to see this pass just about a week and a half ago. It actually passed the House by vote of 416 to 2 last July but due to a Senate amendment during the Senate passage process it had to bounce back to the House and was quickly passed without objection so we look forward to seeing the President sign that into law and that should happen in the next few days. The next one that I wanted to flag for all of you is a new piece of legislation that we've already received a comment about in the chat which is the African-American Burial Grounds Preservation Act. This legislation was introduced just a few days ago in both the House and the Senate and if enacted this important legislation would authorize the National Park Service to establish a grant program in coordination with government, private and non-profit partners to assist communities across our country in identifying preserving and restoring these historic and cultural sites. The new program would help with the discovery of these places ahead of any commercial development helping to avoid any disturbances to those locations and also aid the family members, descendants and community members in honoring and remembering their shared paths at these sacred sites. This legislation is bipartisan and bicameral as you can see here in the House, in the Senate was introduced by Senator Sherrod Brown and Mitt Romney and in the House led by Alma Adams, Don McKeechin and Brian Fitzpatrick. The National Trust is planning on releasing some new advocacy materials in the next few days which we'll share through our various channels and we hope that all of you will help us generate some momentum around these pieces of legislation and hopefully get those passed during this Congress. And finally and last but not least wanted to mention a cornerstone of one of our newest national treasure campaigns of the National Trust which is our Brown v Board of Education campaign featuring the Brown versus Board of Education National Historic Site Expansion Act. This legislation is a big feature of our campaign it's led by House Majority Whip James Clyburn and also Senator Chris Coons in the Senate and it really, it helps share the full history of the landmark Brown v Board of Education case in many different ways. What the many people in the public don't know is that that case was actually a consolidation of multiple court cases representing the communities in Kansas, Washington DC, Virginia, Delaware and South Carolina. And this legislation would expand the existing site in Topeka, Kansas to include those other communities in a combination of new National Park Service affiliated areas in each of those states and also an expansion in South Carolina to include those sites as well. We have gotten a lot of great momentum and buzz around this bill over the last few months. It's had successful hearings in both the House and the Senate. It passed the Senate committee unanimously just a few months ago and we're looking forward to having some movement in the Senate and the House in the next few weeks and we could definitely use your help in reaching out to your member of Congress asking that they support this legislation if they see an opportunity for a floor vote in the House or the Senate. We have all of those resources available on savingplaces.org where you can send an automatic letter to your member of Congress asking that they support the legislation. And as you'll see in the chat, we've added some information regarding our ongoing Brown v. Board of Education webinar series. Our next webinar is on March 30th where we'll be highlighting the three sites in Delaware that are proposed to join as part of the legislation. We're feeling very good about the prospects of this bill. It's supported by 100% of the House and Senate offices that are part of that proposed expansion, including Senators Cain, Warner, Marshall, Moran, Carper, Coons, Lindsey Graham, and Scott of South Carolina, and all of the House representatives as well. And we hope for you to continue to help us to support that legislation as it moves forward in the next few weeks. And now I will turn it over to Shaw to give us a little bit of an update on the historic tax credit. Thank you, Pam. Like I said, we were hoping to have colleagues from Senator Cardin's office on, but unfortunately they got pulled away the last minute, so I am filling in on where things are related to the Historic Tax Credit Growth and Opportunity Act. That's S2266 in the Senate and the HR2294 in the House. For those of you who have been engaged in historic tax credit advocacy at the federal level, this is familiar territory. This bill would do several things. First, it would make it easier to do smaller deals by increasing the credit to 30% for these projects. These are defined as qualified rehab expenses of $2.5 million or less. It would make more buildings eligible by lowering the substantial rehabilitation test, always an important element of increasing the number of projects that are eligible for the credit. If you purchase a property for $100,000, you have to invest. I currently have to invest $100,000 in that rehabilitation. That provision would make it so that you only have to invest 50% of that, making more buildings eligible to use that credit. It would also increase the value of the historic tax credits by eliminating the requirement that the amount of the historic tax credit is reduced from the building's basis. That is a key provision that we have been advocating for since tax reform as a way of increasing the value of the credits, the investment value of the credits, which would have a significant impact in that regard. Next, the provisions would also allow nonprofits like community theaters, health centers, local art centers, access the credit. It would make it easier to facilitate those transactions by eliminating that disqualified lease rules. The house version of the bill, congressman Blumenauer's version of the bill also includes a temporary bump up in the historic tax credit from 20% to 30% for all historic tax credit projects for a period of years that have been impacted by the economic challenges brought on by the pandemic and subsequent trade challenges, materials challenges, labor challenges, things like that. As I mentioned, for any of you who have done federal advocacy on the historic tax credit, these are familiar provisions. We did achieve a really important milestone in the fall, which was that all of these provisions were initially included in the House Ways and Means Committee section F of their recommendations for the Build Back Better Bill that provided for infrastructure financing and community redevelopment. Unfortunately, as the negotiations around BBB became more difficult and the overall funding amount came down, this provision was not included in the final bill that did pass the House, but suffice to say, there are many tax proposals as I'm sure Tucker and as Hill staff will attest that you hear about many proposals out there. To be included in that initial version is an important step for this historic preservation community, so we're close. We need to be looking for that next legislative vehicle. It's unclear where Build Back Better will go, how that might manifest again before the end of the year in some smaller package, perhaps an opportunity there, perhaps there's an opportunity at the end of the session during a linked duck session when tax bills, tax provisions expire need to be reauthorized. We're looking for those opportunities and in the meantime and for next week during advocacy, we will be asking everyone to co-sponsor these bills in the House and Senate as we are accustomed to experiencing strong bipartisan support, so in the House right now there are 72 co-sponsors of Congress from Bloomin' Hours bill, 40 Democrats, 32 Republicans, so it's one that does enjoy broad bipartisan support in the Senate. There are 10 co-sponsors currently, three of them are Republican co-sponsors, so that's something that we are encouraging everybody to continue to make sure that Congress is supporting those two bills and keeping an eye out for those opportunities where we will be able to insert it into a larger moving tax vehicle. I think that quickly covers historic tax credit enhancements. We do want to again thank Congressman Bloomin' Hours, Congressman LaHood, and Senator Cardin, and Senator Cassidy in the Senate for their leadership on this bill and for doing all they could during the Build Back Better discussions to include historic tax credits as part of the community development title. I am now reading questions, so we'll pause there and move to a Q&A session, so if you'll bear with me I will take a look at the question here. For those of us working on the ground, in on the ground preservation and advising grassroots community preservationists, is the expanded federal HTC go through about when would they go into effect for listed properties and be available from the Park Service? Is it worth advising projects for whom these provisions would be useful to wait before applying? Well, I would say that it would be difficult to advise if you're advising from a historic preservation consultant standpoint. I would not want to get too far ahead of yourself in advising the possibility for what may happen in terms of improving the historic tax credit. You wouldn't want to have any client rely on that given the uncertainty in Congress despite the strong support and despite the bipartisan support, so if I'm understanding the question correctly, I think it's worth noting these enhancements to clients as an important direction forward so that they're familiar so that they can be evaluated against future projects, but certainly wouldn't structure any financing an HTC project around legislation that hasn't passed yet. I see another question about a skinny version of the Build Back Better bill, and that being a vehicle for historic tax credit improvements. Maybe instead of me going on and on, I'll turn it over to Tucker for any broad thoughts, 30,000 foot view on Build Back Better coming back in some form or fashion and any prognostication he might want to offer toward that. Yeah, I think someone once said that prognostication is the lowest form of journalism, and I'm not a journalist, but I agree with them, but I know Sarah Manchin spoke to some reporters last night, I believe, with his ideas for a package that might move through the reconciliation process, but might not be called Build Back Better, and I think everyone is hopeful, but at the same time I remember this fall and I'm not going to hold my breath and tell the bills on the President's desk. I think what goes into that package is anybody's guess, and ultimately it's going to come down to what Sarah Manchin decides he can support. Well, thank you for indulging me, Tucker. I know it's difficult to predict, but certainly there is an opportunity through the budget reconciliation process to advance a priority, so we look forward to hearing how those conversations develop and what opportunities they might offer for historic preservation and the historic tax credit. So with that, I don't see any other questions. I'll open the floor perhaps to colleagues to offer any final or concluding thoughts before we wrap up the webinar. And perhaps wait for another question to come in. Yeah, this is Pam. I wanted to acknowledge the question we got earlier about the African American Burial Grounds Network Bill. I spoke a little bit about it. I would share also this legislation existed in the previous Congress. This is a new version with some additional provisions. I think it's a very strong piece of legislation and really aided, I think, by the support of a bipartisan and bicameral approach with some great offices and really active staff that can really help push this bill forward in the next few weeks and months. I think the original question was about what its chances for passage are. Well, it's too soon to say just with it being introduced just two weeks ago. I think there's a really good and diverse group of members of Congress supporting this and a really strong constituency within the preservation community and look forward to its progress. We'll certainly do our best to provide all of you with the resources that we can to help advocate for this and push for its passage. Thank you, Pam. No questions from anybody. Okay. Well, I think that then let me provide a few resources for everybody on how to stay up to date on various federal policy priorities. We'll continue sharing our resources and federal advocacy opportunities as they become available. We do have a forthcoming report, preservation budget, select preservation priorities for FY23 appropriations. This is our fourth edition and we found that it is a helpful tool to lay out our priorities but also provide a bit more depth in terms of the funding history and a number of examples of how these programs work and the need and the justifications for these programs. But there are some really wonderful case studies and examples highlighted in the report that we're excited to share with you, so please keep on the lookout for that. Please also visit forum.savingplaces.org and our social media channels where we'll be updating you as well. And if you have not subscribed to our advocacy monthly advocacy newsletter, please also take the time to do that. There is the subscription link on the screen there. And with that, I don't believe I'm supposed to flag an upcoming webinar but that is usually something we do at this point. But I want to thank Tucker and my colleagues for joining today and thank all of our leaders in Congress for supporting historic preservation. We look forward to seeing you soon for Preservation Advocacy Week hopefully and of course if you have questions after the webinar do not hesitate to reach out to any one of us. Thank you for joining today and we will conclude the webinar now. Thanks very much.