 I thought it would be interesting to pick up this notion, and I'll come to you last if I may, about relating, ultimately that's what you're talking about, a city to its water as a resource, as a place, and not negating it, which is behind your question. Ask Mayor Williams, who in fact just stood down earlier this year after two successful terms of Mayor of Washington, D.C., to perhaps reflect on the key questions we've asked you, but also connect it perhaps if you have a moment on the issue of what you did on terms of rediscovering the city's waterfront through your eight-year mayoralty. When I listen to the questions, what challenges did you face, and what were the impediments to you in meeting those challenges? I felt like, you know, give me a day and I can explain them to you. I mean, I inherited a city where a couple of things were clear, and what I want to do is I want to touch on the waterfront, but I really want to play off of Jerry's remarks because I've actually listened to them over a couple iterations, and I think they really offer us, I think, some instructive lessons for those of us who've actually been there in government trying to run the day to day. So to really kind of talk about the kind of internal issues that we faced in running a city like Washington, D.C., touch on the waterfront, but then some of the external issues that really relate to some of the impediments. Now, internally, a couple of things struck me. One is when, at least when I was standing on the bridge of the ship of state, and I'm listening to my colleague Enrique Pinolosa talk about, maybe it's a manner of speaking, Mayor, but he says clearly, clearly, clearly. Well, the point is when you're standing there in the bridge of the ship, something may be very clear to you, but it's not at all clear to your constituents. It's actually quite murky and cloudy. I think he would agree. There's a lot of explaining that has to go on to your constituency, which is a part of leadership, which gets to another point. I think if you listen to Jerry's speech the wrong way, which you, and I don't think he doesn't mean it this way because you have to listen closely, but if you took it the wrong way, you would take it as this kind of romanticism of the Vox populi, this kind of Jeffersonian notion that the people out there in the countryside, or in this case down in the neighborhoods, know what's best, but they're being tormented and bedeviled by these evil, corrupt, self-interested public officials. I actually think that it's actually quite a difficulty. It's actually quite difficult in running a city to strike a balance between proper accountability and alienation from kind of malformed passions, necessary change driven by the people, but the need for continuity. I'll give you a great example of an issue I faced. What's a primary issue I faced when I became mayor? The city had been bankrupt, absolutely, positively bankrupt in default, and everybody agreed. Corporate interests, the citizens, everybody was behind the mayor, in this case, Mary and Barry, I don't mean to criticize them, but of course I am, drove the city right into the ground in bankruptcy. So one of the things that I did as mayor is basically work with an unelected Congress who kind of functioned as a state legislature, right, because of the interesting kind of tormented history of Washington DC, work with them to create an independent CFO, in other words, chief financial officer who would be insulated, I thought, properly by the kind of misdirected passions of the people. Because what is important in finance of primary responsibility of government? It's very, very important to set your expenditure expectations high and your revenue expectations low. And most of the time, if you go around and you just count up votes and you just go around and count up people, you're going to end up doing what? You're going to low-ball what you expect to spend, high-ball what you expect to receive and you end up like Sao Paulo or Washington DC out of money. So that was a case of where I thought it was important to insulate a public function from the kind of pure democracy or public site. On the other hand, a case of where this actually worked, there are two cases where this actually worked. One case was in the case of the public hospital that we had as a legacy of this default in this bankruptcy, a control board that was in place and existed a couple years into my time as mayor. Unfortunately, because we were able to get our finances together, we were able to say goodbye to them two years early. But they were around and they decided that the best thing to do with the public hospital was to close the public hospital and take the money for the public hospital and put it into social insurance. The thinking being that the citizens would be better served by primary care and they'd be better served by a choice of hospitals to go to as opposed to going to a poorly managed, poorly financed, really grossly irresponsible public hospital which existed at the time. I happened to believe as mayor of the city that actually it was a better response to the citizens. It was actually less patronizing to the citizens. For me, if I actually agreed with this control board to actually stand up front and center and say, you know what? You elected me and I actually agree with them. And if you don't agree with me, don't elect me in two years. Fortunately, they agreed with me. Basically, the citizens by and large agreed that this was the best use of public resources. And last but not least, you mentioned the waterfront. One of the problems I thought existed in our city, Jerry, was that you had in some cities, you have cities that work very, very quickly and they're not very democratic. In other cities, you have cities that work very, very slow but they're very democratic. We had the worst of both worlds. Our city didn't work and it wasn't very democratic. So what we tried to do with, what we tried to do was to move the focus of attention in our city from the mall. If you look at, and Andrew was talking about this, if you look at many of the maps and portrayals and illustrations of Washington DC, what do you see? You see the Washington Mall. You never, you never, you don't barely see the Potomac River. You certainly don't see the Anacostia River. It just so happens that if you take Washington DC and DC, and for that matter the Washington DC metro area, it will, the Anacostia River actually divides the city educated, less educated, rich and poor, divides the city and Bruce Katz would tell you divides the region. So our goal was to build popular support, actually engage citizens in a vision for the Anacostia River, a new 100-year vision for the city based on the people that would shift the focus of the city to the river or expand the focus maybe to the river and in so doing bridge these differences between rich and poor, between educated and less educated. And I would have to say that the, I mean literally hundreds of engagements and these citizen summits that I talked about where we actually talk to citizens and we link citizen voice to the actual budget of the city, I think went a long way to do that. There were still impediments. One major impediment is we can, I think I can speak for mayors around the world but certainly mayors in my country, we could talk as long as we want about our own governmental processes in our city, right in our own approach to our citizens in our city and how we meet challenges in our city but unless there's a proper support from the federal government let along the state government to what we're trying to do we're only going to go so far and I agree that these changes are possible but what do you do to promote these changes that he talked about and in the intermediate period try to address some real issues that exist day to day and I would suggest two things for mayors. Mayors need to think about first of all the vertical and to use this and to do a much better job in trying to harness the citizen voice, right, galvanize the citizen voice, channel the citizen voice, direct the citizen voice toward the state and state and federal government, these higher levels of government that are responsible for proper funding of these initiatives and have to respect if they are to fund these initiatives that these initiatives whether they're in healthcare or transportation really have the proper articulation at a local level and then I would also say horizontally we're going to fail in our efforts unless we realize certainly in a city like Washington DC but this exists across our country and I think it exists here in Mumbai if I may dare say the notion to think regionally. In other words if you look at the United States right now it really is organized constitutionally around an agrarian economy that no longer exists. The states really have no real function but they're there. Are we going to really change state forms? No but can we get national discussion and national voice and hence national action around changing government structures and processes around regional, local, political economies? I think we can if we start working together in common as mayors on the issues of global warming or the issues of transportation or the issues of health. So I think a lot is possible if we recognize that when we talk about citizen voice a couple things are clear. One is a lot of things aren't clear. Number two that you have to follow the 70-30 rule I would say. If you really want to be responsible with jerry saying the local voice and you're an elected official you have to recognize that 70 percent of the time 60 percent of the time maybe it's 80 percent of the time you're basically taking dinner orders. That's your job as a public servant you're there to respond directly to what the people want but 30 percent of the time they elected you to interact with them and take decisions that sometimes may be a little contrary to what they think their immediate interests are but it's your job to lead them and that's difficult and how do we create the processes that encourage that that encourage that and recognize I always used to say that the public voice and democracy was like nuclear power if it's used properly it can light the city if it's used in a wrong fashion it can blow up the city thank you