 We're going to try to get started in the next couple of minutes here if people could come on in and have a seat. Welcome everybody. We're going to try to get started. We've set this up tonight so there's lots of time for discussion. But if we could pull together to get started it would be great. Folks, we're going to launch into this. We've got a lot to do tonight. I'm Mayor Murrow Weinberger. It is exciting to see so many of you have turned out to be part of this phase two conversation of what we're calling the BTV Housing Summit. Let me give you just a little road map of how the evening is going to go. And then I have some remarks to share and then Megan Tuttle, our senior planner and other members of the big city team that's been working on this all spring and summer are going to come up and share some details about the proposals that we've been working on since the first part one of the summit in June. After that we're going to break in to five small groups and the idea is to use 90 minutes of this two hours, about 90 minutes, so that everybody here can weigh in on all five of the different proposals. We're going to try to basically have short discussions and as long as you want to at least be engaged you can weigh in in each of the different five policy areas. So more about the detail on that to come in a moment. Let me kick things off by first of all sharing our excitement and enthusiasm as a city team for the work that we're engaged in with you tonight. From my perspective getting our housing policies right affects every Burlington in one way or another and impacts most of our major community goals. Getting our housing policies right will ensure that our young, our old and working people can continue to call Burlington home. Getting our housing policies right will give a huge boost to our efforts to become a more inclusive and diverse community. Getting our housing policies right will strengthen our businesses, create jobs and create new public revenues for the many social programs we're committed to. Getting our housing policies right, building homes here in Burlington instead of building them further out into the farmlands and forests of Vermont will help propel our climate goals and protect the historic character of this beautiful and unique state. So that's why we're doing this. Where are we in this discussion? In some ways this is a conversation that's been going on since at least the 1980s. I believe Mayor Sanders had the first mayor's task force on housing and every mayor since then has continued to work on housing and I will say from day one housing has been a top priority of this administration. I came into this job after 15 years working as an affordable housing developer in Vermont, New Hampshire and New York. In the first couple years of this administration we did a couple big things working hand in hand with the council. We did a major study about trends in housing in Burlington that confirmed what I think many of us felt which is there were a number of disturbing things going on in our housing with respect to our housing. Downtown housing growth has not kept up in recent years with the amount of growth that is happening out in the suburbs and the exerbs of Chittenden County. Younger households have been pushed out of downtown Burlington by older wealthier households. Downtown housing growth, we really kind of missed the housing boom of the early 2000s in Burlington. We didn't keep up with pure cities that saw a lot of new homes created in that period here in Burlington. In response working with the council we created a 23 point, 23 different strategy housing action plan which was unanimously adopted by the city council with the administration support in 2015 and we have made real progress in almost five years since that past. Basically that 23 point plan boiled down to two big ideas. One that we recommitted ourselves to Burlington's I think very proud legacy of creating and protecting as much permanently affordable housing as possible and protecting tenants with strong and vigorous regulatory enforcement. Two, what we have added to that, and I'm happy to tell you a little more about this record, we have made good on number one. What we have added to this is that we have added an emphasis on increasing the total supply of homes. So let me say a little bit more about the progress we've made in both those areas. By working with supporting our outstanding housing nonprofits, and I see the leaders of those nonprofits here in the room tonight, we have built and preserved over 500 permanently affordable homes since 2012. In addition we are weeks away from the Laurentide project at Cambrian Rise which the Champlain Housing Trust has created with over 70 new homes being created there. And almost as I understand it as soon as that one ends, a new project will break ground being led by Cathedral Square that will be a seniors project that will create another 70 permanently affordable homes. Also in that time, and you know I think this hasn't gotten as much attention as it should, we have greatly improved our code enforcement efforts. For example, back in 2012 we didn't meet our commitment to do a minimum housing inspection of every Burlington rental apartment every three years. That has changed. Under the leadership of Bill Ward we do get to every rental apartment within the three year timeline that we've set for ourselves and do those inspections. In addition, we've implemented a tiered fee system that ensures that the worst landlords pay extra costs for their abuses of the minimum housing code. We also instituted policies like with a focus on performance metrics and the operations of the code enforcement office and on average of two days every complaint that is made to the code enforcement office is responded to. Another area not that we've improved Burlington's enforcement has been with respect to inclusionary zoning. While the city had a good record of ensuring that all new developments that came online had a number of apartments that met this inclusionary zoning standard that were permanently affordable, there was basically no system in place. We found in a review we did a couple years ago to ensure that those units stayed in compliance over time. We now have a monitoring system and a reporting system that happens on an annual basis to ensure that we don't go back to that practice. With respect to improving, expanding the overall housing supply, we've also had some progress. I think we got a slide on this year which shows you can see basically from 2003 to 2019 the total number of homes produced in every year. This is inclusive of permanently affordable homes. This is all new homes and you can see in general there has been a significant uptick since 2012. Number of factors behind that is certainly not all city government pushing that. The general state of the economy has been a major factor in this. At the same time I think the city's efforts to clean up problematic downtown regulatory rules that we're getting in the way of homes being created to partner on projects like Cambrian Rise that offer the possibility of creating hundreds of new homes with property owners that wanted to move in that direction. Of generally supporting the creation of new homes has played a role in this change in trajectory. Obviously creating new homes helps the households, the individuals that are able to get into these new homes. We think it's had a broader impact as well. We're starting to get a sense that this is doing what you would expect an increase in supply to do. It is having an impact on the economics of the housing market. And again I say this while being clear at the start this is not where we want to be. This is not an acceptable well functioning housing market. At the same time it is progress to double on average the vacancy rate in recent years when we've been producing more homes and to see a bend in the curve where instead of housing inflation outpacing the general inflation in recent years we've seen that change where actually housing inflation has been happening at a rate that is lower than the general inflation. Further we are we think another important data point that says we are on the right path with this additional focus that we've added in recent years is the fact that it is very much in line with how the housing debate has shifted nationally. In numerous democratic presidential campaigns in numerous progressive cities across the country you see a shift in the focus that is exactly what I'm trying to describe to you here focusing as much as ever on building as much permanently affordable housing as possible focusing as much as ever on renter protections while at the same time adding to that a commitment to expanding the overall supply acknowledging that a lack of housing supply is a root cause of the challenges we face. You see that in these headlines about California and this national editorial that The New York Times published you also see the keynote speaker we had here in June Lisa Bender has led an effort there that has really been quite remarkable in bringing new focus and new ideas to this housing debate. So sort of the backdrop that brought us to the housing summit in June and what we brought forward in June is five areas three of which are focused on housing supply issues two of which are focused head on on affordability issues four for work and progress in an accelerated fashion. So the three areas focused on supply are about eliminating parking minimums in the downtown and on transportation corridors. We want to make it easier for people to build accessory dwelling units in their in their backyards and as as or perhaps making changes within their home that has the potential to create significant new supply. We are concerned about the erosion of the existing long term rental supply that the new world of Airbnb and VRBO and short term rentals presents you know what let me just pause here for a second to say I think sometimes when I talk about this increasing supply what this gets heard as is being about supporting developers and there is no doubt that there is no way to increase supply without developers playing a key role. They we do not create new homes without someone serving in that without someone serving in that role. What is I think sometimes lost is that all of these initiatives are about improving the lives of tenants and renters as well. Increased housing supply gives renters more and better choices. Increased housing supply puts greater pressure on landlords on property owners to take care of their homes and reduces their ability to increase rents. And again I think we're starting to see that in the data. So that's great. That's what tonight is about. That we're committing to and talking about tonight is that we listen to the feedback at the housing summit in June and definitely you will see that feedback reflected in changes to the proposals that we're going to lay out in a couple moments here. We'll see that tenant protection and greater code enforcement it has been is a significant part of what we're proposing to take to the council. In October in particular around energy code issues where we think there is a huge issue where tenants pay the utility bills on property owners and those property owners have little incentive in some cases on all cases but in those property owners E5% of the home rentals here in Burlington the tenants pay the heat, I see your expression. Those are more focused on where there's a split in the senate. Okay Eric we're going to work in addition to review as well as to look at the national context where you do see in New York and Oregon some significantly expanded efforts in rent protection against evictions. To see if there's anything in that then we should add to Burlington again. I will stay on by the idea that Burlington is one of the most aggressive and effective cities in the country with respect to rent or tenant protection. This is something we have focused on and delivered on for 30 plus years and over the last seven. However we're going to look at whether there's more to do and I've tasked you with commenting forth with a memo that we can get to the city council, the CDNR committee by the end of October to explore whether in addition to what we're talking about tonight that we have a flesh out for discussion today, we have additional things that we should work on and we do think that there's likely a number of additional ideas that are going to come from that review. So with that you're going to hear from the staff these specific proposals we're having. We're going to be taking feedback in small groups tonight so we can hear everybody's voice. In addition it's not the only opportunity that you all have to weigh in here. We are also going to have MPA discussions throughout the month of September on these five proposals. In addition, I met with President Kerr right earlier today and we're going to schedule within the month a council work session to get feedback from the council on the stage because I think I haven't quite made this point yet. What we are laying out here tonight are our concepts. They are not yet at the stage where we can say this is what we as an administration, we as a city think we should do. This is the next step in the process again in our policy right here. We talked about these areas in general on June. Now we have specific proposals for you all to respond to tonight and in those other feedback sessions I just described. We are going to then take all that feedback and we are going to finalize these proposals. I expect there will definitely be a refinement of these proposals and maybe even major changes to these proposals where we then take the next step and hand to the council proposals that the administration is backing for action in October. That is our plan to get to that point in October with the hope that the council can then take that and move on those and we can see quicker change, a quicker pace of housing change that we have at times in the past. And with that, thank you for bearing with us for that. Let's have Megan come up here to take on the next step. Megan, thank you. Thank you. We asked the city to talk to look at the feedback that we received at the housing summit in June, to do additional research and data collection about not only these issues but other related issues and to ensure that as we are bringing forth these policy proposals, they are complementary to one another. So we look forward to sharing them with you tonight. The mayor did note that a lot of the work that we're doing, and I received this question actually just before we started tonight, how did we pick the topics that we're talking about tonight? One of the main reasons for why we're talking about the issues that we are is to continue the work, the unfinished work from the housing action plan. And you can see what the kind of five major housing issue areas were that directed the work of the city and many of its committees and commissions over the last four years related to housing, both in terms of the creation of both affordable and market rate housing, but also in addressing specific housing needs and housing communities. Some of you may be familiar with some of the work that we have been doing as a result of this plan. Many of you, I see that I recognize, have participated in the couple year conversation that we've been having about updating our inclusionary zoning ordinance here in the city. We've been working on things like creating a toolkit and strategy to score near campus neighborhoods through the neighborhood project. And we've also, our partners in CEDO and other organizations in the community have started to create a coordinated entry system for permanent supportive housing. Just to name a few of the projects. Sure, I can talk a little bit slower. Sorry. Those are a few examples of the types of projects that we've been working on to date that came out of the housing action plan. So we're continuing that work then with the discussion of these policy items that we'll be talking about tonight and building on our conversations from June. We focused on these issues as the mayor noted specifically because they're related to both the availability, the supply of housing, but also some of the cost factors that affect both the cost of construction and the cost of them living in housing in our community. So tonight we look forward to continuing the collective conversation that we started back in June about these specific policy issues. I think one thing that is really important to note about these policy issues, and we're already seeing it right now, is that there is not unanimous consensus about how to move forward on these policy issues. We heard that very clearly in our conversations at the last summit. Our team has spent a lot of time digesting the various opinions that we've heard about how we move forward related to these housing issues over the summer months. And we hope that what we're presenting to you tonight is a balanced approach to take into account the variety of feedback that we've heard about each of these issues. And we figure that the conversations tonight will probably have a lot of differing opinions that are presented here too. But the purpose of the conversation tonight really is to let all of those conversations come forward so that we can continue to test and refine the approaches that we're presenting to you tonight related to these issues. So at this point I'll invite my colleagues up here that are just a few of our team that have been working on these proposals that we'll share with you tonight. That we'll talk to you a little bit more about what the issue is, what we heard at the summit in June, and what our proposal is that we want to hear your feedback on for the rest of the evening. So Chris, can you join me? This evening with you all is energy efficiency in rental housing. And the issue that we've been unpacking is the general affordability issue. Energy costs sometimes aren't looked at as part of the overall affordability equation. The other is climate change. Reducing fossil fuel usage in existing buildings is a Burlington goal and a Vermont goal. Some context as to why this can be a little thorny as we look at this. So 60% of our households are renters. And as the mayor pointed out, 85% of those folks pay their space heating costs directly. Space heating and domestic hot water are the two biggest drivers of energy costs in our climate. 60% of our renters are in cost burdened households, meaning they're paying more than 30% of their income towards their housing. So the issue in one other piece of context is about 95% of our buildings use natural gas for space heating and hot water. We have a very old housing stock and we've learned a lot about how to cost effectively reduce energy use in this housing stock through weatherization. But when you have the tenants paying the energy bill and the work to be done would be to put more insulation in the adequate sidewalls or do really good air sealing work. That's not something a tenant is going to do. So we have what is known in the energy efficiency world as a split incentive. And it's not just a Burlington problem, it's a Vermont problem, it's a national problem. How do you get more energy efficiency in to rental housing when the tenants paying the bill? So what we heard at the first summit was a couple things. We really would like to accelerate the pace of weatherizing buildings at need. Can you energy folks figure out which buildings need the work first? Can you come up with cost effective, not the most expensive work, but can we come up with some minimum things for folks to do? And can we do it quicker than some of the ordinances that are in place today? So in 1997 the city passed the time of sale energy efficiency ordinance for rental housing to try to address this issue. But it only happens when buildings are sold and that doesn't move through our 11,000 rental properties very quickly. So the proposed framework for the policy change is to borrow from our already robust minimum housing mode inspection process and evolve the time of sale elements so that they will happen within the timeframe of the minimum housing code. Of course with some time to get the work done. To get a weatherization contractor and do that we understand there's going to be a little bit more time. It will only apply to rental properties where the tenant pays the space heating cost directly and it will only apply to higher use buildings. So at the breakout session in the corner over there we can get into those details, talk about benefits costs and the timelines we're thinking about. We'd love to hear your thoughts as well. Thank you. We're at the CEDO and I'm going to continue our discussion about ADUs from last week but I'll start off with a quick recap. So an accessory dwelling unit or an ADU is simply an apartment allowed inside a single family home usually in the basement or in the attic. Or allowed on the lot as a backyard cottage style ADU. The state of Vermont's law on equal treatment of housing allows ADUs statewide since 2005. As part of the city's housing action plan we conducted a review of ADUs in the city that found since the city passed its ordinance in 2008 that there have been roughly 50 ADUs permitted in Burlington with about 7 per year in the past few years. So a pretty low number even compared to some of the other cities in the state. As we learned at the last summit ADUs are not a new concept but they have gained popularity all over the country and cities struggling to meet the housing needs of their community. The reasons for that is that they provide benefits to homeowners, renters and the community at large. So in this slide you can see how an ADU, the use of the ADU evolves over time. So in the beginning a family made by a home and used an ADU to supplement their income pay the mortgage. The research shows that typically ADUs are rented at affordable rates. As the family grows it may be used for living space or for a grandparent. And then later on the homeowner may move into the ADU and rent the primary home or have the children move into the primary home. So they're really flexible housing option. Additionally they provide housing without the complications of larger development projects. They have a minimal impact on neighborhood character because they're accessory in their use and they're also energy efficient of their small home. The challenge is that developing a unit of housing is hard. It requires navigating zoning, permitting, financing, managing contractors, possibly becoming a landlord. The cities that have shown success in building ADUs have been able to tackle a full range of these challenges. So we saw at the housing summit that there's a lot of stakeholders and residents that are interested in pursuing ADUs as a housing solution for Burlington. There were many suggestions about how to make this process more accessible and ensure responsible development. Based on that input we've recommended specific policy changes to reduce the barriers. It is important to note that education efforts, technical and financial assistance are also a critical piece of this. So we've got kind of the ordinance changes that we're talking about but there are background efforts with the city, home share and AARP, just to name a few, working on the other pieces. So what we'll discuss in our breakout group is the recommendations to streamline permitting. So not requiring conditional use approval that will require an ADU just because it's an ADU to go through the DRB. To not require a parking space for an ADU although you may still choose to build a parking space. We've looked at sort of the size of homes and lots in the city and looking at increasing the size of an ADU in relation to the house where it's prohibitive. That would bring us in line with other cities in Vermont. Some of the parking and short term rental stuff will touch on ADUs as well. So look forward to that conversation. So short term rental or STR I think were in states, overnight stays of 30 days or less. There's significant demand. They benefit owners with a source of income and they can even encourage investment in the property and it's tourism economy in place to stay and travel. In Burlington, STRs can take away from available supply. Some quick stats for Burlington. As of August 29, about two thirds of the entire median nightly rate is $119. So what did we hear at the June housing summit? We heard a few basic themes to address. As we should deal with them, we should have standards either in the zoning code and through rental registration. We should encourage or require the owner occupancy of the STR. We should encourage partial unit STRs as opposed to whole unit conversions. We want to consider different standards for different types in different areas as opposed to a one size fits all. We want to require minimum housing standards. We want to consider ways that STRs might support affordable housing in the city. We want to consider neighborhood impacts where these go. We also want to focus our efforts on what we want to see as opposed to what we want to prevent. So later tonight, the STR station will talk about a basic potential framework to address these in the city. There's three basic pieces. One is business registration to ensure that the required rooms and meals taxes are paid. Second is minimum housing registration. That's to ensure that minimum life safety standards and ongoing inspections to ensure ongoing safety for occupancy at least. And then finally zoning standards. So it's important to point out here that we're talking about something that's longer than temporary, but shorter than a traditional long-term rental unit. There's two basic types as I mentioned before, bedrooms with any unit and the entire dwelling unit. So we have existing standards for bed and breakfast that will modify to address just the bedrooms within for STRs. We'll incorporate new standards for the entire dwelling unit in STR. We'll look to make it relatively easy to rent bedrooms within your dwelling. We'll have more rigorous standards for converting or establishing a whole dwelling unit in STR. And again, that's to limit their proliferation and impacts on our overall housing supply. We're considering allowing STRs wherever residential uses are allowed. Hosts need to be a resident of the property where the host can be a tenant or the property owner. Conversion of an existing dwelling unit to an STR might trigger a payment to the city's housing trust fund. It's important to point out that that's an existing provision that applies for any commercial conversion. Finally, we're going to consider conditional use standards for whole dwelling in STRs. In plain English, that means it goes to the development area board. Neighbors can notice it provides a public forum for neighbors to weigh in with their concerns or comments. David White, I'm the director of planning and I'm going to talk to you a little bit about minimum parking requirements. So one of the issues we discussed back in June was the fact that the city requires all new development to provide a certain amount of on-site parking as part of that development project. There's a rapidly growing consensus around the country and in fact internationally that these parking requirements like these lead to an oversupply of parking. They make new development overly expensive and complex and undermine our goals for a more walkable community and better transit. As a result, hundreds of communities around the country have made the move to eliminate their minimum parking requirements in all or part of their communities. Many communities never had them to begin with. So the question we posed was should Burlington join this list and remove what is understood as being a significant barrier to the creation and affordability of housing. We know that parking takes up a lot of space. About 14% of the downtown area right now is occupied by parking. Parking is incredibly expensive to build and maintain and therefore it adds to the cost of everything that's associated with it, whether it's a residential unit or a retail space. Not everyone regularly uses or even has a car. In the census blocks that are around the downtown, 25% of the households do not have a car. And as a result, a lot of the parking that we're requiring to be built sits empty. About 30% of the downtown parking spaces are vacant at any given time. This is an incredible waste of money and space. So why should we require the creation of more parking spaces when we're not making the best use we can of the parking spaces we already have? So in the conversations we had in June, there was a lot of support of this idea and the understanding that the need for parking is highly variable based on the location and the type of development. Several folks expressed the need and support for better public transit if our goal is to get people out of their cars, which it is, but only in park. This is really about the city no longer being in the business of telling development how much parking it has to create. There are indeed many co-benefits to a policy like this, like greater economic vitality, more sustainable development and improved viability of transit and other transportation modes. One misunderstanding that I want to clean up is that we're not proposing that development cannot create a park. We're simply not mandating the minimum amount of parking spaces that have to be associated with it. Our expectation is that nearly as much new parking will be created and there'll be a greater opportunity to share the existing parking we already have. Communities that have done this and have measured the outcomes have found that between 40% and 60% of the otherwise required parking still gets built. So the proposal that we want to discuss with you tonight is really very simple. We eliminate the minimum parking requirements in the downtown and our neighborhood centers and the long major thoroughfares as illustrated on the map. Places where we know there's an oversupply of parking and or there's a wide range of effective transportation alternatives available to folks without a car. It also would apply to affordable housing projects, rehabilitation of historic buildings and accessory dwelling units like Ian noted in his presentation. We also want to make more efficient use of the parking we already have by making sure that parking that is out there today is not encumbered by his zoning permit that prevents that property owner from sharing their vacant spaces with adjacent property owners. This will help facilitate the creation of new development utilizing the parking that we already have and to make sure that the spaces that are being created are as efficient as they can be. So by looking at the spatial requirements, how big a parking space is required to be and finally ensuring that alternative forms of transportation continue to be supported and readily available. By re-looking at our existing traffic impact fees that are assessed on new development and make it available to and focused on a more holistic and comprehensive view of all kinds of transportation and parking infrastructure. My name is Todd Rawlings. I'm the Housing Program Manager here at CEDO. Over 1,800 vulnerable households in Burlington have affordable housing because of the Housing Trust Fund. Low-income families, individuals, people with disabilities, people experiencing homelessness and seniors all have benefited. First funded in 1990, the City's Housing Trust Fund is the largest source of non-federal funding for the creation and preservation of affordable housing in Burlington. It's flexible and it provides critical early funding for these projects. The vast majority of funds have come from a dedicated property tax of one-half penny on every $100 of assessed value, which generates about $200,000 a year for the fund. From Burlington's Housing Action Plan to the Inclusionary Zoning Working Group and other City Council committees, we've heard there's a strong interest in having a conversation about the Housing Trust Fund and whether or not it is being funded adequately. The dedicated funding has been essentially flat since 1990 and inflation has eroded the impact of these funds. Adjusting for inflation this year, the dedicated tax is contributing 46% less to the Housing Trust Fund than in 1990. This might be appropriate if fewer low-income Burlington residents were struggling with affordability than they had been in the past, but the data suggests otherwise. In 2000, 33% of low-income households paid more than 30% of their income toward rent or mortgage payment. In 2018, that number has risen 7% so that over 40% of households do not have affordable housing. Many community members, including some of you here today, participated in one or both listening sessions about the Housing Trust Fund at the June Housing Summit. What we heard was near consensus that the Housing Trust Fund should be increased to at least one penny. For some time, the Mayor supported increasing the Housing Trust Fund through the dedicated tax, and this fall he will propose to the City Council that they join him in supporting this effort. This would involve the Council referring this to the Charter Change Committee putting the increase on the March ballot and ultimately going to the State Legislature for approval. If successful, this effort will generate an additional $170,000 a year for the Housing Trust Fund, which will leverage an additional over $1 million a year to preserve and create new affordable homes in Burlington. Since 2016, to make up for this erosion due to inflation, the Mayor proposed and the City Council approved an additional $170,000 per year in general funds to supplement the dedicated tax. The Mayor's proposal would guarantee that this increased funding is available to affordable housing every year. During this period of increased funding, the Housing Trust Fund has funded an average of 68 units per year compared to the previous four years where 55 units per year were created. Given that, and since this funding is targeted to non-profit providers of housing, it's reasonable to argue that this increase from one half penny to one penny will result in the creation of at least 13 new permanently affordable homes for low-income families each year. We want to spend the rest of the evening hearing your reactions to what my colleagues just shared in terms of the proposals that we have put out there related to each of these topics. We want to spend about 15 minutes asking you to visit each of these stations for about 15 minutes to share your reactions. What do you like about these proposals? What do you think that we need to further tweak about these proposals? As the Mayor said, we fully anticipate that these may go through some additional or maybe substantial additional modification before they are actually delivered to the City Council to consider this fall. So we ask that for the duration of the evening you join us in a conversation so that we can hear your reactions to each of these policy proposals. Yes, Housing Summit, that was really helpful, was that when we broke up into small groups of having just about 10 or 15 people, everyone had a chance to say what they wanted to say about every single topic. So we would really like to have that level of input on each of these issues here tonight as well. I think that what you will also have the opportunity to hear, like I said at the beginning, is that within your groups I fully anticipate that you will hear from people with different opinions. And I encourage you to start a dialogue in those groups. We want to record everything that you're sharing with us, whether it's support or opposition or something in the middle questions about these topics. So we definitely encourage you to break up around the room. All of my colleagues that presented these topics to you tonight are going to disperse. There are other members of the City staff team that will be there supporting them so that we can take your questions, answer your questions, and take your feedback on all of these issues. I see one more question. That's also a great question. The question was about what does it look like for us to take the feedback and what will we be doing next? After the last summit we collected all of the input that was shared at every single one of the break up groups and we actually compiled a summary report, which I know there were some copies of when you first came into the room that we provided to the city council that we posted on the city's website and that our city team used to then have a conversation, do some research to ultimately formulate what you're going to see here tonight or what you're going to talk about here tonight. I anticipate that we will do the exact same thing with what we receive here tonight as well. And ultimately each of these policy proposals has a public process associated with them. This is early feedback associated with how we might approach these issues. The policies that are related to zoning will be talked about and visited by our planning commission before they move to the city council. Each of these has sort of their own kind of public process that the folks that will be at each of the stations are also prepared to talk to you more about in terms of what the next steps look like. But ultimately I know that this package is anticipated to go to the full city council for some dialogue in October and then be referred on for more conversations in there. We have a small breakout group on the health and safety impacts of the plan basing of the F-35. That's one of the breakout groups, please. Sure. So a couple of the logistic details that we'll touch on your question and then we're going to break up because it's getting late and I want to make sure that we have a chance to hear from you. So as we mentioned we want to hear your specific feedback on the five issues that we brought up. But we know that there are other issues that are on your mind that you're interested in that are important for us to think about. So right here in the back with the folks that have the renter signs right behind them are a couple of posters of other housing related topics that came up at our last summit and a blank poster for you to also share those topics again here tonight. So if you have things that you think should be on our radar for future discussion please add them to that poster throughout the evening. If you are interested in talking with the woman in the back corner about health and safety of housing please feel free to stop by and chat with them throughout the evening as you're making your way around the room. In terms of getting us started I will kind of help keep us moving that way we all have the opportunity to visit and talk about every single one of these issues here tonight. So please look for me occasionally I'll try to be vocal but if you can't hear me I will also put this on the screen that will help you think about moving around the room to another topic. But at this point I just ask you to get up and move to the poster that's closest to where you're sitting. You'll have a chance to make your way around the whole room.