 Hey, good evening. Welcome to Montpelier Civic Forum. And this year, we're talking about Town Meeting 2020. We're going to be doing, as always, the city budget, the school budget, the school candidates, the city candidates. And this year, and we're also doing the mayoral candidates, which of course is Anne Watson running on a post, but Anne will be here doing her show. And it's going to be a good show as well. But today, we're in District 3. And District 3 is kind of unique, because this is the first time in a long while that we've had two open seats at the same time in one district. Of course, it would have been nice had we had two incumbents in District 2 and 1 running against someone, but they're running on a post. So this is our city race, which is District 3. And tonight, I'm pleased to have Dan Richardson. Dan? Well, thank you for having me. Sure. What part of District 3 do you live in? Well, I live on Liberty Street. I'm actually in the far corner of District 3. District 3 is a little bit unique in that the bulk of it sits on the south side of the Winooski River, but there's a section that comes up, up Main Street, and in the neighborhood of St. Paul Street, School Street, a part of Loomis, and a part of Liberty. And I'm pretty close to where all three districts meet together right in the middle. So I'm in the heart of Montpelier, but I'm in District 3 and have been for 20 years. District 3, most of it's across the river. Most of it. Why is District 3 different than the other two districts? Well, you know, if you think about identity of a city, you know, I think you think of it as a whole, but it's really composed of smaller neighborhoods. And District 3's neighborhood to the south doesn't have the same sort of downtown features that either District 1 or District 2 have. I mean, District 2 has the college. District 1 has a section of the downtown. It has a lot of rec and civic opportunities there and the park itself. And District 3 really sits on the south side of the river and does not have as many of the city facilities. So in some ways, I know that there's a number of people that feel a little bit isolated on that side. The main connector, Berlin Street, has been the subject of a number of hearings in before city council as far as the speed limit and people trying to build neighborhoods. But it's not the same as some of the District 1 or District 2 just simply because of its geographic location. It's actually, it has an interesting history. I mean, it was part of the town of Berlin. I think so. It would be about the mid-19th century and Montpelier just took it. Now, the rumor was that Berlin was willing to seat it because it was one of the poorer neighborhoods in the town of Berlin. So they didn't fight too hard, but there was no actual vote by the town of Berlin to give this land to the city of Montpelier. The city just took it and the legislature ratified it. Well, if you look at it at the housing stock, in the early 20th century, it looks like there was practically nothing there. There wasn't and there's a lot of post-World War II houses there. So small, you know, one or two-story capes. So it's an interesting, it's a little different than, say, some of the neighborhoods in Liberty Street or Main Street and District 2, as well as some of the more modern houses in District 1. It's a unique place unto itself. Or the houses over on Terrace. Correct. In District 1. Sure. Some of the big old Victorians. Exactly. What are the concerns of District 3? You've walked the district now. You've had the chance to actually do some, hey, I'm running for city council. What are you hearing? Sure. Well, I think there is a concern about the character of the neighborhood and, you know, how does it forge an identity? And I know there are some concerns about, you know, obviously the biggest one that the council saw in the past year, I wasn't on the council at the time, but was the speed limit in Berlin. And I think that's really a function of people in that neighborhood, particularly that Berlin Street neighborhood to the north and south of Berlin Street wanting to feel that they had a neighborhood as opposed to living along a throughway. And, you know, I know I've heard when I've talked to other people, you know, want a desire for some type of park or civic access facility in their neighborhood. Any idea where that would be? What people's thinking is on that? No, I mean, we're not going to change the water plan, too. We're not going to. And, you know, it is somewhat limited, you know, these neighborhoods are fairly well developed. And, you know, there are limitations, you know, that's one of the qualities of District 3, at least on the south side of the rivers, you know, it's bounded by Route 2, which is a U.S. highway. It's bounded by 302. And it has Berlin Street. None of those really lend themselves to sort of quiet, quaint neighborhood streets or a park. But, you know, there is always, there are always, I think, opportunities. And I think that's going to be part of what we have to look at as a city, as well, you know, it's a very residential neighborhood in parts. And there's there are some sort of, for lack of a better word, strip mall along Route 2 and 302. And, you know, one of the goals that I would think going forward would be to integrate those so that you would have the ability to walk to a convenience store or have accessibility much in the way that people in downtown Montpelier have. Now, that's as people who've watched this show year after year after year know that my wife does have a business in the core downtown. Right. But those that somewhat strip mall-y thing are still family-owned businesses. Absolutely. I can't think of a single, except for maybe the paint store. Or I can't think of even that. But even that's owned locally. Exactly. What can we do to integrate that business strip? I mean, we have Montpelier Live, which is chartered for the downtown, but they can't reach out there. Their charter does not allow them to reach out there. Well, I think that that needs to change. And, you know, I think as a city, we need to be thinking of the entire city as well as we need to be thinking regionally. You know, I think we need to be pursuing either partnerships or looking to promote different areas. You know, you have that whole district there where the Pioneer Street Bridge exits. And very little attention has been paid. But that has a lot of promise. I mean, if you've ever been to the VFW, they have a beautiful facility there. It sits right along the river as well as the Growler Station there. It would be nice to have some promotion and some activity, you know, as opposed to sort of the constant focus on downtown, which is good. But, you know, I think as a District 3 representative, I'd like to see some of that promoted as well. Doesn't District 3 extend beyond the wayside? Well, technically, I thought it went to the old walker to the city limits. It goes to the city limits. Because those streets that cut back into 302 are the heart of District 3. Right. So Sherwood and those... Exactly, Ebertson. Exactly. Yeah, all of those are part of District 3. Anything south of the river is District 3. And then you have a little notch cut into the city itself on the north side of the river that's also part of District 3. Well, when Ashley Hill was city councilperson, she used to talk about that strip and beautifying that strip. Could you see that going on? We do Christmas lights downtown. We don't do anything in that area. Well, you know, I mean, I think that's where the city can help. You know, we've created Montpelier Alive and it does a good job of promoting the downtown. But, you know, as we think about growing, as we think about putting houses out and saving pasture or, you know, expanding some of the housing stock, I think we have to think about these resources there and what can we do? And does it...not to say we turn that area into another version of downtown Montpelier, but yeah, to give that an identity and to work with the people that own property there, the business owners, that would be fantastic. And I think, you know, the people in District 3 would benefit from it because the more we can create opportunities and accessibility for those type of residents, the residents in those areas, I think it's a benefit to everyone because then they don't have to drive into the city to get some of the necessities. They have their own neighborhoods and that's the way cities grow, is these little neighborhoods develop and their own services and facilities develop alongside of them. Now, I know a little bit about your background that many who are watching don't. You've worked on the integrity of the downtown of Montpelier for a long while. Can you give us some of your civic background? Sure. So, I started actually involved in City of Montpelier in 2005 by serving on the Design Review Committee, which at the time was the committee at which any changes to the downtown or the design control district had to come through us. What is the design control district? Well, the design control district was the area not just in downtown, but some of the residences that were on the register of historic places that were protected. And basically, I happen to live in one of the houses, so if, for example, I wanted to change the paint color of my house, I would have had to go through the design review committee to make sure that they approve the color of the paint or if I wanted to change my windows or my doorknob or any exterior feature required approval by the design review. Did that seem intrusive to you at the time? Not really, because I think everybody's first reaction is, whoa, don't tell me what to do with my private property. But I think it's important because Montpelier looks the way it does, not by accident and not by chance. It's the hard work of a lot of people to make our city look the way it does. How close does the city look? Well, I think it has a quaint atmosphere. I mean, if you look online with the reviews that the city gets, and it makes the top 10 list of quaint downtowns, I mean, the adjective Norman Rockwell-y is often applied to our town. It has a lot of historic buildings. Stop. Within the matter of one sentence, you jump from our city to our town. No, no. I ask this every time. Everyone will get this eventually if they're sitting on this show. Is Montpelier a city or is Montpelier a town? Well, technically and legally, it's a city. But to you, they mean different things. And if you look at it as a town, it means something. If you look at it as a city, it means something. Well, now you're tapping into my background as a municipal attorney. And actually, I used to teach municipal law at the Vermont Law School. And the distinction between town and city is collapsing largely. And in Vermont, it's not quite the same as it used to be. So I do. My daughter, when she was little, I said to her, I said, do we live in a town? Do we live in a city? Or do we live in a village? And she said, oh, daddy, we live in a village. It was because she thought it was this quaint little place that she knew everyone or walked around the streets. So to her, it seemed like this little village. But functionally, we are a city because we do have a council and we have districts that are different than towns. We don't have a select board. We don't have at-large seats other than the mayor. But not technically, just in terms of sociologically. Does this feel like a city or feel like a town? Well, it definitely has a town feel to it because we are a big little city. We are very small in population or under 9,000. 7,500, I think at this point. At this point, I haven't looked at the statistics. But it's very small. It's very quaint. There's a lot of people that know everyone else. There is a small geographic area that composes the town. And so as a result, it does have a sort of insular and small feel. So a town is where your second grader can look around her class and realize her prom date is very likely in that grade. Exactly. Or as your child grows up and goes into eighth grade, they still refer to the person who moved to town in third grade as the new kid. Exactly. When did you arrive in Montpelier? 2000. What was Montpelier like in 2000 that it isn't like now? It had a few more people besides me. Aside from a few more of you, I've driven them out. No, it's a much quieter city at that time. Quieter in what sense? In the sense that there wasn't as much economic activity. At the time I came, capital grounds had just started. It was still in the Yield Chittenden Bank building. Horn of the Moon was still around, although it was on its last legs. Onion River was a smaller, what's now Onion River outdoors. And Warren Kittsmiller. Yeah, I think he still owned it at the time. He still owned it. The Sweet Melissa's, I think was empty at the time. A lot of empty storefronts. There was an Indian restaurant actually where Rebel Heart is now. And we went into it one night and there was this woman and we sat down and we started to order. And she said, well, I don't have that dish. So we ordered another dish. And she said, I don't have that dish. I said, well, how about this dish? And she says, okay, but I should tell you, we don't have rice. And so we didn't eat dinner there. It was a lot of experiences like that. I think the city's grown and certainly it's developed and become more vibrant economically in the 20 years that I've been here. So anything we can do in the commercial downtown to support it more? How do you see that? Again, I have my own thoughts. I'm not going to share because my wife is merchant. Of course. Well, I mean, I work downtown too. I have an office on East State Street. And so I spend my days here in Montpelier. As I joked, I never leave District 3. I live in it and I work in it. But I think as far as a downtown goes, I think we have to think about what our strengths are. We have to think about what our weaknesses are. And... Boy, you tossed me a softball. What are our strengths? We'll be happy to give those. One of our strengths is that we have a good, solid retail district where people can come, whether they live here or they're visiting, and get a lot of the necessities of life. Try and buy a hammer in downtown Burlington. Try and buy some of the basic staples of life in downtown Burlington. You're going to struggle to find some of those. You don't struggle in Montpelier. We still have a downtown that's friendly and accessible. Two residents as well as visitors. The visitors can come. They can go to the olive oil store. They can go to the toy store. They can go to the quirky pet. And they can have an experience that is going to be unlike any other place that they're visiting. But the person who needs to get a roll of toilet paper or needs a refill on Robotus and can walk downtown as well and get some of those basic staples. But at the end of the day, this is a small town. It is. It is. And we do have a small town commerce. We do. With the internet lurking in the background. With the internet lurking in the background. We have an advantage in that we have, somewhere in the range of 20,000 people that come into the city every day, especially during the legislative session, to work and they shop and they eat. And that helps support the restaurants and the retail. And being able to take advantage of those people is really important. And some of the weaknesses that we have is that the city sits in a floodplain. And so development is not an easy thing. If you look at the transit center, for example, they had to put it up as high as they did for floodplain regulations. That makes any new development a challenge. And the geography of it as well. You know, I always have been surprised at the town-state government relations. For as big of a presence as the state of Vermont has in the city of Montpelier, we don't ask of it as much as I think we should. Because while it does give benefit to retailers, while it does allow us to a certain quality of life, I think, with their retail money coming in, they have a disproportionate impact. There's a lot of downtown real estate that is the state of Vermont, which is great. But we've asked year after year for a greater share of faux taxes. Right, the pilot payments. The pilot payments. And we've been turned down, along with other towns. Well, you know. I mean, Waterbury joins us. There are other towns as well. I think of it as an alias. You think about Middlebury. In the town of Middlebury, flourishes because of Middlebury College. Yet there's tensions there. No retailer in downtown Middlebury would do anything to get rid of Middlebury College. That's what their livelihood is built upon. At the same time, there's always tensions. And it's always surprising to me that there aren't those same town and gown tensions between the city and the state. We ask, we get turned down, and we don't look for other leverage or other ways to try and unlock certain funds or support where the state has a huge impact on our, it has a huge footprint in our downtown. And it's not unfair to say to them, we need some support here, or we need you to think about doing this. And it would be good to see more of that. Isn't the pressure point usually between state and our town parking? That is definitely one of the major issues. That's the question I always had about the parking garage, is that while the parking garage is a good thing, it also doesn't involve the major cause of parking issues in downtown Montpelier, which is the state of Vermont. Having a business on East State Street, I can tell you that the free spaces between my house and my business fill up at 730, between 730 and 830 when state workers come in, which is fine. But that's an impact. And when I have clients come, they can't find free parking. And sometimes they can't find metered parking because of the state. And that's... What could the state do to step forward in your mind? Well, you know, the pit. Besides pilot. Well, you know, I think there are certain projects. You know, it's interesting that we've had a lot of state expenditures in the region, Waterbury, Berlin, Barrie in the past few years. And we haven't had major projects into support some of the infrastructure that the state creates in Montpelier. Now identify, I know where the pit is. You're talking about behind the faux restaurant that used to be the thrush. Correct. It's what has happened. So Court Street runs parallel to State Street but a block behind. And it used to be lined with little Italianate houses. And if you look at pictures from the early 20th century, you'll see all the little houses along there. And systematically, the state and other owners of that property have torn down those houses. Notably insurance companies. Yes, have torn down those houses. And so that now you have this sort of what we call the pit. It's a big bowl of open land that these companies park. And it's underutilized. You know, if you put either some sort of parking structure or building on top of it, it could unlock that area. And that's prime, again, prime downtown real estate that is simply thrown away without any type of option for people in Montpelier to utilize. The state keeps it as their sort of open parking lot and it's not even that well organized. I think they could do a lot to improve that. And they have no incentive to do it right now. And not to say that we necessarily have the leverage to do it, but it always strikes me that the conversation is missing and that if there was a public support or if there was a public mandate for that, we might have more attention paid to it. Right in that area, in front of that area, let me stay there, was the golf station that was Thomas's that's now on Elm Street. And that is a parking area with a very ugly sign that used to be the golf sign. There is no zoning right now that does not violate any sort of zoning. Would you see supporting an ordinance that would take those kinds of signs that are now just derelict and not and address that? Yeah, my understanding at least of that particular sign and that particular lot is that it's temporary. It's been temporary a long time. It has been temporary a long time, but my understanding is that the new owner is looking to build. But again, as we saw with Sabin's Pasture and the Zorzi family that would love to build. And on the other side, the car lot and the transit center that would love to build has a very different meaning in Montpelier terms. No, that's true. But to the extent that it stays there and it's an eyesore, yes, I would support something that would require. And in fact, there was a certain point in which there were a number of downtown retail spaces that were empty. And there was a question about whether or not there should be some sort of abandoned space ordinance. Well, they weren't abandoned. They were just empty. They were still technically for rent. Right. But some of them were close to abandoned. Aren't some of those filled right now? They are. Okay. So, they weren't abandoned. Well, in the sense that they were that they were vacated. They were eyesores. You know, you can you can use some of the kind of legislation when it's composed? No, I wasn't not the particular legislation. But I can tell you that other towns do have, you know, legislation about how empty storefronts should be managed. That's not an unreasonable burden. What would part of that be if you just give us an example how you would manage that? Sure. I mean, there could be a requirement that would just simply require them to have, you know, updated paint and appearance. And to keep any type of empty storefront clean and empty and of good appearance. You know, so if the for example, the glass is cracked, they need to replace it, you know, so that it kept a sort of neat appearance, even if it is not occupied, you're managing the building. Were there object lessons in how long it took to develop the car lot into something and Saban's pasture as well? Are there lessons to be learned from those experiences? Well, the car lot was somewhat unique because it had the brownfield element to it. And that always is complicated, you know, because you're dealing with federal government at that point and you're dealing with brownfield funding that can be inconsistent or have a number of conditions on it that can drive the normal development in a different direction. You know, I think the lessons that could be learned for both is that, you know, the city needs to work with potential developers. And I think one of the good stories about the car lot was that they did, you know, when they partnered with Down Street, you know, the city was able to provide certain elements of that lot recovery that no private developer could. So some of the remediation work that was done, you know, was done through the city. You know, we're facing the same sort of question with the Moat lot where the You're going to have to explain what that is? I will explain. Where the old M&M beverage? Sure, the old M&M beverage. You know, that right now, that building's been torn down and it was And there's a path? There's a bike path, but you know, what had initially been done was the city did a swap. The city owned the land that was right next to the drawing board. And they swapped with the Moat trust to trade parcels. So we could build the bike path where we have it. And the Moats would have the city lot to build a new building on. And they've backed out of that. They no longer want to build a building. And so there's an option to for the city to take ownership of that lot. Would you support that? I would, because I think there's a lot of opportunity there. Now, whether we would turn it into a park or whether the city would look to turn around and have find a developer to either sell it to or to partner with, I haven't quite focused on whether, what are available options are. But I think being in control of that is important. One of the things about the car lot was it had a very difficult owner who was not willing to sell. Notwithstanding the fact that he owned a brownfield in the city. Well, he was licensing it to the state for a while. Exactly. Yeah. I mean, you know, but that was, you know, if you think about what is the real value of a lot like that, you know, that's, that's a minimal return for what he could have gotten. And but it was enough for him to, you know, time was on his side. He didn't care if it remained undeveloped. And the city did because it's an important part of our downtown cityscape. So we go one block south and we're in a lot right now that's our, I'm sorry, we go one block north of that. Right. And we're in an area that's being argued over a hotel in a parking garage. Right. Is there a lesson on that one? Could we have done something differently to have avoided that argument in court? Well, I don't know if we could have done in anything to avoid that in court because, you know, there was general popular support for the parking garage. You know, the people that are opposing it are very well-meaning and, you know, strong, strongly held beliefs. They're neighbors. Yeah, they're our neighbors. I mean, they've, you know, there are, they're not people that are looking to build another hotel and are blocking it so that they can build a hotel or a parking garage on their own property. They're people that care about the city of Montpelier. You know, and that... Could the tents have been, do you think the tents could have been big enough to address those concerns during the process or do you think the gap was just too wide? I think the gap was too wide. I mean, I was part of some of that process, obviously, on the DRB and there were hearings, there were a lot of comments taken and I think at the end of the day, people tended to fall along a spectrum of either four against the parking garage as they saw its benefit to the downtown or its detriment. And so, you know, I think it depends on how you see, you know, this functioning. As I mentioned before, you know, one of the, I think the legitimate criticisms of the parking garage is that it's seeking to solve a parking problem without involving one of the major players, the state of Vermont. And, you know, the counterargument to that is, well, look, we can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Yes, we'd love to get the state of Vermont to build something over the pit. We've approached them, as you know, you've mentioned before, you know, we've approached the state and they've refused. It's fair enough. And so, you know, policy is often born out of these compromises where you can't have what you really want, so you go for a second best. You try to still capture the public good. And so in that respect, I, you know, I think that how far you believe in some of those arguments informs how you view the parking garage. But I don't, I haven't talked to anyone on either side of the spectrum who's done it from disingenuous or bad faith reasons. And so I don't think you can avoid certain of those fights. And part of it's a function of the fact that Montpelier has a lot of people that care a lot about the city. Can we kind of square, you know, put square of the circle, square of the circle over the downtown downtown master plan vis-a-vis bicycles versus parking. I'm talking about the traffic calming study on Main Street. How do you stand on that one? Because that's one that the next console will be weighing in on that entire downtown master plan. What's your thoughts on that? Well, I think it's going to be a function of whether or not we build this parking garage. Well, it's only going to happen if we do. Right. Assuming that we do. Assuming that we do, you know, the more we can free up, I always look to Church Street. I mean, if you talk to somebody from the 1950s in Burlington and you said to them, someday this street will have no parking whatsoever, you know, have a bunch of bricks and everybody walks. That was Mayor Sanders, wasn't it? It was. But I mean, if you went back in time to before that, well before that, people always said, you're crazy. That's insane. That's, this won't work. Where are we going to park? And it's worked out very well. Except for a pit right behind it. This is true. That's, well, that's a different story all together. But you know, I think, I think that to the extent that we have a downtown, if you look at the 1976 cityscape for the City of Montpelier, it envisioned that state and Maine in its, the sort of trying, the, you know, essential blocks of that intersection would be walking. And that they imagined, they envisioned that School Street to Elm, and then Elm would go through what's that, the, the parking garage, the Heaney lot, and it would come around Berry Street. Was that when there was a bridge between State Street over the next to Capital Grounds that would go over to Langdon Street? Was that in that one or was that a later iteration? No, I think that might have been a later iteration, but they were going to make a circulator around the city. They were going to Cedar Street was going to, they were going to punch through the park that's that little known park on the top of the hill there behind City Hall and they were going to make a little circulator and they were going to make that a walking area downtown. Obviously didn't come to fruition. And I don't think it will necessarily, necessarily ever will but to the extent that we can make downtown less about cars, less about parking, and more of an area where people can come walk around where they can enjoy the retail. I think that is a positive because that makes the downtown a destination and that promotes both the businesses as well as the community center that it represents. How do we deal with, we have a homeless task force and we have an issue on begging in the downtown? Yes. How do we address the needs of those of us who are homeless as well as the integrity of our small downtown vis-a-vis begging? Well, I mean I think the homelessness issue is a regional one and Montpelier standing alone trying to solve it is, it's not going to work. We just don't have the resources nor do we have, you know, we have control over a very small geographic area. And so you know, the homelessness situation I think is a larger one that we need regional support on and in, you know, Vermont's kind of unique in that we have such a weak county government that a lot of the issues that municipalities like Montpelier face are things that in other states would be handled at the county level. And we have Sheriff Sam. Right. And which is, it's not his job. It's, it's just simply but I mean, you know, if you think about, you know, if you go basically anywhere west of here, New York, to a lesser extent, but certainly the Midwest and Western states, county government does all this and they can look at big swaths of area and they can start to develop solutions that look to the region. And homelessness strikes me as one of those because, you know, if you look at the homeless population, they're, they're, they're not just here in Montpelier, they're moving between the various municipalities, Barry, Berlin, you know, they're looking, you know, and they're, they're semi transient. And so when, when we look to a solution, I think we have to encompass that area and encompass that larger population. And it's not just a Montpelier homeless population, it's a central Vermont homeless population. Isn't Missy Mary Hooper working on funding in the state that we'd share between a person between the Barry police department and the Montpelier police department? That's my understanding. I mean, she's on appropriations. So, you know, to extend a lot of these issues. And I, part of the work that I've done is on more of the legal aid and I'm on the access to justice coalition that, you know, is looking to get greater resources. But I can tell you that talking to those providers who often work day to day with those, those populations, you know, it's, it's stability in, in housing. But the solutions are really about money and access to this, these type of housing or these type of programs that can, you know, stop evictions or that can stop, maybe not necessarily stop an eviction, but give people room to go from one property to another. We're not really picking up rental units in this town. In fact, we're losing them to Airbnb, I suppose, in a sense. In a, in a sense, I mean, you know, they're, I think there's a lot of things that are, are changing. And I think the homelessness is a, you know, there's no magic bullet solution to it. And so, that's why I think, you know, ultimately, when we think about this, we can't think of ourselves as an island. We have to think of where we sit within this larger population. Some of the panhandling issues, that's also thorny as well. You know, we've had a lot of decisions from the federal circuits that have said, you know, that's a freedom of speech issue. So, you know, evicting people from encampments is something that- Does that mean that we possibly will be looking at camping in Howard Park? We could. And the city can't- you know, at least the Ninth Circuit has ruled limitations. Where is the Ninth Circuit? The Ninth Circuit's on the West Coast, but it's, you know, it's influential. So, it's not necessarily binding, but it is a decision that I think people have, have in municipal governments have taken seriously in that there have been rulings that when you don't provide other alternative locations or camping areas, you can't just en masse evict people. And so, I know cities like Olympia, Washington have been trying to find, you know, like encampment areas to mixed, mixed results. And again, it goes to the fact that these are not easy, easy questions or easy answers. Let me ask two questions. I always ask these. Okay. If there were a former city council person or a person on council right now that you would say, I would like to model myself after that city council person. Doesn't have to be on the current council. Who would you say? That's a good question. You know, certainly, I think Tom Belanka did a great job when he was on city council because he, I never saw him approach a question from a knee jerk position of, well, this doesn't, this doesn't work with what I believe in. I saw him go outside of his comfort zone a lot of times, but I always saw him being very thoughtful in his responses. And, you know, one thing that I would promise that serving on city council, I will always try and be that kind of council person to not necessarily say, wow, I don't like that idea, but okay, what are the issues behind it? What's driving this? You know, something like homelessness, rather than taking a straight answer, well, we got to get rid of all the homeless people or, oh, we've got to house every single homeless person we can find. And you hit the next question. Which of the issues would you grab as your own? Donna is into transportation. Tom was into infrastructure. Sure. You know, certainly infrastructure is an important one to me. And, you know, part of what I'd like to see, and obviously I have a background in the land use and zoning. And so those are very important issues to me. There are certainly issues that I feel very comfortable talking about. But what I like to see is that as we continue to grow and we have ambitious plans, you know, the city plan for the next 15 years, or it's only a five-year plan, but it looks out beyond that, you know, looks for a lot of growth. And to do that is going to take a lot of thinking about what we have on the ground and what we're going to need and to try and make that growth smart. You have a son in fourth grade at Union. I do. What grade will he be in when there's houses and savings pasture? Hopefully still within the Montpelier school system. Thank you so very much. Thank you very much, Richard. I appreciate your appearing. Now I want to talk to you guys. I want you to come out on Town Meeting Day. That is really important to get out and vote and to participate. Absolutely. It's so important to a democracy that you weigh in in your own ways. And I would encourage you next time to actually get out and run as he is. So thank you very much. I hope that you watch all of these shows because all of them are very unique and we have an excellent set of candidates as we always do. That's our community generates good candidates. And particularly the shows on the city budget and the school budget. Those are important. And you'll hear Bill and Libby talking about them. And I'll be asking them good questions. So make sure that you watch all these shows. And thank you for watching this one.