Vermont May Day Strong: Stop Burlington Backward!

Um, welcome all who are watching this or here in person at concerts auditorium um to a panel discussing the so-called Burlington Forward resolution and why increased policing and surveillance sweeping unhoused people out of our city and banning harm reduction and mutual aid from where it is needed most will not solve the crisis that capitalism has brought on all of us and only a society that invests in people and their basic needs will. My name is Meritt Broadick. I am the W 8 Burlington city councelor and I will be your MC. Um, first of all, I'd like to thank the Mayday strong coalition and my colleagues in the Burlington City Council Progressive Caucus for putting on this panel. UM, and thank you uh for people's kitchen for providing us with food this evening. AND I'D ALSO like to personally thank Bella Fern from Vermont Harm Reduction Advocates and the BTB Cleanup Crew was supposed to speak this evening but unfortunately could not make it. Uh so in terms of the run of show um we have four amazing panelists here who are here to talk about Burlington backwards. Um each panelist will have about 5 to seven minutes to speak. Then I will leave room for questions for the panelists and I will give some remarks at the end. Um so let's get started. Um first we have Theo Wheeling, member of the Green Mountain chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America. >> Hi everyone. Can you hear me? My name is Theo. I am, as Merrick said, a member of the Democratic Socialist of America, the Green Mountain chapter, which covers the state of Vermont. And I'm not on behalf of any other. So this perspective is going to be a socialist perspective. I just want to start out by by saying um so good to see all of you. Um I know that we're in this together. This is a war on workers. Point blank. The rich and their political tools are scapegoating homeless addicts. Um this is a war on you and you and you. It's a war on you, Nolan. It's a war on you, Reubana. It's a war on me. This is a war on us. Okay. Tonight, we're going to hear a lot of humanizing language, which is good for the soul, but we also need to remember that we are under attack. And so, this is not just charity. This is solidarity. Um, I want to ask you a few questions. Uh, and and to anyone that's listening in the future that has not decided on this, I want to ask you, did homeless addicts create and popularize Door Dash? Did homeless addicts create and popularize Amazon and online shopping? Did homeless addicts create and popularize Netflix? How about Gen Z drinking less? How about the cost of living crisis that reduces discretionary spending on tourism, nightlife, leisure, and old school brickandmortar retail? No, of course not. So what is the function then of uh homeless addicts, homeless people, addicts in general that you can you can see using drugs. Um, for the Burlington Democrats, it is primarily to distract, to derail, to demoralize, and um to go after a progressive mayor, to go after a progressive uh wing on the council, which is to go after in part um a worker's agenda. So, I have been renting for 20 years. I have uh in that time received one security deposit back. So to police protect me from the theft of my security deposit from landlords? Do police protect me from wage theft, the largest form of theft uh in America if if not the world? Uh, do police protect um protect me from union busting? Uh, from the Burlington Democrats violation of my First Amendment rights, from medical debt and drug companies and insurance companies? No, of course not. So, the police, they were created for a specific reason, right? the the like um predecessors to the police were slave catchers were um were political spies that would spy on the labor movement. Um were uh rangers at the front of the um the American frontier, the the at the vanguard of genocide of Native Americans. Of course, that's not what police are today, but that's that's their um beginning. And what they've morphed into is um a professional class of um you know, a catch-all to solve all the ills of capitalism. So, one of the problems uh from the perspective of a business owner on Church Street, if you made an investment a long time ago, was that your profits are slagging. They're not, you know, as high as you had wished they would be. Maybe your buildings paid off or maybe your building's not paid off and your landlord every year is asking for more and more rent money. I think a lot of us in this room can relate to that dilemma of a landlord just jacking up your rent because they they felt like it, right? They felt like they deserve to have a little more money. And and uh so what is the solution? The solution is to bring in police to beat up homeless people, beat up addicts, to terrorize them, to take their encampments um and tear them apart. Um, and to do that over and over again in a systematic way where where people know, oh, okay, if I hang out on Church Street, um, you know, it's going to be it's going to be bad news for me. But that doesn't solve what I said at the beginning here, which is that we have a shift in consumption patterns. We have a shift like how many malls in America are struggling? Most, right? And that's not because of homeless people. you know, closed malls already solved the homelessness problem. They became totally uh encased, you know, totally locking out homeless people, and yet they're still failing. Why is that? It's because people are shopping online. It's that simple. Uh people are ordering food online. People are addicted to their phone. They're addicted to social media. So, we have a change in consumption patterns. That's intrinsic to capitalism. We have the the Burlington Democrats who are the champions of the dynamism of capitalism, right? They're not socialists. Uh they're offering no reforms uh no meaningful proworker reforms to capitalism. And so they really don't offer a way forward even for these small businesses. So who are they protecting? They're protecting the very very rich. They're protecting the billionaires, the imperialists. They're protecting um you know the the real big industries that root this town. town is is not, you know, primarily rooted in small business. Um, and small business is simply the vanguard, the tip of the spear uh for the um agenda that wants to give more and more tax breaks uh to the wealthiest people in this country. And those tax breaks are coming out of our housing, our healthcare, our social services, our roads. You can feel it everywhere you go. When you drive your car and you smash into these potholes and it banks up your car, that is the rich stealing from you every single day. And I want to talk about freeloaders for a second. The rich are the freeloaders. Every dollar that the billionaires have was created by workers. Whether they were once enslaved under American cattle slavery, or whether they were the kind of free workers that we are today, whether they steal it from us at work or they steal it from us when we go pay our rent uh at the start of the month, that their wealth is ours. They took it from us and it's time that we should take it back. I want to just um How am I doing on time? I think I'm over, right? Just want to say um just a couple more bits. I think fentanyl is the perfect drug for chronic unemployment and homelessness. The reason why I say that is because fentanyl is a painkiller. It's the most powerful painkiller that you know we had created up until a certain point. I think maybe now there's more powerful painkillers. But if you've ever been homeless, if you've ever been afraid of being homeless, you know how scary that is, how painful that can be. Where am I going to be? Oftent times when you lose your housing, you lose your job as well, right? I don't know if any of you have gone through that or even just worried like if I don't have my job or if I don't have my housing, will I not have my job? The answer is yes. They oftentimes go together. You lose your job and then you you lose your house. You lose your house and you lose your job. And so if you no longer have housing and you no longer have a job, you are, excuse my language, you are [ __ ] Okay? You're in a really tough spot. And when you're in that spot, you're experiencing a ton of pain. And you know, there's a lot of ways of dealing with pain, but one of the most powerful and effective ways is with painkillers. Now, it's short-term and it makes you lethargic, does not make you a better candidate for the capitalist labor market, but it also prevents you from killing yourself from the the extreme despair. And we know that um suicide is oftentimes rooted in despair. And so, uh, I just wanted to offer, um, a program, a socialist vision of how to get out of, uh, you know, sort of the capitalist, um, state of affair that the status quo that we're in. Right? The status quo is fentanyl. The status quo is a church street that is being run by landlords, unimaginative landlords that are expecting our taxpayer dollars to fund more and more police um, chasing slagging profits that are not going to come back. And so I I just want to end on a hopeful note, which is that I think if those of us in this room or maybe those of us that are listening online in the future were to put our heads together, and maybe that's what we're going to be doing here tonight. We're going to hear from other panelists, we could create a program that works for us, that works for people, not just for landlords and billionaires and um kind of unimaginative small business owners. Uh and and I think that at that core that real solution would look like housing, a guarantee for everyone to have housing because it's a human right. You need it and without it you're [ __ ] And I think that we should also guarantee healthcare because you need it. It's not something you can negotiate with a drug company or an insurance company. They have you over the barrel. They know that you need it and you're going to pay whatever it takes to get it. It's life-saving. uh social services, education, um child care, elder care. These are things that would make our lives so much better. And that's what I'm fighting for today. I think that's what a socialist solution looks like. And I also just want to say one last thing. I know that in the last six years, it's become less and less popular to talk about abolishing the police um or defunding the police. I think there's been a bipartisan war on what we accomplished six years ago, the rebellion when we said it's unacceptable for police to have a license to kill innocent unarmed people. And I just want to valorize what we did six years ago. And I want to say that it is still popular despite what the corporate media tells you every single day if you happen to have the misfortune of turning the TV on that transferring some amount of funds, let's say half a police budget to housing, healthcare, and social services that is still popular in this country. I don't know if it's still popular in this town, but there are many things that were not once um popular, such as ending slavery, such as union recognition, such as women's suffrage, the right to strike, ending the war in Vietnam, um the right to an abortion, the right to gay marriage, and freeing Palestine. And I think we have to be bold and brave and and um speak to our co-workers and our neighbors about what we want and what we need and not just let uh the billionaire media dominate the um our agenda. Thank you. >> Thank you, Theo. Um, next we have uh Rebaina, economist, uh, co-chair of the tax the rich coalition and former member of UVM grad students united. >> You um, thank you all for coming today. Um, and the Burlington forward resolution was sort of created to address the um, uh, I guess they say the situation in Burlington downtown. And I will acknowledge that the situation is quite unacceptable. I find it unacceptable that even one person one person is experiencing house uh homelessness. Um I find it unacceptable that people are struggling with substance use disorders. Um and that is why uh we need to work um collectively. Um, I hear a lot in this Burlington forward resolution about compassion and accountability, but what about collective responsibility that all of us have to help those who are suffering? Um, I don't know how these Democrats, I'm sorry to call them out, can walk by um city hall and then write all of this um in this resolution. And it is quite unfortunate that the blame is being placed on um people that are suffering uh extensively. Um I am co-chair of the uh Vermont tax the rich coalition. Uh we are um asking for a 5% um tax on the richest uh 5% of verters. Uh it includes um an income tax uh search charge on um income above 250,000 and 500,000 um as well as um a search charge on certain types of investment income. Um and last session there was also a sort of second home um tax property tax passed. Um but um I guess that the legislature is still sort of figuring out. Um but why is why are we talking about taxing the rich? It's because the the reason that um we have um people experiencing homelessness in Burlington is the same reason that we don't have universal healthcare. Um it's the same reason um that we don't have affordable housing. Um and it's if you look at um you know the American economy uh productivity worker productivity increased uh increasingly over uh the last um 50 to 60 years but worker pay remains absolutely stagnant in um real terms and we really need a redistribution of that so people can actually get the services that they need. The city has no money and and and and uh councilors on both sides and the frogs and the dens have acknowledged that Burlington does not have the resources to deal with this. Very few cities do. Um we do New York City does but Burlington does not. And the reasons for this are structural. Um and Vermont especially is a net receiver of um federal funds. of our economy is is um dependent on well one is the health care um system uh so the hospital so that is one aspect that brings in income for the state but the other is um tourism tourism and we know for all sorts of reasons from um the invasion the original like Russia and Ukraine war um and then now the Iran war we have um sort of supply shocks that are sort driving um all of these things. And then again with the with Trump's tariffs and u enmity towards Canada, we know why Vermont is suffering. Um and we we don't have really compared to other states like a great economy. A lot of our income is um you know, we receive a lot of federal support, social security, uh Medicaid, all of this. And and that's just the reality of Vermont's economy. So sort of just talking about oh mind business isn't doing well here in Vermont as you point out there are many reasons broadly all over the country but also specific to um Vermont and that's why I I'm very happy that um both the um progressives and the dance on council uh called for um the uh for for Phil Scott for the state to do more. Um but unfortunately Scott said he was disappointed. He says we've done a lot for Burlington and private city in Newport. I might wonder what more can we do for one of the most affluent parts of the state when there is suffering in other areas as well. But what is he referring to? Um what the counselors have asked for in their resolution is prior to the coming winter a properly staffed 100 bed low barrier year-round shelter by the Champri Valley Office of Economic Opportunity um is created somewhere in Chichin County with transportation services. I I don't know how Scott can say that this is for the wealthiest when this is for those who are suffering the most. Um so when I say we need not just accountability but collective responsibility it's it's up to all of us to demand from the state as well as the federal government. The federal government has responsibility here. Federal government is um essentially the entity that has um the power to build affordable housing. These are long-term infrastructure projects that are very difficult to finance. It's very expensive for municipal governments to um finance these projects through bonds, especially now with interest rates the way they are. They're going to go up. Um and it's it's not looking great. And unless somebody does something to change the entire system, we're going to be stuck with this. And I think it falls on all of us to not only demand from I guess the city government but the state and the federal government. Thank you. >> Thank you Ruba. Um next is uh Nolan Rampy president of the Howard Center Union ask me 1674 and member of the Tempest Collective. >> Yeah. So, as as the other panelists have spoken to um multiple times here, I think one of the things that's really important as we attempt to address the issues that are coming with the Burlington Forward initiative is that there is a chronic tendency that we see both from our politicians and in the media to um divorce the problem of homelessness or the crisis of homelessness from its root causes, right? Homelessness is sort of treated as this like brute fact. Homeless people and drug users exist. And so what are we going to do about it? As though they it is just again this like brute fact of society we have to deal with. And what is that is fundamentally failing to understand is that there are social roots to this crisis. And let's be real, like let's not try and deny it. There is a crisis of homelessness in our community right now. There are far too many people that do not have adequate employment, shelter, and access to general resources. What Burlington Forward fundamentally does though is to find the solution of let's just get them out, right? just pushed them to the periphery of society. And what's the reason for that? It's really clear. They want to make downtown Burlington friendly for businesses. They want to increase commerce. They want to increase tourism. And so rather than actually like addressing the deeper social issues that are actually at play in what's happening because those are things are really difficult right to to do like those are deep structural issues and they don't want to address that. So instead let's push them out of the city right and they try and wrap it up in language about increasing accountability. What does accountability mean? is a euphemism for incarceration. That is what they're talking about. Addressing the real problems that are causing this crisis would be talking about, as others have mentioned, stagnant wages, right? Skyrocketing wealth inequality, the lack of affordable housing, predatory financial policies, and a local government that has largely been bought off by real estate developers. Right. Those are the actual issues at play. And I can't help but notice as as was mentioned, I'm the president of the union at Howard Center. And I can't help but notice this increase in the calls for policing and incarceration is happening at exactly the same time that Howard Center social services are being gutted. They've been getting gutted for years. I I have lost track of the number of program closures that have taken place at Howard Center. And yet they're managing to find money to build more prisons. They're managing to find money to increase the police presence downtown, right? It is essentially taking the problem and rather than addressing the core issues, they want to sweep it under the rug, right? in order to make downtown more friendly for capital accumulation and for businesses. And speaking of the wealth inequality, which I think is really fundamentally at the core of this, I don't think it's a coincidence that also like when you look back at when the wealth inequality like really started to just skyrocket, you go back to the 1980s and that is precisely the moment in time when Reagan implemented an allout frontal assault on unions. unions weren't ready to handle that fight and they have been absolutely decimated and you can look throughout the country throughout the decades since then that as union power union density has declined in the United States in wealth inequality has gone up and up and up the amount of wealth that the top 1% has has far outstripped the level of growth in our economy. So where did that wealth come from? If it wasn't from growing the economy, it came from us. We, the people, the other 99% have been robbed of the wealth that our society produces. And that has now created a crisis in which social services have been privatized and people are no longer having, you know, have the resources to provide for themselves. And again, rather than addressing those, that's one solution. I'd call it the right solution. They go the opposite direction and say we need more police to address the symptoms of the problem rather than addressing the problem itself. you know, just to I think one one little anecdote I'd like to share is that there is a in Howard Center, we have um an absolute crisis in terms of our ability to recruit staff, right? There are massive gaps in in the services that we're able to provide. Part of that is because it used to be that UVM actually helped provide a kind of steady flow of workers into Harvard Center. After people graduated, they wanted to stick around for a few years while they thought about, you know, their next steps in their life. Maybe are they going to go to grad school? Where do they want to live? And they looked really to me. So they stuck around. They get jobs at Howard Center while they figured out their next steps. Well, over the past, I don't know, five years or so, that pool has completely dried up. And the reason is because students can't afford to stay here after they graduate. Howard Center doesn't pay enough given the skyrocketing costs of rent here. And so students that used to graduate and stick around for a few years, have a job, all of a sudden they can't afford to stay. They have to move back home. Right. And so you see these problems that are that are amplified and reverberate throughout society in many different ways. And the homelessness crisis is the most significant part of it, right? Like that that is at its worst when people literally can't afford to move to a more affordable place or be able to put a roof over their head where they're at. But it plays out in many other less visible aspects of society. And it's why we desperately need to rebuild a labor movement in this country because it is collective power of workers coming together to demand higher wages to be able to actually pressure politicians to get the demands to meet the demands that we desperately need. And it's the reason that I think we all of the unions have an obligation to come out against Burlington forward because it is all the same fight. And so it and it is important that we are in solidarity with one another in this fight against the sort of ruling capitalist class because nobody else is coming to save us. It's going to be us. Thanks. Thank you, Noah. And last but not least, we have Fared um of the People's Kitchen and Proposition Zero. >> Thank you. I um I remember uh some of you were here when uh we were pleading to the city council to stop the uh bulldozing of the Sears Lane encampment back in 2021. We warned the city council that among other things uh uprooting that community will result in the homeless folks ending up in other parks including downtown and city hall park. We we we warned them over and over again that was going to be the consequence of of Mero's order to close down Six Way without having an alternative plan in place. And sure enough, like you know the last few years we've seen an increase in uh people who are uh fairly unhoused uh who are dealing with mental health issues who are dealing with addiction uh ending up here in in St. Hall Park and in other places in other parts of Burlington and somehow the people who are responsible for closing out lane are now blaming the homeless folks for existing because you just because you close up doesn't mean like the homeless will disappear, right? They have to be somewhere and uh but we our police were ignored. Um we were able to hold down to the encampment uh preventing like the bulldozing for a month or so. Uh people even showed up like they had to to uh to pick everyone there. Uh we were able to do that for about 30 days. And in that in those days, a bunch of UBM students uh from the their engineering school got together and decided to do uh to try to build a a mini home uh proof of concept in sane to show that it's not that hard to actually house people. We were able to find actually a a plan published by the King County government in Washington state on how to convert and unsanction encampment so that you would uh comply with fire and safety code and health code. Uh and there's a checklist like so other other governments have done this like they could have converted it to semi-section or or fully section encampment. So we downloaded it we like we we work off of that. the the students help us uh construct this that might tie homes um using donated ingredients like and donated um materials and by using donated labor um we had a team of uh volunteers going through like the garbage there and like trying to clean up. So um and so after a week of this effort like we were very close to having this functional um you know mini homes that we were going to show to the city council that hey you know like we could do something like this just give us location but we were waiting for I think I don't know we were waiting for the roof because we wanted to make it solar um and like the night before like that they arrived like cops showed up at 3 in the morning dismantled the project, right? And and took it apart. So, and then the next day they they they send in the pool owners when everybody was asleep. So, it's so that that's like that's what like gets me really really frustrated is like how why are we listening to these people who like ignored us? We actually we submitted a plan to them uh about like how we going to provide wraparound services. I don't think they even opened the email uh to the proposals but they just wanted serious lane gone and what seriously provided actually was not just a shelter for people providing community and it been it's been providing that community for the homeless folks for almost 20 years but because the location was too close to Joe Shannon's place or like to hoola where they were about to do a grand opening it was not acceptable for serious lake there and for that of or they send the cops like over and over again. The police have been basically like the tool that they use to implement their policies since they they defrauded everything else. Um I I think like when when they talk about, you know, 2020 was the year public safety uh went downhill in Burlington, like that's privilege speaking because public safety has been going downhill since way before that. Um I remember when Nero first came uh into power and I call them like the neol liberals because they are because they they they what their agenda is neoliberal municipal neuroalism which means privatization of public resources privatization of public uh public institutions and privatization of public decision making processes and when bureau came into office and and you know this is Britain is still best place to live in in the top three, I think. But back then in 2012, we were like constantly voted as the most livable city in the United States. Um, and you know, we had we had the the most modern uh fiber network that we we we built ourselves um being making us the envy of uh all municipalities in the nation. We had um you know the shine housing trust which was a learning program. All these were good things that the progressive you know the worker friendly uh government put in place for being disbanded. Um there was a ballot question in 2012 asking if uh Burlington thinks the government should prioritize the needs of the people the 99% versus the needs of the corporation or the 1%. And the result of that advisory question was 80% like yes was a landslide. So I think that Burlington is still here. um that even though we elected Mirro at least the first two terms like the third and fourth term he denied also because he not and he still became mayor because the election got break but um but I think like the the main tool that the m used is the police and before mu came to power police did not kill people that wasn't the thing like you know they were there the cops were getting beat up like people like pretty regularly but none of them actually killed Barington under the neoliberals the there is more val civilian death at the hand of the police than all the previous administration combined. That's like a statistic that we should not forget. And that shows you like what happens when public safety is privatized because that's what it says like if it's if the worst part of of the privatization not just of public assets like telecom but it's the privatization of public processes where like the decisions that used to be subject to democratic control are being made by fewer and fewer people behind closed doors and that's what we that's what we have to deal with. Um I think um we we we unfortunately have also have to deal with multiple crisis at once right and the way to do that is we are reduced to just you know either like electing people who are uh who represent our interest but the rules are designed so there's never going to be enough good guys if if you look at Burlington and other places like the the rules of election so it's it's hard to also just rely on a party or or a set of candidates to make the change. Um I think we have to engage in direct action. We which include like eviction defense like we did with Sland uh uh help bring food, share food with uh people who need it like what we are doing with what cops are doing and but we also need an alternative plan to pass our agenda and thus lead to direct democracy in in Vermont. This is a long tradition that are very proud of that we share of the town hall style democracy where when a group of of uh of voters have a proposal they could gather enough signatures and after it meets a certain threshold usually between 5 to 10% of all the eligible voters that question will be put on the ballot for city vote for so uh this is this this is something that happens that every other every other county in Vermont has except for Burlington. We don't have the right to initiative referendum and recall. So there is a way to do that and it's through a charter change and that's what privacy zero is all about. Um we we need to be able to make sure that we we can hold the government accountable and that's through referendum and we also need to be able to put forward our vision, our ideas, our proposals and that's through initiatives. If we have that in Berlin, then I do think we still have the majority. They have not like supplanted us with all the the yappies yet, but they're making good progress. So, we need to like we need to do this now. Uh we need to give Burlington like we need to give people the power to uh to impact decisions that that affect our lives. So, if you uh if you can, please consider signing our petition proposition zero on the table there. um or even better who sign up to be a volunteer uh for this November election. We might not be able to put proposition zero on the ballot in March, the general election. So the tactic that that worked uh great for us is to be to have a canvaser at polling station getting signatures and that will get us to 2,000 signatures. We could submit it to the city in no uh in December and have it on the ballot in March. And once once we have that ability then let's bring in like the division but the proposal like so that we could pass it through majority rule um so we don't have to deal with this corrupt like rig electoral system that they have set up. Thank you. >> Thank you for um another round of applause for our amazing panelists. Um, >> well, it is 6:45. Um, I'm comfortable setting. >> Yeah, I know. I'm sorry. Um, I'm comfortable setting about maybe a half hour for for questions. We see how many people have questions. Um and then um I will have an announcement for folks about next steps. So stay tuned. Now let's uh let's see some hands and we have questions for our four panelists. >> Um when I attended the I'm a I work in Burlington and I'm a union member. Um when I attended the city hall meeting, I heard a lot of um people say that harm reduction didn't have compassion. Um, and that in the Atlantic article, some the gentleman who wrote it said something like harm reduction means mazotov do drugs. Um, and they also seem to imply that like syringe exchange and safe injection sites did lacked compassion. Can somebody talk about what harm reduction fundamentally is and what its relationship to compassion it is and how like safe injection sites and syringe services tie into that because after leaving that meeting it sounds like harm reduction might be a bad thing but um I don't maybe believe that that's true. So can somebody address that? >> I will. Yeah, I'm I'm happy to speak to that for for for just a moment. Um, so that actually it reminds me I don't know if you all uh if anyone here remembers there was a 2022 New York Times article um that talked about this um rampant problem of bike theft in Burlington. Um it was very strange. I was not aware that there was a by pandemic, but apparently a warranted New York Times article. And the way that it framed it was juxtaposing the hippie liberals who wanted compassion for the uh, you know, homeless population in Burlington versus the, you know, pragmatic, logical people who wanted safety as if those were two separate, you know, mutually exclusive choices to make. Um, and the, you know, and and I think that you could just as easily take the, you know, the fallacy of that juxtaposition or the article around BA to the idea of juxtaposing that with drug use and homelessness. So, you know, the the fact is that people who are suffering from addiction are, you know, are are just that suffering, right? And so the compassionate thing to do is to both offer, you know, wellfunded and read readily available, easily accessible treatment options for people who want to get treatment. And simultaneously, people who aren't ready for treatment reduce the harm that they can potentially do to themselves by doing things like needle exchange programs, right? There is no benefit that comes from denying needle exchange options, right? Because the illnesses, the diseases that can come from the use of dirty needles only exacerbates the problem. right? It creates more harm, creates more despair. And so the idea of both keeping people safe while they are in the throws of addiction while simultaneously making treatment options readily available and accessible is both compassionate and the most effective way to address the drug problem. Right? So safety and compassion are not mutually exclusive. Again, you know, and I go back like it when I was reading the Burlington forward proposal, it just made me so angry the way that they talked about that they kept this euphemism of accountability as though that you know that it's like we are helping them by increasing accountability. But again, when they say accountability, they are talking about incarceration. They are talking about fines. They are talking about no trespass orders. That's what they mean when they say accountability. And the research in this area is very very clear. Those things are not effective. The the the same things that we talk about when we talk about compassionate care are also the things that are validated in research around how to address these issues. So it is up to us to just fundamentally reject the dichotomy of compassion versus accountability or compassion versus safety. Those two things are not mutually exclusive. In fact they go hand in hand together. I I wanted to add also um we have um UVM here college of medicine and there is a public psychiatry um practice there and they do work with the state but specifically um I think the city could also um partner with them and um as as Nolan said there's you know evidence-based treatment for uh substance use disorder and uh one is like medication assisted treatment and um there's you know there's a history of why that's a challenge here and you know more than 100 years ago the American Medical Association and the US Supreme Court said that providing measured amounts of opioids to uh people with the disorder to help them um uh wean off is is still like not a legitimate practice of medicine. So this comes from this long history of demonizing um providing even like life life-saving treatments to people suffering from these disorders. And um the thing is wealthy people do have access to these um so buprenorphine is one of the uh medications that has been uh shown by the evidence to treat this disorder. Um, and it's difficult to access because of the way it's it's classified. Um, and its relative cost and just just overall how people suffering from substance use disorder are treated by by the system just to be accessed care as a first step. Uh a couple things in response to your comment about it if that is effective treating people with morphine related addictions. It's not effective uh in treating people with um methadone and meth and co. >> Yeah. So the problem today is that Burlington has taken over by method by Matt and Coke uh correct and so there isn't actually a medically assisted treatment for them um and incarceration is not any more of an effective treatment. One of the things that I just I want us to think about is that in in true harm reduction, which is a treatment philosophy, but it's also a treatment approach. Burlington does not offer harm reduction services. We offer at our best cops who ignore people who are in terrible pain and uh mental health and substance abuse system that is unfortunately uh not sufficient. It's not that it's not effective, it's not sufficient. And in fact, Medicaid is being gutted as we speak. So the services that we have been able to provide and could then build a harm reduction harm reduction community around and that's what a harm reduction is. It's a community. It's an approach in which we we all have to buy in. And so the first time production people I saw had tents that are they were I was at a conference. They were on the west coast. They would put up tents in the middle of the night. And there were these beautiful tents where people could come get information, get safe drugs, get safe needles, get counsel. And so then it was sort of like that. It's like a like a snake sort of. Um and they could choose to do what they were prepared to do and they could come back again and then the cops would come and they would take the tent down and then the people move and go put it up some. And so h reduction is not like it's a whole thing and we're not even close to Berlin. We're not even close because the best we've gotten from our police is that they ignore people who are in terrible shape. They don't get them help. They don't really want to talk about it. They want don't want to help with overdoses. We've had people who have we've had friends who have called the police because someone was overdosing and they didn't want to come. They just didn't want to come. I mean, they finally did send a, you know, a fire truck, but they just didn't feel like it. So we're not we're not even in the so Burlington forward to suggest that harm reduction has failed in our city is absolutely a dishonest and uninformed at best state harm reduction has not failed here it hasn't happened most effective crime reduction uh the first that we could date with the homeless population is actually housing providing housing like how this this past winter like uh some of the regulars that we ser so we serve with the people served at the city hall park three nights a week and the regulars that that we serve most of them are house people um there there's many many like cases that we saw when uh they had a motel voucher and they were able to stay in alter right like people were like got help were noticeably healthy they're on the way to church they were like picking up like you know they have their hobbies were like trying to do like go back to school. And then as soon as they lost the the motel vouchure and they lost their housing, they were back on the street and you know, one of these c one of the couples there like it been like so for six months like and then lost their hotel vultures the the very next day like on the street like they had to go back to and had to be revived three times that week. And we see that over and over again when they say housing first doesn't work like we haven't even tried it yet. like that let's try that but like let's provide housing that let's reduce the harm that way you know people to our house also use drugs we just don't see them so we don't complain about them so let's let's not forget the housing please share before that question >> um yeah really good question I mean it's generated so much important discussion and I just wanted to add a few things um you know just think about the the experience of addiction it lives inside of all of us, right? Like why does addiction exist? It's because humans evolved to be addicted to food. We we evolved to be addicted to reproducing. So, you know, we can all kind of imagine these uh socially acceptable addictions that we live with. And one of the key things that's necessary to manage an addiction or to overcome it is motivation. And you need to have the motivation that there is a life worth living on the other side of the addiction. Someone who doesn't have a job, someone who doesn't have housing. And not just that, right, but someone who's been experiencing that for years, possibly decades. That is someone who's not qualified at that moment perhaps for the labor market that capitalism has given us. And so that might be someone who's feeling a lot of despair. and rationally they're not thinking like there's a great likelihood that there's a great life on the other side of their habit or their addiction. So I think we need to be thinking about how can we come up with a program that would entitle and ensure everyone has an opportunity at a good life. Right? And what does that take? That takes housing. That takes health care. It takes free education. It takes elder care, child care, social services, public transportation, right? Like the right to repair your phone. Like there's a lot of things in there. Good food, you know, not lead in the water. Things that actually, guess what? Would benefit all of us in this room. And there's very few people on this planet that are working non-stop to ensure that we don't have that so that they can become trillionaires. So that I just want to I want to start with that. I also want to just add about harm reduction that um you know what is the alternative to harm reduction? It is the war on drugs which began in 1914. So we've been not we not us in this room but you know the billionaires the rich that run this society that run this government have been waging this war for over a hundred years. At any point in time has the supply of drugs been extinguished? No. But what it has created is cartels, gangs, all sorts of um corrupt politicians and corrupt elements within our society. That's that's what has occurred. So that's why, you know, some drugs have been legalized to try and uh cut down on that. Um and I think the other thing I just want to say is that for the last 300 years, drugs have most often been seen through a moral framework. And I think maybe perhaps a lot of us in this room and hopefully those of us that are listening um online, we have to fight for a scientific view of addiction. We have to think about the objective facts of neuroscience of our bodies. Um all of that research, much of which, you know, is going on here at the hospital here and the the university. We have to integrate those facts also into the subjective experience uh of addicts, what they're telling us. We have to marry those two things. And um yeah, I I think a a harm reduction approach is um it's the word we used or the synthesis of our best understanding of how to help someone struggling with addiction uh in the in the social context in which they have. If we can't give someone a house right now, if we can't give them a pro-social job, um you know, a social network, we can't end the isolation right overnight, we can at least give them our best tools at managing and hopefully overcoming this addiction. >> Okay, we'll do and then in front. >> Hi, I'm Vivon. um and with the party for justice and liberation but I also managed the exchange park street for three years until Howard Center closed it down. Um and I just wanted to say is that harm reduction has policy meaning and it also has a philosophy meaning and the philosophy of harm reduction comes from the star program. It's the street transvestite action revolutionaries was carried forward and mentioned by the black panthers who are definitely doing it and also the young lords. That's that's what harm reduction is. It's a revolutionary movement that puts the care of people above profiting off of the off of the pharmaceutical companies etc etc. The policy of harm reductions come from the 1980s and they're not so generous. They're not about building revolution. They're about capitalism fixing itself in the most efficient way. It's a public health strategy that is uncontested today. There's not another public health strategy even broken windows policing is not a public health strategy that even alleges to compete with the performance of harm reduction which does what? It keeps, for example, in the case of Burlington Ford, unhoused people off the streets. If if you're if that's the biggest sort of moral issue you think of the day is that I have to walk past homeless people, harm reduction is the thing that solves that. To be clear, there's no there's no contestant about that. So, I just wanted to say that like in this resolution, they still include it despite knowing that an overdose prevention center is the best way. They've said it in other meetings, right? There's they fought for it. So, there's there's no there's no confusion about that. And yet, they still choose to push this forward. That means that it is valuable to the Burlington Democrats so much to lower the status of people and to turn the working class against the unh unhoused people. So much so that it's worth taking public health negatives. They're they're willing to make that sacrifice that they fully understand. And I bring that up also, you know, when I was working at safe recovery, we did a survey about how people spend their time who mostly people who are fighting against opioid, but I'll say there's like about 91% uh sort of overlap between people who are suffering from methamphetamines, crack, metadatamine, etc. Um, and they spend about three and a half hours a day uh working to evade arrest. They spend about seven hours a day meeting basic needs. That means trying to get food, stealing from a grocery store, lining up in people's kitchen, the [ __ ] palm rats who are there serving people, trying to get into the hospital, etc. That is an 11-hour I left some things out, but told 11 hour workday just to stay alive every single day. That's not counting child care. That's not counting caring for each other. And the last thing I just wanted to say is that harm reduction as a philosophy is happening right now. It's, you're right, it's not happening by any government as a policy, but it's happening right now. Homeless people are taking care of each other. They're people who are falling out. They're being revived way more by the fire department, by their neighbor, by by the person in the tent next to them, by their daughter, by their friend, right? And they're not being paid for that [ __ ] And in fact, that a lot of that I passed somebody who I invited to come to the racial equity meeting about Burlington forwards and they said they couldn't come because they're looking after their friend who's falling out, right? So, it's just it's it's absolutely insane to try to come after harm reduction when they're not even they're not even uh trying to go for the philosophy of harm reduction. All that to say is I think everybody in this room, but certainly beyond should feel so empowered to defend harm reduction tooth and nail, but in the back of their minds always remember that we don't have to fight for the for the limited little scope that the Burlington Democrats have created. This little battle that they that they've created really limits our imagination. And you know like San Francisco and all a lot of cities in California right now are fighting to put second home taxes. Uh and it went over extremely easily and it has I I won't speak with it but relatively solved most of the problems that set out to do. We are the the state right now that has we moved from second to first most number of second home owners. The first number of vacant homes open right now. There's no housing crisis. There's just empty homes and homeless people. YEAH. Um I guess um I I I'm I'm thinking a lot about um you know the the mention of Sears Lane, the mention of this sort of um moment that I think many of us witnessed in um 2020 and 2021 where we I think as a you know as a as a city um reimagining what it looks like to build community care and and what it looks like to have these structures that really take care of each other and watching that get swept away so abruptly was horrific. Um and and I think what I wonder about um is this you know as as you're calling it backward like it feels like a distinct progression um from what is even a very basic um you know half attempt towards um something really meaningful. Right. and and there's the the system of of government and city government that dilutes and consolidates that power, right? Of course, is going to take radical action and then make it into something less radical. And I guess I wonder um how in this moment we or how how you I guess would propose um we take these actionable steps to imagine past the container that the Romans and Democrats have sort of made here, right? How do we how do we actually move in more compassionate um humanoriented ways um rather than just trying to fight for what they're trying to take. How do we like how do we actually move forward and not just try to pull the ground I guess is kind of my wondering it's a broad question but yeah >> um yeah I'm happy to speak to that a little bit um you know I I think that it is it it is true and we absolutely need to acknowledge that there's a very real regression that is that is happening here um you know when you go back to the Black Lives Matter movement that happened during the time of COVID. It really brought onto this stage the the the explosion of the Black Lives Matter movement which brought you know million tens of millions of people onto the street and raised the issue of defund the police really for the for the first time at least in my lifetime. >> Yeah. th this real question around what is the function of police, where are our resources going, and how could they be better spent? And it really was this this paradigm shift where all of a sudden these that conversation was on the table in a way that it had never been before. And it was it was really inspiring to see. And I think what we're seeing right now is and Burlington is not unique in this. This is happening and has been happening all over the country of this supposed line that like this defund the police, you know, attempt, it failed, it didn't work. And so now we need to go back to the old way. And what that actually ignores is that defund the police never happened, right? If if you look back, the you know, police budgets across the country increased >> throughout that time. Um, and so now we're so it's like we're trying to say that a project failed that wasn't ever actually tried. And you know, I think it is it is up to us to we we need to be building movements that just that you know, I think as you said, we we just have to reject the framing uh that that Democrats are attempting to place on us. you know, I there's there's many things that um you know, I I support that Alexandria Casiocortez has done, but her recent attempts to apologize for um you know, woke 1.0 and saying that things got crazy during that time. That is her attempting to like apologize for the gains that the left wing made, right? that is uh you know and that is the opposite of what the left needs to be doing, right? Like so that you know to me that is an accepting of the framework that the Democrats and the Republicans are trying to use as if things went too far during the Black Lives Matter movement. And we to say absolutely not. Not only did they not go too far, they didn't go nearly far enough that there is far more deep structural work that needs to be done. And so I think just, you know, >> even begin. >> Yeah, it it did it didn't even begin. You know, the the the biggest thing that it did which was was phenomenal was that it changed the conversation, right? what it was acceptable to talk about the questions and the issues that were able to, you know, that were no longer outside of the, you know, overtoned window of of what could even be considered. Um unfortunately large parts of the movement got co-opted by the Democrats and and funneled into more conservative directions and they were ultimately able to um you know just revert the conversation back to now where we are today where people are talking about you know so again we're moving the needle exchange programs out of the downtown area where we're wanting to like you know move away drug treatment facilities in the name of getting the police to come and sweep sweep about the encampments as if that's the only option. Um so you know I think we you know we have to reject that framework and then build a movement that is is large enough to actually you know to to get back to where we were and go further and that's going to require you know social organizations from around the country and also unions. I I firmly believe that, you know, in the power of unions to be able to shape things um and and and move forward as, you know, as a social force because that's where our power lies and that's where we've got to get to. >> Um and also specifically about the Sears Lane, um I I grew up in India for the first 22 years of my life. I lived in India and we have slums like many uh countries in the global south have slums and these are informal settlements that you know people just sort of uh congregate uh and sort of settle in one area for various reasons. people migrate from rural areas to urban areas for work and these are people just living and um there are sometimes what happens uh in Indian cities there will be like you know the government will come and say it's illegal and raise it down but there are certain protections and sometimes they are recognized as legal u settlements and um sometimes what what's done is that those um settlements are removed moved, but new permanent settlements like actual apartment buildings are made in that place. So the people who are there can now actually live in more safe um structures compared to the temporary temporary settlements that they had. And for me when I was here, I moved to Burlington around the time this year's landing was happening. And I think the question that like any Indian would say like doesn't matter if you're poor or rich would be like where are these people going to go? this is their home. And how can you have compassion um when you say you're just going to take away someone's home and not give them a place to to stay? And I think that um recognizing that the US now has uh is is despite being so wealthy is having wide inequalities and um there is something called like the clo the the south and the north. So these are the most marginalized people within the global north and to recognize we have you can't expect that oh things were a certain way for all these years and we continue that way. We need to have compassion for those people and sometimes our city might not look exactly the way we wanted but as long as um we all are caring for each other I think that's the most important to me. >> All right. Uh, you still go here, then here. >> I'm Reverend Mark Hughes. I'm the executive director of the Vermont Racial Justice Alliance. And um, I'm going to stay seated right now because I'm I'm a little bit disregulated. And I just can't believe that I've sat here this long and haven't heard the word race in this conversation. Uh, so I'm just I'm still just sitting here going, "Wow." Um, so yeah, I was on a national call earlier this afternoon where I learned that 22 uh people were enriched over the last 17 months nationally. also know that um here in the city of Burlington in the midst of this discussion that we've never had a time where police have stopped black folks, arrested black folks, and used force against black people at this rate in history. Never. Yeah, we're having a public safety conversation right here. Burlington Forward is moving forward and uh I don't see uh I don't see this being political because I don't I don't I don't view the Prague in any position any better than that of the Dems in this conversation. period. And I at some point I hope that my white brothers and sisters would find other places to move in these discussions besides the places of fear and guilt. because there is a place of love. Our comments are attached. They're public. They're attached to what came forward out of the REIB committee. We made the committee, the Racial Justice Alliance. Oh, I didn't hear anything about Battery Park, but there was 35 days of unrest in Battery Park back a little while ago. And when you start to put things together, we didn't defund the police. In fact, I think that's probably a bad idea to say. It's just like talking about CRT or woke. It's all been weaponized. We didn't use that language anyway. We we divested from policing in an attempt to reinvest in marginalized communities and to attempt to address these areas where these failed public safety systems were unable to address. That's what we sought to do. And the entire apparatus is still yet to be carried out. And most of that is in our report. I'm not going to get into it right now. Um, but I'll just say that we made a good college effort to try to move this conversation of public safety uh to a place of um community reinvestment. And much of that has been varied uh in uh in in the city and you can again you can read our report and you'll see some of the initiatives everything from the CNA report what happened to the THAA report to the uh to the work that we've we've done on uh making recommendations on the remember racism is a public health emergency. Hello. Um, remember Operation Phoenix Rise? So, all of these initiatives were um were a part of a strategy um that had everything to do with public safety because what we figured out was is that racial injustice is antithetical to civil rights and civil rights are required for democracy. no matter if you like it or not, the democracy that we had, and I hope we never go back to that one, but maybe we can figure out another one. But you can't do it with racial injustice. And I don't care if this is a socialist society or a Marxist society or a communist society, you still can't do it with racial injustice. So, the conversation here is as cute as it is. Um, I would just want to invite y'all into I mean, at the end of the day, what we know is if the products are Prague and nobody's standing in line for $5,000, then the mayor could just veto this damn thing and we can go to the next thing. Yes. >> So, back to uh this business about uh race and racism. What we know is is that this is this is something that we got to come back to. This is, you know, so I'm inviting I'm calling everybody in. Uh come to the Richard Kim Center on the 17th at 6 o'clock. There's your invite. come to the Richard Kimps there on on the 17th, which is next Thursday at six o'clock, and we'll continue the conversation on raise justice, raise up justice, which is a civil rights movement. Here's the last thing I'm going to say. While we're having this conversation, civil rights at the federal level has been completely upended and gutted and weaponized. while we're having this conversation, which means we've got to look to the state and in this case the municipality to do everything that we can do to hold the line because here in the state of Vermont, what we know is is yeah, we're pretty liberal and we're, you know, we we've got, you know, we're progressive and we're exceptionalist and all that other stuff, but how can we go through a meeting of this nature and not have this conversation up until now and I have to come in and carry that Why? There is a civil rights conversation we need to be having in this room. And we recommended in in conjunction with the the divevest reinvest initiative. We recommended that the city place a civil rights asset on city staff in 2000, I'm sorry, 2020. We still stand by that. and the REI director is not going to oversee what's going on here. Not Not only is she not equipped, but she's not she her her her job description has nothing to do with civil rights. So, here's the good news. We're all here. We all care. And together, we can move this thing forward. But what we got to do is we do need to get back and make the main thing the main thing and stop trying to get through meetings like this without talking about the legacy of slavery which made civil rights necessary and civil rights which makes which make democracy possible. >> Thank you. Any more questions? Thank you, Reverend. >> Um, I have a question about the the proposition. Um, I came here looking for an action step and and you gave one. Thanks. Great. Did you gave one? I I guess my question is, can you give me some hope that this will work? Because um I have been to city council meetings, particularly about the ones about the uh the apart free community proposals where the Democratic majority shut them down and even gave comments direct against direct democracy saying basically we don't do that here. Uh what's to say that this won't just h have follow the same footsteps? Um and I will also say like some some more context to that is I I I want an action step and I believe in one that is where we have a unified front in it. And I think a moderately okay idea that everyone can get behind is better than a really good idea that only a few people are behind. Um, and so I'm I'm I'm ready to sign it right now and get behind it, but um can you give me some hope that this is going to do something good? >> Yes, I'll answer that. Um so um the first thing uh to note is that the three community potential those were uh balance advisory questions. So the way Burlington City is set up, the city council has to approve all advisory question um before can take it on the ballot. Um but what we so what we're trying to do is actually change the signature itself so that once once this the number of signatures threshold is is met then it will go automatically to onto the ballot. So the city will the city council will not have any anything to do with it. uh which is the case for every other Vermont municipality. Uh here we like is like the most recent change like they so basically what happens in like once the petition have enough signatures they get presented to the city city council then the city council has the option to either enact it like enact the proposal right away which will skip the whole like citywide voting or if they fail to do that then he will go on to the voters. So the the and and in Vermont uh Vermont state law like state uh city charter amendment has to be put by voters. So, and the way to there's two way to get the charter change, which is one is like the council initiated, but voters can always initiate charter changes. And so, we were able to get the the proposition zero on the ballot back in 203, I think, along with question seven along with police accountability because those were challenging uh proposals which the city council doesn't have any power over. uh the apart free community for advisory question. So what we're trying to do is like basically like make sure that advisory question can get on if they want without the city council approval. That's one of the things that the proposition bureau will do. But to take it further and actually will have binding power like proposal we are able to propose laws ordinances that will be binding if it pass the majority without the city council actually being able to block it. Now it's not really taking power away from them. like model about like at least taking our power away from the city council. It's not actually we're not taking power any power away. We're just empowering voters. We're giving more power to the voters which is the way it should be. We believe in check and balances of government. So in terms of like getting on the ballot, I think if we meet the signature requirements, it will get on the ballot. Uh and for that we need 2,000 signatures. That's why it's important to get to get those signatures on time and and then but then like really pass it failed before I think when we tried it was 47 to 53%. And it was uh I think you know we didn't really campaign on it. What we ended up doing is like spending most of our energy into like the police accountability ballot question. So there was not not really voter education that we engaged in uh which was a mistake. Um and uh and also we we were assuming that this is like a no-brainer. Yes. You know who would oppose democracy, right? We didn't think that like there are some entrenched powers who like don't like be disturbed and so they like went hard and like misinformation campaign against zero. Um so it won't happen this time. Uh we was also on a a not on a um it was there was no other mayoral election uh back then like this we're hoping there will be a mal election so there will be a higher turnout for voters uh that that way I I still look at like I mentioned earlier that 80% ofians agree that it's corporation uh should is not people and that the interest of the people should be prioritized over profits. this is what we voted like 80% of us voted yes to that statement back in 201 I think we're still there I think that's what I'm counting on so that's what what that gives me hope that I do think Berlin is special uh what what makes like the reason is like more painful is that we were actually like we were in a good we had further to fall from uh everybody's dealing with the same crisis like all the cities I mean look at well like they're responding to like establish a citizen control to assist the police and patrol like the plas and catch stuff like that's like their civic like responsibility like Bington is different like that's not who we are we go out we see our our neighbors we like give them like to try to survive and so that's that gives me hope for the question >> I I I don't have hope >> not in Berlin not on question of homelessness and people don't have shelter I remember Terry two years ago a Republican senator on state of Vermont hired buses and encouraged he made an ad encouraging homeless to come and take them to warmer state to California. So what is the problem? the problem. We are living on a racist state and racist city and if we don't recognize that we are missing the point. I know Mark Hugh mentioned the civil rights movement and the struggle of black and poor people if they are white. No difference whatsoever. But us here as activists and all the speakers which is they spoke beautifully. We didn't talk about this subject until the resolution came into the table. But the problem existed. We came to this hall so many times passing how many homeless and did we talk about it? Did we bring it in our meetings? So when the city brought it and the democrat we know where they stand. Yeah. I listened to the progressive on their press conference. I was a president. Everything was a beautiful. But who has the power? Emma has the power. She can veto that. The progressive caucus has to force Emma to veto that. and not only to veto to veto and we start talking about the solution otherwise we are lying at each others you know this is a song we're going to do it next year 10 years from now and 32 years from now thank you um I'm going to I'm going to wrap us here uh another round of applause please for our panelists Um you you've heard a lot of Yes. Andre announce an event real quick. >> Go for it. >> Um so this Saturday at Hollow Street Congregational Street Cats Food South Burlington Collective um and some other groups are hosting a parking lot dance party. It's the fifth one. Um we'll have Green Mountain Swing playing. Um Ray from South President Food Bombs. We'll have a whole kind of feast and the intent is to get members from the unhoused community, people on the hill section, just kind of everyone in one space enjoying food and music and community and the things that make Burlington great in one space with the idea that social connection increases public safety. And so yeah, we'd love to see everyone there. Can I also quickly make an announcement? Um just another way to um I guess action item would be to join the um Vermont tax the rich coalition. Uh we this is a way to you know get the resources that we need to um finance the services that we're talking about. Um and we are trying to pass um ballot measures in Manuski and Montelier. Uh so we're going to have canvases to do that. So please come talk to us if you want to help volunteer or if we're looking for volunteers in any capacity. So um yeah, tax the rich Vermont. >> Thank you. Uh, and I I will end with uh the app of my an ask of my own. Um, well, first of all, thank you all for for sticking around and uh turning up and tuning in. Um, you've heard a lot of asks today, a lot of campaigns for change um in the short term and in the long term. Um, coming back to Burlington forward. Burns Forward is coming back to the city council on Monday, September 14th. Um, it is coming out of committee and it will be discussed. I do not know because I am not a Democrat. So, I do not know if um this will be the last time that we'll be discussing Robinson forward at the city council. Um, but I do know that I will be back. Um, and I would highly encourage um, anyone who resonated with anything that you heard today um, from the panel, from the audience. Um, to show up Monday, September 14th, 6 p.m. in this room. You already know how to get here. Um, public forum is at 6:30 p.m. Sign up in advance. Hopefully, there's a lot of people there. And speak out. Speak your truth. uh tell the mayor veto it if we vote on it on Monday um and veto it if we don't vote it on Monday uh just uh so yeah thank you all um there's no um yeah thank you all for showing up >> what >> you're doing thank you um solidarity. Have a great night.