Alright guys, I need one call the regular meeting to order at 5 30 p.m.
Our first order of business is that we're going to go ahead and do the Pledge of
Allegiance and then we will have to introduce, I pledge allegiance to the flag
of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one
nation, under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Honor the Texas
flag, I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, under God, one and indivisible.
We're going to go to item 2A which is to consider the approval of the minutes for
the September 11th 2023 meeting so I will entertain a motion for discussion
at motion or a discussion of the minutes. I move approval of the minutes. Thank you, Lenny, do I have a second? You got a second.
Alright, all in favor raise your hand please. Alright, unanimous.
So as you all can see we have a new member amongst us. I wanted to introduce
Heather Gregory. She has joined us and she has replaced Commissioner Kacen Cagle
but we're excited to have Heather. I don't know if you want to give a quick introduction.
Hi, I'm Heather Gregory. I'm a native, I don't know, background, well native from IAICS.
I have a background in architecture, love this town. I'm excited to do some historic presentations.
Great, glad to have you. Yeah. Thanks for choosing to serve with us. Okay, let's move on to item 2B,
number COA 23-011 on our agenda is to hold a public meeting and consider an
application for certificate of appropriateness in accordance with
section 2.92 of the DIN development code to rehabilitate the former garage at 722 West Oak Street,
a local historic landmark property and a recorded historic Texas landmark
located in the Oak history, Oak Hickory history district. The site is located on
the northeast corner of West Oak Street and Mount Avenue.
All right, Cameron do you have something for us? Yes, thank you Chair.
I don't know where the podium went so I'm going to just be standing like this.
So as stated it's at 722 West Oak Street. The owners are Randy Hunt and Annetta Brancy.
We're going to be talking about the former garage which was built in 1939.
So the garage itself it was constructed for Mr. and Mrs. M.S. Webster.
The architectural style as you all have seen this property before, it is that of a Victorian Italianate style
but that former garage also has craftsman style detailing.
Defining features, it does have that gable roof.
It is here highlighted in the far right hand corner or I guess right hand corner sorry.
It does have a gable roof, tongue and groove siding.
And as I stated the property, the house itself is a local historic landmark
but the recorded Texas historic landmark is just solely the main residence.
So this is a rehabilitation of the former garage which is highlighted there in red.
As stated it's on the northeast corner of the property along Greg Street.
And then the garage is not part of that RTHL designation as I stated so it does not require THC review.
So the current conditions for the property,
you can see that front south facade that's facing the interior of that property
and then that north rear facade that is along Greg Street.
The proposed elevation drawings, it does propose including new and current wooden tongue and groove siding.
The addition of an antique wooden multi-light window here on that front south facade
as well as paint to match that main residence including wooden brackets as well along that overhanging weave.
So these are the existing elevation drawings of both that south and north facade.
The windows currently are aluminum, those were replaced in the early 90s and it does have a central door.
They are proposing bringing back the original craftsman style door that was on the garage prior to
and then as I stated that double hung multi-light window which they are trying to find a vintage window to replace it or to implement.
They're also adding that decorative wooden brackets trying to bring together the main residence along with that former carriage house that's just adjacent.
And then on the rear elevation which faces Greg Street,
they are going to be bringing craftsman style garage doors to that exterior to allow for access in and out with their vehicles.
So SAS analysis is for the standards for rehabilitation according to that Secretary of Interior Standards.
It is focusing on points one through six and point nine which were in your AIS and your backup.
It also looks at the architectural requirements from our DEN development code from section 4.9.4C of the Oak Hickory Historic District
specifically focusing on our accessory buildings, architectural detailing, facade materials, roof forms and windows and doors.
So staff is recommending approval of the COA request for the rehabilitation of the former garage at 722 West Oak Street
as it does meet the Secretary for Interior Standards of rehabilitation and does comply with our section 4.9.4C.
Any questions? Yes.
This is the same property that we heard about the carriage house a few months ago.
Yes, right. Yes, so originally we had looked at that back in June and then we're focusing on the garage next door.
Did they complete the carriage house?
It's still undergoing renovation, but it's in the process.
Anyone else have any questions?
I guess you do not have questions. Why a group today?
All right, I will take a motion.
I'm going to approve of the request. All right, any approval? Do I have a second?
Thank you Lance. All in favor please raise your hand.
All those, do I need to wait for time? Yeah, let's go ahead and wait for anything.
We're going to pause. Is that all right? Yeah. We're going to pause at 538.
Sean, we have a motion and a second to approve.
He's not voting on this item. He was recused. Sorry, I thought you were asking if you wanted to pause to move on to the next item.
I'm still going to pause. So we, okay, motion carried.
Now I'm with you.
All right, now we're going to move to number three work session item three, number HLC 23-046. On our agenda is to receive training and hold a discussion regarding the City of Denton Code of Ordinance, chapter two, article 11, ethics.
All right. Hi, I'm Madison Rorschach, I'm Denton City Auditor. I'm also the staff liaison to the Board of Ethics. I'm going to be giving you a brief training on the city's ethics ordinance.
This is a training that you're required to receive for the ordinance every year. It's much shorter than it used to be, so you're welcome.
But I'll stop periodically in case you have questions, but we'll kind of go section by section.
So today we'll be covering the ethical expectations laid out by the city's ethics ordinance. The ordinance's mandates and prohibitions are basically what it requires.
How city officials are subject to the ordinance, which includes y'all can request clarification on its application and a quick overview of what happens if an ethics complaint is submitted against you as a city official.
To begin, the city's ethics ordinance was adopted in 2018 and was most recently amended this year.
The code is intended to foster an environment of integrity for those that serve the City of Denton and its residents by ensuring that decision makers provide responsible stewardship of city resources and assets, and by providing behavioral guidelines and requirements.
The key goal of the ethics ordinance is to further the public's trust in those who govern their community.
More specifically, the ethics ordinance outlines six aspirational expectations, and these expectations cannot be used as the basis of an ethics complaint, but they are intended to guide city officials in carrying out their duties.
So these include conducting yourself in a manner that fosters public trust, performing your public duties with personal and organizational integrity, avoiding behavior that might call your motives into question and erode public confidence, placing the interests and concerns of Denton residents above your own, valuing honesty,
trustworthiness, diligence, objectivity, fairness, due process, efficiency, and prudence, balancing transparency with the duty to protect personal privacy and preserve any confidential information that you have been trusted with.
So, the rest of the training will focus on kind of specific behaviors that you have to comply with. However, this kind of expectations are the most important section of the ordinance.
If you ever find yourself questioning of a specific action or inaction might be ethical, first ask yourself if it would align with these expectations.
It's important to realize that expectations are not only focused on the way things are, but also how they might appear.
A city official has a position of privilege within their community that they must respect. So, serving your community as a city official is an honor that requires integrity and dedication.
In general, you can think about an ethics code as a stoplight. In some instances, the code clearly prohibits specific behaviors or creates a red light.
However, in other areas, the code creates broader prohibitions or yellow lights. Yellow lights communicate that a city official should thoughtfully and cautiously consider if the action or inaction is ethical based on the city's expectations as they proceed.
So, throughout the presentation, I'll be calling out what parts of the code are red lights versus yellow lights to help provide guidance.
So, now we've covered the basics of the city's ethical expectations. I'll get into more specifics.
Ethics ordinance includes three mandates and nine prohibitions that cover different actions or behaviors that city officials may take and I'll briefly cover them in the next couple slides.
But I can stop now if you all have any questions about expectations.
So, beginning with the mandates, the ethics ordinance requires that city officials disclose certain business relationships if they are relevant to a pending matter.
Specifically, if a business entity with a pending matter is owned by a city official's partner, the city official must disclose this relationship to the city secretary and the city auditor, which is me,
at least one business day before the meeting where the pending matter will be deliberated. All disclosures will be provided to the relevant body before the deliberations.
So, this disclosure requirement is a yellow light in the ethics code as even though city officials are allowed to deliberate on these matters for the ordinance, it calls out there might be a risk that this type of business may receive unfair treatment from the related city official.
In addition, it requires that city officials comply with any financial disclosures required by a Texas state law and that city officials report any person that they know has violated the ethics ordinance.
These mandates are red lights and not recording a known violation of the ordinance is the self-considered violation of the ordinance. So, any questions about the mandates?
Moving on to the prohibitions.
So, beginning with conflict of interest, ethical best practices suggest that a city official recuse of deliberating on a pending matter if they or their relative have a personal or economic interest in a business entity or property that's not shared with the general public.
This general guidance is a yellow light that's intended to draw attention to the risk of conflicts of interest.
However, I should note that while this is good guidance for city officials, the general prohibition is not. That's not actually in the ethics ordinance, but that's just good guidance.
So, the ordinance does include some red lights and specifically defines the following as conflict of interest.
Owning 5% or more of a business entity's voting shares or stock, owning $600 or more of a business entity's fair market value, owning $600 or more of the fair market value of your property, receiving $600 or more in income from a business entity, serving on the board of directors or as an officer of a business entity or nonprofit, or having solicited, received, or accepted an offer of employment from a business entity or person in the last 12 months.
So, if you have a conflict of interest as defined on the slide with the pending matter on an agenda, you're required to recuse yourself from the discussion and submit an affidavit of abstention to the city auditor. That's me again.
A pending matter includes an application seeking approval or authorization, a proposal to enter into a contract, or a case involving the city that is or may go before a civil criminal or administrative tribunal.
So further, it's a violation of the ordinance for a current city official to represent a person, a group or entity before a board or commission for compensation.
This prohibition also applies to former city officials for one year after they are no longer their determination of their official duties.
Similarly, a former city officials are prohibited from performing compensated work on a city contract or arrangement if they substantially participated in the negotiation, award or administration of the contract, unless that was limited to deliberation.
So any questions about conflicts of interest or representation?
All right. Did you tell me when you started out that this covers state employees too?
It does not cover any state employees. It covers the city council and certain other boards and commissions as well as the four employees appointed by the city council.
So next, the ethics ordinance prohibits a city official or their relative from accepting any gift that might reasonably influence a city official in discharging their official duties.
And this is kind of the general prohibition that access the yellow light for city officials.
In addition, there are specific red lights prohibitions. So specifically a city official cannot accept a single gift valued more than $50 or multiple gifts with a total value of more than $200.
In general, a gift is considered to be anything of monetary value such as cash, property, services, meals, entertainment or travel related expenses.
If a gift is accepted, the city official may remedy the violation by promptly donating it or reimbursing the gift giver for the actual or fair market value of the gift.
If the gift is accepted, the city official has to disclose that acceptance and the remedy by filing a disclosure with me.
The ordinance does allow certain exceptions to the gifts prohibition. These are actually green lights and this includes lawful campaign contributions, expenses related to a city official's travel to a conference or other training event that's connected to city business,
expenses related to appearances at nonprofit or community events related to city business, complimentary attendance at fundraising events or hospitality functions,
complimentary or promotional copies of trade publications or clothing items or gifts that are given due to a personal, familial or professional relationship that regardless of the city officials city position.
Any items that items received that fall under one of the exceptions do not need to be disclosed. However, the city official may choose to disclose it if they would like to.
So any questions about gifts.
Next, it is a violation of the ordinance for a city official to misuse the influence or information gained due to their official city position.
So, specifically a city official may not use their influence to secure special privileges or treatment for a person group or business organization beyond what is normally available or to imply that they can do do such things.
So, while this is a specific prohibition, it's kind of a yellow light because it's not meant to prohibit a city official from providing individuals groups or businesses with information on how city processes work so that they can more easily access normally available services.
For that reason, city officials should proceed cautiously and thoughtfully when they're trying to help the public with specific concerns.
Specifically, you should be cautious when stating what you can do to address a concern that they raise.
Further, a city official may not state or imply that they're acting as a representative of the city unless they're authorized to do so by the city council.
And it's a violation of the ordinance for a city official, either current or former, to use confidential information gained through their official capacity to advance the personal or private financial interest of themselves or anyone else.
So these are red lights. There's not really an instance where misrepresenting yourself as an authorized city representative or using confidential information for personal or private interests would be ethical for the ordinance.
Questions about this section?
So last, it's a violation of the ordinance for a city official to abuse the city's resources or the power or privileges granted by their official position.
Specifically, a city official should not use, request, or allow the use of city resources such as facilities, personnel, equipment, software, or staff time for private purposes, including political purposes, except to the extent that those are available to other residents.
While this is a specific prohibition, it's also kind of a yellow light as it doesn't really have any clearly defined thresholds, and there are instances where a city official can ethically use city resources like renting a city facility at the publicly available price.
On the other hand, it's a violation of the ordinance for a city official to harass or discriminate against a person based on their ethnicity, race, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, marital or parental status, or religion.
It's also a violation to interfere with the city, any city related criminal or administrative investigation, including persuading or coercing someone else to withhold their cooperation.
These are red lights, there's really not an instance where harassment, discrimination, or interfering with an investigation would be considered ethical for the city's resources. Questions about this part?
All right, that was our last prohibition, but now we're just moving into a couple administrative things.
Now that you have an understanding of the expectations, mandates, and prohibitions, if you ever come upon a situation where you need additional guidance, you have a few options.
First, if you just kind of need direction on finding the ordinance or looking at a specific section, or like how to submit a disclosure, you can reach out to me, or the city attorney, I guess.
Should probably just point you to me.
Yeah, I think it actually has to go directly through the auditor because as the city attorney's office, we're also subject to the ethics ordinance, so we don't review it.
If they just were like, where's the website?
Second, if you have your own attorney, not Marcella, they may be able to provide you with information on the ethics ordinance or help you decide whether or not to recuse yourself in a given situation.
Marcella and I cannot do that.
Finally, you can also request that the Board of Ethics issue you an advisory opinion, which is intended to answer a question about compliance with the ethics ordinance in a particular situation.
So the biggest advantage of an advisory opinion is that you can use it basically as an affirmative defense to an ethics complaint if you relied upon it in good faith. So essentially, if you say, hey, Board of Ethics, can I do this? And they say, yes. And then somebody submits an ethics complaint against you. You could say, but they told me it was fine. And that should be okay, basically.
So to receive an advisory opinion, a city official has to submit a request in writing to me, including relevant details of the situation in question. I will then communicate the request to the Board of Ethics chair who assigns it to a panel of three Board of Ethics members for review, and then they'll issue their opinion within 30 days. It usually doesn't take that long though.
So, but if you see something coming up, get it in earlier so they can try to get it to you.
Any questions about the advisory opinion process?
No, but I was very fond of your saying it should be all right.
I can't promise anything.
All right. And so now, this is just about the, there we go. This is a brief overview of the ethics complaint process and that's it. So, the Board of Ethics' primary function is to process ethics complaints.
And there are four phases of the ethics complaint process that I'll run through briefly. And then if you have any additional information, there's a lot of information available on the city's Board of Ethics webpage, which I can also direct you to if you have any additional questions.
So first, the initiation phase. During this period, an individual would submit an ethics complaint using the prescribed form to me. The complaint form should be accompanied by any evidence such as images, videos, or documentation that the complainant has to support their allegations and must be sworn to in front of a notary.
The city auditor will then determine if the ethics complaint is administratively complete, but does not make any judgments on the complaint's merits. If a complaint is accepted, a copy is forwarded to the complainant, the respondent, and the Board of Ethics chair who assigns it to a preliminary assessment panel.
During the preliminary assessment phase, a panel of three Board of Ethics members reviews the submitted ethics complaint and determines if it is actionable or baseless. A complaint is actionable if on its face the behaviors alleged in the complaint would constitute a violation of the ordinance.
The panel may also recommend that a hearing be held to determine if the complaint is frivolous instead of determining if it's actual or baseless.
The outcome of the preliminary assessment is communicated to the complainant and responded by the city auditor. And if the complaint is determined to be baseless, the process will stop, though the complainant may submit a written appeal within 10 business days, which will initiate the hearing phase.
During the hearing phase, the Board of Ethics schedules an evidentiary hearing and may request additional documentary evidence or issue subpoenas to require individuals to testify.
The complainant must attend and testify at this hearing and may also present any additional evidence that they've gathered. In addition, the respondent may provide testimony and evidence for the Board's consideration.
Both the complainant and respondent have a right to be represented by legal counsel or another person, another advisor at the evidentiary hearing.
And based on this hearing, the Board will determine if a violation of the ethics ordinance has occurred. And if they do, they may issue a sanction.
Once the Board has decided on the ethics complaint, the complainant and respondent both have five business days to submit any new evidence and request a reconsideration in writing with the city auditor.
The Board of Ethics chair will review a reconsideration request and then gets to unilaterally determine if a new hearing is warranted based on the new evidence.
And so if during the hearing, the Board of Ethics finds that a violation has occurred, they might issue one of four sanctions based on the city officials' perceived intent and the seriousness of the violation.
And I've kind of generally illustrated that process in the matrix on the slide, but I'm not going to go through each section. So if one is imposed, you will be notified within 10 days by May.
So that is the end of the training. Any questions on the sanctions or the ethics process or anything else?
It doesn't look like they have any questions, but I would like to say thank you because you did make it fun, all that color. I tried. I need you to sign this, basically to prove that you did it. And then I'll leave.
I also think that's the shortest. It was very succinct. It's all available online. If you have your life.
Yes, you put it on the back. Oh, awesome. I'm bothering you. No, you're fine.
They're still fine. Yeah.
Thank you.
Don't be a stranger, Madison. Come back and see us.
And that's what you're doing.
All right, thank you.
Do we have any properties that we want to look at?
Yes. Yes. Yeah, I was just saying, I'll explain. So this is essentially similar to a city council's two minute pitch. Every opportunity, once a month, that HLC member of the commission has the opportunity to come up, give a two minute pitch for a property they think is worthy of designation.
Then you make your pitch. Essentially, the rest of the commission then will vote. We need another. You need a quorum, essentially. So you would need three additional votes. And if you have four people who vote on it, then it's added to kind of a living document.
So as of right now, we've sent out letters to 214 West Prairie. We've sent them out to the five historic black churches in Southeast Denton. So that's essentially what we're doing is we have a living breathing list as our exhibit.
I believe it's exhibit number two on that agenda item. It does link you to our Denton historic resource map. And those are all of our eligible properties within Denton based off historic resources surveys that have taken place thus far.
So that's essentially what this agenda item, but it's every single agenda item will have this.
All right. No one has a new one.
Not this time.
That's fine.
Okay.
Okay. Item 3C, number HLC 23-041 on our agenda is to hold a discussion regarding the Historic Landmark Commission's Project Matrix.
Yes. So to provide you some background, this is also a item that we see every single meeting. It's essentially regarding different requests that staff receives from HLC in terms of what they want to discuss.
Maybe they want, the commission would like to, as you can see, quantify the economic impact of preserving historic properties. So those are kind of different discussions that we have. Items for Historic Landmark Commission, these are just things that I can add to the matrix that you all can vote on or discuss.
And then we also have our annual update. So these are items from our Denton 2019 Preservation Plan. These are the work plan goals that were voted on last December.
And so these are essentially goals that the commission should be working towards during 2023.
But if we have any items, we can add them today. If not, we can add items next time.
Lacking question.
Yes.
Would this be, when you say, "Client for 2023," is this like fiscal year 2023 or is it calendar year?
It's calendar year.
It is calendar year.
2023, yes.
We're in October.
Yes, exactly.
Okay.
Yep.
The things carry over. Yeah, they can carry over, but these were work plan goals that we discussed at the end of 2022.
Are you familiar with that one?
Your tax exemption.
A little bit, yeah.
Well, we can get the camera and happily explain anything that you want.
I can do that.
Yep. And then at the end, I just list the future HLC meetings for that year.
Okay.
Just as a nice reminder.
As staff, are there any pressing needs that they see perhaps?
I see things like forms of community or something to look at.
Various tasks related to serving and education efforts, et cetera.
So it really is at the commission's discretion.
Staff is here to assist you all in your efforts and what you want to see done and what you want to see as the goals for the commission itself.
So, you know, because there's only so much limited staff time.
So having guidance from the commission in terms of what our priorities for you all as a commission really assists staff in prioritizing what they work on.
We had a subcommittee.
Yeah, so there was a subcommittee.
I won't sleep.
But yeah, so like right now, obviously we have our study lists that we're working on.
So those are those destinations that were sent out for 3B. So we have those six items that have been sent out.
We're just waiting for feedback or hopefully some positive, you know, saying, well, they're interested in land marking in terms of the tax exemption eligibility.
That's just been in discussion. I shared with the commission what we currently have and what we're currently lacking, which is primarily tax incentives for residents.
Tax incentives for residential property owners, because those are not available at the state or national level.
In regards to the subcommittees, as our chair stated, we used to have a subcommittee and that has since dissolved. So we do not have any subcommittees at the moment.
So we have a subcommittee that has been in discussion. We have a subcommittee that has been in discussion.
We have a subcommittee that has been in discussion. We have a subcommittee that has been in discussion.
We have a subcommittee that has been in discussion. We have a subcommittee that has been in discussion. So we have a subcommittee that has been in discussion.
We have a subcommittee that has been in discussion. So we have a subcommittee that has been in discussion. So we have a subcommittee that has been in discussion.
We have a subcommittee that has been in discussion. So we have a subcommittee that has been in discussion. So we have a subcommittee that has been in discussion. So we have a subcommittee that has been in discussion.
We have a subcommittee that has been in discussion. So we have a subcommittee that has been in discussion. So we have a subcommittee that has been in discussion. So we have a subcommittee that has been in discussion. So we have a subcommittee that has been in discussion.
It's based on the repairs that they do. Is it restoration or preservation? So it has to be one of those two.
Have we heard anything about, I think we sent out letters to our delivered package or something to the churches? Correct, we have not heard back. From any of them? No.
So we did certified mail. We received one certified mail back from St. Andrew Church of God in Christ. It was received by the pastor. He signed it, saying it was received. We have not received any other certified letters.
Because we want to ensure that the property owners are receiving the letters and it's not just getting thrown away. But we have not received it from the five other property owners that we sent it out to.
That's a testimony, you know what I mean? Suppose we sent another little short note, "Did you get this?"
Are you proposing that it be sent via certified mail or just send out another note again just to say, "Did you get this?" Yes or no?
Suppose they didn't recognize, you know, they were supposed to do something with the certified mail and just ask them. I would kind of think more so when the mail is delivered, there may not be anyone at the building because it has to be hand-delivered in sign.
Or they have to go to the post office and pick it up. Well, I would think they would have picked it up by now. So I suspect.
So that was just staff's way of trying to make for certain that it was received by the property owner and that it wasn't, like I stated, just being thrown away or going to the wrong recipient and that it was being received by the pastors of those churches.
I understand why, but we just haven't heard anything.
It wouldn't hurt to just, "Hey, we sent you something." I like your idea.
I'm just trying to figure if somebody maybe received it that didn't understand or something. Or they get the notice to go pick it up and then forget that.
I would say I'm happy to actually call. I think that might be better than just say, "Hey, did you, by chance, get a certified letter from the city? This is not a notice of anything. It's just, you know, an informational letter stating that the HLC has interest in designing your property, no matter what level it may be."
They would like to have further discussion with you. So I'm happy to make that call. I know some of the churches do not have numbers, but I got my ways.
I have to use Sirco and Mel all the time, and people react to it in all kinds of different ways. So that's a great idea. Thank you.
Part about the walking tour of Historic Homes. Would this be an appropriate place to list something like doing an in-person, like a home tour event of Historic Homes, or is this not the right spot to kind of document that?
No, that's definitely something that you can bring to the commission, and then we just need a minimum of three votes for it to be added to the matrix, and that can be something that we could put on as the agenda item, and then we can have a further discussion about.
Okay, so do I just say it? I would love to see a Historic Homes tour in Denton as a way to celebrate and actually get to go inside. I love the online one.
It's a great resource to be able to know kind of some of the mid-century modern homes that are in the Denia area, but I'd love to see an in-person one. I'd love to help coordinate this.
It'd be cool to get to go into some of the old homes that have been preserved and have one more for sure, so I don't know what else to say. I make a motion that perhaps we put it on the agenda for next time to explore ideas and entertain possible, maybe even a subcommittee.
We love a subcommittee.
I mean, I have a lot of the historical info and know-how, just as background. Randy Hunt does with his Historic Denton, does those tours, right?
In the city, we might not be able to go inside the homes, but develop a, I mean, they do have at least discovered and used to have like a self-guided walking tour, for example, but that's kind of gone away during different iterations of their updated their website presence.
But I'm with you, something like that would be really cool, especially the heightened awareness, and we do that as an express purpose to kind of generate interest in, like develop another one that's for Southeastern, a tour of these historic churches and do the stories of them, right?
It's a great discussion, but let's save it for when we put it on the agenda.
We'll save it for putting it on the agenda, so I'll make a motion to put it on the agenda and fish for a second.
Okay, who would like to, we don't have to have a second, we just have to vote for this.
Well, you're welcome to come to my house.
After my cleaning people.
All right, anything else from anyone?
All right, if there is no other business, I will adjourn this meeting, it was adjourned at 612pm.