First, I wanted to thank everyone for coming and what I love about this is that it kind of like resembles one of the topics we would love to cover here in Fund the Commons, like different approaches to funding public goods, different mechanisms, different design choices to do so, and that it like literally brands that with like actual like building together because I know there's a lot of like different collaborations and different ways to actually build aligned systems and also just like ways to help each other through like gico and optimism, of course, you know, so like I'm super excited for this talk because I know like there's a lot of overlap, but also a lot of like friendship and a lot of just like building together throughout the years, so I really like that extra aspect of this. So I wanted to start just to think about like when you guys think about funding public goods, like what is measurement, how do you think about impact? In terms of like, I know you both, all of you guys kind of like have a lot of insight into the crowd and just like they let many communities in the crowd make some of the decisions, so I wanted to touch on like how your experience being kind of like giving the power to the edges to make those decisions of what impact means. Making impact is all about friendship. That's true. Done. No, I think that like really a lot of what we're talking about in web3 is actually taking away, and in my view, is taking away from like traditional notions of impact, you know, deferring to some kind of large like committee that like decides like here is some like, you know, metrics we need to hit. It's more about letting the community from like a grassroots perspective decide for themselves, locally, like what are the things that they care about and how do they actually then kind of like bubble those things up to broader like global ecosystem. So, you know, the kind of solutions that we've come across in previous models of like impact measurement often come from like, for example, effective altruism, which like has its benefits, but from my perspective I think it's much more effective to think locally first, think from a mutual sort of perspective and try and start with like shared needs within communities and go from there. Agreed, and I think coming back to this shift in who decides what is impactful? Whose opinion matters? And we've been in this dynamic that has been so one way for so long, which is why people are so disillusioned with anything like charities with any models that we have because it simply doesn't work. There's this dynamic where somebody made a decision over there and the effect here is completely wrong, misunderstood, not actually impactful at all. And so I think a granular local first and then concentric circles of impact that goes out of that is the way to to think about it and really try to explore it that way. Nice, and absolutely agree on these, you know, concentric circles, and we start out really small, but when we have a small group of people and a community, one question that's really not trivial to answer is what is the scope of that community and what is the scope of that impact? So basically like when if I'm in some, you know, internet community what, like, okay, yes, I may really want to make more money or I want to, you know, live in a better place, but that's not really related to that online community and that online community's mandate. So it's really hard to not only measure impact, but also scope impact with respect to some local community's objectives. Well, so I think, you know, this is interesting because I always think of impact is like, you know, obviously it's very grassroots, right, especially for everything that we do. All of us here, it's from the ground up, but I think, you know, when we think about Web3 systems and the intersectionality of like what it is that we all kind of work on, we do, you know, start thinking globally, but I think that the big thing is really acting locally. As you all just said, right, making sure that in whatever that scope of our community is, whatever this concentric circle is, right, wherever in it we are, how are we actually moving forward and driving these things forward? And I think one other thing to kind of point out in terms of like how we actually go about funding these things, it's not, I think we tend to sort of conflate funding, like all, it's like one giant thing, but like venture capital and, you know, grant funding are very, very different, right? When we think about grant funding, it is within the scope of, you know, one sort of determined thing. For VC funding, you have a lot more free rein to kind of, you know, ebb and flow and find places to go if you fail. Great, let's pivot and find something else to do, but for grants, you don't really have that benefit. You have a scope that's outlined, you have milestones you want to achieve, and those are the things that you're heading towards. So the overall impact of what you're doing within grant funded work is sort of more akin to impact bonds, right? You're heading forward in the future and trying to see how this is going to affect something in the future. Whereas for venture capital, it's not necessarily that. You have quantifiable measures that you're aiming for. There are things that you know you want to hit. You know what's going to bring returns, and like that's what you're optimized for. And also on that note, for example, we have a lot of grants here that it's like very proactive, like, oh, I have this idea or this project, I want to make this a reality, and I'm going to talk to my grant to see if other people also see value in it. But then we also have the retroactive funding, which is we also see the value that this created that maybe was someone creating this action or this project that was pure intrinsic motivation, and then you would recognize that value and give it back to them as like retroactive funding, which I think it should be, it would be as more effective if it eventually became more of a norm or a default, because that way people are intrinsically motivated to do things knowing that eventually if they do things well, they would get the retroactive funding. But I'm curious to hear what do you guys think on like, what are the different categories of public goods that are best matched to different types of funding, and if there's any sort of relation there, where there's some public goods that will thrive on a specific model versus not very much on the other model, and if there's any gaps there. Yeah, that's a good question. I think there's there's certainly a challenge that I think can kind of identify, you talked about it really well with grants versus venture capital VC funding. And I think the challenge there is hardly that like with grants you don't really have a good sort of sense of, yeah, return. You don't have a sense of kind of like, hey, if I make a massive impact, I'm going to get, you know, some decent size return of profit, and you know, we're gonna get into this early, but like you could almost say that like what we should be doing, maybe Carl can elaborate on this, is like impact equals profit in some contexts. Now there's things where that doesn't work, like Ether's JS should not be a DAO, you shouldn't just have the community managing like a JavaScript library, but like I think that you can have sort of these different modes of community management that at least allow for some kind of, you know, kind of collaborative way of at least giving positive externalities back to Ether's JS, even if it's not directly from them having their own community DAO or whatever. And so I think on the one hand, I think it's very important to be able to give people stable funding such that they're able to like continue and like feel safe in like doing the work they're doing, but on the other hand having that like external like kind of incentive and long-term sort of set of positive externalities that are going back to those communities is really important. I guess like, yeah, I feel like maybe the model to like answer your actual question, like I think that I would see working would be like, you know, something like Uniswap is a good example of something that in my mind does have positive externalities in that sense is a public good. And I think that can be really useful in terms of being able to go back and leverage those positive externalities that like impact people's profits sort of model and give back to other things that may not have like maybe further down the stack might not have that same level of sort of, you know, possibility. So that's just the one, I mean, one way to think about it. I think it's a really interesting kind of question. I don't think this can be the right answer, but I'm curious to hear. And that's the thing, right? Like, I don't think there needs to be a defined answer right now. And the same way as we've had this conversation across different panels that we've had this week, it's okay for us to be figuring out what works and what doesn't. It's okay to not figure out, okay, that works for this, that doesn't work for this. And I think a lot of hybrid stuff could emerge by combining certain models further down the line that apply to a certain type of funding or a certain type of project. And I also think a lot of it is, and I've said this before, so much of it is this unlearning of these were the only ways that we could do it. Why would we still think in those limits now? Because this is a chance to rejig, to combine, to really put it as an open source, an open source element to it, where it's like an open source economy, open source funding, where you have the bits and you combine them to be relevant to an initiative, to an impact, and so on. It's a work in progress. So it was my turn. I am a retroactive funding maximalist. I am definitely a savage when it comes to that. Now, I will say that retroactive funding is not the going to be, at least my guess, is not going to be the primary driver of you know, funding right now, not right now, because the world is not ready. It's coming. It's coming. It's like a freight train. It's just gaining steam. But right now, we still need some proactive grant funding. We still need these like less, I guess, scalable types of funding. But eventually, once we kind of put, you know, some juice in the engine, then it'll start revving up and then the retroactive funding thing will actually cause that intrinsic motivation that you were talking about to build towards impact as opposed to building towards profitable extraction. And so this is, you know, just the beginning stage. And I think that's why we're seeing a lot of grant funding. We're seeing a lot of proactive investment. But I actually do really hope that over time, we can kind of wean ourselves off and start doing more interesting types of things, like even even some kind of hybrid model where with like purchase commitments, which where you say, okay, well, you can do this thing. And if you did do the thing, I'll give you some money for it. And I'll commit to giving you some money now. So it's a different kind of grant. But anyway, very interesting. I want to quickly chime in on that. Is there one area or what would you think that would steer that engine forward even more? Hmm, I think, ah, ooh, okay, the thing that will steer the engine even more is we need to capture the intrinsic profit centers of the internet. Okay, what does that mean? Okay, normal old fashioned ugly companies, which we don't like anymore. They have profit centers, and those profit centers make tons of money. And then they redistribute that money to all the things in the company that make those profit centers, you know, work.  So what we need to be doing is we need to find the profit centers that are on the internet, maybe block space in layer two, that might just be one of them, but and capture them for the people and allow those profit centers to actually redistribute and fund public goods as opposed to funding private interests. This is hard to follow.  I want my retroactive public.  Agreed. I guess, like, I don't know, to make it a little spicier, I, for, for the longest time, I was very anti retro, uh, I don't know, grant funding. I mean, I think in general, still today, like exactly what Carl said, I think we, we are not there yet. The world's not ready yet. And that, that's okay, right? We have to unpack, unlearn and kind of like re, relearn what it is that we, um, or where agency lies, who actually can empower whom, um, if anyone has been on a grant's call with me, like I, I like to say that grant funding is like dating, you know, it's, it's a two way street and it should be a two way street.  You shouldn't just take money willy-nilly. And I think what, what three enables, especially like with grant programs today, it's, it's, you have the ability to actually turn down capital. There's money everywhere. So you, you can actually say like, no, I don't want your money because you're asking for too much from me and I don't want to do what you're telling me to do. I can go to someone else and get money.  Right? Agency has shifted so that it can be, this is what I'm doing. This is where I'm providing value. Is this something that you find valuable? If yes, great. Let's see if this works out because you can also figure out whether or not the institution is the capital that you want to have, right? What is it that they're asking from you? What is it that they want you to do? Is this pulling you away from your core values? And if the answer is yes, you know, the making you do things that you don't want to do, that's not the money you want, right? You should date and see other funders and figure out, you know, is this good? Uh, and the answer might be no, you know. And that's the thing. And really it, it all boils down to that, right? Web three and what we're all doing enables choice. You have a choice and you can choose that or you can choose this, but it gives you that option and you feel empowered to take it or not to go somewhere. And that value alignment is incredibly important because you want that to be there from the beginning and not feel like a prisoner because you took some money. And that is a complete game changer. And it's incredibly, incredibly impactful, whether it's retro or whether it's pro, it boils down to that. And that's a lot in terms of meaning. You can actually also choose to, I mean, like, which is pretty amazing, like create your own money.  And I think that that sort of like it goes back to the local point that we started with, right? Or like, you're not just choosing between like, Oh, like, do I want like money from like Google or Amazon or whatever? Like you're choosing like an actual sort of like set of values and then like kind of designing converse principles like from there instead of kind of working backwards from what's in the market, what's available to me. And that's harder. What's the lesser evil? Exactly. Yeah. Yeah, diversity is a lot, especially since like when I first started like with 50 years, and we're like connecting, like, connecting our founders with like the next round, like after we supported them with future investors, I don't know if it was like, who could they we also connect them so that they will be like, also good partners along the way. And it's like, not just like the mission, but it is like allowing them to build what is really valuable and not optimized for like the returns or other things, but actually like provide a lot of value, which we focus a lot on. And also the fact of like those, and it was really like with demand of opportunity, something that I've been seeing a lot is a lot of people actually who have told me like, Oh, now with a lot of so many like work or a big job opportunities, it actually acts as a forcing function for me to stop and be like, Oh, where do I really want to contribute or grow or like give my time to because there's a lot of like potential possibilities to go there. Something that I was thinking is the unlearning as well with this possibility to design our data currencies or to give value to like grants to different areas of like the ecosystem rounds, like different specific causes or even like choosing where to give the retroactive funding. What are the things you guys think we need to like unlearn about like, how do we measure impact or like, what kind of impact do we measure? And that we would and what are the things we want to implement like new learnings? Good question. So just pulling from what Ken was saying earlier about dating, it's I think it's reshaping our relationship with value and what value means and how we define it and how we how comfortable we are with definitions that go beyond cash money. And I think and that's hard, like for a lot of people, like let us remember, you're putting so many people in the situation of having to completely shift the way they evaluate things, what they give their attention to, how they give their attention, the fact that it isn't like it's a two way street versus, you know, you need directional flow of value. You're like completely blowing all of this up and saying, now we're redefining what is impactful, what is beyond the cash, what is cash, what is money? Because we're also redefining that. So you're like, doing all of this plate spinning is the only way that I can define it is all at the same time. And then also trying to keep your balance, which is scary as hell, but also incredibly, incredibly exciting. And I think it's that it's redefining a lot of our relationships with value. It's kind of like an absurdism to crypto, in that sense. Like I do think there's actually like a really interesting like, and I think that that's actually like a broader it's broader than crypto, like in web three is a cultural movement where people are kind of recognizing, wait a minute, like, yeah, these institutions or systems like, I don't kind of like suck, like they don't really work very well, actually. And like, maybe we should like think about that, like maybe we shouldn't just be like, Oh, this has existed for like 200 years. So of course, this is like, what we have to stick with, like people who were no smarter than the people in this room like decided like at some point to randomly put this system in place. And then at some point, everyone just like, by like a kind of Lindy effect was just ready to accept it. And I think that we need to just be willing to redefine those things more carefully and be part of the process. Everything is a social construct. That's that's what it is. It just comes down to social construct. But in all seriousness, like, even the idea of like success, right, like everyone kind of like anchors on like, what is success, like, it has to do this, like, we need to accomplish this. But if you remember, a couple of years ago, there was something called plasma. You don't remember plasma scaling, Ethereum. So where is plasma today? No, but I can tell you that so much of what we know and have learned from plasma has brought us to where we are today. So would we call plasma a success, Carl? Absolutely. Context, I worked on that stuff. Ken, this is a personal dig. I feel fully. This is an alley. You're right. It's an alley. You're right. You're right. No, no. This is redefining success, right? Like, we don't have to say that just because plasma doesn't exist today in the form, right? No, but that's okay. Because it's the learnings that, you know, have brought us from plasma to where we are today with optimism, right? We would not have any of that without without what we had done in the past. So I would call plasma a huge success, state channel success. We don't see it in the form that we thought when we initially gave all these grants out. Even the ICOs that came out for whatever projects did these ICOs, you know, it doesn't matter because it brought us to something that actually works. And that is a huge success. I didn't take it personally, Ken. I was just kidding. I love you. Okay, anyway, what was I going to say? Oh, you said unlearn. I think the the main thing that is kind of, it's kind of like the, I don't know, it feels like it's in the ether is just that we need, yeah, I guess, we need to unlearn and help everyone else unlearn what we think is the profitable and right thing to do as a good old-fashioned capitalist, you know what I mean? Like the classic conception of what is the profitable avenue is find a way to gain power and then exploit people, right? That's like when I imagine it, I don't know about you. That's what I think of when I think of like a good old-fashioned capitalist. But that, that like mental image is incredibly damaging, eh? And incredibly untrue and poorly thought through because the moment you start capturing things and the moment you start exploiting things is the moment that you actually slowed down true growth of the economy and the true growth of every person's, you know, quality of life. And by bringing people up, we're actually raising the, you know, the most wealthy person in the world. It does not matter if we've destroyed the world in the meantime, right? I don't want to win the video game of point systems where, you know, in my bank account, if it's going to mean I come at the expense of everyone and our, and myself as well. So that kind of like weird, like gross meme of, of like what it means to be a capitalist and like make money, we need to get rid of that. I was going to say that. One, I love that. Definitely. And then I think another concept I really value is that kind of like experience. So like reigniting people to what wholeness could mean or what like being connected to nature could mean so that ultimately guides kind of like their actions. But something I'm like hearing a lot is this concept of decentralizing innovation to the communities. So developing the tools that you can give to communities that they kind of like incorporate their own values into the, that they value within their little economies. And they have everyone around the world kind of like using these tools to signal their values and what they want to fund and what they want to create forward. But do you think there's like, is that enough? Is that, is it enough to just give them the tools to signal the value if we are still operating from those beliefs that we need to let go of? Or do we need to actually bring forward new kinds of measurements or new kinds of things as like a proxy of like what should we be aiming for? I definitely think we need just very quickly like guide rails because like you can't just have people in you know every single local legal system just deciding like actually like maybe our think our shared needs are like we're like you know the capitalist like mustache or like that whole thing. Like we're gonna you know decide our shared needs are actually to make a bunch of money and just like figure out a way to like make profit and like not really distribute it back. You could theoretically end up in a world where like a lot of people are doing that. But what we want to do I think with this sort of like quadratic funding model that we're taking on is like say you have the shared needs you have like the things that you're trying to achieve but you also have like kind of a guidance guiding light from like movements or narratives that we can gather as web free like start to push forward like this or like this or like impact these are things that can help steer in the right direction what are fundamentally still local decisions. And that to me is like the connection point that I think we need to be making as we start to like iterate on these ideas and these tools. The other thing I'll notice like we just what Carl said earlier like we've had like a hundred years of being a very hyper individualistic society. And I think we don't really have a good muscle of like how to think about like collectively like what we need now or collectively what we need in the future. And I think before we can really use these things at scale I think we have to start iteratively and learn from like basically where are we now what how far have we gotten in terms of like our mental models and the narratives that we're kind of using to guide these particular decisions. And I also think pulling from everything that we've said around unlearning and redefining a lot of stuff it's also enabling people to feel comfortable because I genuinely believe and this is what we see with so many people coming into this ecosystem and they feel so drawn to it and so aligned to it it's in there you want everybody to be good and you want people to thrive but again we've been bastardized into this mindset that if I win you lose if I get mine you lose yours and being comfortable to let that go and having these models where you can go oh shit that's a choice that is in opposition to this extractive thing and the more you perpetuate that and the more you have that narrative the more you catch people and they become comfortable to let go and be there for the betterment of everything versus I'm going to take this because God knows when I'm going to like you know make it first but it's a long process by like let's face it it's not which is why it's not a revolution it's an evolution it takes time and it's fine that it does obviously it's a problem when we don't have that much money because we still deal with that shit but it is important to understand that that is the path and it's important to keep going at it and like bring new people in and make these examples and have these local efforts and and look at these local models and how we improve them together and so on and you know it takes all of us to do this and like genuinely fight the that horrific model that we've been just again stuck with for so long and now we have an opportunity to like look prosperity for everyone enjoy your meal. Yes strongly strongly agree and okay I don't know about y'all this is something that you kind of touched on with this collectivist in individualist thing right this dichotomy some I don't know about y'all but when I got into crypto I had a bit of a political identity crisis because in my mind there are two sides of the spectrum you're either individualist and you're a freedom liberal loving you know like you're really you know everyone's for themselves and you got to be free and bubble Bob pull your bootstraps up or whatever and then you're on or you're on the other side where you're like let's think about the community let's think about everyone and let's also make top down decisions for everyone that is going to benefit all the people right so there's this like your individualist and there's no there's you know there's kind of like this cold-heartedness I guess to that world but it's decentralized or your your collectivist and it's really centralized but I think crypto brings about a decentralized collectivist mindset which is like wow this is like literally the best from both worlds because we can actually think about the betterment of everyone but we don't need to be making top down decisions that may or may not pan out as we plan them that's huge I yeah that is like the big thing it's like we didn't have these coordination tools before our coordination tools were just like you know large companies or like states and so forth and like those things are still useful in their own way in certain contexts but like we have like tools and problems that those tools can address that are so far beyond any of that like scope like I mean climate change is a great example that there's like not really an easy way for like everyone around the world coordinate on like hey like how are you reducing for example like your emissions or how are you like hitting these metrics and I think that this is actually the first time that yeah we have that ability I think the last thing I'll add because we have 30 seconds left is that funding is not the only thing right like if we're solving these problems it's not a money thing right there's so much in terms of non-financial support that you actually need to address these issues to actually collaborate and it's not money that actually brings us together right it is a vehicle for us to do things but it's not you know the thing that intrinsically motivates all of us to actually make for a better world it's friendship yes all I was going to say about the money thing is if you look at it it's almost like you go to a restaurant and this is why the obsession with money is so irrational it's like you would go to a restaurant and eat the menu eat it and you would like eat like 10 of them and you go this is so delicious and then there's like all of this food that's just that's what we're doing this is what our society has pushed us to do we're like a bunch of many readers and it's time for us to eat better is all I'm going to say no I will and we still have a little bit because that was not very good tidy I was growing we've got more time through friendship we have added time back to being a flatter but something that I was going to say that I really appreciate I think when I first got and learning about like different models and mental models for like how to think about what three I came across I think it was building for human thriving that you seem and I were doing with the public library at keep going and you were talking about this efficiency versus diversity and how you could go try to be very very efficient with like a monocrop but maybe like destroy the land that we're like building or cultivating our plans versus we could have like something that is more diverse that is so resilient because of the plans kind of symbiotically built for each other and something that I really value as well that now we're talking about is this concept of like not individuals winning but rather that collective outcome and I think I would like to double double click on kind of like how good going and optimism have been very symbiotic themselves and building with each other and even now like when it comes to keep going grants 2.0 you guys are even collaborating and like doing things between each other and even with our work with a mutual grants and community building with token shops for other new and upcoming projects is all about this ecosystem growth and collaborating between each other. So I would ask if you guys have any other like advice or thoughts on how to create or enable these collaborative ecosystems. So one thing I'll kind of highlight which is interesting in that context is we have this concept of the commons which actually comes from like Eleanor Ostrom's work principally but like the idea with the commons is that like when you take things from you know you know local pool of like a local forest or like you know fishery it diminishes what's available to others and I think what's interesting about like open source software and like these other sorts of like public goods that we're talking about in the context of like web 3 is that they're more generative when you have more open source that's being built naturally more and more people can build on top of it and you have these composable kind of like positive some games that end up being played and that's something that didn't exist in we talked about this on the other panel I think too but like they didn't exist that way in web 2 and it's very difficult to like think about that in our current sort of like just yeah we have this sort of like you have to win mindset versus having like a collaborative mindset and we don't need that now because of these new tools and the new sort of dynamics we've introduced. So I think that's just a huge point. Yeah. I mean, Carl, I love your thoughts here. Well, I just want to thank Gitcoin for just being so collaborative really like it is incredible to have y'all coded very you know, you they Gitcoin has been working with us to help us build out aspects of our retroactive public goods for funding round 2 and like that kind of thing just saying oh I'm going to you know I'll help you do it. I just feel like that is such like within the spirit of building for the open source building for the commons building for the betterment of everyone and not feeling kind of insecure about your position like a lot of the public goods stuff like building out in the open and building open source software is really about being comfortable in yourself and being comfortable in the future that you will actually you know your time will come you will be recognized I think that people are the most selfish when they don't think that other people will recognize their work which is I mean it makes sense and so we you know with this software we're able to recognize each other and so I recognize y'all Gitcoin you know great. Hearts, hearts. Let me try out. Okay, perfect. I think like one takeaway would be like we're here like funding the commons everyone's presenting their own mechanisms their own design systems and their own ways of funding and supporting public goods and I would say like one encouragement will be to create those bridges as you guys did and kind of like support each other in creating these systems and creating as an ecosystem and just like learning and supporting. So thank you all of you so much for this amazing panel and I think after this we're going to workshops so yeah. Thanks everybody. Hey Alehek. Thank you.


Let me start. I was driving last week From where I was to Piazza and I just stopped when I saw this view of This beautiful old building against the backdrop of What's the new is coming and I just sat for a moment took this picture and I asked myself What do I see? Do I see fragility? Do I do I feel that tension between the old and the new? of more older traditional forms of architecture That to me represents our values our identity our heritage our culture versus the new which is kind of Tall taller, it's very new shiny. I think it's gonna be shiny most of it and and Yeah, it was a very profound moment for me because this was a tension of where our city is and myself as an architect Of course this picture is not telling the whole story about what's happening in our city Obviously, but it tells where we're going or what our intention to go is In this rapidly Transforming city in the last two decades We grapple with this as designers are professionals as residents We grapple with this tension and find ourselves Breathless in fact on the on the fastness of the growth Because when it's so fast, you really are not in control of either your urban fabric your resident The way you build and the way you actually bring bring bring ideas onto the ground and So though clearly what we inherited In the built environment was by no means the best example of especially inclusive planning where distribution of wealth To all residents was equal. My question is when we go towards fast urbanization How are we building our buildings? How are we actually transforming the cities from the city scale? To maybe when we go to the human scale where we are using new buildings new concepts But actually the how we implement it is rather poor Very chaotic and very unfit for our environment So I go back to our identity that we can live that both can live together our sense of scale the way we used to build our buildings the way our tradition our You know Unique indigenous styles of building. That's what we have to kind of learn from even in our public spaces These are our landmarks whenever there is road networks that are converging. We have beautiful landmarks against beautiful and Set of buildings. What about our public spaces? We have enjoyed the spaces Mascals square is the way we where we meet up and this is an amazing Identity for us through different regimes So for me the question is how then through this fast urbanization How can we then build a livable city and a city that we and we've talked about what the livable city should be but my question is What about inclusivity and how do we Include within special planning as well as others economic and otherwise What do we actually do on the ground because I'm an architect and I'm so involved on on the ground thinking How do we bring excellence? I mean we're we're doing all this mega projects. We're you know Expanding we've done so many things in at this, but how why can we not? refer to excellence as our Trademark because historically, Ethiopia has done amazing buildings. So Again going back same space, but a little different perspective I saw the soldier standing and I felt this is me speak I mean as a resident and not as a as an architect. Where am I in this? Am I a bystander? Am I part of this change? Am I part of the change that is building this nation or part of this? Of of of this person that is standing by and not being part of a participatory process that actually Is my main agenda today? Where is the participation? Where are we as residents? What is our stake and this is on behalf of the people and behalf of myself? Thank you very much


All right, so we are here and I will call the meeting to order and we have six appeals for a set for tonight and I was thinking of taking them in reverse order from what they're listed to get things going officially. So Gerald D. Denison, there she is. Ms. Denison, hello, can you hear me? Okay, Ms. Denison, can you hear me? And we can't hear you yet. Yeah. Okay, try saying something again. Can you hear me?  Yes, thank you. Sorry. Can we move the speaker like onto the table? Okay. You can get a chair. That would help. Okay, Ms. Denison, we'll get started. I'm Jack McCullough. I'm the chair of the Board of Abatement and we're going to start with you and I'm going to start by having you raise your right hand. Do you solemnly affirm subject to the pains and penalties of perjury that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you. Great, thank you. Now, we have a couple of remote introductions. Yes, we have a couple of remote introductions. So, Sal, would you introduce yourself? Sal Alfano, District 2 Council member. Thank you. And who's the S? That's Sarah Carter. Okay. Great, Sarah. Thanks. Okay. So, Ms. Denison, we have your filing and we have your statement about why you are requesting an abatement. So, would you go ahead and tell us what your grounds are for requesting an abatement of your taxes? Well, I didn't find income level, but that's not something, it's my ability to afford it based on my income. I think that normally I qualify for a private tax with a state of, as you know, what my knowledge would be afraid and it would increase like a huge amount. And the state may determine what private tax credit I would get because I take that into consideration. They put my whole property back and determine what my private tax credit would be. And so my private tax bill is from, it's all doubled. It went from $495.00 a quarter to $904.00 a quarter. And my income, I mean, that kind of spent to pay the first due to the court, then all my savings, the pay for that. And I know I guess the law doesn't allow for people that are really afraid to consider a person's income level, but I'm just asking if you would consider my income level and to challenge my private tax. Okay, thank you. Now, based on your exhibit that you filed, and I'll rule all the exhibits you filed are received in evidence, you were reporting for 2022 household income of $44,569.00. Do you know what your 2023 income was? I don't yet. I did get a pay raise in July. So I'm, I think, yes, it might be around $50,000. But I haven't gotten my, you know, W-2 or any like tax documents yet. Okay. Now you noted in your statement that your home was also damaged in the flood. And could you tell us what the damage was? Well, I had three to four feet of water in my basement. So my boiler, and I, I had a lot of the laundry and things like that. My boiler and my hot water heater, they were able to be repaired fortunately. My washer and dryer, I had door lights, and it was a space like, you know, the humidifier, space heaters, and things like that, small appliances that I had. It's not so bad that they were in the flood. So we had a lot of therapy on the area. But yeah, and then, you know, just, I did do some mitigation, but to help prevent the global warming that doesn't happen yet. And again, and soon, but I did do some precarious mitigation repair in my apartment. So we were replying so that, so we wouldn't tell them in my basement, they're over the back of, you know, quite have that thumb mitigation repair. I didn't do some thumbs. I don't, I don't, if that's not the way I can deal with right now. And I was like, well, I think it's better, I'm sure that it's the way after a place like boiler, but I don't know yet. Yeah. And none of the water flooded your, the first floor or upper floor, of the building. Good. Any other members have any questions for the taxpayer? Can you repeat what the damage was? I lost my freezer. I lost my washing machine and dryer, but my boiler and my hot water theater were able to be repaired. So fortunately I did not have to replace those. I was told by the insurance company that I need to replace my boiler for them to ensure me, but I don't know what, if you deal with that right now, I do have home insurance. But I'm dealing with some of that. And the repairs and if you have a future. Did you catch that, Bob? No, maybe agree. And do you know the total cost of the damage to your home that you've made out of pocket? Well, I don't know. I think it's something, I mean, I got, well, I don't know, $4,000 something. So I don't know for sure how much I need more, I think. Maybe a few thousand. Because I have to do some plumbing work. And I do replace a lot of things. Right. Okay. I'm going to repeat what I think you said. And I'll ask you to tell me if you think I've gotten it right, because there are people here who are having difficulty hearing what you've said. So what I think you said was that there was damage to both your boiler and your water heater, but they were able to be replaced.  And there is a variety of other items of personal properties, small appliances and stuff like that, that were also lost and not able to be repaired. Is that about accurate? That is, yes. And you think you got about $4,000 from FEMA? You had to do some plumbing work and that on top of what you got from FEMA, you're probably out a few thousand dollars? Yes, they are. Okay. Okay. Anyone else have any questions? Kim? No. Do you have a sense of what your total loss was? Yes. Yeah, I did all of them. I did not calculate that. I don't know. I don't know. I did not do that calculation. Okay. Donna, you had a question. Could she calculate it and send it to us later? Well, we can hold it open. Do you have the ability to add up all your losses and send them to us? Okay. I can't, you know, have not replaced. It's just, I can be using my own, I think, look through some of the bills like that. I guess I can. I mean, but I don't have to say receipts. Because some of the stuff was just thrown away. You know, I did not replace them. They were in the small appliances. I think I would have to go back and find the receipts and If you had a couple of weeks to do that, could you do that? Yeah. So do I actually have a receipt for it? Or do I have to find all the receipts and Even if you don't have receipts, if you have a statement that you would testify is the accurate statement of the amount of your out-of-pocket losses, we would accept that. Tim. Great question for clarification. We're talking about personal property and others. So it's not fair to ever calculate property, is it? We're really, we're really interested in property to your structure, your damage to your structure, not your personal property. So I don't know that to the structure, I'm not aware, I never had access to our personal determine. So I need to be able to Okay. So, you know, it's like washer, dryer, no, it's personal property. It's not my structure. Right. Okay. Bob, Mark, Kim, Bob. When were the repairs made? Not to washer and dryer, but say the heating system. When were the repairs to the heating system made? It was pretty quick. We've been, well, maybe about a month. Okay. I had a wonderful repair person came and fixed my boiler and my hot water heater. Come. Okay. I mean, I'm not part of the board, but I don't know if I can say anything. Sir. Okay. Okay. We won't take anything from you. Sorry about that. I didn't didn't recognize who you were. Kim. I didn't hear if there was this year's income. Her estimate was 50,000 for 2023. Is it a rental property here? Is this, is there any rental properties that's your home? It's my home. Okay. Okay. So she's not asking for a baby to the income, I guess. Right. Well, she's based on inability to pay as in the statutory criterion of inability to pay. Tim. So it seems like we've only had one other meeting, but a similar issue. Last time when it looks like the question is because the pre-bate that she got was based on last year and then the new assessments came out. This is the same thing. Yeah. So it would seem like a similar resolution would be fair. Yeah. Oh, sorry.  I was only saying that's what I thought she was asking for. Because of her income, she's not able to pay the tax because it went out. But I just, when I noted that her complaint also had to do with damage, I wanted to rate flood damage, I wanted to raise that. Donna, did you have something? She's given us two tax bills. And one that's for this year actually has the new assessment on it, the one for 2324, and there's, she's allowed the $3,072 state payment. And then, so it's about the same payment. And last time, her appraisal for 2022-23 was the 175. So I'm confused about her saying they didn't do her alignment on the 37, 317. Yeah. This is the same question we had last week, isn't it? It's the same thing with Susan Advil where the assessment came out, or the tax bill came out after the assessment. They crossed in the mail so the state payment isn't applied to the new assessment. So the tax bill is higher. Yeah. And it'll adjust itself next year. But for this year, it's a catch. And it's almost the same amount as the Abdul case, too. And do you know how the income sensitivity is computed? Does it, is it based on income and the assessment of the real estate? It is. And like John just said, it will be corrected next year when the current assessment catches up to her Homestead Declaration. So the amount that she pays at the end will be relatively close, other than increase in taxes. The only question I have is, if you look at the Homestead Education Tax Rate for the current year, okay, which they have is $1.12. As we look at it for the previous year, it's $1.67. I think they equalize it. Based on the value. Based on the value. That's why our tax rate didn't go down in Montpelier between those two years. So they're making a calculation. I've been away from this for 15 years, but the calculation comes into effect when you take the value from last year at $175,000, that gets equalized down because we were, say, at 70%. And I think when they look at this year's, that's why the tax rate says $1.12. So it's something we should really look into before we start adjusting all the state payments. So is the suggestion that we get some more information, not make a decision on this today, get some more information, and then use that to... I would do that, or else we should be adjusting everybody's tax bill who had a state payment. Well, only if other people have an ability to pay a share, because there's still the underlying, it's not, the argument isn't that there's a difference, but that the difference creates an inability to pay a share. So we didn't hear anything about other extrovertary expenses. We didn't hear anything, something that stopped. She's still here. Yeah, yeah. What's this? We can ask that now. Ms. Dennison, I know you've been hearing a bit of what's been said here. Did you have any extraordinary expenses or anything else other than your income or your taxes that has made it impossible for you to pay this year's taxes? Well, not that it's other than just the usual lowly expenses, utilities, and just, you know, paying my mortgage and, you know, the thing all... My income level was just not, I would not appear to have that kind of increase of a property tax.  I'm saving and to be able to cover some of those things, but you know, I just get by and I don't have any moderately, my income is moderate, so I appreciate whatever you would consider. And are you willing to tell us what your mortgage payment is for a month? It's all up to $800, like $790 some dollars a month. I've been living in my house since 1998, and I've been through two other appraisals, and they're all manageable. I've been able to handle the increase. If they weren't at any point in time, I'm not going to spend anything for a long time. Gotcha. Any member of the board have any other questions before we wrap this up? This one's harder because with Susan Abdo, she very clearly said this was impacting her ability to handle basic life. And so that's kind of a different situation than simply that the taxes are very high. I don't know where to go with that. So is there a motion of any kind? Make a motion to postpone judgment until we get the additional information that we ask for. I mean, it doesn't make any difference. I don't want to go to the effort just try to find all that information because it was personal property. So because my whole point was that my income level is not, they have a property tax increase of this level with excessive and it really doesn't impact me my ability to save money today and have a cushion for emergency. I have a car. I may have car repairs. I have just basic living expenses that I need to have like everybody else who likes to be able to have a little bit of savings. But I don't want to go to the effort to try to figure out why I lost because the whole experience I'm trying to pass it. So I don't really want to wait. Okay. It doesn't really impact what you know, it's personal property. When you said that that doesn't count, it has to be the structure. Donna. I have a question. I thought we were making decisions on these after we did them all. The flood ones, just the flood ones. The flood ones, yeah. I did not give it. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, her extra expense is related to the flood. Right. But this isn't a situation where there's damage to the structure due to the flood, the way the other flood related abatement could. I understand that it doesn't qualify as a flood abatement. And yet when we talk about her other expenses, she's told us she's happy to do the flood. That's her hardship and I don't know how you exclude them. That's part of her. It's like having medical bills. She's had these extra bills due to the flood. The difference in the municipal obligation for the two years is $767. If there's going to be any sort of abatement, maybe it should be the $767. Or a portion of that because Or a portion of for the two months of flooding or something along those lines. Because the big difference in the two bills is what the state allows for state payment. The municipal rate only went up 700 bucks. The state was $7 for the state payment. So where the real difference is what the state is going to give her back as a credit. So if there's going to be an abatement on this, maybe it should be a part of the $767 difference. We did that two quarters and split that in half. That's 383, 384. And it will correct itself next year. Okay, so the chair would entertain any kind of motion that someone wants to make for a resolution of this request? I'm not convinced of an ability to pay. I don't know if we would do a motion to You could make that motion to not grant the request. Okay, I will not grant this request. Is there a second? Bob's second. This is limited to ability to pay for the whole. Right. This is the entire request. Okay, so your motion is no relief. Yeah. Yeah. Is there any further discussion or are we ready to vote? Okay, the motion is not to grant the relief requested. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? The motion carries. Ms. Dennis, I'm afraid we were not able to grant your request. Thank you for participating though. Have to say this. Sorry. It's just me. Before I move on, it's impossible to hear clearly people. I think it was just her because when Sal spoke he was booming. Sal was loud and clear. Yeah. Sal was right. Yeah. There's some echo going on. There's some echo going on. There's some echo going on. There's some echo going on. There's some echo going on. There's some echo going on. There's some echo going on. That's right for what you were saying. Everybody's home situation equipment is very different. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay, Scott, you're up. Okay. Do you have that shake with the question? May I ask that again? Yes, please do. I don't have a lift ring. Here, you know I'd like to give you some stuff. I have some documents to pass on. I know some members who are not present. Yeah. So, I believe there is a... Just stop. Thank you. I think I might have to get some sound. Wow. I have a couple of extra copies. I don't know if we'll have a chance to read them, but these are all members not here. Great. Thanks. And I'll tell you and also Mr. Boardman, the way we are doing these abatement requests based on the flood damage is that we're taking the testimony at the individual hearings. We're not making decisions at the hearings tonight. We're reserving decisions on all of them until the end of the process. So at the end of the process, we'll have a meeting that we will discuss all of them so that we're sure that we're applying consistent standards and treating everybody fairly. I appreciate that. Thank you. So we'll get all your testimony tonight, but you're not going out here with a decision tonight. I understand. And you want to raise your right hand? Do you solemnly affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Great. Thank you. Now, we have all your packet of materials, which I will admit into evidence. Including what you filed and what you brought in tonight. And we have a standard list of questions. We're going over with all of these, which the clerk is recording the information because we're going to need to refer to all that stuff at the end. Donna. No, he answers the questions. He starts with your questions. In the second page. Oh. Yeah, those are the questions. And I assume they were, I thought it would be helpful. Again, since I know you have limited time and so I thought I'd print them out and here they are. That's great. That's extraordinary. Well, this is great. Now I don't want to go. So is there anything that you need to tell us that you haven't given us in writing? Yes, because I got a couple of surprises this week. I do want you to know, you know, people, I own the building at 124 and 28 Main Street. And my wife and I own that through an LLC. And we have a tenant, which is Yankee Wine Spirits. And my son and I own that through an LLC, a separate one. I wanted to know, you know, we probably wouldn't have survived this at all, except for the graciousness and the generosity of this community.  The trash collection was relieved. All of us who were building owners of an unbelievable burden. The BGAP program from the state was very helpful. I got, I got a grant. That's this satchel property got a grant of 42,000. We got a grant of 24,000 from the, from Montpelier life or Montpelier strong. And that was wonderful. So I want you to know, we did get that money. But also, I don't know if it's come on your radar or not. I sat down with my accountant today. And, and I realized, I should have known this, but I realized for the first time, those, those grants are all taxable income. And so, it's, you know, cut it by a third or so, which is crazy. Anyway, it is what it is. But I wanted to make sure you had that disclosure. And you understand my commercial tenant is my, my other, my other business. Um, I'm a long time resident, resident of Montpelier since 1980. We own a home here in town. And, uh, been a business person in Montpelier for over 40 years. I'm, I'm not retired yet as an attorney, but I'm, I'm sort of semi-retired. I've stepped back a bit. I'm a counsel to my old firm. But the surprise I wanted to take about, because the second, after these questions, I put a spreadsheet together and it, it details the, um, the cost we've experienced as we've gone forward, nearly 150,000 to repair the kind of buildings and the systems to do things like relocate the electric above the flood level and things of that nature. We relocated hot water above the flood level. We couldn't do that with our furnace. We had to repair it. So it's nearly 150 to date, but this is the strange one. If you look at the, um, that first page of that spreadsheet and, and before I do that, behind it, this is just old documentation and it's not every invoice. It's just the major ones, um, to give you a sense of it because, you know, then you'll see things for $10 to buy brushes or rakes or something. It's, it's an unbelievable project to try to put together a building back together again. But the one I wanted to point out on the, on the first page, um, there's a entry, the third entry down for 22,500. We had, um, engaged service master to, um, work with us and help us clean up the building. And they, um, gave us an estimate, um, which is in the A1 exhibit. They gave us an estimate of $89,000 to do that. And, uh, and some, and actually, I know some of you did stop by the building in those early days after the flood. So you've seen the mess that had to be cleaned up. And some of you own buildings yourselves and, and you, you saw your own mess. So I thought that was a lot of money, but, um, I didn't really think I had any choices. And, um, so I agreed to that. It was a time and, um, materials contract. Um, I paid the 22,000 and, um, it did a good job. And, uh, subsequently I didn't get another invoice from them. So I, I, I didn't hear from them. I didn't hear from them. I actually didn't figure the 22,500 was going to cover it all, but I just didn't hear from them. I didn't go out of my way to try to contact him either, but I didn't hear from them. Um, I think the reason I didn't hear from them was because of the destruction to our post office that they did. Turns out they sent a bill sometime in, um, November. And, um, I never got it. And they never used my email or anything else or called me or did anything else. And then finally, um, uh, like last week, they sent me a letter, um, and, uh, and attached an invoice, which is A2. And the invoice is for $165,000 for the cleaning of this building. The, uh, I don't know where this is going to go yet, um, because I hadn't planned on that. I had planned on somewhere around the 89 or 90,000. I can tell you that if anyone, if I, I mean, my work as an attorney is, is sort of timing materials too.  This is all I got from them. I didn't get one piece of detail about the work they've done. It doesn't reflect my $22,500 down payment either. So I don't know where this is going to go, but I know right now I have it hanging over my head and I have a Fortune 500 company that's probably going to sue me, um, if I can't work it out. Uh, so I did want you to know that while I've spent about $150,000 to date, um, it's, it's not over. The, the other things that I wanted you to know is there is some, um, you'll see here and you'll see from the, from the responses to the questions, um, we did the things everyone had to do, clean the building, repair the electric system, repair the furnace, new hot water, relocated the electric. We had to take new floors. The floors went down to the original boards and new floors, new flooring, um, the sheetrock to about five feet. The insulation was done. We blew in foam insulation, new sheetrock. We even had to replace our drop ceiling because with all the moisture, it started at mold in the ceiling. So we had to have a, put a brand new ceiling in. Um, we also, we sustained, um, some damage to the foundation. Um, the, the water pressure in the back of our, in the back of our building, the sort of the corner where, um, the hue goes back entrance in the Vermont Community Foundation and our back entrance is a drain there. I am concerned. I've talked to DW about it. I'm concerned there may be a problem with that drain. But I think water has undermined, um, the foundation a little bit. It blew a hole through our concrete, um, so that we've, when we had this last, uh, rain in December 18th, it was coming through there like a fire hose. No place else was leaking, but it was just coming through that. And I know, um, um, the building next door to us in former Hugo's. I know they were getting water coming in as well. Not from us, but from probably from a similar source. So, um, we have to explore that and we're going to have to repair that part of the foundation. I don't know if we're going to have to dig down outside to do it. Um, I, it doesn't seem to me we can just plug it up with cement and hope for the best. So we're going to have to do that. The other thing is our building has a brick veneer and I had, um, oh, I'm blanking on the name of, uh, the civil structural engineers. They were on, not very well, but yeah, dual. And they came down and looked at it. I don't have a structural problem with the building, but the brick veneer on the bank side, um, part of it is pulling away from, from the wooden structure. And, um, so in the summer, I'm going to have to, um, get a masonry, um, company to come in. There's a way to tie the brick back in. Some of you who've been around, I know a lot of you who've been around this town a while might remember on Elm Street where the brick started falling off the building down there by, um, which I think is uncommon market now. So I don't want that to happen. So, um, there is a way to tie that brick back in. You take some out, tie it in, pin it back to the building. It's not a structural problem, but it is a problem that you can't just let go. So there are still some things to be done with this building. We lost, um, I couldn't provide electric to my tenants for two or three weeks and hot water for a little bit longer. I gave them a rebate and I detailed that in this as well. So I didn't charge them for the times that I felt they lost the use of their building. With the, uh, the liquor store, which we've been unable to open, we have lost income to the, to such properties of 24,000 today here. Going to start charging, um, rent again March 1. We're hoping to be open. We're close, um, but still it's amazing how many small details there are. Again, there's a whole separate set of, um, a whole separate spreadsheet for what it's cost us to put the store back together, but that's not for you to worry about today. So, um, you know, I regret to answer any questions. I do, like I said, I've spent 150,000 close to that already. Um, that doesn't, that doesn't account for any of my time. It doesn't, it doesn't account for the stress of the trauma. And, you know, I think that, um, you know, it's not part of this evapement hearing, but everyone who's gone through this, this is a traumatic event. It's traumatic. People in the city council, it's traumatic to see our city in this situation. It's not just traumatic for me or my building. It's traumatic for this whole city. And, um, we're, um, you know, we thought long and hard about whether we were going to try to make a comeback or not. And we decided to do it. And I hope we'll be able, as a city, to move forward and to find some ways to, um, invigorate and mitigate the, uh, the river, uh, and the potential in the future. But, uh, you know, we're, my wife and I, we're committed to this city and, uh, my son and I are committed to it. And, um, so if there's, uh, again, if this request is consistent with the other requests that you get and that you deem worthy of, uh, supporting, then, uh, thank you for it. And, uh, if it's not consistent, I thank you for your time. Great. Thanks for coming in. Does anyone have any questions? Okay. Can you read his flood and church for the next month? I hope so. Do you have any idea what the cost is? I don't. I don't. I haven't, you know, I, I've been thinking about it a lot. And I was thinking about it a lot on December 18. Yeah, really? With that coming in, we had a, um, we had a, a summer over, over time, it almost burned out. Uh, a friend, you know, I put, I put a call out. It was late at night. I put a call out on Facebook. A friend went to a granite shed and got a commercial sump up and brought it down to our place. And, um, so we never filled up with water that day. Um, I, I know that the building next door to me did have quite a bit of water on it. But I think, I think we need, we have to get flood and church. I couldn't, I couldn't do this again. We have cost, you mentioned here somewhere, the concern about repetition. And it's gotta be real and it's gotta be expensive. Flood insurance? Yeah, well, flood insurance is one way to do it. But it's very, it's very expensive. I imagine it would be horribly expensive. You can Google it. The average house is like $13,000 a year. Oh, it's not. Yeah. Flood insurance? No, not. You can buy a lot of flood insurance, Todd. Okay, well, it's not. Okay, that's good. No, that's great. Well, you're scaring me, Don. Well, I mean, I Googled it for a neighbor. I was just stunned. I just got some new bills for some of our blocks that portion of the work I was doing. They didn't drop me, but I'm very, very glad. Well, you do have to take some mitigation. So in all your repairs, did you feel like you were able to take some mitigation steps? I did, but it's not 100%. We were able to relocate all the electric service. So, for example, we had like many commercials, our electric service main entrance was down in the basement. Now everything is up on the first floor above the flood level. It cost a lot to do that, but, and I wasn't even, you know, I didn't do it because of the regulation, which I now understand requires it, but I just wasn't going to put it down there again. I would have, I tried to look at alternatives to the heating system. We have four commercial tenants, sorry, sorry, four residential tenants on the second, third floor. And we explored heat pumps and exchanges up there. But the cost for that was over $50,000. And I just on top of all this couldn't do it at this time, might do it in the future. There are some rebates available for that kind of work. And we had cellulose insulation in the walls. It turns out we, we had to cut the walls out and, you know, pull all that stuff out. And then the dry stuff on top fell down through it. So we added all that. So we got Elliott Curtin to come in warm and they used closed cell urethane foam, which is waterproof. So if it happens again, you'll still have to cut out the drywall and let it dry out. But I don't think you will. We have to replace that. Yeah, so, all that's good. So those types of things we did, we have, we had wood shelving for wine. We have now metal shelving. Our metal shelving for the liquor, we took that out and brought it to my son's house. He had a spare horse barn. And we ended up, I don't know. I thought it was crazy, but we did. We salvaged it all. A lot of it was rust, rusted, everything. We got it, pressure washed, it painted it all and it's back in place. So we were able to save that. So for the wine shelving, which was wood, we bought metal. Now that's not part of the satchel property thing. That's part of the liquor store. But that's also, it was answering your question. So, but there's a lot of things that you can't protect against. And even with the flood insurance, I understand there's some limited protections you get for your basement and anything that's below ground. I didn't see it. I think he's right. Yeah. I have another question about, I didn't see anything about your lost income. Even if I just looked at it here. Oh, you know, I didn't put a spreadsheet. I could follow it up, but I did it in the answers to the questions and I spelled it out. You know, specifically the time that the tenants were out. I think it was, that was the question. Six, property lost income. Yeah. So I put down the rent we get from the apartment monthly and from the, it's on page three of the answers to the questions. So the question is number six. It's the first part of the exhibit, page three of that. So instead of the 3600 for that month, I gave them a credit for $2,613 and charged them $987 for the time they had full use of the property. So I lost 2,600 there. And then we've lost August through January. We have not been able to, we've not been able to, well, we wouldn't even be able to offer the building to the liquor store until pretty recently. And now they're refitting the liquor store. So we lost 24,000 and we'll probably, we'll start collecting rent next month. Well, great. It's very helpful to have this information provided in this form. It'll make our job easier. Bob. Yeah. Scott, what percent of the building was unusable for how long? You know, I guess it's how you count it, but I would say 50% of the building was unusable. But that's if you're talking four floors, you know, someone might minimize the basement, you know. But we used the basement. That was, it was integral. That's where all the liquor was stored. Thank God the liquor was owned by the state. They own it to the seller? They own it. And this was, you know, not, this is ironic, I guess. Because no one, well, not no one, we had, you know, we knew there could be a flood, but no one really expected what happened that day. If there's anyone here who did, then I'm mad at you for not telling me. But the state delivered about $70,000 worth of liquor that morning to our basement. Wow. It wasn't, it wasn't until three o'clock in the afternoon. I know. But we had, we had all our storage down there. We had our furnace down there. We had our electric down there.  Our oil tanks were down this. So you said about 50% of the building was totally unusable? Yes. The basement and the first floor were totally unusable, except, I mean, we were in there doing repairs. I mean, we didn't finish the floor until just about, I don't know if you can look at where Alex came from. Okay, one place here, you say the total loss ran between August 4th and January 31st is the $26,000. In two? Yes. Now, and then with the other portion where you're down here and you talk about you're not going to open until March 1st, I don't see direct. But then it doesn't matter, because we're just looking at the first two quarters now anyway. Oh, okay. So, I mean, that's what we're doing with this process. But that includes the first floor. That would be the first floor. The liquor store rented, their lease was for the first floor on the basement. And each of the floors are the same number of square feet? Yes, it's a rectangular building. The second and third floor and the apartments, other than the temporary loss of use, because mainly from the loss of electric. But, you know, we did lose hot water. And, you know, it's easier to live without hot water for a little while than without electricity. And we were lucky to get the heat back, because I explored everything for heat. I explored city heat, which again, we couldn't have got up and running in time. Couldn't have done it. I explored the heat pumps. And finally, I realized I had no choice. The only thing that would get them heat before the weather turned really cold was repairing the furnace. So that's what we did. The furnace is no longer the source of hot water. That's now the hybrid system that's above the flood level. But it is, that's our heat source. And we just barely got that in. And I think it was mid-October. So it was getting pretty chilly. And you were able to repair it and not replace it? We were able to repair it. Because I understand if you'd been required to replace it, would have been required to go upstairs. Yes, and I don't know where we could have put it. Well, thanks. I'm sure I'm not the only person looking forward to having you back at business. Dry January is almost over, Scott. I know, I know. And everything seems to take longer than you think. All right, thanks for coming in. You're very welcome. Thanks for your attention. I appreciate it. And I appreciate all you do. Thanks. Break down the tail. Still some sort of. Well, I have some access to any of that material that's ended up in the extra copies. Yep, we've got extra copies. There's two extra copies. Okay, Mr. Boardman, thanks for coming in. Yeah. Well, I didn't realize we had to do that. Well, you don't have to do that. He went over and... I don't know. I see that. Above what was required. Yeah. The lawyer told you so. Yeah. There's a cost to not. So, we'll just raise your right hand. You solemnly affirm subject to the pains and penalties of perjury. The testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Okay, now we are looking at four. Four, is it? Separate properties of yours. And as I have with the other properties, I will admit the filings that you submitted into evidence, presumed that you would testify that these are fair and complete statements. Okay. And what I'm going to do is I'm going to go over the list of questions that we've prepared to get the basic information that we've decided we need to address these. So, speaking first of eight Langdon Street, was there a 50% or greater loss in the value to the primary structure of the property? Was there a loss of use of the primary structure for 60 days or more? And how many stories is this building? Three. And what floors were, did you lose the use of? Well, because of the electrical and septic we lost use of the whole building for the duration of the process. Okay, actually the tenants. Gotcha. Was there a loss of access by the property owner to utilities for the primary structure for 60 days or more? No. No. Was there condemnation of the property under federal state or municipal law? No. Is the damage to land only to the outbuilding only or both only? Do you have any? Do you have any outbuildings on the property or just the main building? Just the land main building. Uh-huh. And has there been income loss? Yes. And do you know what the income loss? Yeah, we can send that to you. Okay, great. Do you know the building's total square footage? I think it's 23,000. And we have, actually we have your property card too. Because it's on there. Yeah, uh-huh. I didn't realize we had to do that, but I can send you all the information properly. And the estimated square footage of the damaged area, once the utilities were restored Was there damage to the upper floors or just to the ground floor? Just to the ground floor. Okay. And we've got the figures for the square footage of each of the floors, so we can compute that. Okay, does anyone have any other questions regarding eight Langdon Street? Just one, so on that one, so you had started a project before the flood, right? That's correct. So basically you moved all the tenants out and you had the process of renovating the upper levels? Well, we didn't move the tenants out yet. We were in the process, just we gave them all notice, but then the flood hit. Okay, so they weren't. So yeah, exactly. Yeah, unfortunately, yeah. Is the uh, is the place back habitable and able to use now? The first floor is ready, but that seems like we're working on the second, third floor is another renovation, so the tenants are able to use it now. Great. They're able to use the building now. Okay, anybody else have any other questions? Sorry, when was the first floor repaired and ready to use it? Um, I'd say mid, mid November. We were pretty close. So five months basically. Which building number?  Nice. And what efforts? I mean, what took so long so we didn't feel free to not, not met in a, in a meeting about give us a description of what you were doing during that time. It's square footage based. It's uh, you know, as Scott said, we tried to rectify for future flood. We moved utilities. There's a lot of utilities in the building that size and everything, the basement that was existing. We removed and mitigated everything and cleaned, repaired all the floors, replaced everything. So we did a due diligence, which takes time. Did you wind up having to replace the furnace or whatever the heating system is? Yes. All electrical, all heating, everything's been moved in. That's all up above flood level now. Depending on how bad the next flood is. Yeah, within, yeah, the best of our abilities, yes. One thing just that's interesting with this building compared to a lot is it has a sewer problem system. So like most of the properties we're talking about is gravity flow and the city lines. This one. So there's an extra mechanical system. That's why we had to remove the tenants, right? Because you actually couldn't use the building. There's no stability for septic or water. Which now it is gravity. You did. Good for you. Congratulations. It's a little tough, but we did it. Thank you. How long was it? You said it already. But how long was the delay on the fixing all that so that the tenants, for the no, for the upper floors? Oh, they had to move out.  Right. How long was the sewer system out? Well, one thing we moved out, it wasn't a priority. We discovered all the flood debris. So I wouldn't know maybe three months till we got it functioning. Because the work you're doing upstairs is not just to get it back to where you were, but to create housing units there. I forget. How many housing units are you putting in? Great. Always happy to hear about new housing units. We need people. Yep. We're going to spend money. Last night's topic. Donna. Last night's topic. Yeah, exactly. I'm missing something. Any actual cost numbers? He said he was going to send them. Okay, that's what was missing. Well, it didn't state. It just, it was, they're all yes or no. And I've never done that. I totally understand. I just wondered, are you sending for that? Yep. If Scott's sheet is public information, I will. I could use that as a template. It's a square red sheet. Yeah, actually it is. Right. So yeah. I could use that as a template. I think everybody really should.  Thank you. I'll compliment him on his legal work. Yeah. Make life easy. All right. Are we ready to move to the next property? Seven Barrett Street. All right. Seven Barrett Street. That's the building I'm familiar with. This is the apartment building. That's very gentleman. So that wasn't as bad. We had no flood insurance on that. But we did have to do a bunch of work in the basement, laundry, remove all the storage units and all the flood debris and mitigation of water from that. So that was, like I said, there's no insurance or anything on that. So we ate all that service out of pocket. And in this building, the only floor that was affected was the basement? That's correct. So was there a 50, I think I'll know the answer to all these questions. So I'm going to go through them all just so we have them on the record in easy form. Not a 50% or greater loss of value to the property. Was there use to the primary structure of the property for loss of use of the primary structure for 60 days or more? Was there loss of access to the property owner to utilities for 60 days or more? Condemnation? No. And condemnation is no for all of these. That's correct. Is there damage to land only, to an outbuilding only, or to both only? Was there damage to the land? No. Okay. And I don't remember if you have any outbuildings or just an outbuilder. Okay. Was there any income loss? No. And we have, is this another one where all the storage orders are the same square footage? That's correct, yep. And the damage was only the square footage on the ground floor? That's correct. Okay. Any questions for this one? I want to picture where this is. Is this? My neighbor. In the Liberty Chamber? Close. St. Paul. St. Paul. Oh, here. You know that little, it's this cool brick building, yeah. He has beautiful apartments. Yeah. And it's a sideways on St. Paul Street. So, yeah. Just, you said there was damage to the first floor, to the basement. Just the basement. Yeah, the first level. First, okay. That's, the basement is the first level, okay. Yeah, when I said ground floor, I meant the basement level, yeah. Okay, because first floor got it. Yep. Okay. Just wanted to check on the guard here. Thank you. Is that, looking at the picture here, is that the first row windows that we see? That's that. That's it. That's it. Okay. Okay. Okay. Yeah. Two sides of garage street. That's the garage center. Yeah. And the laundry. And the laundry. Okay. We can move on to 8th State Street. And could you remind us which building this is? That would be Botanica's World Cow and Anna's. Okay. Can you say those again? Botanica, World Cow, and Anna. And, and that is how many stories? The building? Yeah, three stories. Okay. And, is there a basement? That's correct. Okay. Was there 50% or greater loss in value to the primary structure? Was there loss of use by the primary owner of the primary structure for 60 days or more? By the primary owner? No. Okay. What about the tenants on the first floor? And were they paying rent during the time or was there a time when they were not paying? No rent during the floor. Okay. Once they were, once we got our occupancy, we charged rent. And that was up to them. Okay. And not condemned any damage, no outbuilding. No. And no damage to the land. What was the income loss? I can send you that, but it was the three months of tenancy for the building. Plus, we had no flood, so we repaired, moved, altered and did all that in-house. So three months of income loss for the first floor? That's correct. And the upper floors remained usable and occupied the entire time? Yeah, there was a little inconvenience with the power, but we got that sorted out right off. Are there any offices in that building or is it all apartments? It's all apartments. And we have the information about the total square footage and the square footage of the damaged area. It's just the first floor. And I'll send you the expenses. First floor and basement? In basement. That's correct. Yeah. Any other questions? Donna. Um, was not this building also affected by the floods in December? Um, no, there were just some water into the basement, yeah. So that affected electrical? I had no heating. No, no, no. No, they had no heat because of Irving. They had no heat because of Irving. Irving, oil. Yeah, so when Irving set all those tanks, they didn't, when they set the new tanks, they never put them on auto, so everybody ran out of fuel. Oh, yeah. But to their, to their benefit, it is new setup and it is a new account number because the tanks are new numbers. So, and they did a lot. Irving was very busy. I just knew that they were closed. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Maybe, and I wasn't sure. Yeah. No, because they were back over, not an hour later, but they were helpful. Any other questions? Or are you going to move on to the next one? Okay, finally, two-state street. This is the one on the corner. That's correct. And the basement in this building, too. That's correct, yeah. And was the damage in the basement in the first floor only? Basement in the first floor only. Uh-huh. Was there a 50% or greater loss in value to the primary structure? No. Was there a loss of the primary structure for 60 days or more? Two times, yes. Uh-huh. And how long was it? About three months, but uh-huh. Yeah, I saw Willis in there working in the store sometime before Christmas, but yeah. Well, and fire hit him. So, he's got some broad shoulders. Oh. Yeah, he took it. I mean, but we got him back as fast as we could on that one, too. I guess nobody else is open. There was some budding, man. Charlie, I was just kidding. No, I know. We kicked it in gear for him. We cleaned it. Got the pure clean in there the next day. We actually got the power run to the whole block. So, yeah, we pushed for him. And there was never a time when the upstairs tenants were out. Oh, great. They were only inconvenienced by hot water for maybe three days or something. Okay. Not condemned. No damage to land or outbuildings. Loss of income. The rent on the first floor for three months. And we've got the square footage because it's rectangular, the same. Yep. Now, with some of these properties, my recollection is you're the owner of these buildings at this point? Yes. Okay. Anyone have any other questions? Are the bases rented or is that just kind of storage for utilities? Yeah, it's just empty utilities, please. And did you have to replace the furnace in this building? In two stages to it? No, we repaired it. Okay. Anyone have any other questions? And Sal and Sarah, I just want to make sure that you're hearing and you... Yes, Sarah, you're all set? Okay, good. All right. Well, what we're going to do, as I said, is we're going to go over all this stuff at the end of the process, which is around three weeks from now and now. Can I get it out there? Oh, sure. Okay. Thank you. I've got the mic in the front. Yeah, yeah. For the other folks. You can probably keep me on the job. I was going to say... Or me, yeah. Yeah, I'm sure she's done some communication, so we'll deliver each individual property in question. And... Sure. Great. Thanks for coming in. It's awesome. Thank you all for your time. Thanks for your time.