Welcome everyone. I'm Hillary Bassett, Director of Greater Portland Landmarks, and I'm very glad to see you all here this evening. As you know, Greater Portland Landmarks' mission is to preserve and revitalize the architectural fabric, history, and character of Greater Portland, renewing our neighborhoods, spurring economic development, and keeping Portland one of the most livable cities in America. Before we begin, I'd like to do a little shameless promotion of landmarks, and one thing, of course, is membership. I know many of you are members, but if you aren't yet, we'd love to have you, and there's information at the front table. We are promoting our new note cards that you may have seen, and these are celebrating our 50th anniversary, all with our art by Peter Roth, who's a local artist who does subjects in Portland. And then this is also the last week of the Images of Change photography exhibition that is out in the Lewis Gallery. I encourage you to, if you haven't had a chance to see it, do come back. It closes February 28th, and I think it's a wonderful opportunity to look at how Portland has evolved, but also to celebrate the quality of the art and the artists and photographers in Portland. There's some really excellent work, and I encourage you to come back and take a look. I'd like to take a minute also to thank the Portland Public Library for being our host this evening, and also to Ocean Gate Realty, our sponsor for their partnership in promoting these lectures. And finally, I'd like to mention that Portland Community Television, CTN, is filming this program tonight, so if you'd like to catch up on your Portland history, the Portland Preservation Program, you can do it by watching this on CTN. Now, this is part of a series of programs celebrating Portland, Greater Portland Landmarks 50th anniversary this year. We were founded in 1964. And as part of that, we have some wonderful sponsors who are sponsoring our whole season. I'd like to recognize the Debt River Company, which is our overall sponsor for the 50th anniversary, J.B. Brown and Sons, and also the Danforth Group of Wells Fargo advisors for their support. Now, lastly, I'd want to call you to your attention that we have a very special program coming up in April. On April 9th, Morrison Heckscher, who is the chairman of the American Wing at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, will be our keynote lecture April 9th. It's a Wednesday at the First Parish Church, and he's going to be talking about the preservation movement in New York, parallels with Portland, Maine, and also including plans of the two cities and the influence of the Olmstead Brothers firm on the two cities. So I encourage you all to come to that. There'll be invitations coming your way. You'll see information on the web and do plan to join us for that. Now, tonight, our speaker is probably one of the people who knows the most about historic preservation in Portland because she's been active in the field since she came here to be the executive director of Greater Portland Landmarks in 1984. Deb Andrews is currently the historic preservation program manager for the city of Portland. She started out as a senior planner in 1990 and then became the manager of the historic preservation program in 1992. Now, during this period, there have been amazing, amazing transformations in the historic preservation program. I'll just mention a couple that I've been part of. One was the expansion of the historic districts, including more properties in the West End, also the addition of the Congress Street District, the revision of the Portland historic preservation ordinance so that Portland became a certified local government, which is the high standard for historic preservation, and also our board, our Portland Historic Preservation Committee, became a full-fledged board during that same period. Now, Deb is a graduate of Bowdoin College in art history, and she has a master's in historic preservation from the University of Vermont, and she's also a member of the board of the National Alliance of Preservation Commissions and a trustee of Maine Preservation. So we're very honored to have Deb Andrews here with us tonight. Thank you, Hillary. It's so nice to see so many familiar faces. I have great affection for landmarks and great memories of my time there, so it's a real honor to be part of this lecture series. I went to work for the city of Portland six months after the city council adopted an historic preservation ordinance. As Hillary said, that was in 1990. So at this point, I think it's fair to say that I'm a lifer at City Hall. But one of the advantages of working for the city and with its preservation program as long as I have is that I've been a first-hand witness to really a very striking, slow, but striking transformation within the city with respect to historic preservation. And when I say city, I mean city with upper KC and lower KC. It's not just a physical transformation within the city's historic neighborhoods that I've witnessed, but a transformation in terms of attitude within City Hall, within much of the business community, I could never say all, and within the neighborhoods that are affected by Portland's historic preservation ordinance as well. I thought to appreciate that transformation, I would take you back to the 1980s, and it was great fun digging up some images from that time period. And some of you probably remember some of this. Do you remember this was the Long Wharf proposal that was proposed for the Portland Waterfront? And the 1980s in Portland, I arrived at Greater Portland Landmarks in 1984, really so green and not really understanding what I'd gotten myself into. The mid-1980s in Portland was a tumultuous period to say the least. Janet McKay and I were talking about that, and she said the word tumultuous, which just hits it on the head. It was a real time of economic prosperity, a real boom time, and there was a sense. What was interesting about that time is much of the newfound prosperity and economic optimism in Portland had really been fueled by historic preservation efforts. By that point, the old port was flourishing. Many of those projects were the product of young entrepreneurs who bought buildings at very low prices with a lot of sweat equity, had really invested in those buildings, then along came historic tax credits, which fueled more investment in the old port and such. And then at the same time, Landmarks was very active with its own revolving fund, doing a number of very successful high profile demonstration projects like the rehabilitation of the HHA building. So for a number in the community, I think there was a sense that our historic neighborhoods, our historic buildings were really truly appreciated by the community. And that old Yankee saying if it ain't broke, don't fix it. But I think for those within the preservation community, we recognized that we were really quite vulnerable without having a formal preservation program within the city of Portland. And I'll give you a few examples. This is the former Scribner Iverson building on Union Street, which was demolished and cleared for a new development. You're standing right here at Canal Plaza looking across at the Scribner Iverson building. This building was demolished in 1983. And I don't know if it was this building or others, but I remember a string of trips to the planning board fighting for various buildings without a platform to fight for them. And at one point, a planning board member told us those who had shown up for the planning board meeting, you people need to learn the difference between landmarks and dirty old buildings. So here we are just a block west of Exchange Street, which was experiencing this great enthusiasm and great feeling of success. A block away. And these kinds of buildings were considered dirty old buildings and being taken down. Other things were happening, not wholesale demolition, but slow kind of incremental changes to historic buildings that once you have one layer after another there of this kind of thing, it gets really hard to appreciate their intrinsic value and their potential. A rash of rooftop additions. Here's another that, you know, this incredibly iconic view looking up Malton Street. Is it Malton? Yeah. Up to 4th Street in exchange with this rash of rooftop additions. Great for those inside taking in the view, but a pretty significant impact on the city's streetscape. Those of us who were involved in historic preservation also knew that Commercial Street was really poised for redevelopment at this point. This is Commercial Street in 1990. It's hard to imagine now. It was fairly moribund. Many of these buildings had remained in the same hands for decades and had not changed hands yet, but with the whole economic activity and prosperity we knew that these would be changing hands in the near term. And there was concern about the way in which these buildings would be rehabilitated or renovated. And whether the incredible power and significance of this street wall would be retained in the future. For all of the arguments building by building that were made at City Hall and to the planning board, they really fell on deaf ears. We were fortunate to get a demolition delay ordinance in place. That was put in place before I arrived at Landmarks. But it was the demolition of this building at 7678 Park Street directly across the street from Victoria Mansion that really galvanized the community to realize that our historic buildings, our historic neighborhoods were vulnerable to loss. And I think that people were generally aware, those who were not intimately active with the historic preservation movement involved with Greater Portland Landmarks, there was a sense they were generally aware that a number of buildings had been listed on the National Register. And so doesn't that mean they're protected? And we knew that National Register listing is primarily a form of distinction and designation. But it doesn't, when push comes to sub and someone wants to clear a property for future redevelopment options, that listing in the National Register would not prevent it. So this was one of those instances that really galvanized the community. But to no avail, it was demolished. You know, there's always a silver lining to all of these losses and every preservation or every historic community in the country has a story much like this. It was the loss of this building that really was a wake up call to people to say that without a formal mechanism in place adopted by the City Council, that we would be always behind the eight ball trying to make the case for historic structures. And if you couldn't make the case for a structure like this in a setting like this, far be it from you to make a successful case for some of the warehouses on York Street or Four Street or such. So this is when the City Council, and I can't thank enough Pam Plum, who was on the City Council at that point. Pam had been the first director of Greater Portland Landmarks and a number of her fellow counselors that really shepherded this process through. It was a 21 month effort to draft an historic preservation ordinance with umpteen meetings with various interest groups. It was a very controversial effort, but ultimately in 1990 was approved. I want to share some of the, it was a 7 to 2 vote and I want to share some of the comments from the two dissenting counselors at the time. One counselor who shall remain nameless said, a regulatory nightmare. I think this is dreadful. God help the everyday people in the historic districts when they start to get pushed around by the bureaucracy. Another, we're putting on the shelf of illuminous ordinance that will probably not be followed unless we pit neighbor against neighbor and have them spying on each other. It was Tom Allen who went on to be a, was it Congressman, not Senator, said he was very proud and we were very fortunate to have Tom on the council at the time. Um, he said this ordinance, it seems to me, rises out of this city as none other could. Noting that the city had lost dozens of historic buildings in recent years, he said the law will save others for future generations. Saving those structures won't rise out of the air as some suggest. It will come from this ordinance. Others weighed in as well. Um, Bruce McGorrell who was the director with WCSH at the time. And I remember Lee Urban went on the air with point counterpoint with Bruce McGorrell, um, advocating for the ordinance. Once the decision was made, Bruce wrote an op-ed piece in the Portland Press Herald or the Evening Express at the time. And in it he wrote, Portland's newly passed historic preservation ordinance is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Very shortly the city's home owning lands will be devoured by a voracious preservation movement that smells their blood. So, we were off to a roaring start. Um, ironically, even though it had been such a hotly debated and contested effort to get an ordinance in place, in one fell swoop it applied to over a thousand buildings in the city. Many communities establish an historic preservation ordinance and start very small with a very small area. But Portland had already put a number of neighborhoods on the national register, including the old port and you can read the list here. Um, when Portland adopted its ordinance, it automatically made all of those national register districts, local districts as well. Um, but notwithstanding the fact that, um, that we had a lot of territory to govern, uh, I think there was a very, um, concerted effort to start slowly, um, to be, uh, very, um, careful and cautious in the decision making to clearly defend the decisions. We were very fortunate to have a terrific, um, group of people serve on that first historic preservation board. For those of you who were here last month, you heard, um, Lee Urban. He was the first chair who was a real estate attorney by background, very involved in greater Portland landmarks and with a demeanor that just made people feel good about the process and very fair and very cordial and very understanding of people's, um, reservations about having their, their projects reviewed. Um, and, um, there were others on the board as well. And it was, um, I think they did more to lay the groundwork for, um, an effective process than anything. And, and since that time, we've been very fortunate to have great members of the board, too, of whom I see here tonight. So, for three minutes. Um, over time, and I can go over, uh, Hillary touched on a few of the things that were done to strengthen the ordinance. Um, it, we worked very slowly over a seven-year period. We revisited all the boundaries of the National Register districts and ultimately made a proposal to the council in 1997 that included or swept into the district's more vernacular buildings in the West End. I think it was very important that we not just recognize the obvious landmarks, but also the real fabric of the community, which is made up largely of, um, working class housing and, and vernacular buildings. And there, um, every bit is part of the cherished fabric of this community as the landmarks are. Um, we also gained what's called CLG status, certified local government status. That was very important because it made us eligible to apply for grants for specific projects and be able to pass those grants on to other organizations. And I'll touch on that in a minute. Um, I think I wanted to start first just in showing and I've got a whirlwind of slides and I'll stop whenever the buzzer goes off. But, um, but I wanted to start with the impact on city owned properties because I think everyone at the time focused on how it was going to affect private property owners and how their rights were going to be affected. But it also applied to the city of Portland and the city of Portland owns a lot of historic buildings and it owns a lot of sites in the city within the districts. And all of the city's activities were also subject to review and approval under the ordinance. Um, I want to share kind of one of the early stories of this is Milk Street and the Department of Public Services wanted to pave, um, the granite Belgian block pavers, um, because these were difficult to drive on. They were a maintenance difficulty, all the rest of it. Um, so we put it on an agenda and out comes to the meeting. All of these business owners of the old port, several of which had vehemently opposed the historic preservation ordinance, but they were, um, they were saying, you know, this is the character of our area. It's essential to, uh, the, you know, our business. This is what we, uh, this is our stock and trade, this kind of character. So I, I found that amusing and really heartening, but, uh, needless to say that the granite Belgian block pavers were, uh, retained there. And years later, um, then city manager Bob Ganley insisted on, uh, all of Boothby Square being repaved in granite, uh, Belgian block pavers. So he became, uh, somewhat of a believer as well. Um, City Hall, we've, um, done a lot of restoration work to City Hall. It seems to be kind of an endless process. Um, City Hall in, in the mid 1980s, most of its doors and windows had been replaced with stock issue, bronze, aluminum doors, the storefront kind of doors and windows. All of those were, um, replaced with very accurate, um, doors and windows that followed the original care, career and Hastings drawings. Um, came the time that Merrill auditorium really needed. It was long, um, a long time, but they needed more, um, uh, presence for themselves. So this canopy was reviewed and approved under the historic preservation regulations. And I think was a really successful addition to the building that's both compatible with the building and also provides, um, the auditorium, its own kind of unique identity. Um, Boothby Square and the fountain return. Uh, this was a pet project of Lee Irbins, but had there not been the platform of an historic preservation program, which really encouraged this kind of thing. These kinds of projects wouldn't have had the standing to happen. Um, and it's back at Boothby Square after, um, decades being removed from the square. Um, there was also the reconfiguration of the square with the, uh, the granite ballards that simulated, um, early fencing. Um, Miss Portland diner, another project that was a real pet project of Lee Irbins again, um, pushing the envelope. I think for some of what constitutes an historic building, but, uh, as it is, as it is today, sitting on, um, marginal way, it's become, uh, a real, um, appreciated landmark there. Um, the Barking Squirrel, does anyone remember that, that era in, in, uh, at the, um, um, this is stretched out forever, um, at Deering Oaks. And this is a really lovely small building that was built for the park, um, that over time with, uh, various needs, it, it grew, um, with these various accretions that weren't terribly sensitive and really provided, um, more space than what the city had the need for. Um, this was restored and this is the building today, um, back to its original, um, design, um, with toilets inside. Um, uh, this, and I should say the city certainly, I don't mean to suggest the city has taken on all of these things alone, but I think what, uh, having an historic preservation ordinance has also spawned a number of friends groups, like the Friends of Deering Oaks, like, uh, the Friends of the Eastern Promenade, Spirits Alive who have shepherded incredible projects at the Eastern Cemetery. It gave them a platform to make requests for funding to do, um, to do projects. Um, over time, we've developed master plans for virtually every historic open space in the city from Baxter Boulevard, Evergreen Cemetery, Eastern Cemetery, Deering Oaks, um, um, Eastern Promenade and such. And what these master plans really do is they go back to the original design intent of these historic landscapes and they identify the things that have changed in those landscapes that have really started to erode the original character. And they create a, a roadmap for changes in the future. And they prioritize improvements that happen over time that then friends groups advocate for. And having a master plan like this makes it easier for city counselors to justify the funding because it's based on really solid planning and solid research. Um, so I think that has been a really important, um, tool, um, for our various historic parks and cemeteries in the city. Some other projects that have grown out of, um, these master plans, um, the restoration of the lights or the replacement of the lights, um, on the Deering Oaks Bridge, um, the restoration of the, um, gatehouse and wing walls at Western Cemetery. Um, the gazebo at Eastern Promenade. Um, and now a larger project of the Fort Allen Rehabilitation, um, project. This, um, I really, the, the friends of the Eastern Promenade have just been extraordinarily effective at securing funding and securing support from residents on the hill and elsewhere for, um, great projects on the Eastern Promenade. And certainly it's deserving of that. I remember when I was at Landmarks in the mid 80s, um, they wanted to do some project in the Eastern Promenade and they were good to invite me to come talk about it. And, and I asked the question, well, what is this improvement based on? Well, you know, it's deteriorated. We need to do something. Well, there was, it was not based on any understanding of what was the intent of this place or whatever. So, so having these master plans has really, I think, um, been important to, um, um, shepherding quality projects that are consistent with their design intent. Um, this is the Poulin Fountain behind Central Fire Station. Uh, this was a collaboration between the Historic Preservation Board and the, um, Public Art Committee. This is part of the city's public art collection. Um, and this was an instance where, uh, a, a more compatible site plan treatment was developed around it to really show it off and also make sure that cars aren't bumping up into it. So, um, uh, Rikie School, uh, you might remember there was a chain link fence around Rikie School for decades when that had rusted through and there was an opportunity to rethink the edge treatment of Rikie School. Um, this was the result of the review process is one that I think, um, is, is much more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood of, of, um, Rik Piers and, and, um, metal fencing. Um, we've also reviewed and, and, um, and changed out the lights in the old port and Congress Street and, and those, um, slowly implementing through Deering Oaks and such. All of these contributing elements, these public infrastructure elements really, uh, either, um, support or detract from the historic character of an area. So having an historic preservation program in place allows consideration of all of those elements. Um, and I, I do want to say that I think the public services department in the early years, as you can imagine where they had been, um, used to just moving forward with, with, uh, repaving projects and all the rest and not having to consider these kinds of, um, considerations. It was kind of a tough transformation, but, um, I have to say it's been, um, incredibly, um, positive, um, working relationship with public services. The other thing, uh, it allowed when city-owned buildings were going to be sold, it allowed us a mechanism to work with the, um, the buyers to find a sympathetic buyer for the building in the first place and then to oversee the rehab of those buildings. So, um, Martin's Point, the former, um, Marine Hospital was rehabilitated, um, I think just exquisitely and was, um, was, in, in great part, I think part of, uh, careful selection of, of the buyer and also in, um, in overseeing the work and a very sympathetic addition on the property as well. Um, just a detail of that project. Um, Nathan Clifford School as well when that, um, um, when the decision was made to close that as an active school, there were concerns about what would come of the building. Um, the city, uh, sought to list this building on the National Register of Historic Places and also to designate it as a local landmark. So, we've just, um, reviewed a, um, redevelopment proposal for the building. So, it will continue to be a landmark in its neighborhood and carefully preserved. Um, the CLG status that I mentioned that opened up availability of federal funds. Um, this is the Abyssinian Meeting House, which has benefited from a number of, um, CLG grants. Um, because so little fabric was left in this building, it's really been a forensic project of doing archeological work, looking for tiny fragments of material inside to guide the rehabilitation of the building and such. It's been a slow process, but, um, I think is, um, a really important project. It's the third standing, um, third oldest standing African American Meeting House in the country. Um, and Congress Street, as I mentioned, this was in 2009. Uh, again, I think as a measure of the extent to which historic preservation had become embraced by the community or most of the community in, uh, 2009 following about a two year process to, um, study Congress Street and identify both contributing and non-contributing buildings and draw boundaries and have umpteen meetings again. Um, this was unanimously supported by the City Council, um, with a relative handful of, um, of opponents to it. So, I think, and, and what's striking to me about Congress Street, it's not your classic historic district like the Old Port is, or where it's cohesive, older buildings, but Congress Street, unlike those other historic districts, what it tells a story of is a, the evolution of a true Main Street. You've got buildings as old, as early as a once worth Longfellow House to buildings that were just completed two and three years ago. It's truly a reflection of Portland's development over many, many, um, decades. And we've got representative buildings of many styles. Um, and I, just closing on the segment about the city itself, um, this happened just, uh, about a month ago. I got a call from, um, a staff person at the Department of Public Services. They were doing a paving project on Maple Street next to Rufus Steering and, uh, between Rufus Steering and the, um, the new hotel that's going up and came across this, which is original gutter, uh, these cobbles, and then the original paving of the, uh, Belgian block pavers. And they wanted to stop everything before anything more was done to know how we wanted to treat this. And I thought that was really that success. So, um, and then I'm just going to run through some kind of sample projects in various categories, and it was fun digging these up. And I think what happens for all of us is that when a project is completed, there's like an, oh, you know, and excited about it. And then it quickly becomes part of our shared experience, and we kind of forget. And so this was an opportunity for me, and I hope fun for you to see, uh, some befores and afters of projects. Um, this is the Portland Packing Company building on York Street. This was one shortly after the ordinance went into effect, had a fire in the rear corner and the property owner at the time said it's had a fire. It's structurally deficient. It's not going to, can't be saved. We had the ability with the ordinance at the time to say, we'd like to have another opinion, a structural engineer to look at who found that the building was, um, absolutely worthy of, of rehabilitation. It really wasn't a basket case in any, in any way. And, um, and the building, the decision was made that, um, it would be rehabilitated. And then this was the result of that rehabilitation. And these are the kinds of buildings. I think we were very vulnerable to losing those ones, uh, on the outskirts of the, of Portland that were industrial buildings, more utilitarian buildings, but are really important in our, uh, in kind of the, the fabric of the city. And for those of you, I'm sure you remember that sense of coming off the million dollar bridge, which we used to call from, from, um, South Portland and getting onto Four Street and just being funneled into the city by a wall of industrial buildings. It was a very powerful experience. And in the mid 1980s, we lost a lot of those and that, that really cohesive fabric really broke down. So keeping some remnants of this, I think, um, there was a sense of real victory. Um, this building on, um, is this four or your whatever, um, the, what I always call is Portland Pie building. Um, this is the way it was before. Um, again, like so many storefronts had suffered from one round after another of, um, of renovations and too often people don't look above and see the potential. Um, this is the building restored. Um, and using the 1924 tax photos as a guide for the restoration of the ground floor. Um, our, uh, Chestnut Street Church. Um, this is a project that took advantage of historic tax credits. The, um, brownstone in the building was severely deteriorated. The windows had been, um, covered over with plexiglass that, uh, half of it was gone exposing the original windows and then, um, and then the plexiglass obscured the rest of it. Um, this was rehabilitated, opened up, um, uh, with adaptively reused, adaptively reused as a restaurant and, um, really a great success story. Um, here's a, a storefront on Exchange Street and another one of those great buildings, but the ground floor had just been kind of, you know, changed over time with several rounds of, um, of renovation. And again, following the 1924 tax photos as a guide, um, this is the building as rehabilitated. Um, and, and I think having, and I'll talk a little bit about those tax photos, but having those as a, they've been an incredibly important tool in Portland because it's not just, I like this or you say this would look good or whatever. This is what the building, this, um, more often than not, buildings had not changed significantly by 1924. And so we have a very clear record of what each and every building in the city standing in 1924 looked like. And if you can share that, that's been the single most effective tool in just getting people excited about the potential of taking buildings back. And so it's not a matter of just telling them this is what needs to happen if people come around to that, um, to their own conclusion. Um, some of you will remember this, um, the building on your far left, um, was operated on Pine Street as a doctor's office for many years. And, um, Lisa Foley bought that carriage house as well as a building in front of it and did an extraordinary, extraordinarily beautiful job with both buildings. Um, this is the building in front, uh, great bones, but just kind of a sleeper, um, which she invested in and, um, just a remarkable transformation. Um, this is the Hansen block on, um, I think the corner of Oak, I think, and Congress Street again, one of those products of several remodellings. And this is the rehabilitation after, um, um, following the, um, the guidelines of the 1924 tax photos in the review process. This too was a project that qualified for historic tax credits. Um, this building, you remember, was owned by, um, 75 state for a number of years and, um, ultimately they decided to sell the building and it was rehabilitated. Um, and now it's, I think, a great contributing building to the street. Um, this building on, um, on Pine, West, wherever, uh, again, one of those sleeper buildings in a relatively, but it had a, I'm talking about the brown one here, um, just had a, you know, kind of rickety porch and, um, a number of things, um, but really benefited from beautiful, excuse me, new roofing, uh, color scheme and new porch and just, um, beautifully restored for the, the coming decades. Um, this is a small building on Market Street. Um, again, condo, exposed conduit across the front of it. The bay window on the top floor had been all clabbered it over and again, a pretty, um, motley storefront. And through the review process, this was the result of that rehab. Um, in the process of reviewing projects, there's always multiple objectives. There's not just the preservationist and what they want. Obviously, there's code requirements. There's a desire or a need to expand space in a building. There's, uh, fire safety considerations, um, all sorts of things. So it's, it's, that's part of the, the real, um, challenge and, and the, um, very positive nature of a review process is balancing those objectives. So it's a win-win for everybody. And I'll give you a few examples of that. This is, uh, a building, the rack lift block on, um, um, Middle Street, where it was important to bring, uh, handicapped accessibility to the building. All of these, um, storefronts had raised stoops, um, very beautiful raised stoops, um, with iron, cast iron, um, steps and such. But it was important that the building be handicapped accessible. So the entrance on the, uh, left side was lowered with a very compatible, um, door solution. Um, lots of ramps, but done in a way that, um, is, does kind of the least damage to the most important characteristics. But it also doesn't move the ramp to the rear and kind of, um, make handicapped access second fiddle. It's front and center, but in a way that's compatible with the building. Um, this is the, um, the old Chase Levitt building on Dana Street. The Chase Levitt building has a very small footprint. So in order to make the upper floors accessible here, the only way you could do that in the footprint of the building would have chattered up or taken up too much of the space of the building itself. So a, an elevator tower, uh, was, uh, constructed, um, to the side of the building with an entrance court to the side. Frankly contemporary, um, but one that, um, paid attention to some of the visual cues of the building and let the main building really predominate in terms of its projection. Um, here's an instance, um, a new owner of the, um, the building complex that includes a little tap house and the federal era building townhouse behind it. Uh, in order to reuse the upper floors for commercial purposes, the owner was told that this fire escape here, um, would have to, in order to be current code, it would have to have switched backs and then descend into a little courtyard and it would have been a real jungle gem on there. And working with fire safety and the owner and historic preservation a, um, another solution was arrived at the building as being sprinkled and the fire escape is coming off all together. And I think in this particular entrance as you come or instance as you come up high street, it's such an important view corridor coming on to the peninsula to have this federal area era building, um, clean of that fire escape and certainly clean of a much bigger deal on the side was a real win-win solution. Um, and not at an exceedingly large cost. Um, rooftop additions, I showed you some of the rooftop additions that were happening in the mid 80s there. Obviously these buildings, there's a desire on the part of the property owners to, um, really make them get full utility out of them. A lot of them had attics that had never had occupied space. So there's been a desire to introduce, um, more, um, commercial space or rental space on the top floor. Here's an example of how that was done with a continuous shed dormer that set back, um, from the facade of the building and done in a fairly neutral dark way that just is as clean and simple a treatment as possible. Um, here's an example of the, um, of the Portland Regency. They had a lot of skylights on their roof which now, especially in this great, um, hotel competition, um, they were finding that their, um, um, that their, um, guests were not satisfied just looking through skylights and having daylight. They really wanted to see out and so this, um, was a solution here. Uh, it has a big impact but I think it was done in a very monochrome, um, um, treatment and set back away from the wing walls in a way, um, to try and preserve as much of the historic character of the building as possible. Um, I'll show you a few new construction proposals. One of the things about Portland is, um, different communities, I think, approach new construction in historic different districts differently and I think a community has to find what works for its own culture and there are communities where, um, frankly contemporary buildings, products of their own time probably would not be acceptable within that community. But Portland, I think there was always a concern that we not, um, you know, close the door on our own era and, and that we want to embrace new design and we want to embrace new materials but we want it done in a way that has some, um, relationship or respect to the buildings around it. So this was the first addition to the WL Blake block, um, on your right and you can see done obviously very contemporary but in a way that, that really honors the datum lines that were established by the ground floor and the upper floors, um, and also the setback of the top floor, uh, done in high quality materials, granite at the base, copper above, um, highly glazed so it departs from the kind of fenestration you see in the neighborhood but is both tethered to its, um, to its context and also a clear product of its own time. Um, similarly the challenge of introducing a new building in the view corridor shared by the Custom House, um, which I think everyone would agree is one of our absolutely most significant buildings in the city and this is the CIEE building today. Again an effort to establish a strong base that related to the base of the Custom House, um, and, and the same vocabulary or palette of materials there, um, in the relationship at closer view. Um, this is a new housing project on Oak Street, um, that was, um, built after the Congress Street Historic District was passed, um, more conservative solutions which are, you know, appropriate in the Historic Preservation Ordinance allows for either approach and there's certainly some applicants and some property owners who prefer a more, uh, conservative approach. This was an addition at Waynefleet and really in the middle of a residential neighborhood, um, it's attached to the old home for aged women off Emory Street and really kind of nestles in there in a, uh, a quiet way. Another recent project, uh, when USM vacated, um, um, this building which was an old children's hospital on High Street, um, and they wanted to build an addition to it, um, this was the building addition. Again there was a desire in this case for a fairly conservative design response, um, but in this particular setting I think a very successful solution. Um, renovations and, and I'm winding up here to renovations. This is kind of one of, um, my favorite categories that in any given historic district there are buildings which are considered non-contributing, um, and that they don't, uh, have the same architectural significance or they've been totally adulterated over time so they're considered non-contributing. They can be taken down and redeveloped, but in the meantime there are a lot of changes that happen to these buildings. People want to just do maybe a quick and easy rehab to fix them up a little bit. We do review, um, renovations to non-contributing buildings, but they're reviewed differently, uh, to have some general compatibility with the surrounding area, but to give them some kind of design cohesiveness is the major goal. I'll give you a few examples. This is, um, on Commercial Street, the old Angie's Pizza, um, and, uh, the artist's rendering and then, uh, now Company C, again a very contemporary building, um, ideally I think as you look at, uh, Commercial Street, most of the buildings are three and four stories tall. Ideally in the future it would be great to see a taller building fill that space, but that wasn't the desire or the budget of the, um, property owner. So, um, but if you look at this in relation to the surrounding buildings, it fits in quite compatibly. Um, the old, the king of the role on Congress Street, uh, again, a great building behind it that was really a great fence done by this addition, um, but it is thoroughly embedded in the inner workings of the building so it's not going anywhere. Um, this went through the review process and, uh, I think is just a more, um, cohesive, um, uh, design solution and, and using higher quality materials, higher quality finishes. Um, this building on, um, Pine Street, the brown building I showed you earlier, um, was also owned by the same property owner. This building had a fire years ago, is one you could say, you know, what's the merit in this thing? Um, and this building, they took the siding off of it, um, we looked at the 1924 tax photos, they brought back the texture of the old, um, fish scale shingles and such. I couldn't find an after view of it, but it really is quite a handsome building. Just don't look up to the top because you won't see it top. But, um, the, this building, uh, right at the corner of Forest Avenue and Congress just won a front after another over time. It's now reopened as the empire and, uh, again, just, um, not a big budget project but one that I think did a lot to just make it contribute generally to the street. Here, this building at the corner of Worf and Union Street, just what a motley mess, uh, and again, just an effort to kind of clean it up, make it more rational, more cohesive. Um, and this building, the right aid is another building that's considered non-contributing. In this case, the, um, the owner of the building is taking the building down. The historic preservation board just reviewed and approved a replacement building for this site, uh, and you'll start, uh, you'll see construction start, I think, later this spring. So in this instance, it's coming down and I think you're going to see a building whose scale and placement and materials and such are much more, um, kind of complimentary to the character, um, and the development pattern in this area. Sign review very quickly.  We've been lucky to have a lot of people come up with very whimsical and wonderful examples in the historic districts. Also, frankly, contemporary signage, the CIEE building. Obviously, it wouldn't be appropriate, uh, the kind of signage you see on exchange street for a brand new building. This is a halo lit sign. Um, on the Evie Chinchette block on Congress Street, uh, again, a halo lit sign, not a typical internally illuminated box sign, but one that is, um, you know, new and appropriate to a new building but of general quality. Um, one of the little, you know, God is in the details or the devil's in the details. One of the things we've worked hard to kind of transition to is to get away from, uh, exposed conduit on the faces of buildings. I know you've all seen it where everyone slaps the conduit across the face of the building with big spotlights on the signs. We're now, um, encouraging people to incorporate any lighting on signs in the bracket itself and remove all that those are the kinds of incremental little things that just over time really have an impact on, um, the appeal of an area. Um, small projects. These are some of my favorites. Um, I haven't talked a lot about residential projects, but this is, um, this is a little house next to Main Med on, um, on Brackett Street. Took the building, removed the siding, rehab the windows, uh, and just a very sweet little project that starts to really, um, make positive things happen on a block that there wasn't a lot positive happening for a long time. We're seeing a lot of this where people are voluntarily taking siding, vinyl siding, or aluminum siding off of their buildings. In some cases, they're finding wonderful siding underneath it or in other cases bringing, uh, the original siding treatment back. Uh, another example of, um, someone taking the siding off and putting the original siding back on. It's a little building on, uh, Gray Street, I believe. Um, sweet building that it just had a lot of changes. You can see the funny little brick stoop there and, um, a young property owner who's doing it all sweat equity, and rebuilt the, um, historic windows of the building wood windows and is just methodically bit by bit, bringing this building back and it has great potential. Um, we see a lot of this. Porches being such an exposed element of buildings, they're the kinds of things that deteriorate and, and you see, over time, you get very far away from, um, what the original design solution was. And again, those 1924 tax photos to the rescue, they've helped us. Here's an example of just, you know, porches are the first thing people see. They project into the public way and they, um, they can really, those kinds of little touches, the balusters, the new opposed paint, all of that. Those are the things, they're small projects, but they, um, have a big impact. Here's a, a building on, um, um, Clark Street. Winter Street. Yeah. Winter Street, um, sided up the wazoo, all the detail was covered over, um, and then this is somewhere midway. Again, it started with the porch. You can see what a huge, impact that had, and, um, found all the original, or, or, regained all the original cornerboards and details on the building and, um, just a really fine project. Here's one on lower Park Street, below Danforth Street. A building, really fine, kind of transitional Greek, Italian eight building, again, with one of those porches that had just kind of lost its way over time, and, uh, and using the 1924 tax photos and the historic preservation board through its review process. This is the, the porch now. It hasn't been painted yet, but, um, a really, you know, fitting this building. Driveways. We've looked at driveways, where driveways had not been before. This was, um, on, um, Bowdoin Street, you know, with, and trying to do something there. None of these houses had driveways originally, so doing something that was fairly quiet and honored the knoll that all of these buildings sat on. Um, ironwork. It's been really gratifying to see people voluntarily, bringing back ironwork. There's a lot of beautiful ironwork in the city. Many properties that have little fragments of it, and, uh, people are bringing that back at their own expense, and Tim and Gretchen Green are here tonight, and they've been coming to all these lectures. Standfast Works Forge have done wonderful work in the historic districts and are really responsible for bringing back that real, that beautiful amenity to these properties. Another property that had lost its fencing on, on Danforth Street. These are the kinds of challenges, ongoing challenges. CMP comes along, and the building changes hands, or they need new service, and they slap the meters on the front face of the building.  So we've now worked out a situation where, with new installations, we're reviewing going out to take a look at where the, the utilities are located, because often it's as simple as just moving it around to the corner of the building and planning a bush. But, you know, it's those details that really do have an impact. And then just finally, I just want to go over some current initiatives. I've made several references to the 1924 tax photos. We just completed digitizing all of the 1924 tax photos. There were 130 books and over 30,000 records that were all digitized in partnership with this, with the Portland Public Library and the main historical society. And now they're available on Main Memory Network for people to use. They are an extraordinary resource and the best sales tool I could think of for the potential of a lot of buildings that have lost a lot of detail. This is a building on Congress Street where the Historic Preservation Board just approved a project to completely redo the ground floor of this building and the work was guided by this 1924 tax photo. Another Lincoln Park, we're shortly going to be starting a, to do a treatment plan for Lincoln Park, much like we've done for the other historic landscapes in the city. Imagine how vibrant it was then. And then finally, we've started a neighborhood planning process for the India Street neighborhood. And, you know, 25 years ago or so historic preservation wouldn't have been embedded in the planning process as it is now. As we look at things like form-based codes for this area or green space, its needs, transportation issues and such, preservation is right there part and parcel of all the other considerations with its own working group. So it really, and India Street has great resources, some of which are really still untapped. So I think there's great potential for this street and we hope to bring the same kind of results to India Street that we've seen in other areas. And just circling back, again, this is image of commercial street in 1990. And as it, this isn't quite absolutely current, but pretty close to current. I think commercial street, I think is very interesting because in 1990, through, you know, through just luck, it was in a kind of mode of stasis at the time. And so I think Congress or commercial street has had the benefit of this kind of careful stewardship and today it's a very vibrant area. So I think it's probably more than any other single street is kind of symbolic of the potential of historic preservation. I think from the start, it was never a matter of preventing change. It was about thoughtfully managing it. And I think that that's been the goal. It's been the goal of everyone who's been involved in the program and all the great people who've served on the Historic Preservation Board. I think it's that thoughtful management. It's that time to kind of time out to let the building be heard and to do a little bit more research, do a little bit more digging that really benefits these neighborhoods and ultimately the city. So thank you. Give people a chance to ask them questions and also to say what an extraordinary legacy of the preservation ordinance. I think seeing it all and zooming through photographs of the city has just really brought it all to light. So thank you for doing an amazing work. Let's take some pictures. It was fun seeing some of those pictures, weren't it? Does anyone have any questions? Hi, Jim. Who would you make a surprise in the last five years? Biggest surprise? Well, I think Congress Street, that the level of acceptance and the recognition that it was in that preservation was a critical economic development tool and not an impediment. I don't know that it was a surprise because it was a slow process, but that was a gratifying thing. And I mean, come prepared for that question. Maybe I'll think about it and come up with something. I think this is an extraordinary legacy that we have in Portland. Obviously, usually the efforts of yourself and many other people over the generations at the newcomer to Portland are not very grateful for that. But I have a concern that that these very positive gains that have been made in the historic districts in Portland that a very different approach applies to other parts of the city than this kind of a bi-folder approach on the part of our city management towards development within the historic district and development elsewhere and yet. I think that many of the activities that are proposed for development outside the historic district very much have impacts on the integrity of the historic parts of our city, the historic fabric of the city, including height limits and massing that affect the use of city hall, for example, from many parts of the city. And I'm just wondering if you have any suggestions about how those values that are bothered in the historic preservation of the football process might be generalized to consider about development more, development's more generally in our city. Well, I do know that the city is looking at form-based codes now. We're looking at that for the India Street neighborhood and what phone-based codes do rather than classic or traditional zoning looks at uses, allowable uses and such. Form-based codes is really based on the form scale massing of buildings and it and if done well it makes reference to an identifiable development pattern in a neighborhood. So for new construction in India Street, for example, the neighborhood has been pretty clear that they want new buildings that are of the neighborhood rather than something foreign plunked down and they've gotten a few of those already and they're concerned about it having seen the results of them. So I think form-based codes is a good tool and then just each and every time, speaking up to it, I think there's more and more sensitivity within the planning department itself but it's important that you have the right tools on the books. If you don't have the tools on the books then a developer, they meet those standards that are on the books. Everyone can shake their head and say, you know, that was a miss but if the tools on the books or the ordinances and such allow that kind of development, you can't say but we don't like it and so that's what was so important about establishing a preservation movement was, you know, we just didn't have the tools to make the case but I think form-based codes is one, I know Carol DeTine is looking at that for landmarks. I think that's a very effective tool. I do think you're right that it's Walter Muir Whitehill when he wrote the Forward to the Portland book which was published in the 70s talked about Portland that it was not so much a city of, you know, distinguishable landmarks although it has its share that Portland is a city about fabric and gentle transitions from one place to another and so that fabric, that overall fabric and overall scale and the transitions from one area to another I think are one of the really compelling characteristics of Portland and I think we have to be very careful not to have abrupt changes from historic areas to new areas and to see that Portland scale is one of its great assets, you know, that should be reinforced. I don't know if that answers your question. What are your thoughts on the development on the other side of the Whole Foods or 16 story? I don't think I'm going to go there. Do you have a position for landmarks? Landmarks is the advocacy organization. I work for City Hall. We did not take a position on the base side to develop the recent base side development. We have to talk to you afterwards. Due to code and zoning, we have at the street level, we have parking, we have really dead to the thought is that? Form-based code can address that and specifically discourage that. There's also if you eliminate parking requirements, that's another one. Oftentimes people say they have to build buildings with these very large footprints to make the numbers work but if you take some of those requirements out and you provide incentives to developing small footprint infill buildings that are really built on the development pattern in the neighborhood, that's, you know, we've got to find out what are the disincentives out there in what's on the books right now and what incentives can you create to encourage new development that builds on the tradition of development in Portland? Can I just, it's sort of a second part to that question in relation to use of the buildings? I'm thinking specifically, just right because that's the only one I can think of right now, is the eye and ear infirmary which I remember it's on Congress and you're right there. Yeah, eye and ear, whole hall. Right, exactly. So I remember years and years ago that was run down and then it got renovated and really nice but everything at the street level is cafe curbs, you know, which even though the building is nice now it doesn't enliven that corner whatsoever through youth. What we do do in the heart of the downtown and whole hall is really kind of outside of that core is that it has to be a pedestrian-related use, something that invites people into it and where closing the curtains is specifically discouraged and you can't, for example, cover more than 50% of the glass area with signage or whatever but that was in response to projects like not necessarily whole hall but projects where you've got a back office kind of operation in the front of a building and what it does is it stops people from continuing down the street, you know, and so then everybody around it suffers from the discontinuity in the area. I'm taking a completely different approach to like the congrats here. I just wanted to say like how we love with all of this paper thing in the 70s when they took down the Baxter Mansion on Deering Street and this is the first time that I've heard a lecture presented that almost probably took years because it's all about love. It's all about love. That's where it starts. Yeah. That's what he presented tonight which we love with your work and we love it but Hillary doesn't know work. So thank you. Thank you. Oh, thank you. All right, we have somebody back here. Oh, sorry. Hi. Hi. Hi, thank you. Excessive governmental influence tends to underline decent American entrepreneurial spirit. I think that was part of the thinking years ago during the the buildup of the preservation ordinance. I remember that the time then. And with that said, if it's true that the local government's historic preservation ordinance has influenced positively across the board local private property ownership then can you tell me please why some of Oldport District now looks more and more run down that if my honorable deceased parent Frank Akers if he was still alive Frank Akers helped develop the waterfront if you were alive today would probably with hit be a little bit concerned how government is negatively affecting entrepreneurship private property. Well, let me tell you my take on that is that the city cannot force people to make improvements to their buildings. That's the ordinance doesn't have that power to do that. It's when you're proposing to make a change that there's a review process. And there are a number of property owners in the Oldport that have in my view have not been responsible in terms of their tenant selections in terms of maintaining their buildings. And that really rests with the property owner. The only time the city can step in and require improvements to be made is when there are signs that the building is becoming structurally unsound. And that's a pretty dire situation. It's not when, you know, it desperately needs paint or its windows are looking really deteriorated or or whatever. We cannot step in and do that. So it's there's a responsibility. The responsibility rests in a number of hands. And the city is only one player. It's also seeing from a sociological perspective how excessive governmental influence in a way empowers the kind of building owner who is not as socially responsible, shall we say, empowers that kind of person to move into the neighborhood and start making it look like a combat zone. That's very unfortunate. Well, I, you know, I think they didn't move into the neighborhood since the ordinance. I think they were there already. Yeah, like snakes in the grass. But, you know, I am concerned about parts of the old part. Thank you so much. Thank you.


Welcome to the Hindu News Analysis by Shankarae's Academy. The list of topics chosen for today's discussion along with the page numbers is given here for your reference. Before starting today's news analysis, there is a good news. The India's Tiger Census sets a new Guinness World Record as world's largest camera trap wildlife survey. Yes, the 2018 Tiger Census got the Guinness World Record. A quick recap of 2018 Tiger Census. There are around 2,967 estimated tigers in India, which is around 75% of global tiger population. And this survey is the most comprehensive survey to date in both resource and data collected. Very importantly, know that the resolve of doubling tiger numbers under T-Cross 2 fulfilled much before the target year of 2022. And here is a question for you. According to 2018 census, which state is having the highest number of tigers? Post your answer in the comment section. This news article talks about a tweet by West Bengal Governor, urging the bureaucracy to act according to the All India Services Rules of 1968. So in this discussion, we shall see what is this All India Services Rules and other important terms like political neutrality, accountability, transparency, as well as code of conduct. The relevant syllabus is highlighted here for your reference. This topic assumes significance both in GS2 as well as GS4 papers. According to sources, the West Bengal Governor was worried about rampant disregard and violations by the current government of West Bengal. It seems that the IAS and IPS officials are not complying with the orders of governor and are failing to generate the desired response. So the governor has urged the bureaucrats to maintain the political neutrality, accountability and transparency and also to commit themselves for upholding the supremacy of the constitution. In short, they have been asked to follow the All India Services Rules of 1968. Know that these rules have been framed by the central government in accordance with All India Services Act of 1951 and very recently in 2014 these rules were amended for providing service conduct rules for bureaucrats. So this change by including the service conduct or code of conduct rules is regarded as one of the most important civil services reforms in the recent times. If you see the transfer of bureaucrats is happening based on their political affiliations. Even many of bureaucrats were sent to prison or accused of corruption in a large number of alleged scams depending on their affiliation to different political parties. So this mandated service conduct rules for bureaucrats. So these service conduct rules were inserted in 2014 and from then the civil services are expected to maintain high ethical standards, integrity and honesty. In addition, they are supposed to maintain political neutrality or impartiality as well as accountability and transparency. Further, they have to commit themselves to the supremacy of the constitution and uphold the same and democratic values and there is one rule which outrightly prohibits every bureaucrat being associated with any political party or organization which takes part in politics. Basically no bureaucrat should affiliate with any political organization. So based on this the governor has made statements asking all the bureaucrats to commit themselves to the all India services rules. So in this context we shall see what is political neutrality, transparency as well as accountability. So firstly what is meant by political neutrality. If you see there is no perfect definition but it can be simply defined as all the public servants must be neutral without supporting any political party.  It also means that they should act impartially that means not partial to any one section of people. If you see these rules prevent a public servant from indulging in activities of political nature and know that like other citizens public servant also has the right to vote but he or she is expected to exercise it violently because his or her political beliefs should be the private concern and no one else needs to know about them. If you see on the other hand contradictingly the public servant is under obligation to serve whichever political party is in power. So a public servant is expected to serve under the political party in power but he should not affiliate with the political party or he should not discriminate other parties. Simply it can be put as governments come and go depending upon the wishes of the public but the civil service that is the steel frame is permanent. This permanence of tenure encourages every public servant to serve impartially to whichever government is in power. So this is what is called political neutrality. Next let us see what is accountability and transparency. In public administration accountability refers to the obligation on the part of public servants to report on the usage of public resources and the obligation to be answerable for failing to meet the stated performance objectives. So accountability ensures that for every action and inaction of the government there is a civil servant responsible and accountable to the government civil society and the public. For example we know that a district collector has a wide ranging purpose so he will be doing lot of works he will be signing lot of projects so for every project he approved or he rejected he should be accountable for the decision he has made. Next in public administration transparency refers to unrestricted access to the public to the timely and reliable information on decisions made by the government. For example whatever is happening in the government the public has the right to know. Here the government should maintain transparency by giving information to the public domain. For example the right to information wherein the government is expected to give all the details which are not sensitive to the national security to the public. So these values of transparency accountability along with integrity have been the dominant paradigm in public administration. These three are considered as the keystones of good governance so in this manner the transparency accountability are important components of ethics infrastructure. So if all the public servants follow code of conduct transparency accountability this lead to fair and reliable public services predictable decision making and creation of a level playing field for businesses. When all this happens it improves the lives of poor and vulnerable. So this is all about this news article discussion. So this discussion will help you in both your GS2 as well as GS4 answer writing. So let us move on to next news article. Let us take up this news article which talks about the opinion of former Finance Minister of Tamil Nadu about the Legislative Council. So in this context let us discuss Legislative Council, its composition, its functions and its position compared to Legislative Assembly. The relevant syllabus is highlighted here for your reference. Firstly know that as of now only 6 states have bicameral legislature. Bicameral means two chambers assembly and council. They are Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra and Karnataka. So in a bicameral system the state legislature consists of governor, council and assembly. As we just said only 6 states have two houses. So who has the power to create a Legislative Council for each state? This topic is discussed in article 169 of Indian constitution. So this article provides for creation as well as abolition of Legislative Council. And this article empowers the parliament either to create or abolish a Legislative Council. But parliament can do this only if Legislative Assembly of a state passes a resolution either asking to create a council or to abolish a council. It means if state of Tamil Nadu wants a Legislative Council or to abolish a council it has to pass a resolution. Only then the parliament can abolish or create a Legislative Council. Here two important things to note are first one the resolution in the state assembly either to create or abolish council must be passed by a special majority. Their special majority means majority of total membership of the house and a majority of not less than two-thirds of members who are present and voting. For example assume that total membership of house is 100. So when we say a majority of total membership it means at least 51 members should support the resolution. And out of 100 assume that 90 members are present and voting on that day. So out of 90 minimum two-thirds that is 60 members should support the resolution. So simply it means if there are 100 members in a house and out of which 90 are present and voting at least 60 members should support the resolution either to create or abolish the Legislative Council. When such resolution is passed then parliament can consider making a change in constitution either to create or abolish the council. And very importantly here note that the act of parliament either to create or abolish is not considered to be an amendment under article 368. So when we say the act of parliament will not be considered under article 368 it means the parliament can make change with just an ordinary majority. So the state assembly has to pass the resolution with special majority while on the other hand parliament can make the change in the constitution with just ordinary majority. So these are the two things you must be aware of for your film's examination. Next talking about the composition of Legislative Council article 171 says that the maximum strength of council is fixed at one-third of total strength of assembly and the minimum strength is fixed at 40. Suppose if the strength of assembly is 180 then the maximum strength of council can be one-third of 180 that is 60. However the exact number is fixed by the parliament and note that the members of Legislative Council that is MLCs are indirectly elected through proportional representation system by single transferable vote which is similar to the election to Rajya Sabha and talking about the manner of election to Legislative Council know that out of total members one-third of membership is elected by members of local bodies like municipalities, district boards etc. And one-twelfth are elected by graduates and another one-twelfth are elected by teachers and next one-third are elected by MLAs yes one-third of members of Legislative Council are elected by MLAs and remaining one-sixth is nominated by governor from amongst persons who have special knowledge or practical experience in literature, science, art, cooperative movement and social service. Here you can relate this nomination of MLCs with nomination of Rajya Sabha members by the president. In Rajya Sabha 12 members are nominated by the president who has the special knowledge or practical experience in matters like literature, science, art and social service. And in Legislative Council the one-sixth of members are nominated by the governor who has special knowledge in literature, science, art, cooperative movement and social service. Here the only change you have to keep in mind is there is one extra category called cooperative movement from where the members can be nominated to Legislative Council and this category of cooperative movement is not available with reference to nomination of members in Rajya Sabha. When talking about the duration of Legislative Council Article 172 says that the Council is a permanent body and not subject to dissolution. But one-third of its members retire on the expiration of every second year. So a member continues as search for six years and here importantly know that the retiring members are eligible for re-election and re-nomination any number of times. And here again you can relate this provisions with Rajya Sabha. And finally let us discuss the powers of Council compared to Assembly. Here Article 197 restricts the powers of Council with respect to Legislative Assembly. First we shall talk about ordinary bills. See when an ordinary bill is passed by the Assembly and sent to Council the Council has four options. First one it can simply pass the bill without any amendments. Second it can pass the bill with amendments and return the bill to Assembly for reconsideration of amendments. And third one reject the bill altogether. And fourth one keeping the bill pending without taking any action. See if the Assembly accepts the changes proposed by the Council the bill is deemed to have passed by both the houses. But if the Assembly rejects the amendments or if the Council does not make any action for more than three months then Assembly can pass the bill once again. But if Assembly passes the same bill once again and sends the same bill to Council now even if Council rejects the bill or makes some amendments which are not acceptable to Assembly even then the bill is considered to be passed by both the houses. And one more possibility that is if Council does not take any action when bill is sent to the Council for the second time within one month even then the bill is deemed to have been passed by both the houses. So it means the Assembly has an upper hand with respect to Council even in case of ordinary bills. At most the Council can hold the bill for four months that is three months in the first instance and one month in the second instance. After the four months the bill is considered to be passed by both the houses. And coming to money bill similar to the Parliament a money bill can be introduced only in the Assembly and not in the Council. And when this money bill is sent to the Council it cannot be amended or rejected and Council should return the bill to the Assembly within 14 days either with recommendations or without recommendations and here note that Assembly can either accept or reject all the recommendations made by the Council. In both the cases the money bill is said to be passed by the both houses. So from here you can understand that the legislative Assembly has more power with respect to Council both in case of ordinary bills as well as money bills. So this is all about the legislative Council, its composition and its position compared to legislative Assembly. The displayed practice question will be discussed at the end of session. This news article discusses the keynote address delivered by the RBI governor. Though what he spoke in that meeting is not important in exam perspective there are few important points which are considered to be very important in prelims perspective. In his speech the governor has stressed the need for resolution corporation and he also talked about the concept of bail in and bail out. So in this context we shall discuss about resolution corporation, bail in, bail out and some of the important features of FRDI bill. The relevant syllabus is highlighted here for your reference. See the RBI governor has said that the economic impact of the pandemic due to lockdown may result in higher non-performing assets and may also lead to capital erosion of banks. So simply he is saying that the lockdown is increasing the NPS of banks. Further he said that the shocks to the financial system which were once called as once in a lifetime events seem to be more frequent. This is because they are happening at least once in a decade. If you see in 2009 we had a great recession where our banks took a severe beating in terms of NPS and now at the start of this year the S bank had a crisis and now there are many more crisis which are going to come due to the pandemic imposed lockdown. So the RBI governor has said that the shocks to the system have become more frequent. So in this context the governor also spoke about the lack of a mechanism to address these bank failures. See every time we have seen in the news that if a bank becomes financially weak it ends up being merged with a larger bank. So by merging a weak bank with a strong bank the interests of depositors are protected. But it is going to affect the balance sheet of a large bank. So when we merge a small bank with a big bank the small bank depositors are going to be benefited. But the large bank has to absorb the losses and issues of the small bank. So the large bank is going to be affected. But during the S bank crisis the Reserve Bank of India came up with a new resolution idea. See after exhausting all possible options RBI intervened and came up with S bank reconstruction scheme. So instead of merging it with a larger bank it proposed a public-private partnership between leading financial entities of India under the leadership of Ted Bank of India. So through this intervention RBI was able to safeguard the interest of depositors simultaneously ensuring the stability of financial system. To know more on S bank reconstruction scheme please refer 7th March the Hindu news analysis. But as we all know RBI has many other important functions as well. So it cannot make itself busy with these reconstruction and resolution schemes. So this is why the RBI governor has stressed that a resolution corporation with a statutory backing is need of the hover. This is mainly to deal with the resolution and revival of stressed financial firms like S bank. If you see a resolution corporation was proposed in financial resolution and deposit insurance bill of 2017. This resolution corporation is mandated to protect the consumers of banks for ensuring the stability and resilience of financial system. But this bill was not enacted due to concerns over a controversial bail-in clause. So from example perspective try to know the concept of bail-in. See this bill specifies various tools to resolve a failing financial firm. For example this include transferring its assets and liabilities, merging it with another firm or altogether liquidating it. So one of these methods allow for cancellation or writing down of liabilities of the failing financial firm or also restructuring its liabilities on a case to case basis. This method is known as bail-in. Here when we tell liabilities it involves everything the bank owes to others like depositors, creditors etc. So what happens under bail-in is a portion of the liabilities of the bank are cancelled. So when these liabilities are cancelled who are going to lose obviously the depositors as well as creditors. So who deposited money in the bank are going to lose a portion of the amount or complete amount. So this is called bail-in clause. So this became a controversial and many people criticized this move by the government under FRDI bill. So what is bail-out? See bail-out refers to infusion of funds which means infusion of capital by external sources to resolve the financial firm. This includes a failing firm being rescued by the government as well. For example if bank is having lot of liabilities and it is unable to pay its liabilities then government can infuse some amount of capital to the bank which can be used for paying off debts as well as liabilities. So you can see that in bail-in the depositors and creditors will face losses which is because the liabilities of the financial firm are cancelled. Whereas in bail-out the depositors and creditors will not be at loss since money is infused from external sources to revive the failing financial firm. So this bail-in clause was the reason that FRDI bill was not enacted. But now as the RBI governor has insisted it is time to have a resolution corporation. So government can legislate a resolution corporation by revisiting the controversial clauses of 2017 FRDI bill. With this we come to end of the discussion of this news article wherein we talked about the resolution corporation, the FRDI bill, the controversial clauses like bail-in as well as bail-out. Now let us move on to the next news article. Next discussion is going to be based on these two news articles. Both news articles are related to the national security advisers. The first article is an interview with former NSA Shiv Shankar Meenam and the second article talks about the rise of the current NSA, who is Ajit Kumar Doval. So in this first news article the former NSA talks about the Chinese strategy of intrusion. He starts by saying that Indo-China relations are getting more and more adversarial. He further says that the disengagement terms between India and China are dangerous. This is because these terms suggest that we are withdrawing from territory which we have controlled for a very long time. So by pulling out and suspending patrols along the LAC, it sends out the wrong message that both sides are equally responsible for the aggression. But in fact we know that only China is responsible for the aggression. But by agreeing to pull out and suspending the patrolling across LAC, India is agreeing that it is also responsible for the aggression. The author also says that almost all China's military expeditions in Asia used the same strategy. For example that the Oklahoma standoff or recent China's claim to Bhutan's Sachtang Wildlife Sanctuary or even its claim on South China Sea. In all these cases, first China will claim a territory. Then there will be a standoff or tussle between China and the other country. This will be followed by some temporary peace agreement. But what happens is the claim of China becomes permanent. This can also be said as taking two steps forward and negotiating one step backward. And in all these cases China resorted in changing the facts on the ground. This is done by presenting the victim countries, for example India, with a fate accompanying. It means presenting them with a history of agreement that no one heard of. Here China uses these agreements which no one heard of to claim territories by saying that these territories were historically part of China. And China projects these agreements during peace negotiations and makes it claim permanent. And further author tells that China now sees India to be more strategically close to US. So it started showing more aggression towards India. This is mainly to show US that US cannot count India as an ally to counter China. This will also show our neighbors that if they want security from China they cannot rely on India. So what are the solutions given by the author? Author says that India should solve the problems by self strengthening. We should also strengthen our patrolling, our military capabilities etc. We should also insist and force China to implement and respect the agreements which we already have. It includes respect for line of actual control and maintenance of status quo. India should also work closer with others who share our interests. For example Indian neighbors as well as Indian ocean, literal countries and the quad grouping etc. At the same time we should not forget the fact that China is one of our biggest trading partners. So to go aggressive or offensive against China firstly we should cut dependencies on China. It includes reducing Chinese presence in critical infrastructure and Indian market as well. But for this to happen we should first boost our economy by strengthening the manufacturing sector and increasing employment and productivity. So these are the things discussed by the former NSA and certions given in the current context of Indo-China border disputes. So this is all about the discussion of these news articles. The practice question will be discussed at the end of session. Let us move on to the next news article. Let us take up this news article which talks about a case in Supreme court regarding the management of Padmanabh Swami temple in Kerala. You might have heard about this temple which is home to a lot of property I mean gold, silver and other valuable items. So the Supreme court is going to pronounce its judgment tomorrow and this judgment is going to decide whether the state government or the erstwhile royal family will run the temple. And also the article mentions the terms like parents, patriae, amicus, curae etc. In this context let us discuss these terms in brief. First let us see amicus curae. It literally means the friend of the court. So an amicus curae is the one who assists the court by furnishing information or advice regarding questions of law or fact. The decision whether to admit the information given by amicus curae lies with the discretion of the court. So this amicus curae the person is not a party to the lawsuit and thus differs from an intervener. So when we say intervener, he or she has a direct interest in the outcome of the lawsuit and is therefore permitted to participate as a party to the suit. On the other hand amicus curae won't have any interest in the lawsuit but tries to help the court by giving information or advice regarding the questions of law. For example, former comptroller and auditor general Vinod Rai has served as amicus curae in this Padmanabh Swami temple court case. Let us discuss one more term discussed in the news article that is parents patriae which means parent of his or her country. See we all know that the state is regarded as a sovereign. Hence state in its capacity is the provider of protection to those who are unable to take care of themselves. Here parents patriae indicates the power of the state to act as guardian for those who are unable to care for themselves such as children or disabled individuals. So in this context know that all the deities including idols are considered perpetual minors and court has the parents patriae jurisdiction with reference to all the gods and deities in the country. Yes this may look a little funny but it is true all the deities and idols are considered as minors and are unable to take care of themselves. So court serves the guardian and so has the parents patriae jurisdiction over all the temples and deities. Next let us see the doctrine of rest subjudice. See subjudice means under judgment. It can be said as a matter under consideration of a court or a judge. If you see this doctrine of rest subjudice aims to prevent courts of concurrent jurisdiction from simultaneously adjudicating upon two parallel litigations. This is different from rest judicata. See rest judicata means once a matter is adjudicator or finalized it cannot be re-adjudicated. It means if a matter has already been tried by a competent court then trial between same parties in respect of same matter shall not be allowed. The difference between rest subjudice and rest judicata is under rest subjudice two courts cannot adjudicate on the same topic which consists of same litigations and same litigants. On the other side rest judicata says that if a case is settled or adjudicated it cannot be re-adjudicated. However when there are merits or there are considerable changes in the facts and the realities a case can be re-opened and re-adjudicated. So this doctrine of rest judicata is based on three principles. First no man should be punished twice for the same cause which is also present in fundamental rights that is article 20 it says that no double geoparty that is no man should be punished twice for the same cause. Second it is the interest of state that there should be an end to a litigation and the final one a judicial decision must be accepted as correct. So this is all about the important terms mentioned in the news article. We talked about amicus curae, parents patriae, rest subjudice as well as rest judicata. The practice question will be discussed at the end of session. We have arrived at the last segment of today's discussion that is practice questions discussion. First question with reference to national security advisor consider the following statements statement one. The post of NSA was created in the backdrop of 26 by 11 Mumbai terror attacks. No the statement is incorrect. No that the post of NSA was created in 1998 during the prime ministership of Atal Bihari Vajpayee. Statement two. The defense planning committee of India is chaired by national security advisor. Yes this statement is correct. Statement three. The NSA of India enjoys the cabinet rank. Yes this statement is also correct. Previously the NSA used to enjoy minister of state rank. But in the recent past it was upgraded to the cabinet rank. Therefore the correct answer is option C 2 and 3 only since we are supposed to identify correct statements. Next question. Consider the following statements. Statement one. Bailout is an arrangement in which craters of a failing financial institution are required to cancel some of its debts as a part of plan to save it from collapse. Statement two. Bail in refers to external financial assistance to a failing financial institution to save it from collapse. If you see both statements are incorrect. This is because the definitions of bail in and bail out are interchanged. See bailout refers to external financial assistance while bail in refers to cancelling of a few liabilities. Here we are supposed to identify incorrect statements. So the correct answer is option C both 1 and 2 since the both statements are incorrect. Next. Consider the following statements. Statement one. An amicus curie is the friend of court who assists the court by furnishing information regarding questions of law or fact. Yes the statement one is correct. Statement two. The parent's patrion jurisdiction indicates the power of the state to act as guardian for those who are unable to take care of themselves. Yes statement two is also correct. Coming to statement three. Doctrine of rest judicata aims to prevent from simultaneously adjudicating upon two parallel litigations on same cause of action and subjects. Now this statement is incorrect because the statement three talks about rest subjudice while the rest subjudicata means once matter is adjudicated it cannot be re-adjudicated. So the statement three is incorrect. Therefore the correct answer is option B one and two only. Which among the following are stakeholders in electing or nominating members of the Laysley to council. First members of local bodies in the state. Two graduates residing in the state. Third members of Laysley to assembly. Fourth governor of the state. Here if you see all the four are correct. Therefore the correct answer is option D one two three and four. Next let us take up this practice main question. What do you understand by the term political neutrality? How does one endorse political neutrality? This is a 10 marks question and the word limit is 150. So you can define political neutrality and you can give one or two examples. Dear aspirants know that whenever you are writing an answer for GS4 examples play a vital role in getting good marks. So explain political neutrality and how can we endorse political neutrality with relevant examples. And here is one more question which is a previous year main question appeared on GS paper two in 2017. Initially civil services in India were designed to achieve the goals of neutrality and effectiveness which seems to be lacking in present context. Do you agree with the view that drastic reforms are required in civil services? Comment. With this we conclude today's news analysis. If you find this session resourceful click on the like button, show your appreciation in the comment section and don't forget to subscribe to our YouTube channel.