So do you want something more than a Situation ship? Well, I'm gonna offer you do this instead of chasing him. So We're gonna talk about what a situation ship is in a moment I do want to address something first and that is I've witnessed a significant percentage of women who seem to be afraid To ask a man about how she he feels about her how he feels about her and so why I'm bringing this up is because when two human beings get together in a Romantic context When there is uncertainty about each other's feelings towards one another what ends up happening is this thing called a Situation ship now a Situation ship or a casual relationship, and I want to differentiate between the two a Situation ship is typically a Engagement into getting to know another human being but there isn't any Diffinity of what's actually going on here. There might be going out to dinners there might be spending time at home There might be physical intimacy with one another without any clear understanding of what the label is of what we're doing, okay? Now you might say to me Jonathan. I'm with a man who says I don't like labels. Well folks Everything comes with a label. This is called a book. Okay, that's a label. This is called a pen. That's a label This is my eyeglass cleaner that has a label So when someone says I don't like labels what that means is I don't want to define the relationship with you and That's why it's called a Relationship now if you're not familiar with the work of Esther Perrell, okay I'm gonna grab her book. She wrote an amazing book called mating Incaptivity mating in captivity and by the way all the links of the books I recommend are listed below Why I'm bringing this up is she coined the term for relationships that are a little bit more than Situationships and what I'm gonna talk about is casual relationships And this is where there's an agreement of monogamy and an agreement of Exclusivity and the belief the way I've interpreted the way she calls it is she calls that stable ambiguity state stable Ambiguity what stable is there's an agreement to monogamy. There's an agreement to exclusivity, but it's ambiguous as to the direction of the relationship there is there is Ambiguity to the direction of the relationship I believe the reason why this happens is that a Significant percentage of men have a short term mating strategy Versus a long term mating strategy now short term mating strategy is let me spend time with this person Let me have sex with this person and if I have a good time and the sex is good You know then I'll pursue this So long as everything remains good, okay? So long as everything remains good because the minute it is no longer good. No math. It's no longer serves. It's it's It's kind of like these particular men want relationship on their terms on at their beck and call But you might be going well Jonathan all the female energy dating coaches Tell me to sit back to my feminine energy and let a man lead Well, you see when you do that you are basically setting him up to have the relationship on his terms Whereas a man that has a long term mating strategy He's actually viewing you from the potential of compatibility Which encompasses shared values? Lifestyles that are blendable with one another and more importantly emotional maturity Does this woman and or the man because it goes both ways have a capacity to regulate their emotions when there are differences and Do active listening active acknowledging? Active communication with one another emotional maturity includes having your actions match your word Consistently emotional maturity is being in victor consciousness instead of victim consciousness and sadly here in the United States We are suckling on the nipple of victim consciousness and emotional maturity means you know how to You know when you have differences, you know how to listen to your partner's point of view Acknowledge your partner's point of view and Even accept their point of view is being true for them. That's emotional maturity. Motion of maturity means you have empathy and Not just empathy for them for them the other person Empathy for yourself and emotional maturity means that if something is material the relationship You're gonna talk about it as soon as it's possible to talk about it You're gonna be transparent with one another because emotional maturity in the context of a Serious relationship is all about building trust Building trust with one another So I have a radical idea This isn't that radical I brought it up before but I want to lean into this conversation You know Dating isn't is you know off. Okay, so I want you to think of two sovereign beings You're a being and they're a being okay to sovereign beings coming together Okay, now most we have this traditional expectation that men are the leaders of the dating process Men are the provider protectors. They're the ones who plan dates and pay dates, okay? So I want you to think about that and because my hand here is above this hand It's a one-up one-down type of environment I'm here to encourage something a little different to sovereign beings coming together and let me give you an analogy to illustrate this. I Want you to think of two Attorneys could be two men could be two women could be a man and woman doesn't matter Okay, two attorneys will call it a man and a woman in this particular case Who decide that they want to start a law firm together? Okay? The way they approach this process is this two Sovereign beings and what they do is they ask about what are you what do you want to accomplish in this law firm in this? Partnership, okay What do you bring to the table and what do I bring to the table now? They also find out their past experience. Do they have any do they have any contracts with people out there? Do they have any debts with people out there? They find out a lot about their past experience and Then they then they sign a contract together to form this partnership Okay, well, how does this apply to dating and relationships? And I want to share a book with you in a moment because this kind of illustrates this So what if we date? From that perspective We find out as much about their past as we can possibly find out Okay to make sure that and there isn't any Residue from that past that will affect this relationship now residue could be a past relationship that somebody is still hung up on it could be You know financial Concerns it could be maybe even in their professional capacity There might be some residue from that past that could affect anything in the future and you do your due diligence. I call this I call this Radical honesty Laying your cards on the table and I call it the rules of engagement So what radical honesty is is being upfront right from the get-go and having serious radical conversations Laying your cards on the table includes talking about your past experiences and How that might have some effect on any future experience and by the way It doesn't mean just your past relationships as I said before it could be any facet of your life, okay? And the rules of engagement basically kind of like that partnership agreement that those two attorneys had they have this Partnership they have a written agreement Well the rules of engagement could include my dating vows if you're not familiar with my dating vows And what that means is that we you was and by the way, there's a link below to get a copy of my dating vows it establishes the Context of how we're going to explore this relationship together But Jonathan that's going to turn off a lot of guys Well, yeah, because most men have a short term mating strategy See those of you that are so afraid to speak up is because you're counting on the guy to choose you Instead of you standing up for your sovereignty before you ever have physical intimacy with somebody and The rules of engagement basically outlines the type of relationship you see So this is one of the things I want you to do instead instead of chasing his Affections and hoping he chooses you by just merely showing up I want you to establish your standards right from the get-go and Only choose men who are in agreement with your standards Now I want to talk with you about another radical concept here so It used to be an olden time So up until about it fifty a hundred plus years ago and before it used to be people knew each other for Literally a short period of time and they got married so they could have sex. I mean back in the 40s 30s 40s 50s I mean people dated for a few days or weeks and got married You know, I have a friend of mine whose parents got married after 12 days of knowing each other now Obviously today that would be insanity and certainly women don't need to get married from financial purposes or whatnot But I'm here to say if two people have had conscious conversations with one another They've agreed they're gonna explore a relationship together. They've agreed to be physically intimate with one another I'm gonna offer a suggestion going forward and that would be that you each agree to spend two weeks in each other's homes Respectfully in each other's homes day in day out for two weeks You do it once at two weeks in his home. He does two weeks at your home Just to see how you get along with one another now. This is a radical concept, but let me tell you where this was birthed from I Watch this TV show calls luck called I watch I've watched this TV show called love is blind, okay? and In it you spend this time getting to know someone without physically seeing them and when you physically meet them the next day you're whisked off to a week honeymoon with this person where you spend seven days together and then You spend eight weeks with the person living with them in a home that's provided by the studio Okay, and you get to see who this person really is. Well, it's fascinating that basically I would say You know seven or eight out of ten of the couples never make it past the eight weeks Okay, they never eventually get married in a few do back to lead the latest season. It was shocking how many did But wouldn't you rather let me ask you all a question. Would you rather invest? eight weeks of Intense getting to know someone to see if there's potential versus what our current dating environment is Situationships or casual relationships. I actually think dating is just a long strung-out version of friends with benefits and people will spend years Without ever really getting to know someone. They're just spending time together. I call these people spenders They are in situationships or casual relationships. Now. I know this is a radical idea Okay, and it's probably you might say well, this isn't practical Jonathan We live too far away to do this or our our work environment but think about this for a second if two people live far from one another and Their work environment makes it difficult for them to get to know each other on a day-in-day-out basis Then what's going to make this relationship ever work in the future? Like I want you to almost think downstream and apply it to today In other words, if your lifestyles are are kind of mismatched, you know when you all are living in this fantasy women Particularly live in a fantasy. Well, if we love each other, we'll figure it out Look it There isn't some that there is no doubt that love is a juicy delicious experience. There's no doubt about it That's what makes relationships worth making the effort Love doesn't make a relationship work because if that's the case Why didn't millions upon millions upon millions of people get married and not work out? They loved each other Well, they fell out of love Well, they fell out of love a lot of times because they were a mismatch to begin with and they jumped in either Too soon like those couples we talked about in the beginning or they let it strung out and then it failed So I'm here to offer a radical way of looking at things to dive in To see if you actually really get along with this person it but here's the thing Ladies in particular if you're willing to give your body, you know, with another human being then Why aren't you willing to go and do some radical stuff different because our current dating environment is not working the way It is it's just not and So, you know, this is why I offer an alternate perspective. I'm not saying this is an absolute But let's face it to get to know another human being You need to see them in a variety of different experiences our current dating methodology Like I said, it's a long drawn-out version of friends with benefits. It's really a long draw. Most couples aren't Integrating each most humans are not integrating into each other's lives. That's why they're called Situationships, that's why they're casual serious relationships Integrate each other into their lives. They spend time with the grandkids. They spend time with the children They spend time at the work functions. They spend time going grocery shopping with each other They do the seat. Here's I hope you got this far It's in the mundane things that they do together That real Commitment is built It is through the mundane things that real commitment is built. It is not through the superficial things I recently wrote in a blog that romance should be reserved for People that are in relationship not as an entry point into relationship you see we have it backwards here We here believe that chemistry equals relationship success and that's the furthest thing from the truth Chemistry is important. We need it and Romance is important too, but not as an entry point into a relationship that should be reserved for couples that are already in a relationship because then it makes the relationship sweeter to be in Rather as an entry point because you've all heard of love bombing you all heard of coming on strong You've all heard about lust and limerence See being an emotional grown-up means trying something different And if you need some support with that schedule a discovery call with me to see if working with a coach is right for you I just got a call from a client. She's inner. She's in a brand new relationship And she said to me and I quote Jonathan for the first time in my life. I can tell the difference Because I'm operating on brand new software. I'm not operating from software that is so old and outdated Because everything she learned prior to our conversation was wrong everything she learned about relationships is wrong So try something different that's my invitation for you be radically honest lay your cards on the table do that instead of chasing somebody's affections Because the reality is is you're not going to be happy at the end of the day if you can't be with someone where you can speak from the heart Speak from that heart center space instead of that for lack of a better word desperate place And when you find yourself with somebody who's not willing to meet you there, you know what you say just like ariana Ariana Grande said in her song. Thank you next. Thank you next and with that note I'm going to wrap up it first if you have something to say post a comment below I'd like to hear all your thoughts this video was shot for my group called midlife love mastery If you'd like to have direct access to me on a regular basis Go to my website Jonathan as a calm. There's a link below hit that group coaching button so you can join my fantastic group and You can have direct access to me on a regular basis And I'm going to sign up this video as I always do first off give myself a big gigantic Jonathan Barrow Love I'm going to reach into the camera. Please excuse those pit stains and give you a hug of love if that's okay I'm asking you to turn to someone a pet a teddy bear a pillow and give either of them a hug of love Because hugs are a great source of love and let's face it. We could all use more love in our lives. Thanks a bunch. Bye. Bye now


Elizabeth Juan, the honorable, or actually no, the dishonorable senator from the state of the great state of Massachusetts, a great state that will elect a woman like this is something else. Elizabeth Juan is, stinks out a unique, I think, position in American politics. She posits herself as a defender of capitalism. She differentiates herself from Bernie Sanders by saying she is not a socialist, but a defender of capitalism, but a humane capitalism, a proper capitalism, a capitalism of competition, a capitalism where the government plays a big role. Maybe she's a proponent of, you know, Chinese style state capitalism. I don't know, but in the election, she always says, no, no, no, I'm a capitalist. I'm not, I'm not anti-capitalism. I just want everything regulated. She doesn't say this, but I, she just wants everything regulated, everything controlled from the government.  I mean, she really is definition of fascist. She wants you all to believe you have private property. She wants you all to be, you have incentives as if you have private property. She wants you all to make a lot of money so she can tax it. She wants you all to innovate so that she will take credit for it, for the economic growth to generate from that. She wants the pretense of private property, the pretense of capitalism, the pretense of markets. Well, the property, the businesses, the markets are completely controlled by the government, by who? That's Elizabeth Warren. Very popular among Democrats, particularly I'd say among, you know, the sophisticated class, the class that doesn't quite like Bernie Sanders because he's too in their face socialist. But among the policy geeks, you remember when she ran for president, she had like 555 different plans. She had a plan for everything. She was going to fix everything. She had a plan, a fascist plan to address every single issue, right, that possibly could have So one is very, very respected among, you know, the elites, the elite, the economists, the policy wonks, the people in the Democratic Party who want control and who want to control over pretty much everything. Well, Elizabeth Warren is worried about inflation because, you know, as is everybody else, inflation, as we all know, is at another more than 27 year high.  It's at a over 30 year high. We haven't seen this kind of inflation since the 1980s and, you know, arguably it could very well get worse. We'll see how much it gets worse, leave the projection about inflation to our strong Saturday. But at least for now, at least for now, you know, she is, she is worried about inflation. And we are seeing inflation seriously increased. We're seeing inflation go up across the board. Chips, automobiles, we're seeing it in the grocery stores. We're seeing it in, you know, pretty much everywhere, really.  And of course, what does Elizabeth Warren believe that the problem is? What is the issue? Why do we have inflation? Now, there are a lot of theories about this. There's the monetary theory of inflation that basically says it comes from printing money. There is the basically printing money, right, increasing the supply of money. There is the physical policy, the physical theory of inflation, which says that it comes from governed deficits and the belief in the marketplace that the government will never pay back its debt, that that's where inflation comes from. The world of inflation expectations is debated. The world, how do we measure money exactly is debated. I mean, there's a lot of economic theory. A lot of people have written a lot of people won over prizes in economics over this. This is a rich area of economics. But Elizabeth Warren will have none of that. I mean, all of those theories, all of those theories refute the popular theory of economics on the left today, which is the monetary, modern monetary theory, which suggests that the government can spend as much as it wants. The government's spending is never the problem. So they clearly do not hold the physical theory of inflation, that money printing is not the issue that government can spend it will. And that is behind the Democrats attempt to pass spending bill after spending bill after spending bill with the idea that it doesn't cause inflation. Government spending, government borrowing doesn't cause it. So what we need another explanation, and Elizabeth Warren has the perfect explanation. The explanation is a consistent with everything else she believes in. It's an explanation that serves the purpose of promoting her ideas about the economy, her ideas about quote capitalism. And that is that all of this inflation we're seeing right now is caused by monopolies, by monopolies. The problem in the world today is not the supply chain. The problem in the world today is not too much artificial demand, because we gave people checks. The problem in the world today is not supply constraints, because we lock people at home and wouldn't let them work, including in China. China, by the way, just locked down Qixion, the ancient capital of China. Qixion is an interesting city. It's got the terracotta warriors. I actually gave a terrific talk at the University of Qixion years ago. Fantastic. On the morality of capitalism. Biggest posters that anybody's ever made for one of my talks. They put them all over campus, the morality of capitalism. I had 300 people there. It was great. Anyway, Qixion has just been locked down 13 million people have locked in their homes because of COVID. Anyway, it's none of that. It's not luck downs. It's not checks in the mail. It's not helicopter money. It's not any of these things. The actual problem with inflation is greedy businesses. I'm serious, guys. So you know, the problem is, for example, grocery stores. Grocery stores, according to Elizabeth Warren, are putting, quote, corporate profits over consumers and workers. So Kroger and Albertson and Publix, there are probably a few other grocery stores, right? Small ones, big ones, HEB in Texas. They're just putting corporate profits above consumers and workers. And, you know, they're just increasing prices and increasing and increasing and increasing and increasing. And there's no competition because I don't know, why is there no competition? Wait a minute. I don't know. There are many grocery stores. Now there are a few big ones. But even the big ones, there are at least three some places more than that. I lived in Orange County. There were quite a few. And this doesn't take into account the Trader Joe's, the Whole Foods. It also doesn't take into account the Walmart grocery. The Target. Target is huge in groceries. Huge in groceries. Right? At least in California. They're everywhere. Target, fresh. There's Amazon fresh. At least there was. That's some way they might be closing. I mean, how do markets work? If Kroger raises prices, particularly if it raises prices overall, what a grocery store customer is going to do? They're going to go to Albertsons. Or they're going to go to Publix. Or they're going to go to Walmart. Or they're going to go to Target. And let's say they all collude. They get together and they all raise prices. Well, one of them is going to cheat. One of them is going to cheat and lower prices. Customers are going to go there. They're going to make more money. Everybody else will have to match their prices. So no, competition drives prices down. Isn't it weird that when we keep government out of our fears, when they don't send us checks in the mail, when they don't lock us up in our homes, that when that happens, prices actually go down, not up. As productivity increases, prices go down, not up. Chip shortage is not caused by a lack of corporate competition. There's plenty of corporate competition. The cost of milk, the cost of eggs. This is what we're experiencing right is classical inflation. It is a consequence of artificial demand, chasing fewer goods, because we haven't managed to catch up with the production of goods to fit the artificial demand. Where did the artificial demand come from? From the fact that we printed checks and sent them to everybody in the mailbox. This is what traditionally has been called helicopter money and isn't interesting. Isn't it interesting that whoever gets the money first, this money that the government hands out, they're the ones who drive our prices. So for example, when financial institutions get the money first, when it's done through the Federal Reserve buying mortgage-backed securities and things like that, where does that money flow? It flows into assets. It flows into the stock market. It flows into the bond market. It flows maybe sometimes into real estate. But when we actually send that common guy checks, where does the money flow? It flows into groceries. It flows into automobiles. It flows into other things. Their prices go up. This is not rocket science. It's completely empirically observable. Apollo asked, do you go to the corner shop to buy a pint of milk and six eggs? I do not because I don't drink milk. And my wife buys most of our groceries. I sometimes go, but usually my wife is responsible for that. So I don't know what to do with eggs. I wouldn't know what an egg looked like and what to do with it. What would you do with eggs?  But then I get the finer product. I don't get the process. Inflation occurs when you have a high artificial demand across the board, across the entire economy. And that can only happen with suddenly, out of nowhere, people have more money than they had before. And that can happen when the government hands it over. But so Mises's theory of inflation, I think, is very consistent with what I just said, Alex. It is the idea that whoever touches the money first has the greatest impact on prices. That it is a monetary phenomena. It is caused by the Federal Reserve. It is caused by the central bank. John Cochran's theory of inflation is more focused on government deficits and expectations regarding the ability of the government to pay back its debt. Cochran has a book coming out on his physical theory. I think it's interesting. I don't have a final statement about who I think is right here. My guess is you could probably integrate Mises's theory with Cochran's theory and you would get closest to the truth. You like even a wider lens? I don't think we can go much wider than this. This is like an 18 millimeter, 18 millimeters. It's already ultra wide angle lens. I think wider than this, we'd start getting distortions in my face and stuff. So pay attention to this, guys, because what is Elizabeth Warren really trying to do here? What she's trying to do is provide more justification for much more robust antitrust. Agenda. She's going to argue that anytime we see prices go up, that is a sign of monopoly power and that is a sign that we should seek the antitrust division on those companies. This is a trial balloon to see if we can expand the definition of antitrust, if we can expand the role of the antitrust authorities, if we can go off the businesses in a much more systematic, much greater way. And this is again, who fascists like attempts to expand the role of government, control businesses more, break them up. She's, remember, she's pro-capitalist. She wants more competition, not less. She took those classes about perfect competition, those bogus economic classes on perfect competition seriously. And what she wants to do is take away any kind of market power, any kind of size. She wants to destroy the winners in competition so that we constantly get every business of size broken up into tiny little bit of pieces so that we can get as close as we can to perfect competition. If you remember, perfect competition is the theory that the capitalist ideal, this is again why she's capitalist. This is the distortion, that the capitalist ideal is lots of companies competing perfectly, all having the same information, all having the same knowledge, all having the same productivity level, all innovating at the same rate, all exactly the same. The world isn't like that. There's nothing in the world like that. Nobody has perfect information, perfect knowledge. Nobody wants to be the same. Why do you start a business? Not because you want to be the same. You want to be better. You want to be different. So this is part of this broad agenda of control, control, control, and using antitrust, which your Democrats have, using antitrust to control our businesses, to break them up. They're getting more and more supported, unfortunately, from Republicans. Whoever is in control of the Senate, Republicans and Democrats, antitrust is on the rise. It's likely that a Republican president in the future is going to support antitrust, increase use of antitrust to go after his favorite enemies, let's say it's big tech or something like that. Thank you, John. Really appreciate that. Really appreciate the support. John gave $25 and says, he always enjoys the show. He thanks me. And Alex just rounded all his questions up to 100 bucks for the holidays. Thank you, Alex. But that wasn't, I mean, Elizabeth was busy. She's trying to raise her profile. I think she's sensing that maybe just maybe Biden won't be in a position to run for president in two years, and maybe there'll be a primary in the Democratic Party. And given how old she is, this will be her last shot at trying to go for the presidency. And I think she's trying to raise her profile, because not only is she advocating for robust antitrust in order to cure us from inflation, but she is going after the richest man in the world, Elon Musk. And in particular, she's doing that in the context of advocating for wealth tax and advocating for increased wealth taxes. So what's going on with Elizabeth Warren and Elon Musk? Well, I think it all started when a pro-publica reports in November came out saying that Elon Musk paid no taxes in 2018, and that indeed, I can't remember the exact number. Musk's wealth went from 2014 to 2018 from $14 billion to $455 billion. It increased by $14 billion, but he only paid $455 million in taxes. And in 2018, he paid no taxes. And what Elizabeth Warren is saying, yeah, I mean, he didn't pay taxes because he had no income. So my solution to that is let's tax wealth. And when people like Elon Musk, their wealth increases, they'd have to pay a lot of taxes. So she tweeted, according to the support, Elon Musk didn't pay any federal tax in 2018. Neither did Jeff Bezos in 2007. From 2014 to 18, the 25 richest Americans got $401 billion richer, but only paid 3.4% of that in federal income taxes. Yeah, because they didn't, that wasn't their income. That was their wealth increase. Now, you know, this guy, Rick Macron, Taco, I guess, wrote for US citizens opposed to the unrealized capital gains tax, which is a form of a wealth tax that Elizabeth Warren was supporting. Here's an example of a tax file and diplomatic letter template I made. You can use it and send it to your elected officials. And what it said was, I'm just opening this thing up, what the letter said was, I expect you to oppose the widened proposal to tax unrealized capital gains, although the proposal targets billionaires and not myself, the government of elected representatives have a track record of scope creep when writing new taxes. I anticipate that any new unrealized capital gains tax will slowly make its way down to middle-class retirement investments over the next several years. It will start with billionaires, then eventually millionaires, then the modest investments will get hit possibly within a decade. Although principals, although principal residences and holding in 401k plans apparently will be excluded, the widened proposal takes new tax sites a further a step closer to opposing unrealized capital gains tax on the average investor. So he wrote that. Musk, Elon Musk, that response to that, he says exactly, eventually they run out of other people's money and then they come for you. So the argument here is not a moral argument against taxing billionaires, not an argument about how productive they are and how much, in a sense, they have already given to all of us to quote society. It's not an argument about it's their property. It's an argument about don't tax them. If you tax them, they're ultimately going to go after you. Now then Musk gets named person of the year, and of course, it lives with one, doesn't like that. So she writes in Twitter, let's change the weak tax code so the person of the year will eventually pay taxes and stop freeloading off of everyone else. And what is Musk's response? He says, you know, stop projecting.  And then he says, you remind me of when I was a kid and my friend's angry mom would just randomly yell at everyone for no reason. And then he says, please don't call the manager on me, Senator Karen. And then he goes back to the original thread, and he posts. And if you open your eyes for two seconds, you would realize I will pay more taxes than any American in history this year. Now everybody went wild. He called Senator Karen. The internet was hugely supportive of Elon Musk. They got excited. Musk is this amazing person. Wow, this is incredible. This is returning fire. As Scott says, this is amazing. But who won that exchange? Who won that short exchange? Well, Elizabeth Juan won it by a mile by a mile. No argument was made against the wealth tax. Musk almost did was go straight to ad hominem. All he did was troll her. There was no argument other than what's his argument? This year, I'm going to pay more taxes than any American has ever paid in history. And you know why he's doing that? Because on a Twitter poll, more people wrote that he should sell stocks so he could pay taxes that people said don't sell stock. Say sold stock so he could pay taxes less legitimizing her claim. Legitimizing the idea that he should be paying taxes on his wealth. So what he did was he turned his wealth into income so he could pay taxes. He basically completely fell into Elizabeth Juan's trap and has for months. He accepts the idea that it's legitimate for them to take our money. He says things like I allocate capital better than they do, which is true. But that's what he should be pushing. It's my money. But instead, you see to win on Twitter is to insult the other side. If you insult the other side, you win. But that's not who wins in life. It's not who wins in politics. You win if you can capture the moral high ground. And Musk did not capture the moral high ground. He gave in to the moral high ground. Oh, I do pay my taxes. Oh, I'll pay more taxes this year than anybody has ever paid in American history. Oh, so it's legitimate to demand that you pay a lot of taxes. Yeah, he should have refused to pay. He should have not sold this stock unless he wanted to sell it for other reasons. He should have not sold this stock and he should not have paid. He should have said I follow the law. The law does not demand me paying taxes when I have no income. In 2018 I had no income, paid no taxes. This year I had X income, I'll pay my taxes. By the way, he should have said, I pay way too much taxes. You should leave the money in my hands because I'm actually productive when you send it to Elizabeth Wan. She's unproductive. She squanders it. She wastes it. She destroys it. And by the way, I have, look how I've changed the world. What has Elizabeth Wan done? What is the last thing she invented? Who was the last person she employed? What part of the world did she make a better place to live? Where, where, where are all the values that Elizabeth Wan has brought to the world? I can point to the values I brought to the world. I can show you the wealth I created for others and for myself. And my wealth is in my stock. And that stock, as he says sometimes in interviews, is not determined by me its value, it's determined by the market. The market says this is what I'm, this is the value I created. I don't know Elizabeth Wan or anything and I don't know the American government anything. And I don't know in society anything. I produced, could I enjoy producing, I produced the values I believed were good. And the only reason they're valuable is because you guys buy them because it makes your life better. That is a moral defense.  And by the way, I pay all the taxes, I pay 11 billion in taxes this year more than anybody's ever paid into. Okay, who cares? Why is any of that relevant? But you see, we're conditioned by Twitter to view any exchange, the winner of an exchange is the one who insults the most, the one who trolls the most. That's the winner. Thank you for listening or watching the Iran book show. If you'd like to support the show, we make it as easy as possible for you to trade with me. You get value from listening, you get value from watching, show your appreciation. You can do that by going to iranbookshow.com slash support by going to Patreon, subscribe star locals and just making a appropriate contribution on any one of those, any one of those channels. Also, if you'd like to see the Iran book show grow, please consider sharing our content and of course, subscribe, press that little bell button right down there on YouTube so that you get an announcement when we go live. And for those of you who are already subscribers and those of you who are already supporters of the show, thank you. I very much appreciate it.


ehicles it's market rate and it may be cheap market rate but it's market rate i i want to appreciate mr biker and mr everett and through mr biker mr jewel for um committing to work with our staff to help develop the toolbox in a way that's feasible and workable we have a great staff i want to repeat what my colleague said about the staff i have the utmost respect for them but getting the real world perspective and experience real world that's not the right way to say it the business perspective and experience i think will be invaluable to help them do that so thank you um i also appreciate the commitment to helping fund the work and um and for the commitment on not redeveloping popular manner for some period of time when i look at this i weigh out the public good in my opinion um and on the one hand uh we've we've heard talk about jobs we know that density is important to um the application for rail and of course the tax base is always important it's important for every tax paying citizen of Durham um and whether whether they're paying their taxes directly or indirectly through their rents on the other hand i do look at affordable housing i think that's an important issue and i also look at an orderly planning process for these transit areas and that's just what i'm weighing out in my mind those are the issues that i see before tonight and what i'm considering thank you other other comments if not i'm declared put here to be closed and that's back for the council on this item entertain a motion on item it's a discussion recognized council member tony yeah i believe the staff report notes that there are 46 additional students that are possible under this rezoning and we usually um ask whether the applicants willing to support support to our school system council member catati thank you for that question to continue in the spirit that the discussion is carried tonight our development our developer will commit to uh five hundred dollars per student to be paid to be paid to the Durham public schools prior to the approval for any site plan containing additional residential units i believe that comes to twenty three thousand dollars although math and lawyers are a dangerous combination and again we'll email that to the planning director in the morning other discussion if not the question has been called amount of clerk we open the vote close close the vote it passes 70 zero thank you let's move to item 19 zoning map change grand ale grand and trace thank you mr mayor and members of council pat young again with the planning department kc 13 00035 grand and trace is a request to change the zoning map designation of 20.05 acres located between herndon road and grand ale drive south of barbie road from rural residential to rural residential the development plan and plan development residential or pdr 3.3 22 and the applicant is committing to a maximum of 54 single family residential units with this proposal this request is consistent with the future land use map the comprehensive plan which identifies the property as low density residential which is four units dwelling units per acre or less and this is just over three units per acre there is an accompanying development plan with this request which has text graphic and design commitments and those are detailed in appendix d table d five of your staff report there was an error in your staff report that i want to correct on the record section g of the staff report entitled infrastructure alludes to a previous development that had provided a roadway improvement proffer at this location the staff reporting correctly identifies a right turn lane on barbie road onto grand ale i think as all of you know there's no segment of grand ale north of barbie so the correct citation in the correct commitment is that right northbound right turn lane on grand ale onto barbie road turning right onto barbie road with adequate storage and taper so i wanted to clarify that for the record and apologize for the air planning staff determines this request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and other adopted policies and ordinances and the planning commission recommended approval at the october meeting by a vote of 10 to 0 i'll be happy to take any questions thank you again this is a public hearing the public hearing was opened i would ask other questions recognize councilman moffett yes i didn't i wasn't quite sure from reading the report i saw that the applicant had proffered paved bicycle lanes for staff they did proffered paved bicycle lanes where they were doing other improvements did would they or they're providing easement for the additional bicycle lanes you know for the the the area in between for future paving or is that like i mean is there a future bicycle lane possible i think you follow my question mr judge address that question bill judge transportation yes the applicant is dedicating enough right away that the bicycle lanes can be constructed for the full frontage they just only proffered the construction for a portion of that frontage okay are there other questions or comments if not we have bill rippley tony tate as proponents and i have george brine so let's let's say 10 minutes i guess if you could state your name and address please mr mayor members of council good evening my name is tony tate i'm a landscape architect and land planner i'm here tonight representing uh region's development um for this case the location of this property is near the intersections of granddale herndon and barbie roads and um early on in this process we we held a neighborhood meeting and we presented the project answered questions to the neighbors that were there they were um i don't know exactly or at least 30 people from the community there spoke of their concerns um several of them came back and followed up with additional meetings and so um we feel like we've addressed all the currents except for one that i think mr brine is going to speak to tonight just an overview on the development it's approximately 20 acres in size we are requesting a pdr 3.3 2 2 with this case um there was a a section of amanda road which was a dirt road that kind of cut across the northern portions of this and it was substandard intersections distances angles and everything so we um had that portion of amanda road was closed in that area to help facilitate this project we are proposing a maximum of 53 units all single family detached units our entrance is directly across from huntsman drive along granddale and we as staff reported we've the plan meets all the adopted plans and fulfills all the requirements of the udo and so we respectfully ask that you consider this case and and um grant approval tonight i'm here to answer any questions so i'd be happy to entertain those thank you could you could you speak to the um maybe staff can speak to the uh tree recovery piece or tree coverage on on this property i know you have a line of trees along granddale drive is it planning to keep those there or move them along granddale the i don't believe the ones along granddale are part of the proposed tree save areas currently well can someone speak to that from the staff if you don't mind steve are so mr mayor you're referring to the uh the buffer along grandale okay all right there there's a tree he called a buffer along grandale from huntsman down to um i guess uh amanda whatever that road is i'm just trying to i'm trying to understand are those trees going to be removed are they going to be saved or what sure give me just one moment to get it i can develop mayor sure if i can speak i can answer that question i think all right thank you just state your name again yes the record uh bill rippley fifty eleven south park driving durham mayor bell members of the council appreciate your time tonight uh in follow-up to your question the i know you're very familiar with the location in the property there is a group of pine trees that are along grandale for most of the frontage our tree save areas are internal to the project near lakehurst point where there is a stream buffer and also on the north side of the project there is no tree tree saver in preservation in the area you're speaking of however there will be required what's called a double frontage buffer that we will have to do some screening landscaping from the backyards to the street so you're going to remove the trees is up your tone yes sir and replace them with what there will be the ordinance requires what double frontage lots to have a screening uh it will we haven't designed it will be designed at site planning we will replant bushes and trees possibly could be also a burn depending on how much topsoil is on the site i'll ask you about that a little bit later uh okay any other comments you want to make on this since you had signed up to speak uh yes i wanted to go ahead and uh save councilmember katati's uh voice i'll i know there's some concern the only concern i'm aware of is uh george bronze concerned about traffic and i'll let him discuss that as his and then i'll be glad to speak to that and answer questions and answer any additional questions council has thank you recognize uh george brine good evening mayor bell and council members my name is george brine and i reside at 6505 hunters lane in Durham and before i get to my remarks i just want to thank council for all their work because i know it's been a long evening it had been my hope that in connection with the proposed development that we could get a badly needed left turn lane on granddale drive at barbie road indeed the developer was willing to work with us on this matter however it now appears that our efforts toward this end were in vain this being the case my hope is that council can find a way to get that left turn lane constructed otherwise i am concerned that we will see an increasing amount of traffic on huntsman drive as impatient drivers cut through our neighborhood in search of alternative routes to their destinations thank you for your consideration to these comments thank you staff have any comments more on that item can someone tell me what are the plans for the roundabout at herndon and barbie road can anyone speak to that uh westley param city's transportation department uh the state department transportation is still um proceeding with the development of the project relocating utilities and uh we'll be moving forward with construction i believe sometime next year so that is a commitment by the ncdot and what impact would that have on traffic in terms of the barbie road and herndon as far as this particular development well i don't expect it would have any benefit to this particular intersection but obviously we'll make improvements at the uh herndon and barbie intersection to provide better traffic control and addressing safety concerns there and ingress egress movements at that intersection but not the one at grand ellen barbie and the question has been raised by george brian in terms of swapping what what was the reaction to that um the request that was made um to us earlier um by the applicant was they basically asked if we would lobby ncdot on their behalf brand cdot to lower their design standard which would be which is to require turn lane into the development in lieu of an offsite improvement and we advised that that wouldn't be an appropriate role for staff to take on a technical matter of that sort that we clearly understand that it is ncdot's policy to require turn lanes into new subdivisions on roads that carry the volume of traffic that currently exist on herndon road we are certainly supportive of both improvements and see that there is certainly a need for both and what about the the turn lane well as i said we would agree that the turn lane at both locations would be appropriate but uh the the turn lane at grand ell is an offsite improvement since this particular development did not rise to the level of triggering or requiring a traffic impact analysis we didn't see that there was a technical basis within the ordinance to require the offsite improvement at grand ell yes we'd certainly agree that there's no doubt that there's a need for the improvement and that's been identified in previous studies including the uh traffic impact analysis done for the 751 south development bill you have any comments on that i'm not in disagreement with you're driving and mr bruns driving that area neighborhood i know you go through that intersection so i don't have the personal experience of driving through and seeing the delay in the more i i assume it's the am left turn lane delay is the biggest delay the street itself is at 46 percent capacity so grand ell drive itself is serving its needs that intersection or proposed improvement is uh as i think pat young mentioned early is a committed element on 751 south to make that improvement so i can't i don't know if that project is something that will be added in a their first two years or five years down the road of when they get to that improvement all i understand is from several staff members of the city that they have been meeting with different folks to get some plans together so i assume they will be excuse me submitting a plan to start their 751 south um that i don't have a schedule i'm not tied into their development plans but none of this you can't do it the size of this 20 acre project and 50 plus or minus houses is really it's an economic burden um a traffic improvement of that nature is probably our estimation is a hundred and fifty thousand dollar cost okay i've been volunteered if it made more logical sense to put it at grand on barbie road and it was more useful i'd be glad to do that in exchange for offset i'm not doing the one at huntsman drive which is maybe not needed as much uh there's a lot of there's a lot of places where there are not left turn lanes and grand ell as you know is a fully developed street section and this is basically the last remaining parcel of a greater than an acre okay i don't want to get too far in this since it does impact my neighborhood i don't want to accuse me of doing something that shouldn't be doing so i'll leave it at that i hope you look at the brine and berm instead of tearing tearing out all those trees but all right any other comments i'm going to close the public hearing recognize councilman davis and councilman marvin thank you mr mayor i guess i need to um i have a question answer about what triggers a traffic light um particularly if it ends up being one that is so close to the proposed roundabout is is it possible that there could be a traffic light uh at the corner of grand ell and barbie again west of parent with the city's transportation department i've not seen any studies or indication that indicates there's a warrant for a traffic signal the studies thus far indicate that there would be a benefit providing a separate left turn lane so that left turning and right turning vehicles would be uh would not be uh impeding the flow of the other but you are also correct that if the intersection were to increase to even greater volumes we would then have to do a traffic signal warrant and one of the concerns that could very well come into play as a proximity to the uh to the roundabout that's downstream but this point of not seeing any numbers that suggests that the intersection would warrant a traffic signal the first improvement that would be necessary would be the provision of a separate left and right turn lane recognize council yes uh this for the planning staff i was looking just looking at the development plan i suddenly realized um that although the project goes to herndon road there doesn't appear to be any access to and from herndon road is that correct that is correct counseling of it then i have a question for mr ripley which is why no access plan for herndon road um as you can see this is a very linear acreage along grand dale road it is part of an existing farm the herndon uh eh herndon farm currently has cows on it and the cow pasture pond area is mostly the east side of this property which is not what we're developing uh the stub to the west if you'll see it just uh just north of huntsman on the west side of the project there is a stub the the reason for that is that when that property is in the future developed it made more sense to align a road there and tie back into herndon north of senator mckissick's house instead of south of senator mckissick's house to the but it looks if i understand right your project includes the land that's south of senator mckissick's house that's correct and are you planning to develop that land that's correct so in order for those people to there is a crossing a potential crossing of the stream for a street to potentially cul-de-sac uh at the south side of the mckissick okay so all these that that's what puts all the traffic out on the granddale right at this time until the future development yes this project would have all its traffic on to granddale okay thank you any other questions not public hearing is closed matters back before the it's been proper moving second and i assume that includes the um profits and except anything else we need to add to that i'm asking the staff on this motion miss oh mr mayor could i clarify your for your earlier question based on um access to the ordinance if there are double frontage lots as as the applicant indicated there would be required to be a burn wall fence or other uh or tree plantings along granddale to soften the visual impact and prevent access directly onto granddale all right thank you madam clerk will you open the vote close the vote it passes six to one with mr moffitt voting no the city attorney reminded me we didn't do we do it on this one also all right entertain the motion it's been properly moving second madam clerk will you open the vote close the vote it passes seven is zero and we need to go back to item 18 also for the consistency vote so move it's been properly moving second madam clerk will you open the vote close the vote it passes seven is zero okay the next item is item 20 zoning map change waffle house no kind of 55 highway z 14 00019 thank you again mr mayor members of council pat young again with the planning department uh this case c 14 00019 waffle house uh nc 55 is a request to change the zoning map designation of um 1.5 acres of property located at 4203 nc 55 highway uh just south of carpenter fletcher road north of meridian parkway from its existing designation of office uh institutional or y to commercial neighborhood uh which would allow for the development of a proposed uh a waffle house restaurant uh the request is consistent with the future land use designation of this property which designates the site as commercial and staff determines that this request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and other adopted policies and ordinances uh and uh planning commission recommends approval uh at its october meeting by vote of 10 to 0 i'm be happy to take any questions this is a public hearing the public hearing is open are there questions of the staff by members of the council if not we have one person that assigned to speak on this item um sharing mattocks is that correct is there anyone else that wants to speak on this item it's being a public hearing if not miss mattocks you have uh five minutes if you need that's plenty uh thank you all for letting me speak today i live at 5816 hinder place which is just outside of the 600 foot whatever that they have to notify people about um i don't know if anybody's ever been through there or not i've had i've lived there 10 years and i've had quite a bit of flooding the most significant was last june when we had the big flood um my house is on a three foot crawl space it got up onto the floor joist under there um i have some wonderful pictures um my concern is that this is close enough to an overflow area this storm water runoff that this could potentially negatively impact not just my house but several others along hinder place and others in this lowland um i don't know if anybody's ever been through there when there's been heavy rains but meridian parkway floods in fact across from the existing waffle house now there is flood water there i'm not really sure why they're moving the waffle house but that's not important now the two things that i have concern about one primarily is the water storm water runoff and second is the traffic impact because there's a lot of traffic going through there now it's very difficult during rush hour especially uh carpenter fletcher isn't it's a two lane road going into 55 but just prior less than a mile above that is four lane woodcroft parkway which merges down into carpenter fletcher and then once you cross over 55 you come up a dead end on south austin and there's no light nothing there and i'd encourage you to go through there at six o'clock in the evening if you've not done that before again i'm not against the waffle house per se but i do think that there needs to be some significant consideration as far as the flooding potential that is there as i said south of meridian parkway in between there and i-40 floods significantly it flooded during the same time that this was june 30th of last year i know from personal standpoint i lost about 13 000 in repairs and all that i had on my house not covered by insurance because i've been told i'm in a low to moderate flood risk and i'm not even required to have flood insurance i do now uh but at the time i didn't and so that's what i'm looking at the other thing is that we did have storm water drum storm water come out and talk with us last year in august and they looked at it they did some reviews and the best thing they could tell us was by flood insurance um due to topography and all like that they were not very encouraging about what that could be done about protecting my property or those are of anybody along hinder place and so that was a little discouraging but i'm trying to do what i can um because it's all i have um i'm not sure what else i can tell you on that but i appreciate your time and consideration uh at least consider the impact this may have one last thing they did tell us that fema is looking at redoing all the flood maps and while they can't tell me anything specifically i got the distinct impression that they're going to put us in a higher flood plane than what we were before and that's going to include that area thank you welcome was just discussed at the planning uh it was not mayor bell um the area in question is not in the flood plane before the area that's before you tonight uh and as i'm sure you're aware and i'm not a storm water engineer or an expert but i know our storm storm water ordinance will require that both in terms of water quality and volume that there not be excess of current condition a runoff at most uh rainfall events and very high intensity rainfall events that there could be some increase um in that the property in meridian parkway and some of the other jason property as you're probably well aware was developed um at a time when we did allow more development in the flood plane now there's almost no development allowed in the flood plane so i think a lot of these historical conditions that i don't there's no information that makes me think that anything on this property would exacerbate or increase or negatively impact um uh the citizen or any of the other property owners nearby this is uh this is tough because i i always have a concern about what happens when we disturb property and create flooding implications i know there is she's speaking about i draft it quite frequently so i'm going to close public here and listen in the comments i'm going to vote against but any any further comments on the side and recognize councilman marford i just wanted to give you i understand your concerns i wanted to give you my own experiences um i'm working on the development of a small grocery store it's on five acres i'm amazed at the storm water facilities are having to be constructed um uh in keeping with the the ordinance requirements that um mr young was talking about so i'm trying to reassure you a little bit on and for that five acres there's two facilities that are underground one of them is over a hundred feet long 30 feet wide and eight feet high and um it's a sand filter they have to maintain it they have to clean it regularly the other one is the is the holding facility so one holds the water for a large rain event and the other filters it before it's let off the site and that's the kind of thing now with the with the you might have been reading the paper about the jordan lake rules and the car uh the falls lake rules and um because we happen to be upstream of both of those major reservoirs with our development requirements now are pretty excessive pretty extensive um so while no one can say with absolute certainty that uh your home what what's Pete were you on hinder place it's a small dead end street i'm on the cul-de-sac at the end 58 16 hinder place uh basically i can see carpenter fletcher across my back street backyard across the ditch that has the storm water runoff okay um in any case while no one can say with any certainty that this won't add to your woes um that it's certainly not the case that they're going to be able to just pave it let the water runoff um so one thing i did come before the council several years ago when there was a company in meridian parkway that was wanting to improve their property and they were just essentially across carpenter fletcher from me and after speaking there they did add an extra condition that they had to accommodate storm water runoff and they did add that as a condition of them at improving their property i don't think they ever actually improved the property but that was very heartening to me that they at least took that under consideration well we'll be rest assured that that the requirements have changed over the last few years have gotten quite a lot more extensive and um people do have to accommodate the runoff today that's good to know that's very encouraging don any other comments if not entertain a motion on the item it's been properly moved by whom the mayor approached him who second uh i'm doing that for the clerk's purpose she wants to know who does the motion in the second uh madam clerk we open the vote close the vote it passes six to one would mayor bail voting no i hope don is right and thanks work out for you mr mayor this is a statement on this one also moved by councilman shul second by the mayor pro tem madam clerk we open the vote close the vote it passes seven is it thank you we'll go back to the items that were pulled i'm sorry we're 20 supplemental i'm okay 22 approval of landlord sort of certificate by the city of Durham for the tenant shana sp associates limited partnership it's been properly moved and second moved by the mayor pro tem second by councilman shul okay well your voice is sounding a lot this time of night all right madam clerk we open the vote close the vote it passes seven is zero okay thank you we'll go back to the items that were pulled items seven from the consent agenda i recognize victoria peterson on this item can can can you come to the microphone miss peterson if you don't mind this is memorials on city property or right of way can i have can he speak on it please could you ask your question so we make sure we address it what do you want to speak on on the policy specifically what is the policy about and then i would like to say something about it both parkerson deputy city manager for operations this policy was developed in response to a council desire for staff to come forward with some guidelines that provides consistency on how we treat memorials that are placed in roadways non-city property throughout the city i would like to just ask mr baker if you could look over at the first page of the policy where it says the treatment and the removal of ununauthorized memorials and if you approve this i believe that's the wrong word because then you are allowing memorials attorney baker to be allowed place on city properties and the public right of way for at least up to 45 days so how i read it it's not going to be i don't think will be unauthorized but it will be authorized so so now after 45 days when that item has been there then you're going to ask the family or somebody to remove it i really have some concerns even about that mr mayor i think it should be at least even a little longer than 45 days but also when i read this if you can't get in touch with the family or the person that put it there then the city government will remove it itself i think we should encourage somewhere on that memorial that there be a name and address of somebody that has left this memorial there that if the city wants to get in touch with them that they can and also if now what the city is saying to the public that you can put a memorial on city property or either the public right away as long as it's not blocking or hurting or either offending somebody you can do that for 45 days that's what this is saying to me and i don't know if that's what you really want to say here but anyway when you say now that you're calling it unauthorized that will no longer be true it will be authorized they have up until 45 days so attorney baker who i think is doing a good job in this city uh in interpreting the law and our policies what do you think about this is this do they need to change that wording there this peter said i i've had an issue with my machine up here so i'm borrowing the mayors now could you point to me directly it's in the purpose yes i got it out of from your city council book i just have a question of that first sentence there by them using the word unauthorized because this policy this new policy will authorize it i'm not confused with it i'm not sure if if the staff is confused or that's just not my reading of what you just said so when a citizen reads this are you saying now that you have put something in place for memorials if this is adopted yes excuse me if this is adopted yes that's that was the purpose of the policy okay so should not you not change that word since this will be considered an authorized memorial not every memorial that's placed will be author automatically authorized well if this memorial here is speaking forward on city property and the public right away the only way that it will not be if it is blocking particularly the plot the public right away how i read it is any other comments of questions on the side i guess is she does this piece to understand that we're talking about voluntary placement not a a a memorial that would be to or to a hero or something that this is just spontaneously prompted by people who may have been killed along that way these voluntary memorials is what we're talking about here yes but you're speaking this one here is for government property that the city owns i mean where i live at we have quite a few memorials over at meduca terrorists right there on the corner that's been there for some time of young men that have been killed i i do understand that it's just my concern about how this one is reading and and mr bonfield you've mentioned excuse me what you're doing the motion on the item please it's been properly moved by councilman moffitt said by councilman brown madame clerk we open the vote close it up it passes seven zero and miss peteerson you had item 13 13 is FY 2014 jane byron bern criminal justice innovation program planning grant award yes the city receives a lot of federal monies um dealing with crime and my friend chiefs um um uh my my service chief service who's uh very good chief here in dermis and i wanted to i had some concerns about this um i know that the community we have a lot of crime going on and i know we need to have research and data i just have some concerns why are we using a university in the greensboro area to collect that data the criminal data to we we know what kind of problems we have here in derm with crime um i really would have loved to seeing these dollars used to really work with our young people that are seriously have gotten involved in criminal activity in criminal activity in this community and the police department can partner and i've mentioned this several years ago when particularly these funds when they get the funds from the federal government they can partner with nonprofit organizations that are doing things here in the community to try to get a handle on the crime i don't know um steve and ed we've had a lot of gun shooting over the last week or so here in derm over the end of mcduke terrorist area as well in some of the other areas i don't understand why so much of our federal monies are not really used to address these problems and develop programs a hundred and some thousand dollars uh a percentage of that is going to be given to uh to the university of north canline in greensboro uh to do some research on the census track 10.01 uh i would like to know what track that is would like to know why north canline the center university was not called upon they have a criminal justice department they have a law school over there uh if we're going to use these dollars to collect data um my understanding uh i'm hoping after that's done that this city council uh will get that report another report to tell us that we have crime in derm another report to tell us we have murder going on in derm and robbery i don't understand why we need so many reports so much dollars are going out instead of mr mayor and city council members bring some people together in this community and developing the kind of programs for our young men and women to get them out of the crime where are the jobs for our young boys where are the jobs for our young men mr mayor and the other city council where is that program developed thank you miss peterson uh could uh chief service uh respond to why the grant has been used with university of north canline greensboro plus i see other city and county agencies yes good evening ed service with the police department um this this was a referral from the u.s attorney's office to use the university of north canline at greensboro because they do that specific type of research here so it did not require a request for proposal you uh i recognize councilman moffitt yes i just wanted to point out that um is that let me ask how many local dollars how many city of derm dollars will go into this project none none and that and that if we if we participate in this then we can apply there's a million dollars in funding for implementation that we can apply for and if we don't participate in it then we're just out of luck correct right okay thank you okay at the proper time i'll be happy to move in i'm talking to motion or night so move it's been properly moved by councilman moffitt's i'm gonna buy mayor pro tem madam clerk we open vote close the vote it passes seven zero thank you are there any other items coming for the council at this time mr mayor recognize city clerk yes i miss spoke on item number 16 as far as the vote has to do with the unipole free standing wireless mayor pro tem voted no not yes okay that's one to clarify that am i correct mayor protein any other items if not the meeting is adjourned at 10 25 p.m thank you