CBJ Comprehensive Plan Update | Advisory Committee Meeting #3

I promise we're starting right at 5 because we have a lot to get through and we've heard from people from past meetings that we feel like there's not always enough time, which there's not, but we don't want to have 3-hour meetings. So we're just going to try to start right on time and do our best to give ourselves as much space as we can. So thanks everybody for being here on time and for being here on such a beautiful day. I know at least we have big windows to enjoy a little vitamin D. And hopefully we'll get out of here before the sun goes down, which should— we'll be out by 7:00. So, all right, this is Advisory Committee meeting number 3.

This is our third one and we're about 8 months into the project. We've been up to a lot, which we'll get into a little bit. So our agenda for today is— did you all receive your emails with materials? Okay, awesome. Thank you.

I know we're giving you some homework. We really appreciate you doing it. This is another thing that'll give us more time in the meeting so that we don't have to go over a lot of material. Welcome. Welcome.

Okay, great. So everyone received their materials. So we're going to review those revised guiding principles that I sent. Then we're going to talk about, start talking about scenario planning. We're about to launch into the phase that we call imagining possibilities, which is where we do a lot of the scenario planning work.

So I'm going to give you a little bit of background on it now. And the next time we come, which will likely be probably October or early November, September, we're gonna dive even deeper into it and start, and we're gonna be doing the scenario planning game and workshop. And then we're, we're gonna spend the bulk of tonight, about an hour having a discussion about resilience strategies, which you all also should have gotten those materials. I will give you a few minutes to review them because it's just a lot of material. You might need to refresh your memory even if you just looked at them.

So we'll have a few minutes to review those and then we're gonna have about an hour to discuss those and the critical uncertainties. And I'll, I'll give you better instructions than that once activity starts.

What questions? Okay, let's jump right into the guiding principles then. So I sent you a revised version of the guiding principles, and those have been revised based on the feedback we got from our second meeting, um, and, uh, sort of work sessions that we did with staff to, to make those revisions. Um, so Really, the questions we have for you are, do these updated guiding principles accurately reflect the feedback that you gave? Is there anything you felt like you heard or you were saying that, you know, really isn't reflected in the guiding principles?

Keeping in mind that these are high level, we're not trying to get into like nitty-gritty details. That'll come later, right? And then is anything missing or unclear? Okay, so that's— those are the questions to keep in mind, and we kind of ask people to think about what comments they had ahead of time. We've got a board up here, and we do have— this is a hybrid meeting, by the way, so we have a couple folks online.

I think we have 2 AC members online, and so we'll try to— we've got 4 AC members online, so we'll try to be mindful of them as well. And Sarah's moderating online. Sarah, let us know if you have any trouble hearing or seeing, um, what's going on. But so we've got a Miro board up with all of the guiding principles. This is the updated version.

Obviously they're pretty hard to see, um, but you all have a copy as well. Um, and we're gonna take notes. Um, we have about 15 minutes, um, for discussion. Does anyone wanna open with any comments on any of these guiding principles?

We're just gonna—. Any comments you have. I mean, we could, we could go through and just ask, like, anyone have a comment on this one? That's what this one does. That thing, that helps.

I have no idea what these switches do. Okay. You're dark. No.

Yeah, we can go through them one by one. Why don't we do that? So our first one is lifelong well-being and family support. Any comments on this one? Anything missing?

Anything not hitting us right?

One comment that I had is that strong schools seems pretty, I wanna say generic as a term. Like what does strong mean? Are we talking about well-funded schools, well-supported teaching staff? Seems like a little bit more targeted detail in terms of what would make a strong school. And I know these are high level, so it's a balance, right, between getting too far into the nitty-gritty, but it seems like a little bit more definition would make sense.

Huh? Okay. Comments on this one? I'll also note that you're welcome to follow up with comments things trickle in or new thoughts come after this discussion. And we have an open survey right now for the guiding principles.

There's actually a flyer right here with the QR code for the, for the survey. It has the full guiding principles on it with an opportunity for you to leave feedback on any. Obviously, this is a much more like personal way for you all to give us feedback, but That's another way to give feedback. I just want to put that out there.

So I'm not hearing anything else on this guiding principle. Should we move to the next?

Yeah. All good on that one? Yeah, I think we just need to paraphrase what we're hearing because folks can't hear us. So if you want to just repeat what folks are saying. Yeah.

All right. Oh, sorry. The question I had, um, for the Housing for All, uh, young families, seniors, people with lower moderate incomes all need affordable, appropriate, and desirable places to live. The word desirable was confusing to me. I don't remember where that came from in the conversation or what that meant.

My recollection of that is we have a lot of— part of the conversation that I was involved in was that we have a lot of, um, uphouser, uh, places for folks to stay that aren't really, uh, they're rented as a, as a living space but are like substandard. I mean, we know that, that Some of them are not safe places or are—. But it's more like hot plates and rather than a kitchen, a kitchen, hot plates and shared bathrooms, those kinds of things. So yes, substance. And that was part of the—.

And desirable isn't a room with a view. It's a room with running water. I mean, when I think of desirable, Yeah, like there, there's housing that is honey buckets. And, and I'm, I'm just— so depending on who you are, what is desirable to you may be very different than those of us with the, uh, you know, wherewithal to join a group such as this. And so, um, I, I think, you know, there, there are many people who, uh a hot plate in the shared bathroom is a step up from their current living situations.

And I, I just, I, I guess, you know, it's not— we're really very on— this is just like, what does a nice community look like? That's the level we're at, you know. None of this is really super specific to Juneau. I think everyone probably wants most of these things anywhere. But, you know, I, I guess I just, I get concerned, like, as this works its way into a more defined plan, that we don't do something up front that has the unintended consequence of making it more difficult to do something, uh, that is, is needed even though it's not necessary.

There's a lot of triage that's not pretty, but it needs to be done. Um, and so like, you know, if, you know, there are some communities where they have like, you know, beauty standards for the housing that gets built. That would be a step backwards for Juneau. Uh, you know, there's, there's just so much need out there that we can't afford to be thinking at that level, at least in my opinion. So I guess I just stay careful about being too adjective-y.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. I think that's definitely a pitfall that we have to be careful about with guiding principles is we don't want to be so specific that we're limiting ourselves or not allowing ourselves to be flexible, but we also want enough specificity that it's clear. And it's actually gonna be actionable. I think there's two pieces of this thing desirable. So there's, I mean, and desirable maybe is not totally appropriate for this first thing, but the first thing I'm hearing is it needs to be safe and functional.

And then it also needs to be appropriate, meaning it needs to be something that meets someone's needs. And in some cases that could be an SRO, like a, but meaning like a single room with a shared bathroom and kitchen because you just need something affordable. Maybe you're a single person, you know, that transitional housing. I mean, go talk to St. Benny's and what they need is the best, right? And you know, that may not be their ideal dream, but that's some— that is safe housing that is appropriate enough for what they need.

Um, and you know, others might really need a big house because they have a large family or they have that preference. Um, other.

People maybe are recently retired or disabled or maybe need something a little smaller with less care. So I think there's a level of like what's appropriate and do we have enough options for all the people in our community who have a variety of different needs and preferences? And then just a baseline of it has to be safe and functional housing, right? So I think we'll, we'll work on wordsmithing that, but thank you for all that. Anything else on housing for all before we move on to economy?

One word that I might throw out there is adequate. We hear that in housing policy places sometimes. It's very similar to appropriate.

It's kind of what you're talking about, especially in terms of amount of housing. Okay, great.

All right, let's move on to resilient. Oh yes, I'm sorry, go ahead. Um, my name is Logan. Where are the name tags? They are right on the table.

Uh, I guess the, the, the, that first sentence, like, needs more housing, kind of sticks out to me a little bit because, um, just, I know there's like a, there's a lot of push towards like building more housing, um, and I think it's also important that we make more of the housing that we have accessible. And I just wonder if that phrase— like with the Airbnbs and things like that, people are pretty aware of those issues, but like there's a lot of housing in Juneau that could be made more accessible to people that live here, but it's not. So yeah, so the comment just for the folks online who are having trouble hearing is that, um, saying we need more housing, um, is implying that we just need to build and build and build and that will solve housing problems. But there's also So kind of this piece of the housing we have needs to be, you know, like we need to make the best of what we have as well, I guess is kind of what you're saying. And use what we have to its fullest.

Am I capturing? I feel like there's a piece of what you said I may be missing. Yeah, maybe just the word like accessible or accessible. Yeah. So it's not just about housing production.

It's also about other things. Yeah, policy that supports affordable housing.

I just want to put out, I don't know that accessible is necessarily the best word in that instance, since that typically means ADA compliance. It's got a lot of specific meanings behind it. I get what you're going for, but that may not be the right word. Available, maybe? Attainable.

I think we had attainable in here and we removed it. Might have taken it out, so we'll have to continue thinking about that.

Okay, so that said, the general accessibility of Juno is kind of also—. Could probably— yeah, it would be helpful to be in there. All right, let's— there's a point raised about just the accessibility of Juno as a whole. Just for folks online. Okay, so resilient year-round local economy.

Do we have any comments on any changes, updates that have happened in this one? And for me, reading sort of the last sentence there, improving infrastructure such as the ferry system, broadband internet, and the local food system, for me, what I've heard a lot about is the shipping options that plays into a lot of the problems for businesses for building, building construction, the cost of living. And so having more competitive ways of shipping large goods into town, that's a big constraint. Yeah. So for the folks online, the comment was that having better shipping infrastructure can really support local businesses.

We can hear people that speak up, so just speak up and then we can save a little time paraphrasing. Thank you. The broadband part, CBJ did that project and free Wi-Fi for— is it just for summer? I can't remember now, but that does help a lot with all of our issues, people downloading things for free. So is that—.

What do we mean by broadband in Dimet? Yeah, it's like fast internet. Yeah, reliable. Reliable. Yeah, yeah, remote work.

Yeah, I don't know.

For me under this, employee retention is so huge. Like, it's so expensive to get someone up here trained, and then all of a sudden they can't find childcare or what. Like, you've invested this much. So, and that's kind of in there, but it retains young people as mentioned, but employee retention, especially for city, state jobs and all the way around. But so maybe retains young people in the workforce for a year-round workforce.

And that really also includes recruitment. Um, I had a conversation, we had a conversation at the hospital board that, um, we have lost a handful of professionals that we've tried to recruit, they've accepted the job, they got all the way to, we're moving up here, and they could not have find housing. Um, so they declined the job. So, um, recruiting professionals that are willing to move to Juneau and find a place that's appropriate for them and their families and their dogs, um, has Uh, is a big barrier. Yeah, for— I mean, not just the hospital, but I know it's citywide.

The school district has 90 openings. I mean, like, that seems significant. And this— I mean, this all ties directly into housing, right? Like, it's really a housing issue. Housing and childcare are the largest hurdles for—.

And that is covered in Housing for All to some extent, but we can try to tie that into economy. As well. Well, I guess I'm—. I would just be curious what, um, what other people think. But like, does everyone believe that we— that, you know, that to remain economically viable, Genome must continue to grow?

I guess I kind of— I don't know if that's necessarily true. That's kind of like a one economic assumption, but I think there's a lot of ways to have a sustainable, resilient economy. I would think for if the population that is here now that is aging stays and aims to stay in Juneau, that yes, there would need to be growth enough to be able to provide the essential services at the rate that's required to be able to facilitate that, those folks staying at the very least. I'd say that, you know, piggyback on the demographic thing, even You know, so we have a population that is aging out and retiring. If we don't grow the younger population to at least, you know, kind of match that, you know, it's challenging to grow the younger population.

All these people came here because of a big economic boom, which was, you know, state government and all that hiring. And so we're gonna— it's either— it's really hard to tread water. I think our options are shrink or grow. I I would not have much faith in our local politicians managing level city population and economic environment. But one thing I wanted to say just on the year-round jobs, I would personally say year-round job opportunities, and I'm just going to give a little example here, but you know, as the tourism season got longer and longer, I started to meet people here that had made the choice to overwinter in Juneau, and sometimes they were a barista, they were a yoga instructor, or whatever.

And they were— I'd ask them, you know, what made you decide to stay this year? Because they had been past seasonal employees, and they said, well, you know, we made enough money in the season, we think we're going to stick it out and give it a try. And then I, I watched, uh, you know, policy beyond constricting the length of the tourism season. And, and, uh, you know, so it's one of those things where we actually have an opportunity to you know, make it easier for these seasonal employees to become full-time community members. I certainly like the people I met that were doing this.

They have the adventurous spirit that, like, I mean, I like these people. But, you know, it is a kind of political question where, you know, we've gone against that. We kind of said we don't want this. But, you know, that is one way to turn seasonal jobs into more year-round stuff, is to lengthen that season. And we're going to be talking a lot about more specific policies.

What we're talking about right now, in fact, today we are going to, and I want to save time for that. Sure. But so I just want to like kind of refocus us on these are like real high-level guiding principles, right? So that's, we're kind of at a point where we want to make sure that we're just not missing big themes, and then we're going to dive into some more. You're talking about impact tourism and So that kind of piece is going to be a big part of what we're going to talk about later today.

Yeah. When I read the heading of this, number 3, resilient year-round economy, it makes me think about Juneau's seasonal economy related to the legislative session and then tourism. So just not calling out those two specific seasonal things within this sort of makes me think a lot of people reading this plan later will wonder why they aren't mentioned as within each guiding principles.

Um, I don't remember discussing that with our groups, but, um, maybe it's worth including within these. That we have a strong legislative session economy, we have a strong summer 5-month tourism economy. What can we do to improve the shoulder seasons? Yeah, and maybe to the point around growth, because I, I hear maybe the hesitation of like, I think so many of us are here in Juneau because we love the connection to the outdoors and kind of the small town spirit that comes with that. So maybe prefacing it with sustainable growth, recognizing there needs to be some demographic shift to be able to support a healthy, sustainable aging process for the population that's already here, but not wanting a large influx or large demographic change or large shift in kind of the land that's being developed.

Yeah, I'm going to move us along because we are running behind. So I'm sorry. Thank you, Lydia. Yes. The time police today.

Okay, environmental. And remember also, we can, we have opportunities to leave comments via email if there, if anything else comes up. So environmental protection and climate leadership. Yeah, I have a comment and it's related to the last sentence there. It says achieving greater energy independence, especially through skinny fiber power, is critical to the Israeli future.

I would say that calling out, especially through expanded hydropower, is way too narrow and is only, you know, one part. There's a lot of additional hydropower that could be developed out there. I guess my suggestion would be to replace that with fostering a cost-effective local clean energy system, or clean energy. And the reason being is You know, if the reason hydropower is such a great resource is that it's, it's cost effective, right? I mean, people are making the shift to electric vehicles and they're making the shift to heat pumps and, and those sorts of things because it's economic.

So trying to make sure that we are fostering a local clean energy economy goes a little bit beyond just adding more hydro. It's taking care of what we have now, looking at energy efficiency. So That would be my suggestion. Yeah. Just to expand on that, I think that one way to think about CBJ's potential ways to influence that is to think about— well, maybe a tighter phrase is beneficial electrification.

So there is something called, for instance, economic development strategy. Basically, what can CBJ do to encourage beneficial electrification? There's a lot of things there. But that beneficial, the affordability, right, for people and also predictability, things, EVs and EVs versus other types of energy use.

I would suggest adding, so it says allowing responsible use of natural resources and then it has fishing, mining, and tourism, potentially adding recreation because even without tourism, recreation would still have an economy here. You know, people in Juneau are still going to rent kayaks or ride bikes, things like that.

All right, let's move on to connected community and neighborhoods. Any comments on this one?

Then culture and community again.

Maybe just a positive comment. I felt like you guys made some really nice changes on this, and it feels like a little bit more cohesive reflecting on some of the thoughts from folks. So yeah, I appreciate that. Thank you.

Okay, well, seeing no more comments on those two, any final comments? I know that we went through that quickly, but I want to make sure we have enough time for the larger discussion that's going to get into some more detailed policy. Yeah, I wonder if some of the comments about aging demographics could be incorporated into guiding principle number 1. Mhm. I was thinking that, and maybe some of the employee recruitment and retention housing issues could be incorporated in guiding principle number 2.

Mhm. Yeah, I think there's a lot of overlap there. So I think when we're considering those comments, you all, I think 1, 2, and 3, those top 3 have a lot of overlap and a lot of connection. And so we'll think about how can we, you know, hopefully balance the 3, you know, housing calls very long right now, may get longer. So, you know, we'll try to, that is certainly very central to a lot of Juno's issues as we know.

But we also, it's very tied to like family support, lifelong well-being, retaining employees, the economy. So, You know, we may kind of— we'll make sure everything is in here somewhere and hopefully in the appropriate category.

Sorry, are these ranked? No. 1 Through 6? Okay. No, no, no.

It's just a number that's assigned to them. So I mean, I don't even think we'll put a number to them, but I was just calling them 1, 2, 3, so I didn't have to read the title. Gotcha. Yeah. Yeah, no ranking.

They're not— there's not like a priority.

Right. Well, let's move on. Thanks for that second round of comments. Again, feel free to email us. The survey will be open through the end of September, so over a month.

We encourage your family and friends to do that as well. And you, you all are welcome to fill that out if you have anything additional that comes up. Okay, so let's talk about scenario planning. So we've kind of alluded to scenario planning. We've talked about it, we've looked at the project schedule, but we haven't really gotten into detail about what it is or how the approach works.

So scenario planning is a tool that we use for long-range planning, like comprehensive plans. And the reason that we use it is because we want to be able to test our policies that we put forward against a lot of, against a lot of potential future uncertainty because we know that the future is uncertain. We could go to the next slide. So a traditional long-range planning approach assumes that past trends are just gonna continue. It thinks, we think, okay, we know what's happened in the past and that's what's gonna continue happening in the future.

So it's a linear assumption, right? And that misses emerging trends and things that are uncertain that we can't predict. And it reduces the useful life of a plan because a plan can kind of, you know, if a plan isn't accounting for things that are unexpected or uncertain, then when those things— when and if those things occur, it's not addressing them adequately. So that puts communities in a disadvantaged position in the future. With the scenario planning approach, it helps us make a plan that's responsive to a whole variety of future conditions.

In this graphic, we're calling— we're using using the term macro forces, but you all, in our first meeting, we talked about drivers of change, which if you'll remember, are kind of emerging issues or trends that are happening that could have a big impact in the future. We sometimes we can predict them or they're fairly predictable. Other times they're very unpredictable. You know, things like recessions, political shifts, economic shifts, social unrest, infectious disease. And so we, instead of having a linear approach where we assume everything's gonna be the same, we have this kind of approach where we look at a lot of potential future uncertainties or threats.

We start with driving forces and we use those to test the policies that we're gonna put forward in the comprehensive plan.

So why include scenario planning in a comp plan process? Well, it raises awareness of these emerging trends that may impact the community. It minimizes blind spots in the plan and increases its useful life. It focuses the discussion on policies that will help the community to manage risk. So, you know, it allows us to kind of do a better job of planning for things that could potentially happen.

And so having sort of that buffer of that plan. If those eventualities occur. And then it also provides a reference case for what could happen if policies stay as they are. So it kind of allows us to look at what happens if we just do business as usual and don't change things. And then what if we actually like try new things?

So it allows us to kind of play and test with different— play with and test different policies.

Yeah, I have a question about this. This is sort of about this, but the process in general. So some of the things that we're talking about are going to involve a, um, a culture shift of, of in this community, the folks that have really wanted Juneau to stay the same and nothing to change. And, uh, those, and, but can be educated about what we're trying to accomplish. Are—.

Is that part—. Is the comprehensive plan process including— does it include assisting the community as a whole to make that slow or.

Faster culture shift that's going to be necessary to sustain ourselves? Yeah, that's a great question. So one of the things I really like about scenario planning is it is an educational tool, and it's a way to put everyday people in the position, in the seat of a planner, and help them to understand the, like, trade-offs that we grapple with. Because it's like, you know, if everyone agreed on the way we should move forward, the way we should grow, the, the things we should invest in, then planners might not even need to exist, right? What we grapple with a lot is many, many different priorities, many different points of view and needs.

And we kind of have to find some place where we can have enough consensus or, you know, the least amount of harm done so that like the best balance we can between all these kind of different needs. And that's something that scenario planning kind of allows us to think through. So we'll talk about this a little bit more, a little bit today and a little bit more next time. But what we're doing with scenario planning ultimately is creating ways to explore different ways to grow. So we, we have a business as usual scenario.

This is when we get into the actual land use scenarios. Business as usual is just like, this is how we're already doing things. This is what happens if we don't change anything. And then we have 3 alternative scenarios, which are ways that we could grow, ways that we could do land use that are all very different. You know, maybe one looks at if we really concentrated growth on Douglas, or one is maybe we really focus growth in downtown to support more tourism and the ports downtown.

Maybe one is looking at having dispersed kind of centers around Juneau. You know, I'm just throwing some things out there, but we have different ways of looking at these different ways of growing, and we actually have metrics that we can produce from the modeling that'll tell us how they perform in things like transportation access, water consumption, land consumption, public health, vehicle emissions. And so we can kind of look at how each of these, we can look at where these growth things would happen on a map and think about that and think about if that matches our values. Then we can also look at how it actually stacks up in terms of performing in things that are important to us like energy consumption, water consumption, public health. So it's a way of, you know, maybe I like, I really don't want to see Douglas Island grow at all.

I don't want to see any development out there. But maybe in that scenario, you know, housing becomes more affordable because it unlocks more space for housing. I mean, I'm just very hypothetical. Or, you know, I really feel like downtown shouldn't grow. Anyway, like, there's different, there's way different ways to evaluate scenarios that kind of take you out of a fixed position about how you think things could be because we're looking at those metrics that evaluate them and we're grappling with tradeoffs.

And ultimately the public actually gets to weigh in on which of those scenarios. And yeah, so how does the public participate? This next slide. So the public explores tradeoffs for how different scenarios perform against critical uncertainties. And then ultimately they actually get to vote on the scenario that they prefer based on the report card for each scenario.

So looking at metrics. And asking ourselves, do they meet the values that we've stated for our community? I would also— I appreciate that, and it will go a long way, but I would also somehow, if not through this process, through ongoing communications from CBJ, once we've selected a scenario, continue the education process for the community that didn't choose to weigh in on and vote, um, so, so we don't have the, uh, loggerheads between, uh, current property owners or residents and the, um, the city and borough, uh, who is implementing what the majority of those who voted selected. Sure. Yeah.

Yeah. Thank you for that comment. So let's talk about— yes. I have an additional question about that. How does like that modeling framework incorporate like that additional uncertainty of like human action?

So this is like guiding CBGA action. Like there's a lot of property owners that— or there's like not necessarily all of the space would be guided by CBGA policy. So how did that uncertainty get incorporated into like the output of that model? You mean the uncertainty of like, for example, what like a private property owner would do? I mean, you know, there's certain things.

So we'll talk about this when we get to the critical uncertainties, but there are certain things that are out of the control of the internal, like, organ— like the public sector. And we cannot control what Gold Belt does with their property. I mean, you know, there are, there are levers we can pull to maybe have some control, but there are, you know, there's Alaska Native settlement land that the city does not own or have control over. There's a lot of private land that the city, but we do, I mean, the ultimate product of the comp plan is a land use map and land use does, you know, does inform zoning code updates, which is our development code and that you know, has— that regulates how we use land in different ways. And so in that sense, we're kind of directly impacting that.

I think it kind of meant more so in exploring the different scenarios. So you said if we like are identifying these driven factors, then we're exploring the different potential scenarios and we get output from like a modeling framework, but we can't incorporate all of these different landowners priorities? And so, like, how do we know that the output is actually somewhat reflective of what these policies are? We actually can. Yeah, so in the modeling software, it's parcel-based.

So, like, we can control or, you know, change or, you know, say, like, we know this parcel is set to develop. And so this is, you know, like, that can be an assumption in the modeling process. If we know for sure that something's going to happen or that it's likely to happen, we can test it. We can look at if it's not going to develop versus if it is. So it's— that's all something that we can customize.

Yeah, and I know there's a lot of technical pieces that, um, if we had 5 hours I could walk you through and it'd make a lot more sense, but hopefully that at least, um, kind of clears things up enough that we can, um, kind of, uh, get like start to— this is all going to hopefully start to kind of come into, to focus a little bit. So this is just a diagram that's showing the 5 steps of scenario planning, and we're not gonna talk about all 5 of them today, but we're gonna talk about a couple that are gonna get us to the point where we're gonna start talking about the resilience strategies. The first step of scenario planning is to develop the driving, the drivers of change, which if you all remember, we did in our very first meeting. So Um, we can go to the next slide. Um, the next slide.

Thanks. Um, oh, actually, let's— we know what drivers of change are, right? They're like emerging trends that could potentially really significantly influence the future. We developed a set of drivers of change, um, by talking to over 25 local subject matter experts in interviews, um, and then also with you all in that first meeting that we had. Um, and then we, through those interviews and our meeting with you, we developed 10 top drivers of change.

So this came kind of directly from the work that you were a part of, and these are the top 10 drivers of change. The fiscal, um, stability and revenue sources, population and migration trends, housing affordability and development capacity. Climate change and environmental hazards, healthcare access and aging population needs, workforce recruitment and retention, tourism and its spillover effects, transportation and infrastructure vulnerabilities, federal and state political decisions, and the changing viability of traditional industries.

So all 10 of those drivers of change will be, you know, part of our comprehensive plan process. They'll be things that we consider as we're developing our policies and goals. For the land use scenarios that we're creating, what we want to get to is 3 critical uncertainties that are going— that have been developed from these 10 drivers of change. And so the critical uncertainties are used to test and evaluate the policies, the potential policies that we would put forward for scenario planning testing. So these are like land use or development policies specifically.

And we use the critical uncertainties to test how a given strategy performs across a range of different potential or plausible futures, which are the critical uncertainties.

So critical uncertainties, um, are external forces, which means they originate from outside of an organization. So that means they are not things that the city has direct control over.

Control over or can influence or change. They necessitate adaptation and transformation, and they're variables with the greatest potential impact, and their outcomes are unknown.

So the critical uncertainties that we chose for Juneau for this scenario planning, the scenario, land use scenarios, are tourism and its spillover effects, climate change and environmental hazards, and federal and state funding and policy decisions. And that last one's actually a combination of 3 drivers of change, which were the transportation and infrastructure vulnerabilities, federal and state policy decisions, and state fiscal stability and revenue sources. We felt like those 3 were very connected, um, and all very important. Um, and so we combined them into one.

So the step after defining our critical uncertainties or choosing our critical uncertainties is to actually test strategies. So resilient strategies are policies or actions that are designed to perform well against the range of our critical uncertainties. So resilient strategies are designed again to, to respond well, ideally to more than one critical uncertainty.

And, you know, not just one predicted outcome.

So with that, I'm hoping that we can move into the actual description of the critical uncertainties and get you a little break before we start the activity. But are there any questions before we do that?

Okay, I know this is a lot of information. You're probably absorbing a lot. Um, so I'm going to read a little description of each of the critical uncertainties, and then we're going to take a break where I'm going to let— I'm going to pass out the cards with the 15 strategies, which hopefully you all have already seen from your email. But we're going to take, um, maybe 5 to 7 minutes to read those, and if you need to get up, stretch, get some water, you can do that too. And then we're gonna talk about which of these strategies we think would be beneficial or effective in each critical uncertainty.

Okay, so let's read the 3 critical uncertainties, and I want you to have these in your mind when we're looking at these strategies, thinking about how these strategies would work under these critical uncertainties. So the first is tourism and its spillover effects. It remains uncertain whether the city can successfully manage the negative impacts of its cruise ship industry, like downtown congestion and strained infrastructure, while avoiding the decline of the local economy. The city is highly dependent on tourism, and a reduction in visitors due to either new regulations or an unforeseen event would have major ripple effects. And this begs the question, can tourism be managed effectively to protect Juneau's residents' quality of life and its natural environment without compromising the businesses and jobs that rely on a steady flow of tourists.

And the second critical uncertainty is about climate change and environmental hazards. So it's uncertain whether the increasing risk of natural disasters like landslides, floods, and extreme weather events can be effectively managed. CVGA faces a difficult challenge in protecting its residents and infrastructure as long-term ecological shifts such as changing snowpack and unpredictable salmon populations, create new and uncertain threats. And this raises a question: how will Juneau plan for safety and adapt its key industries to a rapidly changing and less predictable environment?

And then finally, federal and state funding and policy decisions. So uncertainty with state and federal funding and policy decisions creates instability. Impacting funding and support for essential infrastructure like roads and bridges and transportation services like the ferry system, as well as emergency management. This exacerbates issues with Juneau's existing infrastructure, which is aging and vulnerable to natural hazards. So this begs the question: will state and federal funding and policy decisions largely beyond local control effectively address Juneau's needs?

Or will the community face ongoing challenges due to limited influence?

Okay, so let's keep those 3 critical uncertainties in mind. We're gonna take a break, maybe like a 7-minute break.

And then you can stretch your legs, get a little water if you need to. But I'd also like you— and if you've already reviewed these 15 strategies and you feel like you know them, forwards and backwards, you can take the whole 7 minutes. Do whatever you want. Um, go ahead, I can do it then. Um, um, so for— I'm gonna pass— this is a stack of the 15 strategies, and if you have any new strategies that you think of, um, that aren't on here, we've got a blank strategy card.

You're welcome to write on these or take notes. Go one by one and two.

Okay, I was like, I didn't get this. Yeah, yeah, that's our strategy. Yeah, I think we haven't seen it. I got email one and then it said email two would follow. Yeah, yeah, I don't know.

I got it. I got it.

In the section. Okay, so for online folks, we will be emailing you the list of resilience strategies. And you can take maybe 5 to 7 minutes to go ahead and review that. There's a sheet there with all the strategies on it. It should be the third page.

And so we're going to review those and then go over them together. Thank you.

So keep an eye out for that in your inbox. Thank you.

[FOREIGN] All right, online folks, hopefully you can hear us. We're just wrapping up our little study session here in about 2 minutes, so get ready to come back and we're going to jump into the conversation.

Right. So we're gonna go ahead and get started with the discussion, and I just want to let folks online know that you can raise your hand or unmute, um, if you have a comment. We haven't had any online folks take the opportunity to comment yet, but we're— you're welcome to do so, and we'll try to keep an eye on, on you.

Call as we're having this conversation. Okay, so we're gonna use an online whiteboard called Miro to go through the strategies and talk about which of, for each critical uncertainty, which of the strategies we think could perform well or work well for that strategy, or for that, sorry, that critical uncertainty. And just to be clear, These strategies can— we can say one strategy could work for all 3 critical uncertainties. In fact, that's kind of what we're hoping to identify, strategies that might work well across all 3. So don't feel like you have to choose one for each strategy, or I'm sorry, for each critical uncertainty.

So we're actually gonna use a voting tool to just get like an initial temperature check of what people, which strategies people think would work well. Um, for each critical uncertainty. And we're going to start with—. Can I ask you a quick clarifying question? Like, when you say work well, do you mean like actually— like, some of these strategies I see as like they would be nice but highly unlikely to actually be achieved.

And then there's some of these that are like within the locus of control of municipal government. And so like, I'm, I'm wondering like, from what perspective should I, should I just be aspirational and not think about feasibility here? Or, or what do you, what do you wouldn't work feedback-wise. What we want—. Looking for— I mean, yes, to some extent feasibility.

So if your comment just generally is like, this strategy, no matter what the critical uncertainty we're considering, is just— this strategy does not seem feasible, I think that's a good thing to—. Yeah, I mean, it's like, I guess it's just, you know, I, I watch the city and them dealing with political day-to-day issues, and it's like Some of these things, like, you know, what's going— you know, some of these things are like highly aspirational and nice, and you ask everyone and they will all say that they want them, but they never seem to make it up to the top of the priority list. And, you know, so I think if it's just that, like, it seems aspirational, hasn't been done yet, then let's, let's keep it on the list for now, and we can work through whether or not it's ever going to happen later. Absolutely. But if it really seems like this just couldn't be implemented or is not feasible for XYZ reason and is therefore kind of should be taken off the table or maybe like seriously downgraded because it just would be so difficult to achieve.

I think that's a good comment and that we should consider that. Perfect. I, what we're also though trying to zero in on, so you ask like what do we mean by successful, like, or, or which one of these work well? What we mean is like would these be able to respond to a critical uncertainty? So let's take tourism as an example, tourism and its spillover effects.

So tourism is, is in its spillover effects right now. The, the conversation is about tourism is growing, right? And like, how do we manage that? And we're thinking about those types of policies, but tourism may not always be growing here. And that is an uncertainty, right?

It could decline. And even if that seems unrealistic now, it's possible. And so we, we want to think about whether tourism continues to grow, whether it really grows faster than we thought, or whether it starts declining. Which of these, these strategies might like succeed or work well, either to address it or just in general, you know, there's something that would not work well in the face of the impacts of tourism. So let's start here and we're going to do a voting exercise that Lydia is going to tee up.

So hopefully the folks online can see that this as well as everyone else has— have folks done Mentimeter before? We're going to probably need phones for this. If you don't have a phone, you have a laptop, there's a URL. And if you don't have any kind of digital device, let us know and we can help you, we can vote for you. So if anyone has trouble voting.

Yes, so we're going to start our first poll, which is in the face of the impacts of tourism or tourism and its spillover effects, which of these 15 strategies do you think would help Juneau respond successfully? Vote for all 15. Vote as many as you want. Yeah, got some votes coming in.

Yeah, menti.com. There's a— if you miss the QR code at the top of the screen, there's a join at menti.com, and then you can use that code 51909929.

There's the QR code again if you need to use your camera. And if anyone online is having any trouble, please feel free to raise your hand. Okay, we've got some votes coming in. Looks like we have 4 or 5 votes.

We've got 7 of 19 people who have joined.

I just want to clarify on number 14. Are you saying you would hand public funding to promote infrastructure development or just allowing permitting of such stuff? Prioritizing public infrastructure projects. Um, and what is—. Are you suggesting public funding?

Public funding. I think that's a good question that we could clarify here. Like, if that's—. Yeah, like, it's a very different avenue than what we've been doing, right? You know, we're Yeah, like, do we want to try to find funding sources within the city, um, to, to fund, uh, infrastructure development if we were to?

And this is for specifically for remote infrastructure, not like existing. Yeah. Um, or, you know, continue to rely on more outside sources. Um, or yeah, you know, is that something that become like is more on the onus of developers? Like, there are Several ways we could go about that.

So that might be something we want to clarify here. That's a good comment. [FOREIGN LANGUAGE] Pretty close to having everyone. So Sarah, you can go ahead and start telling the votes now. I can just verbally say what we have.

So it looks like overall Number— well, I guess we can go through them one by one. So number 1, protect and restore the environment, fairly popular. We have about half of voters, a little less than half of voters like that one.

Mitigation of natural hazards, not a lot of votes for that one. Balancing economy and environment, about half of folks. Like that one. Waterfront development has 9, so about over half of our voters.

Designating and protecting parklands has about half. Affordable housing and strategic land use, about a quarter of people, 4 votes there. So some of these we might want to talk through, what we like or don't like about them. Economic vitality and downtown focus has quite a few votes, 9 there. Support Juneau as a— Juneau's role as a regional hub has 5.

Economic diversification beyond tourism has a lot of votes, 12 votes there. Fostering neighborhood-scale economic centers, only 3 votes. Encouraging infill and redevelopment has 5. Managed rural and remote growth, only 1. Multimodal transportation systems has 7, remote area infrastructure development 0, and create and maintain connected trail system.

So it looks like the ones that really stuck out to people are waterfront development, economic vitality, and a downtown focus. Economic diversification beyond tourism. Those were the 3 most popular ones.

Do folks want to talk about any of the ones that aren't? Green, that maybe, um, some of the— I don't know if you can see very well, but, um, some of these that had kind of like middle votes. Yeah, we have. Yeah, um, I selected number 6, the affordable housing and strategic land use, mainly just because I thought that the biggest spillover effect, me at least, my mind is that influx of so many seasonal workers takes units off the year-round housing stock for a short season. So I was surprised that not as many people picked that one, but I'm not offended.

But, um, and then I think that's my only comment for now. Not seeing the other ones up there, but I was aligned with pretty much every— the, the higher choices other than that one. I have something kind of along those lines. I wrote out strategy associated with that, and it was coordinating seasonal housing from different industries. So looking at tourism, seasonal workers for tourism, and seasonal folks that come in for the legislative session, and trying to see how well those are aligned.

So if the unit is used for both types of seasonal, um, folks, then it would count as—. Right. So I had heard anecdotally that housing for the legislative session is no longer an issue, um, because there's so much stock available, um, with the influx of summer units. Like, there used to be a legislative affairs portal where people plumb coming for session would apply, and I've heard from folks that work in the session, it's no longer a big deal at all because there's so many Airbnb and other units that are vacant those months that they can just get them for session. So no one really— there's not, not, not a lot of stress or anxiety about finding housing for some legislative session.

Are how much the different people able to pay influencing that too? Maybe like, yeah, like, you, they like to pay a little bit higher price, like, to something that would be a higher Airbnb price for people that might not necessarily be able to pay that price. Or the Airbnb owners give them a different rate because it's obviously—. Oh, sorry. I can't hear you.

I'm a chronic mumbler. I'll work on that. I was just saying that the price point at which different, like the legislators versus the seasonal tourism workers might be different too, and that might be playing into it. Perhaps legislators pay a higher price. —Compared to the small workers.

So one of the things that was in the instructions, but that you all may not have had a chance to really read or absorb yet, that I just want to point out so that we're kind of like focused on the right types of, or, you know, just the, our focus is on this work that we're trying to get to with the scenario planning is the strategies that we're trying to identify here. You know, there's going to be a lot of strategies in the plan, right? The strategies that we're trying to identify here are going to help us get to different land use scenarios. So they're going to get us to these things where we can actually identify kind of on a map where we— different ideas for where and how we could grow. So our questions related to tourism and its spillover effects are like, where should growth happen and how should growth happen?

So those are kind of the two questions we want to answer or that we want to come up with strategies for. So An example of a where is, um, number 7, the downtown— is that the economic vitality and downtown focus? So that's a where. That's like, we put a lot of focus, like, we, we use our land use regulations to make sure that downtown, um, you know, has the ability to continue to grow and develop, and we use policies and incentives to get downtown growth, support the ports downtown. That's kind of a where.

There's a little bit of a how in there. So I want us to think about that too. Like, are there other wheres that, you know, other places that we might think about in terms of like where we might want to support growth or types of growth? You know, maybe where would we think housing— we might want to see housing, where might we want to see more commercial? Yeah.

That's why I was surprised more people didn't. Choose 10. In terms of, like, one of the, one of the big potential spillover downsides is if there is a significant change in the amount of tourism. And one of the ways that we can deal with that is by reducing our dependence on tourism and diversifying economic setup. But then that also tends to draw locals to those locations.

Build, build those things up. So I, I was surprised that one didn't have more support behind it. But you were saying one of the ways we can, um, kind of be more resilient to changes, fluxes in tourism, is to have more area, more commercial areas beyond just downtown that could support local businesses. Sure, yeah. I live on North Douglas, and anytime I have to go downtown or go to Fred Meyers, it is a colossal pain in the ass.

Yeah, I think I was like the only one that voted for, was it, you know, number 12. And I guess, you know, I was just thinking at it from the perspective of, you know, you know, I'm sure it's controversial, but, you know, having remote development, you know, even remote tourism infrastructure that adds to our local tax base, that gives us money to fund these initiatives we want in the locality, because Juneau is a huge borough. I mean, we could have multiple cruise ports that aren't coming into Juneau at all and still tax them and fund all these things that are underfunded. And, you know, um, I, I just look at it as a, you know, if, if I were in charge of this place, I'd look at the— let's get the tourists out of Juneau and, and tax them anyways. And that sounds like a win to me, you know, reduce the impacts, have more money to fund our, our government.

But Um, that's— I'm obviously the only one in the room, so I recognize—. Really don't use the tax. Yeah, well, sales tax, I mean, that's, that's a piece. Um, you know, you're talking about the head tax. Yeah, the head tax.

I had a similar, uh, point why I chose the multimodal transportation system with more tourism, more congestion on the roads. I've always, um, been surprised there's no like rail solution that could transfer tourists quickly and efficiently from downtown, out of downtown to the glacier, which would then year-round provide good options to get to Fred Meyer, get to downtown, and vice versa from the valley. But that's not just that. There's investing in good public transit that works for tourism, but that works year-round for locals as well. So more public transit or mass transit that's not like private tour buses.

Exactly. Yeah. We have so many proposals about the Circulator. Been on in front of the CBJ many, many times and never got approved. Circulator is something that you can get picked up and get dropped off at businesses and take you back to your car so you don't have to worry about you know, waiting for transportation or parking and all the other stuff.

But that never really happened. So when I think about, I mean, none of those strategies really stood out to me when I think of what's happened with tourism here. I think that's why I struggled voting, but a couple, I think, along with the circulator, the pedestrian zone, but what that means is land use of a shipping port that is other than AML. On the other side of downtown so that trucks are not driving through downtown. So, so finding a different shipping port, whether it's North Douglas and the second crossing, but, but being able for downtown to be a pedestrian zone, I think that would open it.

The other thing that I, I wondering how Europe deals with the huge— I mean, there have been all these complaints about tourism, what that does to a community. And so looking at Helsinki has some real creative strategies. And one of them is that tourists are considered temporary residents and guests and not consumers. Like, it's not just someone to be taxed, but, but that we sell the values of our community to the people who visit. And I think at some point we just need to rethink what tourism means.

For us here. And I don't—. I think it's a big difference there that our tourists mostly stay for 8 hours and they're not— they don't spend the night. It's very expensive. But yeah, I think—.

No, I'm right. I mean, it does. If China loves like— yeah, and it's like really consumptive visit because it is so short and you must pack it all in. That's where all the rush comes from. It's not going by.

Right. So that's sort of—. Kind of like as a strategy, like what does that mean to rethink of tourists? Along those lines, it, it begins to necessitate an entirely different approach to tourism where our focus is no longer on the cruise ships but bringing in other types of tourists through other means. And maybe it's partnering with cruise ships that do longer stays, 2, 3-day stays, or focusing more on people flying in or, or that type of thing.

But it's a complete philosophical difference in what tourism is. Right. But a strategy of what would it be like to make space for guests, which is a very different space than consumers. What would that look like? Like, what would the location, the where and the how be there?

More Airbnbs, more hotels, spend a lot more, like, to get anywhere near the economic benefit we have from our existing tourism economy. Like, reimagine what you know. It's—. That's what it's going to take to get some amount of people to spend that money. Okay, we're gonna have to move on, but I'll take a couple more.

I just have a question. Um, lots of good questions and thoughts here, but, you know, we have a lot of people working online Some efforts on the tourism side, including Crabtree Juno. We have a tourism manager to see, are we ever going to bring people in to actually answer some of these questions? Answer questions? Well, I mean, it's okay to have an idea that you realize this is already in process or this is already being looked at.

Yeah, yeah, we're working. These are aspirational thoughts, but some of them are being either vetted now or have already been vetted. Yeah, so I'll remind us that the policies we're talking about right now are policies to test land use and growth strategies.

There's a larger set.

Set of policies that'll happen in the comp plan, which will include things that the folks working on tourism in Juneau and economic development in Juneau will all be, you know, essentially part of. They will be definitely, you know, working on and developing those. And, you know, we may be able to talk to them or hear feedback from them. What we're talking about today is land use and development strategy. So I want to make sure we're focusing on that piece now?

I was one of the few to do mitigation of natural hazards. And I chose that specifically because natural hazards grind everything to a halt. You know, if your house in the valley floods, you can't go to work to bring the tourists to the glacier on the bus. This year, you know, the glacier was completely closed down. It pushed all of the tourists to Brotherhood Bridge Trail, actually.

Yeah, so the Brotherhood Bridge where you can view was packed. The day of the flood. And, you know, also on the other end, the flood is kind of the big one in all of our minds, but landslides as well. Cope Park, you know, is slowly collapsing in on itself. Perseverance has a landslide almost every single year.

So I think it's important to also look critically on where we're sending our tourists as well. I would add the same. I also voted for that one. Also from the perspective of this latest flood, despite the fact that it was in some ways better managed than the previous last year, got a lot of publicity down south and did shape people's thinking in my own community around when they were coming up to Juneau and why at a particularly peak moment, just given that the timing of when those floods is happening is also our peak tourist time. So what would be the where, the how of that policy?

What would, what would be like, you know, what's, what is the best way to, to word that policy? Yeah, I think so. Where is just, you know, where are we permitting tourism to take place, whether it's guided? You know, you can't really just stop someone from going to hike Perseverance. But where are we permitting guides to go?

And how are we planning with tourism companies to manage both employee safety and safety of guests and residents during disasters?

Why I didn't vote for number 2 is this includes prohibiting development, and I would— I mean, thinking of the HESCO barriers, it is about encouraging engineering. Like, it is not just about prohibit, but it is about investing in engineering so our bridges don't close and we're cut off from the rest of town and, you know, and all the other things. I agree. That's a very specific statement about strategy that we're— yeah, maybe not. So what I'm hearing is people don't feel totally comfortable with the idea of discouraging development in flood hazard areas, because that would be the valley.

And all of downtown. And all of downtown. So yes, we all agree. The reality is that for much of the valley, that ship has sailed.

The development's there. The option at this point to mitigate is for those of us who live right there and got flooded, we just need to walk away from our homes and let them become green space, which is, I mean, it's not on my radar right now, but it's an option.

I kind of read that as like floodways that are undeveloped. So like, that's not the only glacially influenced or rain-influenced flood path. Like, we have Eagle Glacier and Herbert Glacier and those riverways too. Like, I read that as like prohibiting future development in areas that could become a new valley or whatever. But I think that's a fair point.

I mean, we don't want to prohibit where there's like already development, but I was envisioning that as like new development. I think we're back to the engineering thing because the, I mean, you know, you go to South Carolina and the houses are on these great big stilts. I mean, maybe we just got to go to stilts.

You know, I mean, there's helical piers right now. It's, yeah, we build on them all the time.

It's a bit of a topic shift, but one thing, and I wrote about this a little bit for the revenue for the federal and state-like funding piece of things, and I think it can be either under the free balancing economy environment or its own thing, is that we can create a more progressive tax structure to capture revenue from industry that looks like maybe a severance tax. As with its mining and things like that, or finding creative ways to use the head tax that are legally allowable, since that's our current issue. With either case though, you can, you can reduce in some cases, you know, property tax for the average, you know, property owner in Juneau, and actually still potentially end up with more revenue overall to pay for the services that, the essential services that make Juneau a more affordable vibrant place. So, yeah, the way I phrase that as its own strategy was create a progressive revenue structure to capture benefit major industries. Okay.

Yeah. Number 12, because we like that. I'm envisioning like walkable neighborhoods or something, you know, like he was talking about North Douglas and I just don't think that downtown has to be the answer of all, you know, whatever, that, you know, you have, you know, Oak Bay, and it's kind of developing into its own little community, and, you know, North Douglas, and, you know, downtown Douglas. And I just feel like, you know, we, we could encourage, you know, these little walkable neighborhoods, these little self-contained neighborhoods. Maybe that relates.

Yeah, number 10, I think, what you're talking about. Yeah, yeah. And I don't know if now is the right moment, but there were also some that I didn't rank because I didn't feel that they were appropriate, going back to, I think, the conversation earlier of like, are we talking about investing in like using public dollars for specific strategy, or are we just talking about allowing it? Like, from my own perspective, I think again, it sounds like it's there are other folks who feel that way too. Like, strategy number 7 didn't feel like the most appropriate anymore with kind of where we're going in terms of like more sustainable, more decentralized tourism that is not just focused on downtown.

And equally, as much as I love living off the road, remote area infrastructure development, number 14, also didn't seem appropriate, where I felt like 12 and 10 didn't feel like the appropriate alternatives in those pieces. Just wanted to like put out there those questions of like, I didn't put, I didn't rank those people because I didn't feel like they were appropriately reflecting where we wanted to head. Yeah. Anything you didn't vote for is kind of a, I don't think that would work. Well, I think about that.

Some of them I read and I'm like, well, it depends on how you read it. I mean, are we going to take this to the absolute? You know, because if we're going to go absolute on this, that's kind of crazy, but You know, you, you know, if it's going to be reasonable, then maybe, you know. So some of them I didn't vote for because I went, well, somebody could take this in a bad way. I mean, I'm a developer, and, you know, believe me, when you start talking wetlands and limiting, it's like, then no, you know, because everything in Juneau is a wetland according to those people.

You know, if they see skunk cabbage, you're done. All right, we've got an online comment from Amara. Um, hi, yeah, I just— can everyone hear me? Okay, yes, yeah, wonderful. Um, I just kind of wanted to also piggyback and like snowball on some comments that were made earlier, um, on the North Douglas front.

Um, I have been kind of reading up on the development that's happening with the cruise port over there, which seems like it's kind of making, making a lot of leeway. And I think it would really help. I think Mimi was the one that suggested the hop-on hop-off transit for that, for just the town in general. So I think that would also be really handy to kind of focus on that as well.

So supporting public transit that could both support tourism during that season but also be used for locals year-round. Is that kind of what I'm hearing?

Yeah. Okay. And are we talking mostly like supporting a line that would go like from downtown to the glacier? Is there anywhere to the transit? Like, is there sort of a transit corridor that we want to think about somewhere?

Like an area that you want to focus on really building out transit more for that purpose that we're talking about? I would suggest Lemon Creek right now, watching people rent their bikes and go from downtown to— it's a little bit difficult to— Lemon Creek, there's no good crossing. I live in Twin Lakes. I work right in Lemon Creek. And the crossing to get from Twin Lakes just even to like the side of the road we should be biking on in Lemon Creek.

Is really bad. I see a lot of people, there's really heavy traffic off Vanderbilt, and boardings aren't safe. I've also seen people biking on Egan because they don't know clearly where they should put the bikes. So, and also ferry terminal as well. Like the fact that those, I mean, if we're looking at trying to bring in a different demographic of tourists that's not cruise dependent, there should absolutely be public transportation that reaches the ferry in that area.

Sorry, I was just thinking that area off Bay, right, University, like a lot of students don't have cars necessarily, and you know, I hesitate, like walkability on campus is good in a lot of ways, it is hard in key ways, especially with the new science building out that way, right? If you're having a crossy weekend and there's a lot of traffic, and yeah. I think creating a walk or like the idea of a walkway too, just even from the ferry terminal to like the Occ Bay area, because that's a really tight shoulder and I drive that every day and there are always people, especially in the summer, even if they're just stopping for a little bit and want to stretch their legs or walk a dog. It's precarious. I would also— this is, of course, an investment from some city, state funding, federal funding, whatever it is, but without putting in stop signs or stoplights on Eagan to put either overhead or— harder to do in the wetlands— some sort of a walkway or a long ramp to get over, an accessible ramp to get across without going a mile or two to be able to get to it underpass.

There's a lot of accidents, as we all know, crossing Egan at Fred Meyer. Yeah. Do you mean pedestrian or cars? Both. I was going to say, because right now watching pedestrians try to do that is a big one.

It's nice. You see more and more these days. Yeah. Well, as the development closer to the airport happens. Yeah.

Yeah. All right. So let's move on to critical uncertainty number 2, which is climate change and environmental hazards.

So we're going to vote for— go ahead and vote for anything you feel like is a clear strategy that could help Juneau successfully succeed in responding to the impacts of climate change and environmental hazards. Anything you feel like you maybe wouldn't support or not sure enough to vote for, just don't vote for it. Just things that you feel like are clear winners, and we can talk through all. Don't worry too much about the voting. That's not like—.

It's just to get the conversation started. Don't stress out too much about the voting.

We're just gonna take a couple more minutes, or a couple more seconds really, to let people finish voting. Is there anyone that while Sarah's kind of tallying up the results here, I'm seeing some fairly clear standouts, which are mitigation of natural hazards, not surprisingly, protect and restore the environment. That also makes sense. Balancing the economy and the environment. Designating and protecting parklands and encouraging infill and redevelopment as well as multimodal transportation.

Anyone want to comment on any of the strategies they voted for? Maybe some that you are kind of on the fence about, maybe have questions about whether you think it would be appropriate or not. I have a hand raised. Travis, go ahead. Hi, hopefully you can hear me.

Yeah. Yeah, so I just wanted to, I guess, before we get into the conversation, get clarification on what the definition for mitigate natural hazards is. I think a lot of the natural hazards we deal with in the borough, you just could not mitigate. You could definitely reduce the risk through other, you know, strategies, but you couldn't just say like, hey, we're going to go take care of Pseudocide Basin and make it so it's not a hazard anymore. Yeah, let's do that.

Why don't we do that? That's like, why don't we put that on here? Yeah, no, I think managing risk is a good way to maybe reword that.

Mitigate. Thank you for clarifying.

I think one of the challenges that I'm having with the voting is that the title of the strategy or the name of the strategy might make sense for the same, but then the description of the strategy does not. Okay, well then let's talk about how we can maybe make— like, what works about the name for you? For example, like number 6, affordable housing and strategic land use. Strategic land use seems like it is absolutely geared towards dealing with climate issues and environmental issues, but what the, the strategy is, is about designating urban areas along corridors And it's more about housing and such. It's not— that is directly geared towards climate issues.

Now, if it included not just housing affordable to all economic groups, which I'm in favor of, but environmentally sustainable housing that is affordable to all groups, then it begins to have more of a direct relation to this.

I think what this strategy, one of the things that this strategy is getting at that could have an impact on managing risk of our environmental hazards is we're talking about growing within the existing urban service area, which is basically, you know, the kind of growth boundary of the city, um, rather than maybe expanding into areas that don't have infrastructure built out already or are not within kind of the developed area. And so that could mean potentially like avoiding areas like we were talking about, avoiding areas that are not, not currently developed but might be in flood risk zones, for example. But it's also about like making good use of the infrastructure we already have. So doing things like, you know, what we call infill, maybe where we're, you know, having—. I hear you, but several of the things that you said would be good and related to this are specific in other things, which is why I didn't choose that.

Infill is one of the specific ones. I forget the other thing, right? It's like the things that could be related to this are secondary off of it. Gotcha. Yeah.

Okay. But I'm hearing like land use is, could be really impactful. Sure. Yeah.

What do we think about like how, what land use might look like in, like we talked a little bit about like the valley and all the environmental hazards that are in the valley. And we're saying we definitely don't want to limit, sounds like overall, like don't want to limit or have any kind of like moratorium on building in or new development in existing areas where there's risk. What, what else do we think about what development and growth might look like in the face of some of the natural hazards we're facing— landslides, floods, etc.? Could that be increasing zoning, going from D1 to D3 to D5, or allowing accessory dwelling units? So like increasing density.

Yeah. It's so that's a how. What about like the where, like increasing density and maybe allowing for more, well, infill, like ADUs are kind of a form of infill, right? They're a way of building in places where there's already development that's happened. In areas with fewer hazards, is that what you're kind of talking about there?

Right? With me? Yeah.

So increasing density and infill in areas with fewer hazards. In existing infrastructure. Got it. Yeah, I like that. I guess, I guess one of the things that comes to mind with existing infrastructure though, if we're looking at changing climate and you have, you know, more heavy rain events and things like that, some of the existing infrastructure may not be able to size and weather the storm, storm rains and stormwater in particular.

[FOREIGN LANGUAGE] I said, you know, when we're thinking about existing infrastructure, that we're looking at this in the lens of, you know, adapting to climate change and changing weather patterns, things like stormwater infrastructure that's already existing may now be undersized for the types of, you know, weather events that we get. So, I think it's a little bit tricky there thinking about, uh, the infrastructure side of things and looking at the different types of, um, weather-related events that come. The capacity and the adequacy of existing infrastructure. Yeah, that's very true. A lot of rain on snow that happened, so—.

And the design, not just capacity, but the design. The original storm drain exit was into the river. And what happened in the last 3 years is once the river level rose above that outflow, it started coming back up and flooding the street. So the design itself needs to be modified. See, that's kind of a combination of 2 and 11, the mitigating of natural hazard and encouraging infill and redevelopment.

So developing in a way, or redeveloping maybe is the way of phrasing it, so that we're mitigating for natural hazards. I think that's kind of what you're getting at, at the summary. Yeah. So we're saying maybe growing in places where we already have, you know, growing in places where we don't have a lot of hazards and trying to do infill where there are places that already have existing infrastructure, but also rehabbing or improving the existing infrastructure to make sure that it is actually adequate for the types of natural hazards that we're experiencing. And I think that leaves space for like that balancing the economy and the environment so that we're also leaving spaces that are intact that are important for our salmon rearing streams, et cetera, et cetera, and like leaving space for that as well to become part of our culture as a community.

And also like that redundancy in having stream salmon-bearing streams helps mitigate against salmon collapses, which is an important part of our economy, you know. And so it's not just the land use development that's like direct to like where and how people are living, but also like what redundancies does that allow so that we have like a diverse environmental portfolio as well as a diverse like land use portfolio, or like not land use, but— Yeah, yeah, someone online. Yeah, Travis, are you— do you have another comment? I know you raised your hand earlier. So, well, I think the, the conversation kind of came full circle to what I was going to mention, but the, the concept of, you know, infilling existing development within areas of known hazards Um, that's just kind of counterintuitive to reducing risk, right?

You wouldn't want to increase population density or housing within a known hazard. So, you know, maybe there is some opportunity to develop zoning and code requirements that would, you know, put certain limitations on what's built there or control how those structures are built so that they could resist whatever the hazard is, like if it's flooding or if it's a landslide or if it's you know, some earthquake effects, something like that. But that's just, I guess, a general comment on the infilling in the existing development. And then, you know, if we stop allowing infilling existing development, the only other thing we can start doing as a borough is focusing on, you know, okay, where can we develop? And so I think moving into those other strategies of like 14, kind of going beyond where we are now and our known hazards and making sure that we're looking forward to the areas that we can develop in, in these lower-risk hazard zones.

But sorry, I think the conversation kind of got there.

Yeah, I just want to make sure I was capturing that last comment. So on number 14, so we're, we're talking about infill and, like, developing in places that are already developed and making sure that that infrastructure can support that. But then also potentially looking at places that aren't developed, but are, but, you know, the few places in Juneau, there aren't a lot, but that don't have some kind of natural hazard that they're prone to, as like, we should look at that as well, is what you're saying.

Right. Yeah, certainly if you're going to prevent more development in existing areas, you're going to have to open up new areas. And when we do that, we definitely just have to be aware of what the risks are.

This feels like we were where we would have the conversation about the landfill having a life of 10 years and the wastewater treatment plant being under incredible pressure. So figuring out how we use land to move to a zero waste or, um, I keep thinking like we spend $5 million to send our processed poop. I don't know if we still do that. Out, and is there a way to use that to turn that into an energy source? Um, but thinking, how do we move towards taking the resources that are here?

Um, we've been talking about doing a construction resale shop because right now trying to get rid of construction items is nearly impossible. And as Medicaid moves to work requirements, figuring out how we have employment opportunities for people. I mean, there's just so many things that are wound in this together, but that feels like a huge environmental hazard that we're facing. Yeah. Besides that, electric cars, like AML not being willing to bring up— is it AML?

Yeah. Not being willing to bring up electric cars. So part of that, huh, what does that mean? Well, the environment. So, but for land use, thinking of the zero waste uh, campus that they're trying— that they're working on right now.

And, um, and also if there are ways that we can resell the sort— the stuff that we have.

Yeah, going back to kind of the conversation earlier about what lens and mitigating and where we build, you know, how to build. I, I didn't vote for 13 and 15, but now hearing the conversation, like those are really key. They also tie in with like 1 in 5 parkland that's protecting and restoring, you know, wetlands. Because I think, you know, I, I've walked a lot and spent a lot of time on dredge lakes before and after this year's flood and last year's flood, as well as the Brothers Ridge trails. And these are areas that, you know, you look at inundation maps, were affected by glacial lake flooding, and that has absorbed some of that impact, you know.

Basco barriers pushing more water over to that side. I think that we can still have productive uses for communities, and in fact, you know, as we have more input, serve both and have, you know, accessible recreation. And so I just think about, you know, how do we really support those, those sorts of trail systems, those —especially connected to residential areas. Yeah. And connected to wetlands that protect wetlands, right?

Because you then have that force preserving wetlands when people use trails in the area a lot of the time. You know, that is a thing that encourages, you know, the long-term sort of preservation of a place and again, a productive use for that place that is good for tourism.

Yeah, so maybe using some of the places that are in natural hazard zones for other uses other than development, but still uses that can be beneficial to the community, can bring in tourism, can provide recreation, healthy ways to get outside and that. Yeah. Okay, I'm gonna move us along. We only have about 10 minutes left. We have one other critical uncertainty.

Um, and so let's, let's do our voting and let's not worry too much about it, but just as a little temperature check here, we're going to vote. Um, so this one is state and federal funding and policy decisions, which we cannot always control, right? So which of the 15 strategies here do you think would help Juneau respond successfully to the impacts of either a lack of federal state funding, um, or policy decisions that might impact, um, you know, us, and that could relate to things like roads, bridges, other infrastructure, transportation services like the ferry system, emergency management. What are some strategies for handling the uncertainty of state funding policy decisions?

Mm-hmm. I would just turn it off.

This one is like so widely brought— I feel like we can do a whole.

I mean, on just scenarios of this, right? You know, do we have mass military buildup? Do we lose all our support from the state government? Something in between. I mean, yeah, totally transformative one way or the other.

Yeah, yeah. I mean, yeah, that's a big uncertainty, right? It's going to have to be a gym back. So it's, it's kind of like, how can we locally strengthen ourselves so that if something wild like that happens, we can still, like, you know, be as kind of self-sufficient as possible while also self-sufficient, right? Like there's only so much money and support that comes that can be found locally.

But what can we do that can help us be a little more durable or resilient to those kinds of changes? Well, and the opposite is true too. Like how can we use the money that does come in? Right. Yeah.

Right. That's a great point. We're supposed to be thinking that things could go either way. Right. Yeah.

Yeah. Like in a good, in a situation where we're flush with cash, Like, yeah, what, what do we do? So, um, I'm seeing the votes are almost all in. So, um, I think the most popular one right now is economic diversification beyond tourism. Um, also supporting Juneau's role as a regional hub.

Um, and balancing the economy and environment, as well as affordable housing and strategic land use. Any comments from folks who voted on those for why we like those? Anyone disagree with those or see— feel like those are not strategies that would work well? I guess on balancing in the economy and the environment, I guess it's nice because it can be a buffer either way. If we're all starving, we can burn down, you know, we can cut all the trees down, mine all the gold, whatever.

But if we're flush with cash, we can preserve all our natural beauty and take the, you know, we're environmentalist kind of road. And, you know, I mean, it's, it's, we have a lot of resources around us. We'd love to preserve them, but economic necessity, uh, I, you know, you can look to places with less economic abundance and see what happens to the environment oftentimes. I don't think—. No, it's okay.

I, I think I, I offered with the first, uh, item too, as it relates to balancing economy and environment, this idea of balancing local revenue with industry profit too, right? Like industries that are trapped in to some degree, like tourism and mining, right? This question of how do we create a more sort of progressive tax structure for our community, rely less on the federal government and the state, but also local residents for the money that we spend on essential services. That's the thing that we've seen with the state in particular, right? Like schools, for example, we spend more on schools because the state is spending less on these things, right?

We need to balance that out. And so having that flexibility when it comes to revenue, it's, I think, and I see that in 3 out of all the strategies, and that's why I think it's environment, economy, like local services almost. What is the where of supporting, you know, as sustainably as possible, supporting the resource extraction industry a little more, maybe supporting mining or supporting downtown, you know, AJ mine. Say what? AJ mine.

I mean, it's in a developed area. There's the— it's already the most environmentally disturbed part of the city. If we were to, you know, why mine in the pristine wilderness when you can mine, uh, in a place where we've already basically paved over the natural environment and covered the water with mine tailings? Well, isn't there a plan to have a new dock out by the road? Yeah, skateboarding.

So that's, that's like probably the most likely new mining. So you're talking about new mining I think is what we could see on that axis. Go ahead, Herbert. Nice thing about AJ is the city owns a lot of the revenue, so it could actually come public money instead of going to some multinational. And yeah, the point, like, a severance tax is the sort of revenue side of that.

That's a land use tax, um, Um, I want to add a point to the create and maintain a connected trail system. Um, so, you know, we all know that's one of the reasons why residents love living here. Same with tourism. Um, State Parks has been slashed incredibly in their budget. The Forest Service has been slashed incredibly.

So it's incredibly relevant for the CVJ to focus on their trails and improving them. And then one point that also this hazard mitigation of card misses is that it's also a very sustainable employment in Juneau. Drill Mix, where I work, we employ about 25 crew members. If we have more money, we take more. And it's a very— we were able to pick up 4 service workers who lost their jobs this season.

So it's really relevant to this federal and state first conversation. And I'd also maybe throw into that conversation, I voted for one and two that I see wasn't as popular, but I felt similarly, those are areas that we're likely to see that we're already seeing pretty large federal cuts in, but we have pretty substantial impacts on in terms of like a local level and kind of what it means for both our economy, livelihoods, and kind of living here. And so investing energy in those two places and revenues in those areas where blaze seems pretty relevant.

Um, I'm not sure which one this would go under, but, uh, just hearing about trail systems made me think about more cabins as far as land use, more city-owned cabins, because the ones that I know of are Amalga and the Eagle Crest Cabin, and they're booked out like 6 months in advance. The second they go online, they're incredibly popular with people that live here and that are visiting. Um, and I think there's— I think there's plans to build another one out by Appalga. Yeah, but I think like we could probably build like 10 more, or like a trail, you know, like a hut system like Europe. Like, I think that's a huge opportunity.

So using some like kind of strategic land use and investment in recreational area to help support the economy. Yeah, yeah. And specifically with like cabins, more kind of just the economy, but like a retention of people. It's like a huge— it's like one of the most fun things to do around here. Yeah, I mean, it's like highlight of my summer every year, you know.

It kind of circles back to critical number one that we talked about. Um, a hut-to-hut system has been talked about a lot, um, because it encourages more independent tourism, and independent tourism I can't remember the exact dollar amount, but they spend a significant more amount of dollars per day. Yeah. And per capita. Yeah.

And goes back to that conversation about diversifying the types of tourism too. So it's not necessarily just about tourists that, you know, come on a ship, take a bus out to the glacier, and leave. It's maybe a different type of engaging with tourism. This is all pretty good standing in that pattern.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. All right, what if anything else, the how or where we, how we might, um, respond to state and federal, um, funding and policy decision changes? Infrastructure. Yeah, what about infrastructure? Roads, bridges, ferries.

I was going to say, I think Gertine and Sun to me also seems really relevant in this way, connected back to whenever our larger strategies around like building Juno culture and identity. Like we know that in times of economic and political turmoil that like local communities and local community identity and feeling connected is super important in being resilient more widely. And so I think having more connection outside of through individual car ownership, which is a class dynamic in and of itself, and creating more decentralized city infrastructure and kind of centers would help enable that.

That's important. Like, the— where the infrastructure— like, if it goes— if funding goes away, if money dries up, being stretched out, infrastructure all over the place is bad. We can't afford to maintain it. And on the flip side, if the federal government shoves like 3 icebreakers down our throat over the next decade, you know, I mean, I'm not saying it's likely, but, you know, there's bluster about this kind of thing. And that you get that many crew people here, you're probably— we probably do need to spread out a bit.

But it's like, it's hard to have a policy because this is binary. It's like, you know, we really— I bet you we would have a very hard time maintaining our infrastructure with, you know, like if we had to maintain, you can drive all the state highways that we have here, we really have a hard time doing it on our own economic resources.

I mean, I think that goes back to what you're talking about is changing some of the, like, was it like severance? Yeah, like severance, like just increasing the property severance, that's a weird way of saying that, of our revenue structure, right? Ensuring that we're capturing revenue from that, that it's meaningful to them. Like a severance factor or something like that. That's legally allowable.

To have our own, to be able to stand our own, because again, what we've seen with the state and what we'll see with the feds is a shifting of responsibility down to local governments, right, without the funding that comes with it. So maybe another strategy is like lobbying or legal resources to, you know, be able to actually get some place on being able to capture more of this head tax money for broader purposes. I think that's one place, you know, it not really, you know, it's like we need to go assert ourselves legally and, you know, get more rights for, for the city of Juneau. Not a land use strategy that I— yeah, I mean, I'm glad this is all bubbling up. We don't need to be too like— I do have one question on land use though, and, and we're at time, so I'm going to acknowledge that.

Anyone needs to leave, feel free. Um, but I just— one other question that I'm curious about with the where is if we did have more kind of neighborhood-scale economic centers, somebody brought up like it's really important to have more places to gather other than just downtown and central. What are like, where do we think those places could be? Like we were at Mendenhall Mall the other day and we're thinking like this could be a really cool kind of little like downtown kind of center almost for the Valley if it was maybe built a little differently, designed a little differently. Are there places like that you all think that, like, this would be a great little downtown for Running Creek, or, you know, yeah.

I think Hawk Bay is like right on the border. Yeah, right on the border. Yeah, there's a few things about it that could be tweaked, but like it is really close to being like a new hub. I think Hawk Bay is really important to circling back way earlier when we were talking about retaining younger populations, because as someone who went to UAS, you don't have a car, like, Auck Bay is your world. It is hard to get downtown.

I see a lot of people leave Juneau after they graduate because they don't really know Juneau, um, living out here in this weird little bubble. Yeah, and so maybe also like having a better transit connection would help connect it to the rest, but then also that stronger transit connection, if it were more of a hub, could connect it between downtown and other places too. The area around Safeway with the medical stuff and the senior living, I mean, that's kind of becoming its own little— Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I think your point about if the Middenhall Mall area was designed a little bit differently, it would be like a lot more walkable and feel a lot more like a community.

I agree with the Vintage Park area as well. Yeah. Food truck court there has really made it quite walkable, honestly. And connecting those two areas too. Yeah, absolutely.

I mean, yeah, Nugget Mall too, huge piece of land and hardly any development in it. Yeah, so I mean, great view of Douglas Mountains too. I'm not sure where in Lemon Creek, maybe by Breezin' makes the most sense, or like Western Auto Co. Yeah, like a lot of spaces open in that Western Auto zone. There's just Jerry's really in Western Auto. Maybe the dump, 10 years.

Yeah, yeah, picture a little more density and activity there, you know. I mean, AutoZone, maybe not the most exciting place, but you got a little maybe like mixed-use, like two-story retail and— yeah, little restaurant. Yeah, Douglas, downtown Douglas. It already is. Well, I was part of the steering committee for downtown Douglas, and there was a lot of discussion about this type of thing.

What Douglas would want specifically related to all of this, but it's definitely in there. And what did they say? Oh, there's, oh, what, a 16-page thing that came out? Yeah, that's familiar. Walkable, maintain the character, but more geared towards local rather than bringing tourists over.

Serving the neighborhood. Yeah, I mean, I think that idea of serving the neighborhood too for Auke Bay, like so much of it is like the tourism and people going out on whale watching for like part of the year, which makes it harder to like recreate in that area. And like someone who lives in Auke Bay, like I stopped kayaking because the amount of wake that comes through with like the whale watching boats to and from is like, it doesn't feel fun. Yeah. Um, but like, thinking about how it can be like, like, I don't know, like, so much of the harbor is like not tilted towards commercial, commercial fisheries, and it's like all whale watching.

And sometimes I feel like that doesn't feel like a year-round use. And I think what I wanted, what I would hope is like more consistent year-round uses that like caters to year-round use. Reminded me of something that we talked about at that other committee as well. This, what we're talking about, the smaller neighborhood economic centers, also ties into natural disaster mitigation because it creates areas of resiliency that may be cut out. So for example, something happens in the bridge goes down and down, now Douglas residents can't get across easily.

It creates— or the flood changes and cuts off the valley or something. Having those areas make them more resilient to natural disasters. I'm just going to throw—. I'm sure you guys, you do this all over the country, right? So, I mean, it's pretty— where can these feasibly exist?

It's a combination of traffic patterns, and, you know, nearby amenities, and, you know, who's going to use this stuff. And I, I think we've seen some traffic data from DOT on main thoroughfares, and I think if you go look at vacant parcels of land, it's kind of clear, at least from my perspective as a developer, which places make sense for this and which don't. And, you know, it's, it's kind of hard to write this into existence without the fundamental economic driver standing behind it. Yeah, and that's part of the modeling. Yeah, okay, vacancy, looking at you know, like basically redevelopment potential.

So looking at improvement value of different parcels. So there's a lot of economics that go into how we think about this, but there's a level of like also just sketching out what's possible without thinking too much about market realities, but then also like ultimately, you know, that has to be something important to consider. All right. We're over time, folks. Thank you for staying.

I wanted to keep this a little longer just because it was a great conversation. So appreciate that. I wanted to say that CBJ has offered to do a follow-up meeting if folks feel like they have more to discuss, because this was a lot, we know, and, you know, it's hard to— and you didn't get the instructions. Apologies for that. Technology, not always our friend.

So CBJ offered that if folks are interested. I don't know, you know, maybe we can discuss that in a follow-up email. And I don't know how you want to do that, but if, if that— there is appetite for that, CBJ has space to make that time. Yeah, so we have, um, thanks, Sasha. We have—.

I have the Douglas Library on hold for Wednesday, September 10th, um, from 5 to 7, if, if we want to follow up with this and have more conversation. We want to make sure everyone enough chance with time with each other to really work this stuff out because it's a lot. It wouldn't be a requirement, but we're happy to show up. And it will be me, Flores, and Scott. And we're not as good as Sanjeev and Lydia, but we'll do our best.

You're probably happy to be with us. Exactly. Like, oh, the consultants are going to be there. Great. We'll show up.

Yeah, so that is on the table. That was September 10th. Is that right? Just for the— Wednesday the 10th. Yeah, that's just a date that I, that I could find something that was available.

Okay, at Douglas Library, 5 to 7. Douglas Library. Yeah, so maybe we can send a follow-up email. Yeah, follow up. Yeah, just want to get off of that since there's so much information, and I somehow failed to get all of this included in the title.

Like I had— I don't know what happened.

Well, thanks everyone. Thank you. Appreciate your time. Nice to see you all, and we will be back doing more scary plan work in a couple months. A little bit more.