The Tuesday, August 27th edition of OPEN AGENDA (S2 E37) is now available! On this episode we explore developer subsidies for extending municipal water/sewer services into some areas of the county, and question whether the aspirational goals of creating affordable housing and improving the quality of life are actually achieved by such policies. Does everyone else have to pay more to make up for the millions of dollars in lost fees and tax revenues? Likewise, we examine whether most city/county residents will benefit from downtown development funded in part by subsidies and state grants. Is there a return on investment and do most residents even care about having downtown cultural amenities and luxury housing? We also discuss the upcoming Maryland Folk Festival to be held downtown on September 19-21. Although this is an enormously entertaining annual event that attracts spectators from around the region, does it generate enough economic benefit to offset the costs and state-provided grants? At the end of the day, someone has to pay for all of these things, so whose pocket do you think it will come from? Tune in and be informed.
Open Agenda TV: S2 E 37 Rising Water Bills and Developer Kickbacks in Salisbury
Show Transcript
Disclaimer: The following transcript was auto-generated and may contain spelling or contextual errors.
You're watching Open Agenda. Here's our
host, Joe White.
>> Welcome to Open Agenda. I'm your host,
Joe White. In the studio with me is Dr.
Joe Venosa. Thank you. Thank you,
>> Mr. Mike Goldberg from Delmare. Thanks
for coming out.
>> Hey. Hey.
>> So, Joe, you were at the city council
meeting yesterday.
>> Yes.
>> And uh they've talked annexation.
Uh
Michael Langford, who's been on the show
many times, we're going to have him on
today. uh he actually had some very
articulate points.
>> So when we look at connection fees um
those are the things that normally are
paying for capital like going into the
capital improvement fund for the water
sewer plant. When we had those people
here, I think about a month ago now, um,
doing a report, they said that we were
running this year, I believe, $3.5
million like on a negative because of
capital improvements that are needed and
$4,650
to
uh 7,500 and I forget the exact amount.
If you times that by the number of like
approvals, just lowballing it, you have
several million dollars there. Like that
is why we're in the hole is because we
wave those fees. that is also causing
people to have increases on their water
bills. And again, I've been advocating
that that should be on the businesses
because that's where this money is
normally coming from. We've all had
everybody here that lives in the city or
outside the city has had increases of 40
to 80% over the last couple years. And
it's like that's why so we were sold
this thing that sounds great. Like who's
against development? But it's like the
problem is is that like now we don't
have money to run the city, right? And
like that was an enterprise fund that
did work. So, it's like we didn't really
need to tinker with that and break it
and we did because we listened to people
and we trusted the wrong ones.
>> Not just annexation and the
opportunities that that creates,
>> but also outlining some of the
challenges when you when you're
constantly doing these subsidies and
giving away hookup fees that don't flow
back into the capital improvements.
>> Yeah, I would call them problems rather
than challenges, but yeah, I mean
they're they're he's absolutely right.
So this recommendation did come from the
very last planning and zoning committee
meeting that was the combined meeting.
So we've we we were just watched at the
county council the other day.
>> They did select nine members to be on
their y
>> their meeting or their their committee.
Uh Chip Dashil who was the chair of the
current planning and zoning is going to
be the chair of the new county planning
boss.
>> Well yeah same as old boss. Yeah. Uh but
the city council or the city planning is
only looks like it's going to have seven
members and we don't know who they are
yet.
>> Not yet. I I know I believe uh old
friend of the show Joe Scafino was
putting his name in for one. He's a
contractor. Seems very wellqualified. Um
other than him I don't know anyone I
don't know anyone personally who was
also considering it.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah. So Mike, uh, we've watched some of
this play out when we talked about the
sanitary district on the county, and I'm
interested when Mike L Michael Linkford
comes in just to see what his thoughts
were on how they're going about the
annexation from the city side because
now that the planning and zoning is
split, which is probably a good thing,
>> it also means that one hand might not
know what the other hand's doing and we
could end up paying for things twice and
that wouldn't be good, right? Imag
imagine that with government, not one
hand not knowing what the other's doing.
>> Well, we might get to play back uh those
videos in real time, you know. Um Mike,
I want to ask you if you'll stick around
and uh after we get a chance to talk to
Michael, I want to follow back up and
just on some of those points when it
comes to the sanitary district and what
other people should be thinking about.
>> True.
>> Right. Stay around.
>> Y
>> All right. So stay with us. When we come
back, we're going to bring in Michael
Langford and we're going to talk
annexation. Stay with us. We'll be right
back.
folk music and annexation. So to keep
the conversation going about the city of
Salsbury and their business with the
city council, I brought in Mr. Michael
Langford. Thanks for coming out.
>> Thanks for having me.
>> Dr. Vosa, thanks for sticking around.
>> Thank you, sir.
>> Gentlemen, you both attend and watch
very closely a lot of the city council
business
>> and uh there's there's quite a bit
that's going on now. Uh little bit of
good news that's happening is the
Maryland Folk Festival is is scheduled
for the second weekend in in September,
right?
>> Yep.
>> And uh that's going to bring a lot of
different acts. Actually, they just
posted their their lineup and
>> and not only bringing in outside acts,
but showing some actual local talent,
too.
>> Yeah. And it's a free event, right?
>> Yeah. Fantastic.
>> Um now, talking about the side of it
being free doesn't mean it isn't without
costs. Um and and Joe, you've been at
city council meetings. They've had to
fund some of this. Is that right?
>> Well, funny enough, yesterday at the
meeting that Michael and I were at, um
they had announced that they had just
received a $50,000 state grant to help
with the festival, which, you know, on
the face of it is is sort of great, but
it sort of begs the other question. Um
being that this is a major economic
driver for the region, right?
theoretically being that it sort of
brings in all the support for businesses
and brings in revenue,
>> you know, you could ask the question
perhaps um should the festival actually
show that it's bringing in money that
it's paid for
>> rather than sort of continue to rely on
certain grants maybe?
>> Well, the grant you're talking about
came from the Maryland Heritage Are
Authority. Yep. So, Michael, you know,
the Maryland Folk Festival coming up,
uh, you know, if you compare that, and
they're not this the exact same, but the
the Pride Festival was back in June, and
when they were done that event, there
was a positive balance left with with
that outcome. Yeah, they were clear that
uh Salsbury P flag was very clear that
they were very successful in their event
and that they had a lot of support from
the community, a lot of grassroots uh
fundraising. So, they were able to
actually like have money left over in
the coffers for the the event next year,
which is wonderful for our community.
>> Going back to your point, Joe, the folk
festival did cost money last year. They
had to they had to backfund some of
that. They have the grant this year.
>> Should that be a a consideration for the
for the city taxpayer dollars? I think
so. I think generally speaking, the
argument has always been made that the
folk festival obviously it puts Salsbury
more on the map. It brings in revenue,
showcases talent, which is all great
stuff, but you do have to ask yourself,
you know, if it's going to come at a a
net cost to the city rather than
actually self-generate. Um, and when you
have other events that, and again, I
understand we're not comparing apples to
apples here because the Pride event is
basically part of one day. the folk
festival is essentially three days give
or take how how you count it. Um, a lot
more logistically sort of complex. But I
I guess my concern that I always have on
these kinds of events and growing up in
New York, you saw all these different
kinds of feasts and parades that were
always throughout the year. One of the
things that they were always very
diligent about was making sure that in
certain capacities you don't want to get
too reliant on grants because grants can
be taken away or grants could be cut or
you apply and it goes to somewhere else.
So, it's a it's great we have it. I
think it's going to help, but I guess
the question becomes, can we develop a
more sustainable model for making sure
that these kinds of events aren't
dependent on this funding stream?
>> Well, talk talking about sustainable
models, Michael, I was pretty intrigued
by your comments yesterday u during the
public comment section. You were talking
about the infrastructure, especially
with water and sewer.
>> Yeah. in the city of Salsbury that is an
enterprise fund that that should be a
self self- sustaining fund.
>> Yeah.
>> And it the only way it's stayed self-
sustaining the last few years were these
humongous increases in water and sewer
bills. Uh I've we've covered on on this
show about the the new uh sanitary
district for the county and they're
going to do some some not annexation,
but they're going to tie in some homes
in the county part in the donut areas in
the these little holes.
>> But those folks are going to be paying
some sort of rate may actually maybe one
and a half times the rate of the city of
Salsbury for city of Salsbury services.
>> Yeah.
>> A lot of that's getting funded with
grants as Dr. Venosa said. could be a,
you know, that could be a tricky
slippery slope. But you've done some
numbers here, particularly with the
Horizon program and and how that is
waving some of these fees. Can you
explain a little bit more about what you
meant with your comments last night?
>> Yeah, sure. So, it depending on the type
of development. Part of the hero's home
initiative is the idea was to
incentivize development and their idea
of incentivization was basically make it
cheaper for the businesses like lower
their overhead by waving what were
presented as bure merely bureaucratic
and for you know like some kind of like
formalist fee or something
>> hookup fees.
>> Yeah. And it's connection fees and those
are not actually just symbolic or just
you know red tape like they pay they go
into that enterprise fund that you just
referenced which then goes into pay like
our capital improvement project. So the
businesses are normally why we're able
to stay ahead and that that is a
self-generating like fund. But when you
wave all of those fees for a period of
time it actually ends up being millions
of dollars that we're being that we're
short. And in the end, those fees aren't
really waved as much as they're just
redistributed to regular people,
>> the people who are already paying their
bill.
>> Correct. Well, so that was the numbers
Michael gave me was, you know, just with
what's in the queue right now to be uh
waved, so to speak, you're talking 2442
units. Uh if you use just the lower
number that you had, the the4 $4,650
number for hookup fees, you're talking
over $11 million. Now, I've heard Mayor
Randy Taylor echo the same concerns, not
just about water and sewer, but also
about fire service and parking.
>> Yeah.
>> U Okay. So, gentlemen, you you guys are
city taxpayers. I mean, does this scare
you a little bit?
>> I don't know if it scares me as much as
enrages me to some extent.
>> Okay. particularly when
you know we've been down this road for
years and it hasn't had any noticeable
impact uh in the sense of you know
there's this sort of it's you know
there's this sort of zombie-like
approach. It's like okay we're going to
do this again. We're going to follow
this model of subsidizing costs but
again we're not really subsidizing them
in the sense of they're they're in this
magical place. the subsidy is what we
pay for. And in the end, when you take
away your tax base, your residential
base, you know, the relatively small
amount of people in the city that own
their homes, um you're basically robbing
Peter to pay Paul. And then you're also
kicking people down who who really do
need the help. You know, why don't we
have a policy where we actually
incentivize first-time home buyers for
these kind of things rather than a
business that's going to settle in the
city anyway? Well, well, Michael pointed
out to me with some of the numbers, this
developer in particular with that one
annexation that happened yesterday off
of Gordy Road or Gordy Road in and Beum
Park Drive
>> that they've changed it from single
family homes into town homes,
>> which when you I guess the number they
used was about $160,000, right?
>> Yeah. 160,000.
>> So, if you take our per caterp
and 30% as the margin for affordable
home
>> Mhm. that that leaves you less than
$1,000 in this county if you use the per
cate uh income
>> income. Yeah.
>> So, we're we're building homes that
aren't in that affordable housing
demographic. We're waving fees that then
get put on to the people who are paying.
>> Well, and not only that, but we're also
just missing a kind of an easier fix.
And you and I had talked about this
yesterday at the the council meeting,
but you know, we are still waiting in
perpetuity, it seems, over the city just
adding an affordable housing component
to their code. Um, that would have now
that was brought up by councilwoman Deil
and Jackson in regard to this project.
They said, "Is there a way to stipulate
that there is an affordable housing
component?" Um I'm wondering when I know
April and I or Councilwoman Jackson and
I when there was an annexation wasn't I
think West Road beyond West Road
>> and um I realize that annexation is
separate. We don't have control over
what they do after it's annexed. But I'm
wondering if it wouldn't be helpful if
we would um find figure out what our
policy is as far as what's going to be
built on properties that are asking to
be annexed and whether we revisit the
idea of having affordable housing as
part of that requirement for the
development when you are annexing it.
just a question uh I would like to throw
out there.
>> I agree.
>> It's certainly something we can look
into. The zoning classification I think
Jennifer said would be 5A. So you've got
those permitted uses within 5A. And if
we're if we want to build something in
for affordable housing, we just need to
do that as a team. And it's not even the
point of building just for um affordable
housing, but when they build these these
developments,
>> we were asking that they would have a
certain amount of affordable
houses in there, you know, like if
you're building a development, you're
building like um apartments,
>> if you're building 75, at least make
sure 10 or 15 of them are affordable.
But would that be more appropriate for
at the beginning end for like did like
in the initial and for planning and
planning to to kind of know before it
gets to okay so thank you for those
suggestions and we'll we'll uh pivot
that and work together for that
>> and when I spoke um I just made the
comment well you can do it even a lot
simpler and a lot more cohesive by
putting it in the code itself but as I
said I don't believe they'll ever do it
because I don't believe they're serious.
>> Well what other solutions should they
consider? I mean, what what what else
are are the elected officials maybe
missing in when they're deciding if
these processes are are beneficial for
the taxpayers or not?
>> I think that
the reason why we're in this place with
the hero is home is that the the way
that people are selling this is a very
belief laden. So, a lot of the problem
in our um in our local political scene
echoes the problems on the national
scene where people just want to be
right. They want to believe that the
answer is going to arise when you
believe the right thing about the
circumstance, about the situation, about
the people.
>> Faith will get you there.
>> Yeah. And it is a religious mindset
where people just have this, like you
said, a faith that this is just all
going to work out if we just do the
right thing. And how do we know it's the
right thing? Well, this person over here
told me conveniently enough. And it's
just we have to stop operating that way,
you know, um, in the political game
locally. So, are we missing this because
we're we're too worried about separating
ourselves into Democrats and Republicans
and which may work on the national
level, but is maybe not working for us
here locally? That's a part of it.
Although you could make the argument and
I will that in terms of the typical kind
of corporist approach whether you're a
Dem or Republican there's actually a
pretty big consensus on that it would
seem even at the state level and
certainly locally meaning when it comes
to the big business interests of you
know they'll use the term being
businessfriendly. Um I tend to look at
that as corporate welfare more often
than not. And I do think that there is
an odd party consensus at least among
kind of the mainstream like is that
>> I would say that like I agree with you.
I think it's the politically ambitious
versus the serviceminded amongst us.
That's that's the contrast I would draw.
So you have people like the Deshawn
Doubt if you can look at the summary of
the council comments at the end.
>> Uh when it comes to April Jackson, she's
talking about game on a program that the
city ran in parks in the city. She's
talking about Real Life for Life. Um
Sharon Deile has been talking about uh
programming at the Firehouse. Um their
comments are summarizing things going on
in the community. When we went to when
we pivot to Angela or Deshawn, Gregory
wasn't there, but like Deshan's talking
about his going to some governor's
conference about I don't know some kind
of new office for equity inclusion they
made. Um the only thing I have is that I
had the opportunity to um to attend the
governor's um subc cabinet uh for social
economic procurement summer round table
and again it fits with our discussion
earlier. Um but we were just discussing
um and they were trying to get some
insight on making sure that minority
small women um small small businesses
and minority um businesses were were
getting their piece of the pie when it
comes to um the procurement procurement
process. And so it was really um I know
that folks here have I remember the
comments of concern over developments
that are happening here and making sure
that again not just the big developers
or the big construction companies are
are getting that and so again this is a
concern is trickling down. So um
initiative that from the top from the
state level down they are effective
October 1 um they are creating the
Maryland Department of Social and
Economic Mobility um which they are
comprising um three offices together. of
the governor's office of small minority
and women business affairs, the office
of social equity, and the office of
minority business enterprises. Their
mission, I'm going to read it briefly,
is to advance social and economic
mobility for all Marylanders by removing
structural barriers, investing in
inclusive opportunities, and aligning
state resources to support historically
underserved communities and businesses.
They realize that there's too much red
tape. They realize that they need to
stream streamline the resources. Um, and
so they realize that it's easier if all
those resources are going through one
office to make sure that that you, the
Marylanders, are reaping the benefits
and that you you're getting your piece
of the pie. So again, proud of the
office. They they were here on the
Eastern Shore. They were listening. Um,
so I can't wait for what's going to come
there come of that. Uh, special
secretary um, Martinez, she I I will
I'll find some kind of way, but she she
shared her email. She said if folks have
concerns, if they're not XYZ, she said
reach out to her office and they will
make sure that um that you all are being
heard. Again, this is the governor's
office of small minority and women
business affairs um under Governor um
our our governor Westmore.
>> Sounds great, but local it doesn't
really have any local relevance beyond
namechecking things.
>> Yes.
>> And I think we've used the term before
clout chasing.
>> Yes. you know, when you have and we know
this obviously from examples with the
executive and others, you know, when
when so much of the focus is on trying
to be seen with the right people rather
than actually address the situation on
the ground that people are dealing with,
you you do see that sort of gap between
and I love the way you put it, sort of
the serviceminded and the
>> politically ambitious.
>> Politically ambitious.
>> Yeah.
>> So, did they decide to annex us annex
the the property?
>> They did. There's a property on Johnson
Road that I believe they're looking to
develop 248 town homes on, which is
fantastic. The thing I suggested to them
is I know people who own homes on
Johnson Road who receives that uh that
probably desperately need to be annexed
in due to failing septic, which is an
ongoing issue that, you know, everyone's
aware of in the county. Um, and I think
that we're really sitting missing out on
an opportunity where we could maybe when
that developer wants to develop a lot to
add more people in. Maybe there are some
of the old homes that are there that are
remaining outside that, you know, could
benefit from that arrangement at the
same time.
>> Tie in at the same time.
>> Yeah. Well, I I do hope to have Mayor
Randy Taylor back in and and kind of
update us on just really where some of
these other developments uh downtown and
and out out in the these new areas that
the city's looking to annex would would
impact the bottom line because I mean,
believe it or not, we're only 6 months
away from starting budget season again,
which seems like it's inevitable. So,
well, thank you, Michael. Thanks for
coming out for me.
>> So, stay with us. When we come back,
we're going to bring back in Mike
Goldberg and we're going to talk a
little bit more about the city
annexation. So stay with us. We'll be
right back.
Welcome back to Open Agenda. Mr. Mike
Goldberg, thanks for sticking around.
Thanks for coming in. Dr. Joanos is
still with us.
>> Yep.
>> So it was very interesting to see the
points Michael was making when it come
to the annexation,
the the cost that is being associated
with waving these hookup fees for a
developer.
>> Yeah.
>> Uh the the numbers, the low-end numbers,
you're talking over $1 million.
Uh he brought up the potential on
Johnson Road for some older county homes
to get hooked up and maybe they should
look at annexation themselves as a
possibility. I know there's a lot to
that. It's not just you don't just, you
know, check check a box. But Michael,
we've we've been listening to this with
the sanitary district and right now the
sanitary district, they have agreed to
proceed with three different areas to
give city services at the county's
expense uh to put the infrastructure in.
The state's funding this with a grant,
as you like to say, Joe, and then once
they're hooked up, they're going to be
paying city rates, actually at one and a
half times the city rate. Um, listening
to Michael's um, comment about how
expensive it is to get water and sewer,
are you glad you're not one of the
people paying for this?
>> I'm I I'll be glad until my septic
system fails.
>> You're always ahead until you're not.
I I think uh I I think the the thing
that's hard to put your mind around is
we're using state funds to subsidize
local projects that are in fact costing
us money at the local level when things
like an enterprise fund for water and
sewer
>> aren't funded. Right?
>> Look, there there's no free lunches out
there. You know, sooner or later you
have to pay the piper. And anytime you
offer any kind of a subsidy, then it's
going to be less revenue for whoever the
taxing authority is. And that money
comes from all of us, everybody out
there. And you know, eventually you're
going to have to to pony up into this
collective system. And it um you know,
has
>> there's some bad things that go along
with that. Joe, you know, one thing that
kind of resonated with me was listening
to Michael talk about political clout
versus uh ambition and and and and
understanding how that process works.
>> Yeah.
>> You know, in in our community with city
council, you're talking five elected
officials, the county council and the
executive talking additional eight.
>> We we've talked many times on this show
about whether it's county executive
being overly ambitious or former mayor
Jake Day, you know, in his ambitions and
he's been successful getting into the
state government. uh former uh delegate
Carl Anderson same way.
>> Mhm.
>> Are we are we being misled as taxpayers?
Are we are we funding their political
ambition?
>> I mean, I think that's to some extent
that's always true regardless even
amongst the most well-meaning
politicians. I think the difference
though is that are
are the policies that we are pursuing
with this particular class of local
political figures that we're talking
about. Are we getting anything for it in
in in in a in a improved
quality of life real time situation?
>> Is what you all are asking in the city
are you asking for? Is is your ultimate
goal just to get to affordable housing?
Is that what you're trying to get to?
>> You know, it was interesting cuz as
Michael and I were there watching the um
presentation at the city council of, you
know, they were unveiling the new uh
city website,
>> which is great. It needed to be updated.
Uh they, you know, they had some
computer issues setting it up, but once
they did, they showed the website and it
it was great. And they were talking
about all this, you know, downtown
development, business development. And
then at a certain point, somebody
turned, I think it was a city employee
who turned to one of us and said, "Don't
like 90% of people in Salsbury live
outside of downtown?"
And this is part of the thing that we
fail to think about is we're so busy
sometimes looking at the shiny object
here that you forget that there's all
this other stuff that we neglect. It
might not be, you know, as sexy as a
downtown event, but, you know, roads do
need repair, even bike lanes. Um, you
know, we have to fix the issue of I like
I I think, you know, we have a huge
crisis of senior citizens not having
access to a bus. Um, those are basic
city functions that that I think um we
have looked beyond because we've
followed other projects that aren't
really as tangible for regular people.
And so to to that point, I would almost
have more respect for their political
ambitions if the tangible benefits were
actually seen by regular everyday people
who are not involved with the Greater
Salsbury Committee or not involved in
lobbying groups in Annapolis. I'm
talking about your regular person who is
not politically connected.
>> Well, Mike, you you and I, we've we were
at county council meetings last week and
it was raining that day. It was a
challenge to find parking uh down there
at that point. You're talking about a
website. I mean, is a website going to
make you go downtown anymore than having
a place to park?
>> Personally, I I avoid going downtown. I
go downtown to go to the council
meetings. Um it's not where I go for a
meal. And um
>> not even ice cream, huh?
>> Well, I won't make a special trip,
although the ice cream downtown is
pretty darn good, I must say. But when
you have uh difficulty in parking takes
all the fun out of it. You know, I I
don't want to be riding around the block
looking for some place to park. And I
also don't want to have to pay through
the nose just to go down and downtown
and have a scoop of ice cream.
>> I avoid downtown. and having cultural
amenities, for instance, the forthcoming
performing arts center. What does that
do to change the quality of life for
people who live outside the central
business district?
>> Doesn't really do anything for them.
>> If the rest of the folks can't get down
there to enjoy the the art center, then
it it really won't matter.
>> Exactly.
>> And if the people who are living already
in that area can't afford their water
bill, they're just going to leave, too.
So, you know, it's it's it's really
really weird how you're stuck.
>> And that's the dynamic is that I don't
think we're and like you know, I don't
want to be Michael and I, you know,
we're we're I mean, I'm not as artsy as
as he is and certainly not as talented,
but when we talk about cultural things
in the city, we recognize those are
really important things. That's that's
part of what in human history have made
cities places where artists go. That's
not going to change anytime soon. But
you can't have that without no basis for
other quality of life improvements.
>> And it has to be on a certain scale too.
You know, if if you have largecale
cultural performing arts projects
downtown, we have to we need to
recognize we're a small city here in a
very small and not particularly affluent
county. It has to be proportional, I
think. And uh unless we want to be
Philadelphia or Baltimore, I don't think
most people in Wcomakico County want to
be Baltimore.
>> You know, one thing it brings to mind is
kind of a chuckle through some really
serious stuff, but sometimes some of the
politicians have joked about our
background on this show and the whole
point of our background is to show
sometimes what we think we're acting
like, not what we really are. I mean,
we're I
>> So this isn't Salsbury is what you're
saying.
>> It's somebody's vision of what they
think Salsbury is.
>> I think I know the guy you're talking
about.
>> Yeah. Yeah. And and you know, I'm proud
of where I live and where I'm from. Um
but and I'm glad it doesn't look like
this background, but that's what the
background's for.
>> And look, I'm downtown almost every day
with my son, you know, like we're always
doing stuff down there. There's a there
is a lot to do and it's great, but it is
never going to be a metropolitan center
in the way that
>> some people would believe if we just
subsidized a couple local developers a
little bit more.
>> Those things happen organically anyway.
You can't force them. I mean, Walt
Disney can,
>> but outside of that,
>> you can't you can't curate a urban
district like that.
>> Although, you can destroy it. And
there's the historical reasons for why
Downtown is the way it is anyway.
>> And those mistakes, those scars are
still there. The build it and they will
come, you know, theory, it it doesn't
really work except in the movies.
>> No, but bulldoze it and they will go,
did
>> Well, thank you, gentlemen. Appreciate
it. Thanks for watching this episode of
Open Agenda. We'll be back later this
week with another new episode.
Otherwise, we're in the blind here.
