Transcript: Mayor de Blasio Holds Press Availability Following Staten Island Meeting On Sandy Recovery, Hosted By Borough President James Oddo

February 24, 2014

Video available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkQhpqaVoZQ&feature=share

Mayor Bill de Blasio: …About the challenges that this city now faces in terms of both recovery from Sandy and resiliency going forward. And I just want to credit my colleagues. This is a bipartisan group. There’s a tremendously constructive spirit. A lot of us have worked together for many years, and I think that helps to create an atmosphere of cooperation. But I think the central point here is that – my colleagues here are making very clear how many people are still hurting, how many people are still experiencing Sandy in a very sharp, distinct way. And how much we have to do better at our response. All levels of government have to do better. And I agree with that. I don’t want to in any way suggest anything but that. We know we have to do better. We know in my new administration it’s our obligation to put together a plan to build upon some of the things we think were done right in the previous administration, and address some of the challenges and some of the things that weren’t what they needed to be. But we’re committed to doing that. And I think the – the sharpness of the discussion was that each and every person as we went around the table talked not just about specific problems that are hurting people right now, but they talked about specific solutions. So it was very constructive, very helpful. I want to say the – the borough president is a dear friend. We’ve worked together for many years. And I appreciate his leadership in bringing us together, and I appreciate the way he is standing up for this borough to make sure that people’s needs are responded to. And with that, I welcome – to your own house – the borough president.

 

[Laughter]

 

Staten Island Borough President James Oddo: Thank you Mr. Mayor. Good afternoon everybody. Welcome to Staten Island. It’s wonderful to see – to see so many people in the media so concerned about Sandy. I want to thank Mayor de Blasio for coming out and bringing his folks with him. A few days after Sandy first hit, when I was still in the city council and the mayor was the public advocate, Borough President Molinaro had us here. And then-Public Advocate de Blasio and I actually toured some of the hard-hit Sandy areas. And we have been in communication ever since. But today is a really important day. We’ve tried to pack in as many meetings in six weeks here at borough hall, but this – by far – is the most critical. Because this has been a really difficult time, post-Sandy. And each of us in office has struggled with not being able to help the people we represent to the degree that we want. And to me, today signifies that there is a return to the sense of urgency to an entire mayoral administration. And that’s good news for all of us as elected officials, and that’s good news for the people that we represent. I said to the mayor earlier that much of the six weeks in office that I’ve spent here in this building has been about my staff and I dealing with some of the sins of the ‘60s, ‘70s, ‘80s and early ‘90s here on Staten Island. And I don’t want to be a part of making the mistakes that will impact the next generation.

 

And I stressed to the mayor that we believe strongly in something called Acquisition for Redevelopment, and I know Jill Jorgensen and those folks, the local media are familiar with this. When Council Member Vinny Ignizio and I went down to New Orleans in January, we brought back with us a lesson learned. And that is acquiring property so that we can redevelop it over time and redevelop it smartly. And that’s one of the things that I think we are leaving with the mayor, that there is an opportunity for us to transform communities and transform lives of Staten Islanders. These are some of the notes that I took from that trip, and the top one – it says New Orleans recap. The top one, Mr. Mayor, leadership and resources. And today was about making sure that an entire administration led by Bill de Blasio is there for the people of Staten Island. And I’m very happy about what we got accomplished today, but I’m also aware of how much – how much work we still have left to do. And we will do that together. And we will do that with the mayor at the point on it. So, today was an important day. And again, I appreciate the mayor and his staff for being here.

 

Mayor: Thank you very much. And I want to say that the borough president makes a powerful point. That this is not just about addressing fervent and immediate issues, it is also a transformative moment. And we have to see it as such. And I appreciate that that’s his world view and he’s helping this whole public discussion to move in that direction. Let me just thank Council Member Ignizio, Assembly Member Malliotakis, Assembly Member Borelli, Council Member Rose, Council Member Matteo, Senator Savino and Senator Lanza. Again, all colleagues that I respect, many of whom I’ve worked with for many years. And we are going to work closely on these issues going forward. Let’s take questions first on Sandy-related issues, then we’ll do some off-topic questions. So anything related to Sandy first.

 

Question: You speak a lot about a need to do a review of those housing recovery projects going on. Can you speak a little bit about what you think in Build it Back is working, and what maybe isn’t working and needs to be tweaked, needs to be adjusted. And also, just a little bit about your plans for leadership of the Housing Recovery Office as Katherine Mallon prepares to leave?

 

Mayor: Yes, and we appreciate her service. I think she did a lot of good work under obviously very difficult circumstances. Look, I think – Build it Back I’m still learning, and that will be part of our plan [inaudible] some of our view of where we take it from here.  It’s self evident that the pace has been a profound problem. And that the amount of paperwork and the difficulty for people completing the paperwork [inaudible] of the sort of classic bureaucratic process has been a real problem. That doesn’t negate what might be good about the program, but right now for a lot of people it’s still more theory than facts. So that’s part of our review, to figure out where it fits in our constellation of efforts. And to figure a way to make something as streamlined as humanly possible, and as local as humanly possible. A lot of people have said to me that it’s just very hard to access the folks that they need to talk to in the government. And we want to see how we can fix that.

 

Finally, I just want to note – and again, I know the borough president will jump in whenever he is so moved. But – he’s usually shy and retiring. The – we’ve all been working hard over this last year-plus to address what was the greatest natural disaster in the history of New York City. And I just have to offer my admiration to so many people here who have worked incessantly to help their communities. But with that came a federal response, a state response, a city response, which by definition needs constantly to be coordinated – like everything else when those three levels of government are trying to work together. And I think we can honestly say in the way that the federal legislation was written, the recovery effort was made – in some ways – more complicated. So that’s another thing that we’ve had to navigate. Look, this is the hand we’re dealt. So we all have to find a way to make this work as best possible. But the level of will, at least, of the folks around me, to find every available solution is intense. Yes, Dave?

 

Question: Mayor, this morning at this news conference at city hall about the Build it Back program, and there were a lot of people there who were disappointed in – in the failures of the program. There was one young man there named Bennet – Bennet – you campaigned at his house in the Far Rockaways [inaudible]. And afterwards, a lot of talked to him and we asked him, ‘Are you disappointed in the work that this administration, this mayor has done so far on Sandy?’ And he basically in so many words said, ‘Not yet, but I’m getting close.’ What message do you have to someone who is still struggling, a year and a half after Sandy? And he has a lot of hope in you, but he’s starting to get pretty disappointed.

 

Mayor: Well I think everyone who’s experience the effects of Sandy – by nature [inaudible] nature, should be frustrated with everything. They should be frustrated again with all three levels of government, all of us. They – and I understand why humanly. I’m not saying [inaudible] We are devoted to quickly coming out with a plan that we hope will right some of these wrongs, and then we’re very devoted to mayoral leadership. One of the things we talked about in the room is the fact that I’m going to have to play a very hands-on role to fix some of these problems, and I’m devoted to doing that. So I don’t blame anyone who’s frustrated. I would say to them – I think fairly and objectively – when our plan comes out soon, judge that. Judge our plan when you see it and decide what you think of it, but give us at least the time to put together a meaningful plan

 

Question: What’s the timetable [inaudible]

 

Mayor: In the coming weeks. I have to say, this is a new administration, obviously with many, many efforts that we are trying to undertake simultaneously, as with any new administration. So in the next few weeks, you’ll see a plan. Marcia?

 

Question: Can you give a sense of the scope of the problem? How many people, you know, are without homes? They’re not living at homes or are needy of the kind of aid that you can provide?

 

Mayor: Well I want the borough president to speak about that in terms of Staten Island. I think – look, we know the facts that, again, despite the good intentions of Build it Back, for example, very few people have been reached. We know that there are tens of thousands of people in this city still feeling the effects of Sandy very sharply. So, part of what I want to do in our plan is define what we’re going to do for each kind of person affected in some kind of real timeline. And challenge ourselves, and challenge ourselves to figure out if some of the complications are between the three levels of government. I’m not going to throw up my hands at that. Look, I’ve been through different things in my career, including when I was part of the Empowerment Zone program, back in my days at HUD. And in that instance, you had different levels of government that were in pretty strong disalignment, or unalignment I guess is the word – that nonalignment. Whatever it word it is that – not working together with a common vision. Here we have – I think we’re blessed. With the current federal administration, the state government here in the city, actually a lot of alignment. A lot of ability to communicate, a lot of shared values. And I’m hopeful that that will allow us to make some more sense of this. But why don’t you speak to the numbers?

 

Borough President Oddo: Well I think Katherine Mallon could give you some of the local numbers on Staten Island. but let's say there are 4,000 people in the program. A quarter of them are sort of, have been deemed unresponsive. They just haven't returned a phone call or responded to a letter, but the end number that I think you're interested– how many people have made a decision, and their lives are taking a specific direction is a fraction of those 4,000. To me, though, the more important issue is, how do we help them today? What is the best way of helping them– and at the same time, transforming communities? And again– I will keep saying it, because this is my one opportunity to say it in front of everyone– acquisition for redevelopment. It's the best way of getting people help. It's the fastest way. It is a check cut into their hands, and it also then gives us, as government, more time to take this property and then redevelop it smartly, not do ad hoc. My fear is, and the concern is– as Councilwoman Ignizio and I witnessed firsthand in New Orleans – is a one-off, is an ad hoc development of communities that doesn't elevate a community, literally or figuratively. And we miss an opportunity to take all [this] pain and loss, and transform that into some good.

 

And just to today's point – we feel it. Every single person up here who is an elected official feels it. This is our home community. We saw images that we thought we were reserved for a television. And we understand his frustration. And that's why I said today, what I'm taking from this meeting, is that there is a sense of urgency across our whole administration – not just one deputy mayor, not just a bunch of people siloed – the whole administration. That's the commitment that we've gotten from Mayor de Blasio. And that's what it's going to take 16 months into this to really help people. So I get – all of us – and I think the mayor gets his frustration.

 

Question: [Inaudible]. Philadelphia-based [inaudible] responsible for running Build it Back [inaudible]

Mayor: No [Laughter] Not at all

Question: Do you have any plans in the future to meet with their executive leaders and find out – since they’re the ones who have a $50 million contract. They’ve spent nine – more than $9 million already administering Build it Back. And they’ve been in charge of it since July and have basically done – very, very little.

Mayor: We’re going to do a full review. That’s the whole point here. I have said about the previous administration. I had a lot of respect for and agreement with their plans of resiliency going forward and we’re using that as our initial blueprint. But I think in the response to Sandy was very uneven. There some things that worked and some things that did not. And we’re doing the full review. We’re setting our own framework of how we want to proceed, our own personnel, and then we’re going to announce that. And that’s then what we should be held accountable for. So certainly any contracts in the process will be reviewed as part of that. Yes, Kate?

Question: [inaudible] During the campaign where you visited in the Rockaway’s. You said that you thought that the federal resources to help recover from Sandy. Did you use not just the right the wrongs of Sandy, but to right greater wrongs. To work on affordable housing, creating minimum wage jobs, community, health centers, do you still think that those schools are appropriate use of new resources?

Mayor: I think the discussion on that was another example of something we have to work on here in this city. I think a false choice was created in some of the public debate and some of the news coverage over that. I want to turn to my friend here. We happen to be from different parties. He’s made the point that this effort has to be transformative.  That’s a key word he uses and I appreciate that word. I was saying the same thing – that we must serve the individuals are afflicted, the families who are afflicted. We also have one chance to take those resources and maximize the positive impact. A lot of the housing that was negatively affected for example are public housing developments by Sandy. We have to find the way in the process of recovery to do something transformative with them. For families that were dislocated, for businesses that were dislocated, you have families that not only lost their homes, they lost their income. My point in what I said out in the Rockaway’s is we have to see the ways in the build back process, in the recovery process to get jobs for people who lost their incomes. So I think it’s about taking a moment of crisis, trying to find the transformative possibilities within it, taking the resources that are coming in, and not just spending them in a sort of narrow, [inaudible], but saying what is the most we can get out of these resources that will leave people in better shape? And by the way, another thing I said is that some of the communities that were affected have been – you know, in many ways, neglected for decades. And never got the infrastructure they should have gotten in the first place. And if this is a moment for us to do something about that – and we cannot do it perfectly, we understand it – but if this is a moment for us to start to right some of those historic wrongs, we have to take it. Yes?

Question: Mr. Mayor, do you think the last administration didn’t allocate enough money to housing recovery in that first tranche of that money? Is that a part of what [inaudible]

 

Mayor: I don’t want to offer an opinion without sufficient analysis. And again, we’re going through our review. My critic is based on different pieces, from elements of the lead-up to the storm, to some of the things done in the weeks after in terms of trying to address immediate human needs. And then obviously, some of the things we’ve seen with the recovery that have been slow and bureaucratic. I’m the first to say, some of it is just the sheer, incredibly difficult extent of the problem, which no one could ever have anticipated, and is a hand we’ve all been dealt together regardless of party or  any – geography or any other factor. But some of it, at the same time, in my view, is about understanding in crisis we have to break down some of the normal bureaucratic procedures and find a way to provide a kind of leadership that transcends business as usual. And I – you know from my layman’s point of view, not enough of that happened, and obviously too many people are suffering. We have to come up with a plan that is honest about what we think we can do, recognizing at the same time that there’s some huge structural roadblocks. Again, things like the way the federal legislation was written. But we have to show the people that we’re going to expend every conceivable effort to get them help. Let me get someone that hasn’t gone yet.

 

Question: Did you agree with the borough president’s idea of land – you know, acquiring land for redevelopment?

 

Mayor: I think it’s a very important issue to debate, and I think the borough president makes a powerful argument. I am not ready to endorse a specific plan because we have to go through our review and we have to decide our strategic stance. But I think it would be very healthy in this city to have a debate about where we’re going, and I think that’s one of the ideas that has to be on the table. Grace?

 

Question: Could you tell us a bit more about – I think it’s – I don’t mean to butcher his name, Michael Deloach, who – there was a report that he’s the administration’s point person on Sandy-related matters right now?

 

Mayor: No, he’s working with our intergovernmental team, so that’s an overstatement.

 

Question: Okay. So is he – so who then would be –

 

Mayor: Well that’s part of the whole review process, is there’s an existing group of personnel, and we respect them, who are working on different aspects of recovery and resiliency. Again, we’re going to do a thorough review and decide how we’re going to set our personnel package, how we’re going to put together our leadership structure and who’s going to be those key figures. So that will be a part of an announcement around our plan.

 

[inaudible]

 

Mayor: Yeah, let me do these two. Yes?

 

Question: As it stands now, things like Acquisition for Redevelopment are part of the Build it Back procedure. Should people be concerned that, you know, all this time and their options are going to change 16 months on as you kind of – you know, investigate or ­you know, decide how you want to approach things?

 

Mayor: I’ll start and I think the borough president may have a view here. I think – look, our job is to come up with the best plan we can to help the most people. I think right now a lot of people are concerned they’re not getting the help they need. So our job is to say what we think will get help to the most people the most quickly and be the best long-term planning. So I think – I think what would be refreshing is the notion of a more coherent plan that the public of this city can make sense of and understanding that the buck stops here with that plan. And that’s what we intend to put forward. Let me let the borough president step –

 

Borough President Oddo: Yeah, Jorge, you know options are going to change irrespective of what we do to the extent that there won’t be many more state buyouts. And a lot of people are holding hope – holding out hope that they will be part of a buyout. And the reality is, you will not see large swathes of property like Oakwood Beach bought to be preserved and seeded back to Mother Nature. During the intake meeting at Build it Back, you are asked, ‘Would you be interested in selling your property, buyout, acquisition.’ So that data is there. I guess our point is, we want to double down on that and really find out who’s interested, then kind of graph that, see where it is. Those Build it Back rebuilds outside of those zones move full speed ahead, but those areas that we’ve graphed out, see how much of that contiguous property we can acquire, get as blank a slate, if you will, and then redevelop smartly. And that means a different type of housing stock. That means putting in real infrastructure. And talk about transformative– my old council district, Councilmember Matteo's district, these folks live, some of them live, on streets that are three or four or five feet below sea level. It doesn't take an historic storm. It doesn't even take a good nor'easter. Any rain, they're under water. It's a good place to live with the right infrastructure. So instead of doing one-offs– this bungalow here, that house there– try to acquire as many contiguous pieces of property. It gives help, in the form of money, to people as quickly as possible, and it gives government a chance to now, take a step back and figure out, how do we redevelop this property to create a better housing stock, to create a better community. 

Mayor: Marcia.

Question: I'm wondering if in the [inaudible] problems, if you're talking about rebuilding housing stock in a better way that elevates them from sea level, or you would build different kinds of structures that stay more storm resilient?

Borough President Oddo: Yeah, I think that you have – in some sections – this is neighborhood-to-neighborhood changes, and within a neighborhood block-to-block, it changes. So some places you can replace the existing housing with a one-family home. Maybe in other places you can replace what we used to call on Staten Island a mother-daughter, where you have – it's technically a two-family home. It's a house and an apartment. There, there's your rental component, which is a very big part of our housing stock. In other places, and this is sort of like the third rail of politics on Staten Island, because we had an overdevelopment problem, but maybe, maybe, in one particular block, where you had a string of bungalows, you could put a three story apartment building, and then keep the rest of it as open space. Look at Arverne by the Sea. I don't want that density. I don't want that size. I want that sustainability, and I want that planning. So, the one thing, Marcia, is that we know one size does not fit all in this approach. But, to foreclose us, to foreclose those options, by reflexively going in an ad hoc-ing house-by-house – I don't think that is the best long-term plan for the people and for these communities.

Mayor: Let me just frame that a little more broadly. Look, this is going to be years of work. And our first obligation is to help people who right now don't have a place to live, who right now don't have a stable income. But, going forward we have a whole series of very complicated things that we have to address. We've got important parts of infrastructure, where we are still as susceptible today as we were two years ago, you know, where generators are still in the basement, where all sorts of fundamental physical realities are just as vulnerable as they were. We have to consistently act with federal resources and other resources to try to strengthen that situation. We have people in areas, as I said, that have been in many ways left behind for many, many decades. We have to try to create better and more sustainable housing and economic opportunities for them. There's a series of things that we have to do over time, and then, on top of that, as I said, I do commend the Bloomberg administration's resiliency plan, because I thought it was realistic. It depended on a number of measures that we can take in the short term, which are the ones we want to of course focus on first, and then some, I think smart longer-term solutions like restoring wetlands, for example, which are an organic solution and a proven solution.

So, we have a series of things, and our job is to line them up, prioritize them, figure out where the resources are, what red tape we have to cut to get the resources in play, how to maximize the economic benefit it would have to the people who were affected in the process of doing this recovery work and resiliency work, and just as quickly as possible, move each piece in a logical progression. That's the way our game plan will look. Doing all that, we know there will always be other things we have to get to. And so, I think there's an honest, sort of seriousness among this group, and I think it was reflected in the conversation. Because we've seen firsthand how much dislocation occurred. And we know it's going to take so much work to really get everyone whole and then to really make these neighborhoods strong and resilient going forward. This is work we'll be at together for years. But I think the public deserves to know what our priorities are, what our sense of timeline is, and to hold us to it or, if something doesn't work the way we planned it, they deserve an explanation why it didn't work and why we've amended our plan. But I don't think at this moment we have a clear starting point for that public discussion, and that's our responsibility to put forward.

Question: Mr. Mayor, at this point, in New York City, how many people, you had mentioned, don't have a permanent place to live, and don't have a stable and steady income, as a result of Sandy, how many people are you talking about?

Mayor: That's part of our review, to clarify– as I've said, I think, from my vantage point, the work I've done, I think tens of thousands of people are still deeply affected by Sandy, but I want to be able to break that down very specifically. 

Question: [inaudible]

Mayor: Tens of thousands affected, either in terms of they lost their business, they lost their home, they lost income, that has still dislocated their lives. I think a huge impact, obviously, was had, and is still being felt by many people, and that's – but we have to quantify that and show exactly how we're going to address that, within the resources we have. Let's go to off topic. Who we got here? Yes. Did you have something there? OK, here.

Question: [inaudible] CNN –

Mayor: Hey. 

Question: From a national perspective, you seem to be getting hammered in the press. Everything from perceived favoritism, to how you're driving, to handling the snowstorms and schools closings. Do you think that some of the criticism is fair, or is the criticism unjustified?

Mayor: I think it comes with the territory. I think the school closings is a great example. A mayor has to make that decision. I think it's an objective statement: if you close schools, a certain number of people will be unhappy, if you keep schools open, a certain number of people will be unhappy. You have to make the decision you think is right, in terms of the needs of our kids, the safety of our kids, the needs of our families, their education, you know, which has to be another paramount concern. So, this is part of decision-making in a high-scrutiny environment. And it comes with the territory. 

Question: Do you feel you're being treated unfairly?

Mayor: I think the notion that there's going to be scrutiny again is baked into this whole reality, and you know, if you don't like the heat get out of the kitchen, as Harry Truman used to say, and I chose to take the heat. I think there has to be a different examination of what matters and what doesn't matter in the scheme of things. Today, we're talking about preparing our city against further natural disasters. We're talking about trying to help thousands of thousands of people back on their feet. On Friday, we're talking about saving community health care, and hopefully resetting a dynamic where we've lost over a dozen hospitals in the last 12 years. These are issues that fundamentally affect people's lives, and I think that's where the public debate should reside. And I think too much of the time, the debate veers away into sideshows, but I'm not shocked by that. Grace.

Question: You were talking about focusing on issues that matter. One of the issues that you talked about in your administration is street safety, traffic safety, and unveiling your Vision Zero plan, you said that your administration would be held to the same standards. For many New Yorkers who saw the video footage of your chauffeured vehicles speeding and blowing through stop signs, they said, you know this doesn't look like an administration that's following its own policies, or even following through on promises that the mayor made two days earlier –

Mayor: Let me just respectfully say, I'm not interested in the construct of what you, as an individual think many New Yorkers think. I say that with absolute respect. I talk to New Yorkers all the time, my colleagues talk to New Yorkers all the time. Let's not get into this concept of any of us will speak for all the people. I owe the people a vision, which I had put forward last year, and I'm acting on this year. They have every right to demand of all of us that we follow through on that which we said we would do, and we intend to do that. Every city employee needs to respect the law, myself included, needs to respect the traffic laws, needs to comport themselves in a way that's safe, of course. No one's above the law. That's a fundamental view I hold in everything I think about public life in a democratic society. I think that's a very different question, however, from the question of security for someone protected by the NYPD. And I think those two things should be separated, and my view was, that hasn't happened enough in the last few days. Of course we want consistency in terms of safety. I wouldn't have put forward Vision Zero if I wasn't fundamentally serious. It could have been really easy to put forward something less. I believe in it. There's a reason why it's such an extensive program. We aim to change this city fundamentally. But at the same time, there needs to be a respect for the fact that the NYPD provides security, and they do it in a very professional manner, and I will not get into a discussion of their security protocols. That's just a red line from my point of view, because that, to me, is a very slippery slope. I wish we were living in an environment where I didn't need security. I really do. But that's not the world we live in. In the back, yes?

Question: Mr. Mayor within the security context like for instance Danny Day Kim drove really fast. He went through lights using sirens going to and from an event. Mayor Bloomberg made it clear that he wanted to stop at traffic lights on a regular basis. And you know just have a different approach. Don’t you have some discretion when it comes to that?

 

Mayor: I would say, yeah please.

 

Question: You said [inaudible] that you would hold yourself to the same standard.

 

Mayor: Again let me separate the two thoughts. I think you ask an important question the front end but then I want to clarify the reality security. And again people can hear this and not hear it. But I will keep saying that there are two different issues of play here. One is the very legitimate concern in a democratic society that we all live up to our commitments and we all live up to the law. And none of us are above the law that is absolutely correct. And I would say my message to my detail and all city employees is obey the law, drive in a way that is safe and be careful threes no question about it. The second issue is how we think about security protocols. I don’t t4ll the NYPD how to do their work when it comes to protecting me, they’re the experts I respect that. So in any given moment they may see something I do not see. They may act in a way that isn’t immediately understandable to be but they are trained to handle things in a certain way. So I just want us to understand that there are two separate questions. Should everyone who works for me and should I follow the law scrupulously? Of course, yes. If the NYPD in any given instance believes there is a security for doing something a certain way I think that’s important to recognize and respect.

 

Question: [inaudible] any follow up after channel two?

 

Mayor: I don’t comment on security protocols or what individuals who provide security think. I don’t k now you can feel free to ask them. But I think that the point is and I am not speaking about that specific moment I am speaking about the bigger reality that I understand and appreciate. And I have seen it happen many times and by the way I long experience dealing with the Intelligence Division before I was Mayor and I have long experience in the very different vain dealing with the secret service. I respect that they see things we may not see it. They make decisions and I respect those decision. My general message to everyone who works for me is obey the law, be careful when driving, and that we are going to take this Vision Zero concept and apply it very effectively and consistently over the coming years. And we think it is going to make people safer in this town. Thanks very much.