Podcasts about reet

Sintonía: "Taking a Chance on Love" - Al Haig"Haditouni" - Douaa; "Music de carnaval" - Magdy Al Husseini (Egipto); "Ahl Jedba" - Fadoul (Marruecos); "Heik ha nishtghil?" - Munir Khauli (Marruecos); "Zina" - Ouiness (Marruecos); "Ya aen daly" (Stayin´ Alive/Bee Gees) - Najib Alhoush (Libia); "Bandala Zamana" - Zohra (Argelia); "Casbah" - Ahmed Malek (Argelia); "Reet" - Hamid El Shaeri (Libia); "Free Blow" (Dub Version) - Tony Benn Feghaly (Líbano); "Aït meslayen" - El Fen (Argelia)Todas las músicas extraídas de la recopilación (2xLP) "Habibi Funk - Part 2: An Eclectic Selection Of Music From The Arab World" (Habibi Funk, 2021)Escuchar audio

Episode 358: In Los Angeles, California, in the autumn of 1969, along winding Mulholland Drive, a young woman's body was discovered, brutally stabbed more than 150 times, her identity shrouded in mystery for nearly half a century. This Jane Doe, known only as case number 59, would lie nameless for the next 46 years, her story untold and her family unaware of her tragic fate. In a chilling twist, the proximity of her death to the infamous Tate-LaBianca murder scenes led investigators down a twisted path of speculation. The brutal nature of the crime sparked whispers of a possible connection to one of America's most notorious cults — the Manson Family. It wasn't until 2016 that modern forensic techniques finally gave her a name: Reet Silvia Jurvetson, a 19-year-old from Montreal who had ventured to L.A. with dreams as big as the Hollywood sign. Despite her identity now being known, Reet Jurvetson's murder remains unsolved. Her family is still hoping for answers more than 55 years later. Sources: The Murder of Marina Habe Helter Skelter: The True Story of the Manson Murders About Reet Jurvetson | Reet Jurvetson's Family Memorial Man Who Found Possible Manson Victim as Teen Speaks Out Forensic DNA analysis: technology and application (BP-443E) 'Jane Doe #59' was a 19-year-old from Montreal -- was she also a Manson victim? Woman found near Manson murders ID'd after 47 years ID of woman found near Manson murders site stirs mystery Who Killed Jane Doe #59 | CBC News Jane Doe found in L.A. in 1969 ID'd as Montreal teen | CBC News 'Who is he?': Sketch shows 'person of interest' at heart of probe into Canadian woman's brutal 1969 killing | CBC News Could Canadian's brutal 1969 stabbing death be connected to another L.A. cold case? | CBC News 'In a hurry': Did Canadian woman's killer drop his glasses as he got rid of body in L.A. in 1969? | CBC News Who Killed Jane Doe #59 : The Case of Reet Jurvetson - The Fifth Estate LAPD Seeks to Identify Two Men in Connection with Murder of Reet Jurvetson Reet Jurvetson: Was Jane Doe No. 59 a Victim of the Manson Family? Did Charles Manson Have 4 More Victims? 'There's an Answer There Somewhere,' Says LAPD Detective Murder of Reet Jurvetson | Wikipedia Reet Silvia Jurvetson (1950-1969) From the UnresolvedMysteries community on Reddit: Who are the two men named 'Jean' who Reet Jurvetson visited with before she was found murdered on November 16, 1969? https://www.reddit.com/r/UnresolvedMysteries/comments/gcypxe/who_are_the_two_men_named_jean_who_reet_jurvetson/ LAPD releases sketches of two men linked to 1969 killing of Canadian Reet Jurvetson Who Killed Jane Doe #59 : The Case of Reet Jurvetson - the fifth estate Reet Silvia Jürvetson (1950-1969) Facebook LAPD Seeks to Identify Two Men in Connection with Murder of Reet Jurvetson ID of woman found near Manson murders site stirs mystery Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Elke maandag nemen Dave, Jeff en Raj je mee langs de voetbalvelden van het weekend. Er worden meerdere voetbalwedstrijden besproken en natuurlijk worden er meer dan genoeg (on)belangrijke randzaken besproken!Je luistert voor het voetbalnieuws, maar blijft voor de humor!Word lid van Petje Af: https://petjeaf.com/bet-boys

Welcome back to Not For the Faint! On this episode, Alyssa covers the case of Kelsey Berreth, a young mom who went missing on Thanksgiving Day in 2018. Kelsey was last seen shopping with her daughter, and what initially seemed like a disappearance quickly turned into a homicide investigation. Alyssa dives into the details of how her fiancé, Patrick Frazee, orchestrated her brutal murder in a twisted attempt to take custody of their daughter. Afterwards, Summer takes us back to 1969 to talk about the mysterious murder of Reet Jurvetson, a young woman whose life came to a tragic end near Mulholland Drive. For decades, no one even knew her name. Summer walks us through the heartbreaking story, the decades-long search for answers, and the moment when Reet's identity was finally uncovered. Listener discretion is advised.Rate, review & subscribe!

Send us a textIn November 1969, a teenage boy out bird watching discovered the body of a young woman discarded along the famed Mulholland Drive in Los Angeles. Dubbed Jane Doe #59, this woman would be connected to the similar murder of Marina Habe, the Manson family, and Scientology—but investigators struggled to find out what happened to her. In 2015, a family friend finally identified her as 19-year-old Reet Jurvetson, who may have been connected to a man named Jean/John.Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/badactspodPodMoth: https://podmoth.network/Ad: Anything Bones Podcast — https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/anything-bones/id1536352309 Episode Source List:“Who Killed Jane Doe #59.” People Magazine Investigates. Season 3, Episode 15.https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/reet-jurvetson-killed-1969-could-be-manson-family-murder-victim-n564106https://people.com/crime/lapd-seeks-to-identify-two-men-in-connection-with-murder-of-reet-jurvetson/https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/reet-jurvetson-investigation-glasses-1.3850542https://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-jane-doe-manson-killings-identified-20160427-story.htmlhttps://www.cbc.ca/news/fifthestate/who-killed-jane-doe-59-1.4224867https://globalnews.ca/news/2932243/lapd-releases-sketches-of-two-men-linked-to-1969-killing-of-canadian-reet-jurvetson/ https://www.charlesmanson.com/family-members/john-haught/ 

#newepisode #collaboration #LifeCoach #Women Listen to this conversation with Reet Kundwani , a Life Coach settled in Dubai for last 13 years talking about who is and can be a Life Coach. Why is it necessary to work on the solution than running behind the problem One can connect with Reet at https://www.linkedin.com/in/reet-kundwani-b49054254?utm_source=share&utm_campaign=share_via&utm_content=profile&utm_medium=android_app Instagram https://www.instagram.com/lifecoach.reet/profilecard/?igsh=dXlqdGc0aWtkdWMz One can connect with us by writing to bachpankepitaresebkps@gmail.com #inclusivecommunity #bachpankepitarese✨️ #bilingualepisode

Wat is dat toch met die podcasttitels: ik bedenk ze altijd pas achteraf. En als ik ze dan bedenk, denk ik: had ik dit er niet gewoon in moeten zeggen? Enniewee, zo was het vandaag dus niet. Maar je hebt geklikt, dus je weet: ik moet dit even horen. Ik ben Adine en ik help rebelse Visionairs met het creëren van vrijheid in hun leven. In tijd, energie, maar zeker ook in geld. Niet met allerlei ingewikkelde strategieën en funnels, maar door je te helpen jezelf weer te ontdekken. Die AWESOME versie van jou die je veel te lang in een veel te klein jasje hebt geprobeerd te stoppen.  Ik geloof namelijk niet in one-size-fits all, maar in de kracht van jou als persoon. Jij bent hier met een reden en ik help je om die reden te vinden, om impact te maken vanuit jouw kern én om daar goed geld mee te verdienen.  Is mijn podcast waardevol voor je? Dan zou ik het enorm fijn vinden als je deze met 5 sterren waardeert op iTunes of Spotify, hem in je netwerk deelt en/of je abonneert, zodat je een melding krijgt bij elke nieuwe aflevering. Dankjewel alvast! En… wat gaat jouw volgende stap zijn?

Aujourd'hui, voici pourquoi Lisa Su, la PDG d'AMD, vient d'être nommée PDG de l'année 2024 par le magazine Time.Il faut dire qu'au milieu des annonces autour de la bataille de l'IA entre Qualcomm, Nvidia et Intel, AMD apparaît moins dans les titres de presse. Pourtant, la PDG de ce spécialiste de l'infrastructure vient d'être honorée.Alors pourquoi ce titre si prestigieux ?AMD a centuplé sa capitalisation boursièreEt bien pour commencer AMD a centuplé sa capitalisation boursière sous la direction de Lisa Su. En 2014, quand elle prend les commandes de ce géant des semi-conducteurs, l'entreprise traverse une période difficile.Mais grâce à une stratégie audacieuse et une vision claire, AMD est passé en 10 ans d'une capitalisation boursière de 2 milliards de dollars à plus de 200 milliards aujourd'hui.Un des plus grands tournants initié par la femme d'affaires a été le développement et la commercialisation de la gamme de processeurs AMD EPYC. Ce sont ces puces qui ont permis à AMD de devenir un acteur majeur dans les secteurs des serveurs informatiques et des centres de données. Sous le règne de Lisa Su, la part de marché de l'entreprise dans ce secteur est passée de 1 % à près de 34 %. De quoi damer le pion à l'éternel rival Intel, qui vient lui de perdre son PDG, mis de force à la retraite.Et les processeurs EPYC équipent aujourd'hui certains des superordinateurs les plus rapides et les plus économes en énergie au monde.La reine de l'innovationLe second point, c'est que Lisa Su est aussi une experte de l'innovation. Sous son leadership, AMD a investi massivement en recherche et développement, avec un montant de près de 6 milliards de dollars rien qu'en 2023.Ces investissements permettent à AMD de proposer désormais des solutions d'infrastructure pour l'intelligence artificielle, un domaine clé pour l'avenir.À titre d'exemple, AMD a récemment racheté Silo AI, un laboratoire d'IA en Europe, et ZT Systems, un fournisseur d'infrastructure spécialisé pour les géants du cloud.La plus grosse acquisition du secteur, c'est ellePour couronner le tout, Lisa Su a aussi marqué l'histoire des semi-conducteurs en réussissant la plus grosse acquisition jamais réalisée dans ce secteur. Il s'agit de celle de Xilinx, spécialiste de l'informatique adaptative.Une opération qui a fait d'AMD un leader incontournable du secteur.Née à Taïwan et diplômée du prestigieux Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Lisa Su a toujours été une pionnière. Elle a commencé sa carrière chez IBM et pilote aujourd'hui une entreprise à la pointe de l'innovation.Le ZD Tech est sur toutes les plateformes de podcast ! Abonnez-vous !Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Keep it Reet is a Drifting organization based in Australia, they focus on putting together fun and accessible drift events. They also have a strong focus on men's mental health. The name started as a joke(as a lot of things in drifting do) and has blown up over time. On the podcast we have the Founder Jason Ferron and right hand man Josh Rogers. We talk about the origins of Keep it Reet, and both of their early days of drifting. Jason has been touring the US with his R31 Wagon which he Barra swapped. He has also competed in Australia and in D1NZ as a top contender. They have some big plans for KIR, and hearing the story of how it all came to be is inspiring to anyone who wants to build something in the drift community.   Guest: https://www.instagram.com/keepitreet/  https://www.instagram.com/jasonferrondrift/ https://www.instagram.com/jbrogers_/ Sponsor:  https://fuelab.com/ 15% off with code “Goodest” get the best fuel system products in the game. https://koruworks.com/ 15% off their Koru products using “goodestboi” https://tirestreets.com/goodest "goodest651" for 20% off Accelera 651s “goodest15” for 15% off the rest Goodest Co: https://goodestco.com (grab some merch to support the podcast!) Host IG: https://www.instagram.com/palmer_sndrsn/Podcast IG: https://www.instagram.com/goodestcast/

Headlines from the week of November 13, 2024    - Orcas Vikings, Lopez Lobos, and Friday Harbor Wolverines all head to state soccer tournament    - Preparing for the Trump era    - McVeigh, Paulsen win council races, REET approved    - Catching up with Lopez graduates: Isara Greacen     - plus excerpts from the Sheriff's Log

De eerste periode van kabinet-Schoof is er één vol turbulentie geweest. Ondanks felle debatten is er op veel thema's nog maar weinig vooruitgang te bespeuren. In Vroeg! blikken we vandaag terug op die eerste periode. En kijken we vooruit naar de hordes die nog genomen moeten worden op het gebied van klimaat, landbouw en buitenlandbeleid.  Te gast zijn niemand minder dan de jongerenorganisaties van coalitiepartijen VVD en NSC: Mauk Bresser van de JOVD en Eva Brandemann, voorzitter en oprichter van Jong Sociaal Contract. 

Ajax wint met 1-0 van Willem II in Amsterdam, maar het was wéér niet sprankelend. Met De Klassieker in zicht niet de beste generale.. Bart en Jan bespreken alles in de Wedstrijdeditie!Zie het privacybeleid op https://art19.com/privacy en de privacyverklaring van Californië op https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hooaja avasaates on külas legendaarne Reet Linna. Muusikavaliku lähtekohaks on peagi lõppev suvi.

Aujourd'hui j'ai le plaisir de recevoir Anne Laure Thomas, Directrice Diversités, Equité & Inclusion L'Oréal en FrancePour elle tout est lié; la vie professionnelle comme personnelle.Quand son fils naît avec une maladie génétique, c'est à elle, en tant que mère, que l'on demande d'arrêter de travailler.Elle prend alors conscience de l'importance, pour elle, de ne rien sacrifier et de mener de front tout ce qui la nourrit pour mieux nourrir les autres.Cette gourmandise et cette générosité de cœur et d'esprit la caractérise.Elle est la colonne vertébrale de sa trajectoire.Si cohérente quand on connaît son histoire.Engagée dans des associations sur le handicap et la condition de la femme, on vient la chercher pour créer la direction de la diversité et de l'engagement des collaborateurs au groupe La Poste, puis chez L'Oréal France où elle est Directrice Diversités, Equités & Inclusion.Anne Laure croit à la magie des rencontres motivées par des envies de faire bouger les lignes notamment sur l'emploi des +de 50 ans.En 2035, 50% de la population en Europe aura + de 45 ans.La longévité est en enjeu stratégique.Et si la vie s'allonge les carrières vont s'allonger également.Donc la question se pose : que faire des séniors ?Dans cet épisode, nous abordons des questions telles que comment :capitaliser sur l'intergénérationnelmettre en lumière l'importance de l'employabilité continueaccompagner les transitions de carrièreEt nous sommes tombées d'accord sur ce qui est essentiel :montrer que c'est possible de vieillir avec peps et talent pour changer les mentalités et lever les biais.Avec cette conscience de ces essentiels aiguisée très jeune, Anne Laure nous partage sa philosophie pour traverser la vie avec le sourire accroché au cœur.---------------------------------------------------------------------------Vous aussi faites le choix de l'optimisme.Rejoignez la communauté des cinquantenaires rayonnantes et décomplexées.Cet épisode vous a plu ?N'hésitez pas à le commenter, ajouter ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ , le partager et à vous abonner.Rendez-vous au prochain épisode - Tous les 1er et 15 du moisEt en attendant…Croquez la vie à pleines dents !Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Sylt, die Insel in der Nordsee ist für viele Menschen in Deutschland der Inbegriff von High Society und Prominenz. Exorbitante Immobilienpreise, die Reichen und Schönen hautnah erleben, wilde Partys und das geballt auf engstem Raum. Was liegt da näher, als Eric Weißmann in meinen Podcast einzuladen. Im Jahr 2022 hat er sein Buch "Aber bitte mit Reet!: Ein Sylter Makler erzählt Geschichten von der schönsten Insel der Welt" auf den Markt gebracht - und ist auf Anhieb zum Bestseller geworden. Eric Weißmann lebt seit fast 20 Jahren auf Sylt und kennt die Insel wie kaum ein anderer (Makler). Neben seinem Hauptberuf als Immobilienmakler schreibt er auch noch sehr erfolgreich Bücher. Ganz neu: Den ersten Sylt Krimi überhaupt. "... In seinem Buch berichtet er vom ganz normalen Wahnsinn seines Berufsalltags zwischen Rolex und Reet, Strandkorb und Champagner. Von unerfüllten Sehnsüchten über erotische Kapriolen bis hin zu erbitterten Erbschaftsstreitigkeiten gibt es eine Menge zu erzählen. So entsteht ein hochamüsanter Streifzug über die Lieblingssandbank der Deutschen...." - Quelle: KNAUR Verlag - "Aber bitte mit Reet". "...Der Abend des traditionellen Sylter Sonnenwendfeuers endet mit einem Schock: die Leiche des Archsumer Großbauern Hinnerk Petersen wird in dessen Garten gefunden, alles deutet auf Mord hin. Auch Immobilienmakler Kristan Dennermann ist dabei, als der Tote entdeckt wird. Petersen hinterlässt ein prächtiges Anwesen, das Dennermann verkaufen soll. Schnell stößt der Makler auf gewisse Ungereimtheiten. Ging es um einen Erbschaftsstreit? Und was hat es mit dem Gerücht auf sich, der Verstorbene habe regelmäßig eine hübsche junge Prostituierte empfangen? Je intensiver Dennermann nachforscht, desto größer wird der Kreis der Verdächtigen. Und schon bald hat der Killer es auch auf ihn abgesehen…" - Quelle: dtv - "Mord unterm Reetdach". Wir haben in dieser Ausgabe der "Freitagsspitzen" u.a. darüber gesprochen: -> Was man als Makler so alles auf Sylt erlebt. -> Warum Sylt so eine magische Anziehungskraft hat. -> Warum es jetzt den ersten Sylt-Krimi überhaupt von Eric Weissmann gibt. Das und noch viel mehr gibt es in dieser Folge der „Freitagsspitzen“! "Aber bitte mit Reet" - https://www.amazon.de/Aber-bitte-Reet-%C2%BBPflichtlekt%C3%BCre-Kulturjournalistin/dp/3426791528/ref=sr_1_1?__mk_de_DE=%C3%85M%C3%85%C5%BD%C3%95%C3%91&crid=2WM5OQ9E4LZYR&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.JKn5e1ygLiUam4IUsd_WFfFmIUW1aUapDUknCorHZu-PQHEKaeNZlJSXRilW80De6VBPXZX3Pbkam2Uzvik8x5sAMRdJiC_1yPgHCnhzholCYUQCXbAETM16onlBp4eRMx7vbKu2aRCrfoAchxARH_OKG8B2OU_riQzip2boeLBgogRq4ENqCecX6jJlXNArqPM6_AYf2spA8glJYjRlz-d6aavgz5TMa1w4B7FcfJc.xtm_izh7foaSQjlxNdUg3oqoa8eoGNOTOUWUZqdYLLA&dib_tag=se&keywords=aber+bitte+mit+reet&qid=1720119545&sprefix=aber+bitte+mit+reet%2Caps%2C342&sr=8-1 "Mord unterm Reetdach" - https://www.amazon.de/Mord-unterm-Reetdach-SPIEGEL-Bestseller-Immobilienmakler/dp/3423220511/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2MALGAFKFIS20&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.RRstkf0g4DGHh1xxwZdLSsEAGcG5l9-L2FEOm-mOJUzAK3bXCriXYSVp3e7fckg5wrbg9CA2Kzqrz3-Epaey3qvRRrkrvL9Gq0cVeyvaloBNawme4KusyfqrLPY2tAIQ_TS8vT76vXMAqentPbi_GMMwW1ymrAJnkNo8djUd6v0XX_fyP6KWyzXUM6BZaUu-nHjX7-dZcBoCtqmOtRLS5cnJGEh1lW9GJltN1TmSBhc.CrkwbEaAKq5cdSyQdiOllLWNMDDc5h8xQXIZaI918CQ&dib_tag=se&keywords=eric+weissmann+mord+unterm+reetdach&qid=1720119706&sprefix=eric+weissman%2Caps%2C102&sr=8-1 Fotocredit: Robert Schlesinger ----- Über die Freitagsspitzen ------ Audioapostel, Medienjunkie und Kommunikationsfreak auf der Suche nach unterhaltenden Antworten, freitags im Gespräch mit spannenden Persönlichkeiten. Das Ziel: Themen zuspitzen -rund um Kommunikation, Digitalisierung und das Leben überhaupt! Die Mission: Zuhören, lernen und schmunzeln - gerne auch über das flotte Tempo des Fragenden. Denn Achtung, die Zeit läuft. Es gibt viel zu hören! Bei den Freitagsspitzen. Dem Podcast mit Magazincharakter. Folge uns auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/diefreitagsspitzen/ Kontakt zu uns: freitag@freitagsspitzen.de

With Grand Finals on the weekend Aussie and Leven are joined by Grand Finalist Pinq to discuss all things FNCS Grands

In deze aflevering gaan Joris van de Wier en Jeroen Heijink op bezoek in België om de finale van de Beker van Antwerpen te bezoeken tussen KBSK Retie en K. Kontich FC. Maar voordat zij dit doen gaan zij samen met vriend-van-de-show Koen Driessen de befaamde 'Anale Driehoek' bezoeken.  De anale driehoek is een volkse benaming voor de streek in de provincie Antwerpen gelegen tussen de aan elkaar grenzende gemeenten en Kontich en Aartselaar en de deelgemeente Reet. Bij alle drie maken de heren een stop. Hierna gaan zij naar stadion Visputten van RVC Hoboken om de eindstrijd te bekijken. Halverwege de wedstrijden merken de heren op dat er een deurtje op staat bij de buren van Maccabi Antwerpen. Vragen, tips of suggesties over onze podcasts zijn altijd welkom: ⁠⁠podcast@staantribune.nl⁠⁠.

Loïc Bruni est pilote de VTT de descente et 6 fois champion du Monde de la discipline.Si vous croisez Loïc dans la rue, vous serez marqué par son accessibilité et vous aurez instantanément envie de vous en faire un ami tant il est sympa, posé, et disponible.Mais lorsqu'il enfile le casque et qu'il part pour un run de course, il se transforme en Super Bruni, l'un des seuls hommes capables de gérer des moments de pression insoutenables, comme aux Gets en 2022 où devant à 70000 personnes, il a décroché son 5ème titre mondial devant Amaury Pierron et Loris Vergier.Mais vous allez voir que derrière cette apparence de machine indestructible, il y a un homme généreux et passionnant avec qui on a envie de passer des heures.Dans cet épisode, attendez-vous à entrer dans l'intimité d'un athlète hors norme et à mieux comprendre pourquoi Loïc n'a pas tout à fait fini de marquer le sport de son empreinte.Un épisode passionnant pendant lequel on a parlé:De son enfance avec Loris Vergier, et de comment ils sont devenu les pilotes qu'on connait aujourd'hui.De comment il a reçu puis endossé le costume de Super Bruni pour en faire une force.De son run mythique des Gets en 2022, de comment il l'a vécu et de comment il est parvenu à gérer la pression.De pourquoi il est meilleur sur les courses d'un jour que sur les coupes du MondeSon rapport avec les fans et pourquoi c'est si important pour sui de passer du temps avec eux.De ce qui lui reste à accomplir dans le milieu de la descente et de comment il prépare la suite de sa carrièreEt bien plus encore.Et maintenant mesdames et messieurs, place à mon invité du jour, Loic Bruni.———Cet épisode vous est proposé par LINE, l'agence conseil spécialiste du vélo.De la stratégie à l'exécution, Line vous accompagne sur tous les projets liés au vélo pour vous donner toutes les chances de réussir.Développement produit, création du contenu, organisation d'évènement, ou animation, formation Line vous accompagne sur tous vos projets liés au vélo.contactez-moi sur agenceline.frA-G-E-N-C-E-L-I-N-E.FR——Enfin, pour sponsoriser En Roue Libre, je vous invite à me contacter sur Linkedin ou sur enrouelibrepodcast.fr------Où suivre Loïc : https://www.instagram.com/loicbruni29/The Cycling Event : https://www.thecyclingevent.com/en/the-cycling-event-en/Le site du team Specialized Gravity: https://www.specializedgravity.com/La chaine Youtube de Loïc : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-o6vRC2OGxRtA46RVjKXcA------La Timeline de l'épisode03:17 Le doublé pour l'année de ses 30 Ans? 05:24 Les vélos de Loic 19:17 La rencontre avec Laurent Delorme 32:20 L'école Vouilloz ou l'école Barel? 42:03 La contribution de Loris dans le succès de Loic 52:55 La collaboration avec Jack 56:41 La place de la data dans la style de pilotage de Loic 1:15:12 Super Bruni 1:21:38 Les championnats du Monde aux Gets 2022 1:33:16 Comment il a vécu le run des Gets de l'intérieur? 1:38:51 La place des fans 2:04:46 Objectif x 10. 2:06:26 Rouler encore combien de temps? 2:08:33 à quel moment il se voit arrêter 2:41:25 Qui il aimerait entendre dans un prochain épisode de En Roue Libre ——

Guest Jason Ferron (Keep it Reet) Website - https://www.keepitreet.com/ YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/keepitreet Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/jasonferrondrift/ https://www.instagram.com/keepitreet/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MERCH!!! https://144racing.com/collections/circle-of-drift --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Enjuku Racing! Presenting Sponsor of CODP Here - https://www.enjukuracing.com/?afmc=5vg --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- KBD Body Kits | Official Body Kits of CODP https://www.kbdbodykits.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kansei Wheels https://kanseiwheels.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BUMZ Eyewear! Grab yours here! https://bum-shades.myshopify.com/?rfsn=7626963.2b1560 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FDF Race Shop https://www.fdfraceshop.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BC Racing https://bcracing-na.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wiring Specialties 5% OFF on Wiring Specialties products USING code CIRCLEOFDRIFT https://www.wiringspecialties.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Need Help with your Content? Tell me how I can help here. Contact form at the bottom of the website. https://www.265media.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Want Product Placement on the Set? Check here! https://shorturl.at/hlKS9 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Join the Patreon for AD FREE Content! patreon.com/user?u=84251344 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Socials Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/circleofdrift/ Tiktok - https://www.tiktok.com/@circleofdrift?lang=en --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Audio platforms Apple Podcast - http://rb.gy/q14pzx Spodify - http://rb.gy/e8kcvt Amazon - http://rb.gy/5habmm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To work with me, contact via Email. thecircleofdrift@gmail.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you want to be on the Podcast, email me at thecircleofdrift@gmail.com! Use "Drift Resume" as the Subject line. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Host - Dawson Kula Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/dawson.codp/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Schedule New Episode every SUNDAY TikTok's daily Instagram Reels daily --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/circleofdrift/support

Seekord palusime saatesse teatriinimese, tänu kellele saab näitleja laval särada – meil on külas sügisel noorsooteatris 38. hooaega alustav etenduse juht Reet Loderaud, Eesti Teatriliidu tänavuse aastapreemia värske laureaat.

REET

In 1969, a body is discovered in the brush off of Mulholland Drive in LA California. The murder was extremely gruesome -- the woman was stabbed over 150 times. This unidentified woman became known as “Sherry Doe” or “Jane Doe 59.” It took 46 years for this woman to get her name back. Jane Doe #59 is actually a woman named Reet Jurvetson, who was murdered at the young age of 19 years old.Though there are some persons of interest, the amount of time that has passed between the murder and discovering Reet's identity, as well as some unfortunate events, have made identifying those suspects (and finding them) extremely difficult. Sources:1) https://abcnews.go.com/US/original-forensic-drawings-jane-doe-found-manson-killings/story?id=387326282) https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/mobile/man-who-found-body-of-montrealer-glad-she-s-finally-identified-1.28790823) https://medium.com/the-crime-center/the-brutal-murder-of-reet-jurvetson-9f3c8c1a5004) https://www.lapdonline.org/newsroom/1969-jane-doe-no-59-murder-victim-identified-after-46-years-nr16140rh/5) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Reet_Jurvetson6) https://nationalpost.com/news/world/tracking-reets-killers-lapd-releases-sketches-of-two-men-linked-to-canadian-womans-1969-murder7) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/reet-jurvetson-la-murder-sketch-released-1.37458958) https://www.cbc.ca/news/reet-jurvetson-jane-doe-neighbour-hollywood-1.3835406

ENAURME!!! Jackie Wilson est l'inspirateur du jeu de scène de Michael Jackson, James Brown et Elvis Presley..... Alors... ça vous intéresse? Et les débuts de la Motown? Jackie Wilson, Reet Petite The Royals, Every Beat of My Heart Sonny Wilson, Danny Boy Billy Ward and the Dominoes, You Can't Keep a Good Man Down Billy Ward and the Dominoes, Rags to Riches Elvis parle de Jackie Wilson Malcolm Vaughan,  St. Therese of the Roses Mario Lanza - The Loveliest Night of the Year Hazel Scott, Hazel Scott's Boogie Woogie The Mills Brothers, Paper Doll The Ink Spots, We Three The Four Tops, Kiss Me Baby Ray Charles, Kissa Me Baby The Moonglows, See Saw The Flamingos, A Kiss From Your Lips Louis Jordan, Reet, Petite, and Gone Jackie Wilson, Reet Petite Jackie Wilson, To Be Loved Jackie Wilson, Lonely Teardrops The Voice Masters, Hope and Pray Jackie Wilson, Higher and Higher

Episode 74   On the Banks of Plum Creek ch. 6, "Wreath of Roses"   Join us this week as we discuss butterfly wings, Eleck Nelson, cud, milking cows, the definition of "milch", and the name "Reet".

There's some pretty weird stuff going on up North, and Amy and Ian can't wait to tell you about it. Headlines this week include a bungling burglar in Goole, and a colour changing river in Greater Manchester.Featuring guest correspondent Rob Auton.Rob will be heading to Edinburgh with his show 'The Rob Auton Show' from 2-26 August. For tickets head to assemblyfestival.com.Want Extra! Extra! content? Join our Patreon or Apple Subscription for weekly bonus content.Got a juicy story from t'North? Email it to northernnewspod@gmail.com.Follow Northern News on Twitter @NorthernNewsPod and Instagram @NorthernNewsPodcastAnd follow Rob on Instagram @robnauton and Twitter @RobertAutonRecorded by Naomi Parnell and edited by Aniya Das for Plosive.Artwork by Welcome Studio.Photography by Jonathan Birch. Get bonus content on Patreon Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On this week-in-review, Crystal is joined by political consultant and urban farmer, Heather Weiner. They talk about the newly uncovered messages that reveal former Seattle mayor Jenny Durkan allegedly ordered the abandonment of SPD's East Precinct, where the “Blake fix” stands after its failed vote in the legislature, the remaining need to address renter protections after the legislature passed major legislation to address the housing supply and affordability crisis, the success of the King County Crisis Care Centers levy, and the failure of the Kent School District bond underscoring the need for bond reform and for putting school measures on primary and general election ballots. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Heather Weiner at @hlweiner.   Heather Weiner Heather Weiner (she/her) is a political consultant with 30 years of experience on labor, environmental, LGBTQ, racial justice, and reproductive rights issues. She focuses on ballot initiatives, independent expenditures, legislative, union organizing and contract campaigns. She's a recovering lawyer.   Resources Teresa Mosqueda, Candidate for King County Council District 8 from Hacks & Wonks   ““Please Stop on the Teams Chat”: New Records Expose Mayor Durkan's Role and Others in Abandonment of East Precinct” by Glen Stellmacher from The Urbanist   “WA Legislature fails to pass new drug law; special session likely” by Joseph O'Sullivan from Crosscut   “No Clear Path Toward Criminalizing Drugs in Washington” by Ashley Nerbovig from The Stranger   “5 big things Washington's Legislature passed in 2023” by Melissa Santos from Axios   “Final state transportation budget boosts funding for highways, ferries, traffic safety and the Climate Commitment Act” from Washington State House Democrats   “Washington Legislature increases support for free school meals” by Griffin Reilly from The Columbian   “Washington State Rakes In Revenue From Capital Gains Tax” by Laura Mahoney from Bloomberg Tax   “Voters approve King County's crisis center levy” by Michelle Baruchman from The Seattle Times   “Voters turn down Kent School District bond measure” by Steve Hunter from The Kent Reporter   Find more stories that Crystal is reading here   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I am a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Tuesday topical show and our Friday week-in-review delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is to leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. If you missed our Tuesday topical show, I chat with Teresa Mosqueda about her campaign for King County Council District 8 - why she decided to run, the experience and lessons she wants to bring to the County from serving on the Seattle City Council, and her thoughts on the major issues facing residents of the County. Today, we are continuing our Friday shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show, today's co-host: political consultant and urban farmer - who now even has chicks - Heather Weiner. [00:01:26] Heather Weiner: Hi, Crystal - so nice to talk with you again. [00:01:29] Crystal Fincher: Nice to talk with you again. I guess I should clarify - chicks as in mini-chickens. [00:01:32] Heather Weiner: Well, I have had many chicks, but now I'm married. Yeah, I have four baby chicks in my office right now under a heat lamp - getting them settled and we'll move them out to the henhouse probably in about five or six weeks. So you may hear a little bit of baby chirping in the background here. [00:01:48] Crystal Fincher: A little bit of baby chirping. I did hear the chirps - they are adorable. I actually got a sneak peek and now I want some chicks. [00:01:57] Heather Weiner: Everybody does - you can't go back. [00:01:59] Crystal Fincher: Yes, yes, yes. Okay, I guess we'll start out talking with the news that broke yesterday on a long-standing story - stemming from the abandonment of Seattle PD's East Precinct, which happened in the middle of the 2020 protests amid a lot of controversy - sustained abuses and excess physical abuse by police against protesters and residents of the City. And in the middle of that, the abandonment of the East Precinct - which was at first almost tried to, spun as protesters forced them out - lots of hyperbole on Fox News and conservative media, all that kind of stuff. But for quite a long time, they said they had no idea who made the call to abandon the precinct. [00:02:48] Heather Weiner: But you know that Spiderman meme - where the Spiderman is, all the three Spidermans are standing in that triangle pointing at each other? This was a live-action Spiderman meme where we just had all of these high-ranking officials, high-paid officials within Seattle City government and the department pointing at each other and saying - It's your fault. No, it's your fault. No, it's your fault. But look at this news from internal chats that are coming within the Seattle IT department - who know better than to delete their text messages and their chats - saying the order came directly from Durkan, at exactly the same moment that Chief Best, then-Chief Best, was telling reporters there's no order to evacuate the East Precinct building. So liars are lying. [00:03:31] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, so it turns out Jenny Durkan ordered the Code Red and wow, there's been a lot of obfuscation about this. And even in these - in this records request and what was released - it is clear they are bending over backwards to avoid discussing this in a disclosable way, to avoid discussing this in a way that would be illuminated by issues like this. But they didn't get everyone in on the conspiracy in time. However, they did catch someone being like - Hey, hey, hey, hey, don't discuss this on the Teams chat. [00:04:01] Heather Weiner: Right. It literally says - Do not discuss this on the Teams chat - which was revealed in the public disclosure request. [00:04:07] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely, and - [00:04:08] Heather Weiner: I wonder why all those text messages between Best and Durkan were lost forever. [00:04:13] Crystal Fincher: Lost forever. [00:04:14] Heather Weiner: Oops, I dropped my phone in saltwater. [00:04:17] Crystal Fincher: And there's still an ongoing investigation into that. As a reminder, public employees can't delete records, not disclosable records. And this may be something for - we've talked about this before in the program - but for people outside of government, outside of politics, outside of that world may be like - Texts, they're deleted. I delete texts all the time. Everyone in the public sector knows that you don't do this. There are people in positions who handle these. You're constantly getting - Hey, this request came, do you have this document? Or where was this? We're responding to this. This is a regular course of business, and they clearly were trying to hide what was happening. Big controversy - texts from Carmen Best, from Mayor Durkan were deleted. Mayor Durkan is a former federal prosecutor who has been living in this world forever, who had to be retrained even on prior issues when she was with the City. And then those mysteriously deleted texts, which looks more and more like they were intentionally deleted in order to hide this information. [00:05:19] Heather Weiner: And now former Chief Best is now directing security at Microsoft, right? She got a nice hefty landing pad there for when she left. And so despite the fact that her veracity and her transparency are now deeply in question, she is getting paid - I'm going to say a lot of money - [00:05:38] Crystal Fincher: Oh, a ton of money. [00:05:39] Heather Weiner: -working across the water for Microsoft. I saw former Mayor Durkan at LAX a couple of weeks ago walking by and I have to say - [00:05:48] Crystal Fincher: I was about to be like - in Seattle? I could just see her - [00:05:50] Heather Weiner: No, at LAX - she was walking at LAX. [00:05:51] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, that doesn't surprise me at all. [00:05:53] Heather Weiner: I just kind of stopped and looked at her. Of course, she didn't recognize me - who would? But I just - [00:05:57] Crystal Fincher: I would, Heather Weiner. [00:05:58] Heather Weiner: Ah, thank you - how many five foot tall - anyway, I'm not going to put myself down. So anyway, I did see her walking by and I did almost want to walk up to her and be like - What were you thinking, lady? But I didn't - nobody's happy transferring planes at LAX - even somebody who did that, I don't need to heckle them. It's also super interesting because there are so many lower-level employees, whether they're employees of the Seattle Police Department or Parks Department or wherever, who know that they will lose their jobs if they delete emails, text messages, anything that is subject to public disclosure requests. And so to have your highest ranking people doing that - you know who has not been mentioned in any of this is the current Chief of Police, who was an Assistant Chief at that time. How is, how, I'm always curious about why Diaz somehow was either not included in this chain, or hasn't ever been implicated in what's going on here. Was he just really - just not involved at all? That's crazy to me. [00:06:56] Crystal Fincher: I have no idea. Also haven't seen his name mentioned in this, but - [00:07:00] Heather Weiner: No, I know. I've asked reporters - Is Diaz literally nowhere here, or did he just do a spectacular job of cleaning out his records? [00:07:08] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. [00:07:09] Heather Weiner: Don't know. [00:07:09] Crystal Fincher: Don't know, but this is the saga that won't end. And to your point, this is really about accountability. This is about - do rules apply to everybody, and do people - do public servants have an obligation to the people? [00:07:22] Heather Weiner: You're starting to make a case now about what's happening in the State Legislature with transparency there, and where reporters and open government folks are really putting a lot of pressure on the State Legislature to open up their records. And legislators say - Look, I can't make decisions, I can't go through drafts, I can't do any of this - if I feel like all of it's going to be subject to public scrutiny when it's not final yet. It's legal - involving lawmaking, so therefore it is protected under legal exemptions. What do you think about that? [00:07:52] Crystal Fincher: I wonder why that's different than any of the other legislative bodies, like city councils across the state or county councils, who have more generous and open transparency policies. And again, this is happening on the public dime. There is a measure of accountability here, especially when so consistently through these records requests, we find out such egregious information. Just as a reminder - it wasn't any external investigation, it was a public records request that - in the City of Kent - uncovered that there was a Nazi assistant police chief. And that is a literal statement - literal Nazi, with Nazi symbols, and a Hitler mustache, and literally all of that - that only came to light because of public disclosure requests. And in this time where we have so many fewer reporters covering what's happening across the state and they only make it to the biggest things because they're stretched that thin, transparency becomes even more important. Because there may not be someone there to answer the questions, to cover how something came to be - this is our only record of how it came to be. And people should see who is influencing policy. [00:08:58] Heather Weiner: Right, and how the sausage was made. Listeners, you will be shocked to hear that good and bad politicians out there get around this by using their personal phones. Now, they're not supposed to use their personal phones for official taxpayer funded business, but they do. And so even if we did get a lot of those text message records about what was happening around the East Precinct, one can imagine that probably there was a lot of conversations going on - unrecorded conversations on the phone, in person, undocumented conversations, but also conversations on personal cell phones. Now again, I just want to point out - if any other lower-level employees were caught doing this, they would be fired, right? Cops would be sent to OPA. All kinds of things would happen. But when you're a higher-level political appointee, apparently, you get off scot-free. [00:09:41] Crystal Fincher: You do. [00:09:42] Heather Weiner: Speaking of cops - you want to talk about the Blake - what's happening with Blake, and what's happening there? [00:09:49] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, let's talk about what's happening with the Blake decision. So we just had the end of the legislative session - a lot of bills were passed before then, but some of the most contentious bills took 'til the very last day or two to get decided. [00:10:04] Heather Weiner: Last hour. Oh my - as usual - I just feel for everybody working three in the morning, four in the morning. It must be just absolutely exhausting. [00:10:12] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, when the Legislature does that - just the amount of work that support staff have to do to support the entire operation, to keep information moving under these incredibly tight deadlines. They're working so hard and so long. I think - so the Blake fix, in year's time? Time is an interesting thing for me these days. A few years back - yeah, our State - [00:10:35] Heather Weiner: Not yesterday, but also not 10 years ago. [00:10:37] Crystal Fincher: Yes. More than a year ago, less than 10 years ago - which anything in that zone consistently gets confused for me now. Yes. Our State Supreme Court invalidated - basically said the law about personal possession of substances, of drugs, was invalidated - took the law away. And so it instantly made possession of drugs legal. There was nothing illegal to do with the possession that didn't do with anything with paraphernalia, with selling or distribution, all those other peripheral things still remained in place. But for possession - [00:11:14] Heather Weiner: Personal use possession. [00:11:16] Crystal Fincher: Yes. And so under a certain threshold, or thresholds that come into play sometimes in policy with this. So in year before last, our Legislature - this happened during the legislative session, actually. And so they said - Oh my goodness, we can't let this stand. Even though best practices, sound public policy says that our really expensive and damaging War on Drugs has failed and treating substance abuse issues like a public health crisis and problem is the way to make progress in actually dealing with addiction, actually getting people off of drugs and getting people healthier, and reducing all the impacts surrounding that by crime and different things. But our Legislature basically said - We are not comfortable with that, and so we're going to re-institute a penalty - a misdemeanor - add some diversion in there, fund some kind of diversion-root-cause-drug-court-type things across the state. But they put a sunset clause in that law and said basically - Summer 2023, this is going to sunset, basically expire and terminate on its own. And in the meantime, that'll give us time to figure out something else that we want to do, or stay on the course. But the concern about invalidating that law at the state level was that municipalities, localities, counties, and cities, and towns can make their own laws if they want to in the absence of a state law on that issue. So some have said - Well, it's going to be more confusing to have a patchwork of different drug possession laws across the state, which is not ideal. It's not ideal. But the question is - is that more harmful than what this proposed fix was, which wound up being a gross misdemeanor - which is different than a simple misdemeanor and can come with sometimes financial penalties and jail time that exceeds that of the lowest level felonies. And so from a - we have talked about on this show - but jail, carceral solutions, do not reduce recidivism any more than non-carceral solutions. Throwing someone in jail doesn't reduce their likelihood of committing a crime in the future. And certainly in the case of substance use disorder, it does not address any of the issues about that. And all it does is destabilize and usually throw people further into addiction, further away from being able to rebuild their lives and get healthy again. So this debate is taking place, while evidence and data and lots of people are saying that. But you also have people who really advocate for punitive punishment measures. And even though we have spent decades and billions, if not trillions, of dollars on this War on Drugs, domestically and internationally, it's as bad as it's ever been. [00:14:06] Heather Weiner: Yeah, and it's a war on people who have an illness. It is a disease. And it's a public health issue, not a crime issue. And so to put people in jail who have alcoholism - we've already been shown that does not work. It's the same thing with addictions to other substances. It just doesn't work. And in fact, you're right - it makes it worse. So now we see local folks - Reagan Dunn, three of our City Councilmembers here in Seattle - who are proposing instituting their own gross misdemeanor rules in their jurisdictions. And it's going to cost more in taxpayer dollars to house people in jail - who are going through withdrawal, who are going to have massive health problems, and then are going to get out and not have money and not have support - than it would to put them in housing. [00:14:54] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. And to - [00:14:56] Heather Weiner: And if the real problem here is that we, as the public, don't want to see people suffering on the street - how is it that paying more for them to go into jail than to put them into supportive housing is going to solve the problem? It doesn't make any sense to me. It's not a solution. It is painting over the parts of your house that are disintegrating, that are moldy and disintegrating, and they're trying to paint it over instead of dealing with the leak in the first place. Wow. That was a really stretched out analogy. Not sure that anybody should use that. All right, anyway. So it doesn't make any sense to me - you're right. It's political posturing, coming into election time and municipal election time. Yeah, it's going to be super interesting to see how this is used. And the local news media has been doing this, not just here in Washington state but around the country, has been using this fear around people who have a disease - and they are using that as a fear to other people, but also to cause political dissension in our country. And it is not as bad in Seattle as everybody is saying. Yes, we do have a problem, but it is not as bad as what the news is portraying. It is part of the fear mongering. [00:16:10] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and I don't think there's anyone who really, who doesn't want to do more to address this problem or doesn't acknowledge that substance use disorder is a problem - that we don't want to be seeing this, that it can lead to other things. We all know and understand that. We just want to do something that actually fixes it instead of landing us in the same place we've been for the last 30, 40 years under this War on Drugs, where we just punitively punish people for that. And - [00:16:38] Heather Weiner: For a disease. [00:16:39] Crystal Fincher: For a disease and I - or, there are also people who just use substances who are not addicted and based on what we classify as an illegal drug or not - there are people who drink alcohol socially. [00:16:53] Heather Weiner: I'm one. [00:16:53] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, that's a drug. [00:16:54] Heather Weiner: I'm one. I have been seen with - the fact that the mayor is now proposing open container rules in certain neighborhoods, where people can walk around with open containers - but they're not allowed to be seen with a different substance? Yeah, just the irony, the inconsistency - call Alanis Morissette. [00:17:10] Crystal Fincher: The irony and inconsistency and - look, drug laws, very punitive drug laws have been a major contributor to mass incarceration, to an incredibly disproportionate impact on Black and Brown people. And what we're seeing now. Yeah, I have some thoughts. So one - [00:17:32] Heather Weiner: Do you? [00:17:33] Crystal Fincher: I do. [00:17:33] Heather Weiner: Maybe you should start a podcast. [00:17:35] Crystal Fincher: This should not be a surprise to a lot of people. But this posturing and grandstanding, just - number one, there is talk of a special session. And they're trying to figure out if they can get to a place on this, where they can agree and do something that's actively being talked about. There may be a special session. This has been reported on. So because they're working on this and because people at the county level are talking about dealing with this - all this talk from mayors and city council members is just premature. It's putting the cart before the horse. And it's grandstanding. And it's so plain to see. Allow the people who are working on this to continue working on this. Notice they didn't have any issue with doing that over the past few years. They just recognize that - Ooh, maybe this is an issue we can capitalize on. But I would caution them that it didn't turn out too well for them last year when they tried to bombard, to flood the zone with all of the voter, direct voter contact, media talking about crime and drugs. And they're gonna try and crack down and make drugs illegal again, all that kind of stuff. [00:18:48] Heather Weiner: Look, let's go ahead and let's blame people who are actually symptoms of the larger problem. And the problem is number one, we don't have enough affordable housing. Number two, we have a ton of people who are suffering from trauma and for all different kinds of way - whether it's in the military, in their own households, in their own family. And one of the ways that the body responds to trauma is to try to find a way to not feel the trauma. And that's a lot of what substance use disorder is. Three, we - the Republicans and some Democrats 12 years ago - cut massive funding from mental health and addiction services. And now we don't have enough places for people to go, as we see where the hospitals are overloaded with people who are suffering from mental health disorders. And now the chickens have come to roost. Look, I brought it back to chickens. [00:19:33] Crystal Fincher: There you go. You have brought it back, we're full circle. [00:19:36] Heather Weiner: Brought it back to chickens, to the chickens. [00:19:39] Crystal Fincher: To the chickens. [00:19:40] Heather Weiner: So these are all symptoms of this massive problem. Inslee tried to do something where he wanted to float a massive bond to raise money for housing - that didn't pay out. Some Democrats at least tried to raise some money from a REET on luxury housing and massive buildings that would fund affordable housing - a tax on real estate sales. The real estate lobby killed, the realtor lobby killed that. We tried to get rental caps this year to make sure that landlords, corporate landlords are not egregiously raising rents and causing economic evictions and destabilizing communities - that didn't pass. So let's just crack down on people and put them in jail. Are the jails empty? Is that what's going on? Is there a massive demand? [00:20:20] Crystal Fincher: Oh, totally empty. We're totally not experiencing issues of overcrowding, suicides, deaths from illness, injuries, understaffing - none of that is a problem that they're actively having to spend millions of dollars to deal with and facing lawsuits. No, not a problem at all. But yes, that whole situation is there. So we'll see how this unfolds. But I also want to - some people have tried to characterize this as a Democrat versus Republican issue - on the drug - it is not. This is an issue where there are a variety of stances on the Democratic and Republican side, really. And Democrats control the Legislature and they came forward with a bill, after all the talk and compromise, that landed at gross misdemeanor. The sky-is-falling argument was - Well, we have to do this because otherwise they're going to really criminalize it locally. So this is good enough. I have noticed that no proposal from conservative or Republican mayors or city councils have gone further than the Democratic legislature did. So were they negotiating themselves down? Again? [00:21:21] Heather Weiner: Fair. [00:21:22] Crystal Fincher: And is what we're actually going to wind up with worse than having that statewide? Would we rather have a significant recriminalization statewide, or have lower penalties and more treatment access across the board, or in more places in the state? That's something that they're going to have to deal with, but - [00:21:41] Heather Weiner: When do we think this special session might be called? It feels like there is a hard deadline, right? Of June. [00:21:47] Crystal Fincher: It feels like it, but I don't know. I have no inside information on those conversations or anything. [00:21:53] Heather Weiner: And when they have a special session, they can only address the issue that the special session has been called for. So there's no sneaking other things in there at the same time, which is good. Although there's a lot of things that were left unfinished. [00:22:04] Crystal Fincher: There is. And also legislators don't like special sessions often because it takes them away from campaigning - because they can't raise money while they're in session. [00:22:14] Heather Weiner: That's another reason why we need a full-time legislature and not a legislature where people have other jobs that they have to go do. They're paid so little, they have to have other jobs. And as a result, they just don't have time to do all the things that need to get done. And they don't have time to do it in a really thoughtful way, unfortunately - that things do get rushed. [00:22:30] Crystal Fincher: And that's why we have a disproportionate amount of wealthy and out-of-touch people in our legislators. [00:22:36] Heather Weiner: And white. Yes. And why we keep losing our legislators of color. [00:22:40] Crystal Fincher: Talking about some of the other things you touched on that we were able to see at the conclusion of the Legislature, of this legislative session - certainly, as we talked about last week, some significant movement on some housing bills. But as you mentioned, no relief for renters, which is a major component of keeping people in housing, preventing displacement, and keeping housing more affordable. [00:23:03] Heather Weiner: Yeah. 40% of Washingtonians are renters - 40%. That's a significant portion. And our rents are skyrocketing. There's articles in Crosscut about Walla Walla - retirees who are getting pushed out, they're having to do all kinds of crazy things in order to keep their housing. And a lot of this is because corporate landlords are using algorithms - kind of like what Airbnb does - to jack up prices in response to how the other corporate landlords are doing things. And so I wouldn't really call it collusion, but they are using these formulas to maximize the amount of profit that they make. And as a result, what we're seeing is massive community destabilization. Single parents with children have to move their kids from school district to school district. Retirees, our elders are leaving their neighbors - they don't know anybody around them, they don't know how to ask for help. Our veterans, who may already be facing a lot of challenges, are also being moved and destabilized. It's not good for communities. It's not good for Washington state. And when I see things like in today's news where they say - Half of people are thinking about moving out of Washington state - they don't really say why, but the reason is the rent is too high. It's time for the State Legislature to do something to provide relief for 40% of the state's residents. And I myself am a landlord - I have a small house that I rent out and I 100%, like many landlords, support rent caps and rent stabilization. [00:24:35] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. I didn't even know you were a landlord. [00:24:36] Heather Weiner: Well, landlady. I don't know. It's kind of gendered. [00:24:40] Crystal Fincher: And yeah - I could talk a lot about that. But there are, we are suffering certainly at the hands of big corporate landlords. And they love nothing more than to try and paint all of the landlords - it's we're just little ma and pa, just we just had an extra house, and we're just out of the kindness of our hearts, just being housing providers. Some lobbyists are calling them housing providers. They're not housing providers. They're housing dealers. [00:25:05] Heather Weiner: I know - it's like job creators, right? [00:25:07] Crystal Fincher: Which is fine, but let's call it what it is. [00:25:10] Heather Weiner: Look, the way that the law was drafted, that was supported by the Washington Low Income Housing Alliance, the way that the law was drafted is for the first 10 years of a building's - that a building is, or a unit, is being rented out - there's no rental cap on there as it adjusts to the market rate, figures out what's going on. And then you could always increase the rent once somebody moves out. But if somebody is living in that unit, you can't raise the rent - according to this law, you couldn't raise the rent more than 7% based on inflation and essentially economically evict them. And there is nothing wrong with that. There were lots of landlords who came out - family, mom and pop landlords, like me - who came out and said - Yeah, that sounds completely reasonable. That's what I would like to do. But it's the big corporate real estate lobby that once again came in and killed it. [00:25:56] Crystal Fincher: Yeah - once again. And so I guess what I would say is - there was a big, broad coalition that was put together by the legislators who sponsored this legislation - by organizations, activists, Futurewise certainly was huge in helping to get this passed. I hope that coalition stands up as strongly over the next year - through the next session - for mitigations, for rent relief, for helping people stay in their homes. Because that is as critical to getting costs in line, to keeping people in the communities where they are and their houses where they are, and reducing homelessness. It is as critical - this isn't an either-or - this is we absolutely need both. And so I hope this coalition continues to show up for the communities that have showed up for them and work to get this passed. Also, just want to talk about a couple other things they were highlighting. The budget was worked on until the very end. Democrats are touting investments in ferries, some modest investments in traffic safety. We had the first allocation of funds from the Climate Commitment Act that came in - still need to dig more into that to see where it's going and if they are living up to their promises to make sure that they are centering communities that are most impacted by climate change and pollution. And also workforce investments, workforce equity investments across the board. They did increase the cap for special education, which does increase funding, but not nearly at the level that is needed. There was a bill that didn't make it through that started off as free lunch for everyone, which we've talked about a few times before on this show, which - was a huge supporter of and thinking that - Of course, that totally makes sense. How is this controversial? Unfortunately it was - there was a trimmed down bill that increased access, that increased the number of people that could get school lunch programs. Basically, I think it's in schools or districts that met a certain threshold - if a kid asked for a free lunch, then it could be given to them in those districts. I want to say that it was 50 - I'm just throwing out numbers, but I'll figure that out and put it in the resources and show notes. But it was a trimmed down bill. A lot of good things happened - like many sessions - a lot of good things happened. A lot of disappointing things happen, and we just move forward and we continue to work and we continue to push and we hopefully continue to hold our legislators accountable for the decisions that they're making. [00:28:29] Heather Weiner: Let's have - let's end on a good note, on a positive note. Here's some good news. So article just came out in Bloomberg Tax - I know you read that every morning, Crystal, I know you do - and the new capital gains tax that was passed about two years ago is now finally being collected. The Washington Supreme Court ruled that it was legal and it's now being collected for the first time. There were estimates by policy experts that it would be, probably in the first year, somewhere around $450, maybe $500 million raised from taxes on the sales of huge stock market gains. Doesn't apply to 99.8% of us. And they thought it would raise maybe $500 million. According to the Department of Revenue, $833 million raised for schools, childcare, preschool, and other education. Amazing amount of money. But here's what you got to think about is how rich are people that they are having stock market gains where a 7% tax on their stock market gains over a quarter of a million dollars is raising nearly a billion. That's a lot of money being moved between stocks over there in rich people land. I couldn't believe it. It blows my mind. [00:29:37] Crystal Fincher: It is - absolutely, and more there. So I also hope that the work of the wealth tax picks up next session because it's absolutely needed and we can see how much of an impact that it does make. Also, we had a special election this week. In King County, there were - depending on where you were at - everyone voted on the Crisis Care Centers Levy, which passed. And so we are going to be having five new regional crisis care centers in the County. There are also provisions for helping to boost the workforce, increase the staffing levels in an area that's already really stressed and really hurting for staff. And what was your take on this? [00:30:18] Heather Weiner: I think it's great, but also people are going to come into these crisis centers and where are they going to send them? There's not any housing. So I think it's a great idea. It's a good first step to get people through. But I'm concerned that you're still in crisis at the end of the day. [00:30:32] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I feel similarly - a lot is going to be about the implementation. We absolutely need more resources. And if this is done well, and if this is done right, it'll be helpful. We have also heard a ton of stories about challenging care, especially when that care is involuntary - when someone is in a major crisis. And so I think it's going to be really paying attention to the implementation of this and making sure that they are following best practices, and that people are treated with dignity and respect, and really the focus is on their healing over everything else. We'll see how it turns out, but I deem it to be a helpful - these are absolutely resources that we need. And we can do this better than we have done it before. And we should - we owe it to everyone to do that, so we'll see. Also, Kent School District had a bond vote, also on this same ballot, that failed. School bonds raise for buildings, for capital expenditures - those races, elections carry a higher threshold to pass a bond. It's 60% as opposed to 50% - which is a big, big difference between 60% and 50%, when you just look at elections across the board. This one actually didn't even make 50%. And I, once again, am begging school boards, people in school districts to stop putting these ballot measures on special election ballots. Put it on the general election ballot. If you must, put it on the primary ballot. But stick to those, especially in a district like King County, when turnout is everything. When it comes to these school levies, school bonds - having them in higher turnout elections obviously is going to increase the support. In the same way that we know in Seattle - if it's a very high turnout election, that's going to be a more progressive election than a really low turnout election. So let's just stop doing this, please. Do you have any thoughts about special elections and school levies? [00:32:25] Heather Weiner: Look, the big thing is we keep going back to the people over and over again to pass what are essentially regressive taxes, whether it's for the school levies or for the crisis center. I want to point out that one of the major funders of the crisis center levy - which I supported - one of the major funders was John Stanton, who is on the wall of shame for his work to kill the capital gains tax, to hit up the taxpayers to pay for his stadium to the tunes of hundreds of millions of dollars. And yet he wants to put a regressive tax on the rest of us. The solution here is not to keep passing, or trying to pass, these little regressive taxes to patch the leaky roof. See, I'm back to that analogy. It is to pass wealth tax and other taxes on the incredibly super rich billionaires and ultra millionaires that we have in this state. [00:33:13] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, April 28th, 2023. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Shannon Cheng. Our insightful co-host today is political consultant and urban farmer, Heather Weiner. You can find Heather on Twitter @hlweiner, that's W-E-I-N-E-R. You can follow me on Twitter at Hacks & Wonks - that's @HacksWonks. Or you can follow me on Twitter @finchfrii, or on Blue Sky, or basically any platform at finchfrii - that's F-I-N-C-H-F-R-I-I. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get the full versions of our Tuesday topical and Friday week-in-review shows to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at official hacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

Net als na de tweede helft, is er ook na De Derde Helft een persconferentie. Voor een stukje nabeschouwing, een stukje duiding, een stukje diepgang. Perschef Gijs probeert de aanwezige journalisten in toom te houden, die de gast het hemd van het lijf vragen over alles wat wel of niet met voetbal te maken heeft. Met deze week: Thomas Hogeling over René van Rijswijk, NEC-kauwgom en het probleem van geld in de voetballerij.

We are in the final inning of the 2023 legislative session. CityVoice Podcast sat down again with Deputy Government Relations Director Carl Schroeder to get the latest on the array of housing bills still moving through the Legislature. Carl talks HB 1110 (middle housing), SB 5466 (transit-oriented development), HB 1337 and SB 5235 (ADUs), and HB 1628 (REET). He shares the latest updates and expectations for where housing is headed as the session sprints to a conclusion.

Maarten⁠ wil Bill Clinton niet ontmoeten. Er is ophef over het verzet. Groeperingen ontkennen het bestaan ervan. Tom heeft het laatste politieke nieuws. En een aanbidder van Erdogan meldt zich. Volg de podcast en mis geen enkele aflevering.

Pour le 31 décembre 2022, le critique musical Sophian Fanen vous offre 10 morceaux qui nous auraient échappé au cours de l'année 2022. Jamais trop tard & champagne ! Sophian Fanen est critique musical au site Les Jours, vous pouvez le suivre (et l'embêter ;-) sur twitter, et écouter sa sélection musicale du 31.   Grupo Celeste, Todo lo tengo de ti menos tu amor, tiré de la compilation «Saturno 2000: la rebajada de los sonideros 1862-1983» (Analog Africa, 2022) Hamid al Shaeri, Reet, tiré de la compilation «The Slam! Years (1983-1988)» (Habibi Funk, 2022) Kham Meslien, Ta confiance, tiré de l'album «Fantômes… futurs» (Heavenly Sweetness, 2022) voir le clip  Sessa, Música, tiré de l'album «Estrela Acesa» (Mexican Summer, 2022).   Minyeshu, Qulef, tiré de l'album «Netsa» (ARC, 2022)  Sarathy Korwar & Photay, Utopia Is a Colonial Concept, tiré de l'album «Kalak» (The Leaf Label, 2022) voir le clip  Stelvio Cipriani, Cani arrabbiati (titoli), tiré de la compilation «Piombo: Italian Crime Soundtracks from the Years of Lead (1973-1981)» (Creazioni Artistiche Musicali, 2022) Steve Lacy, Bad Habit, tiré de l'album «Gemini Rights» (RCA Records, 2022) voir le clip  Sudan Archives, Selfish Soul, tiré de l'album «Natural Brown Prom Queen» (Stones Throw Records, 2022) voir le clip  Orchestre Massako, Temedy (Feat. Amara Touré), tiré de l'album «Orchestre Massako» (Analog Africa, 2022). 

On today's midweek show, Representative Jessica Bateman of the 22nd Legislative District joins Crystal for an in-depth discussion on housing policy in Washington State. After laying out the Department of Commerce's 20-year projection of a needed million homes of which half need to be low-income housing, Representative Bateman walks through plans to address issues of supply, stabilization, and subsidized housing in the 2023 Legislative Session. Crystal outlines common opposition arguments to addressing the housing crisis - such as pushing growth into rural areas and maintaining local control - and Representative Bateman debunks these claims as not rooted in reality or equity. The two then make hopeful observations of the urgency of the problem being reflected in a tone shift in the conversation as well as the election of younger and more diverse legislators with closer ties to the matter - as a result, the House is redoing their committee structure and a broad coalition of stakeholders is coming together to elevate solutions to an issue that affects all of us. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find Representative Jessica Bateman at @jessdbateman.   Representative Jessica Bateman Representative Jessica Bateman lives by the commitment that no one should be left out or left behind. A lifelong resident of the Pacific Northwest, she grew up in a single-parent, working-class household. Watching her mom work hard to provide for her family deeply shaped Jessica's worldview and later motivated her advocacy for those most vulnerable in our communities. Since then, Jessica has dedicated her career to serving the 22nd Legislative District, where she envisions an inclusive, equitable future for all who call this region home. As an organizer and coalition leader, Jessica has worked to create affordable housing, assist struggling families, and empower at-risk youth. Jessica also worked to pass a Sanctuary City Resolution in Olympia and is a passionate advocate for accessible health care. Jessica is a first-generation college student who earned her master's degree in Public Administration from The Evergreen State College and her bachelor's degree in environmental science. She currently works as a health care policy analyst, and served on the Olympia City Council and as staff in the House of Representatives.   Resources Washington House Democrats: Representative Jessica Bateman   “What Washington's housing legislation could look like in 2023” by Joshua McNichols from KUOW   “Poll: Strong Majority of Washingtonians Support Middle Housing Options” from The Sightline Institute   “What Will It Take to Get Statewide Housing Reform?” by Matt Baume from The Stranger   “18 Reasons Why Washington Should Legalize Middle Housing” by Dan Bertolet from Sightline Institute   Representative Bateman Twitter thread on creation of new Housing Committee Futurewise: We work across Washington to create livable communities, ensure clean healthy waterways, and protect farms, forests & habitat for this & future generations.   Transcript   [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. So today I am really excited to be welcoming Representative Jessica Bateman to the show to talk all things housing. How are you doing? [00:00:48] Representative Jessica Bateman: I am fabulous. Thank you so much for having me. [00:00:50] Crystal Fincher: Well, I'm really excited to talk about this. Obviously, housing affordability has been a major issue on the minds of a majority of people across the state. Going through election season, we see polls and we hear about what are the most pressing issues that voters are thinking about and that people are facing in their communities - and consistently the cost of housing and affordability comes up as one of the predominant concerns. Housing is usually people's biggest expense that they have, and the cost of housing has just been skyrocketing and has caused a lot of problems that people are trying to figure out how to deal with. You have been working on that. So I guess starting off, I just want to back up a little bit and talk about what brought you to the Legislature - I mean to politics, you were on the Olympia City Council and then the Legislature - and what got you so passionate about housing? [00:01:46] Representative Jessica Bateman: Well, I worked on housing on the Olympia City Council for five years during my tenure there, but I'll go back even further. When we talk about housing policy, we can get really into the weeds and we're on a show right now that has "wonk" in the title - so I definitely can go there and have those conversations. But I think it's really important for us to remember - when we talk about the need for housing - abundant housing and housing options for everyone, housing that's affordable for families - we're talking about people. Because every single person and every single family has to have a home and a place to live. And for me, it's personal. My mom grew up in poverty - she was born and raised in a trailer park in rural Montana. She moved out here to get a job and after having me, she was able to get a job at the county, King County, working as a janitor. And that job was a union-paying job and it helped provide the economic security for her, healthcare benefits - to buy a home as a single mom for $117,000 in Maple Valley. She took the equity that she built in that home and helped me buy a home when I was in my early 30s. I was able to sell that home, pay off all my student loans, and buy a second home with financial security and stability. Fortunately for me, I was one of the lucky ones. I went on to earn my Master's degree, ran for City Council, and now I'm in the Legislature. I want every family to have that opportunity - and right now with the current conditions that we are experiencing with housing, that is not the reality for people across Washington state. And my major concern is that the status quo is not working and we have an obligation - a moral obligation - to make changes so that that opportunity is available to everyone. [00:03:30] Crystal Fincher: Completely makes sense. It mirrors the story of so many people in our communities right now. So what are you working on? What is the fix? What do we need to do to get this issue under control? [00:03:43] Representative Jessica Bateman: I don't want to imply that there is a single solution, or that this is an easy problem to solve. The reality is that it has been decades in the making. It's also multifaceted. We've seen construction after the last recession - we saw a lot of people exit that workforce and we haven't seen them come back since then. So we've got a workforce issue underlying what is a barrier to the construction of housing. The fact of the matter is that the majority of cities across Washington state only allow one type of home to be built - single-family homes - in the vast majority of the residential land use areas. So when we're experiencing a shortage of housing - the numbers that we've been talking about in the last year are the quarter of a million homes that we're behind. We've now got estimates from the Department of Commerce - what our housing need is over the next 20 years - it's a million, and half of those - 500,000 - need to be homes that are affordable for people earning 0-50% AMI [average median income], which would be considered low-income housing. So we have this desperate need to build housing commensurate with our population growth - that's really what we have not been able to do. We've been growing as a state, growing as an economy with jobs, job recruitment. You in Seattle definitely know and see that every day. While we do that, we also have to - must - allow for the construction for homes for those people to live in. Because when we don't have enough homes, the supply imbalance creates this environment - because everyone needs a home. People - what we saw in the last year with the astronomical prices - people in Seattle bidding $200,000 over asking price - really just eliminating the option for middle-income families right out the gate. People that were buying homes in this last year were people that had wealth. So what we're trying to focus on going into the 2023 session is focusing on the multifaceted nature of this issue - triaging the issue of housing - because we know one single solution will not solve it. So it's about increasing supply - making sure that we have homes available to Washingtonians of all shapes and sizes. So that's meeting you where you are and what your needs are and what the demand is. If that's an ADU for a senior that wants to live on the property of their children so they can age in place and provide childcare. If that's a college student that would like to work at the record store down the street and be able to walk to work every day. That's a duplex, if you want to be able to buy into a home and build equity - or a sixplex or a fourplex or a cottage home - we should have all of these options available to us. There's also additional barriers and we have to make it legal to build those homes - we have to lift the bans on those homes. We also need to do things like make it easier for lot splitting - so if you have a piece of property, you can split that line and you can actually sell it - making that equity yourself, that profit. And you can also allow someone else to buy it - build a duplex - so they can then have that opportunity. We're also focusing on things like condo liability, permitting, impact fees. We can get into all those details, but there's all these other things that impact our ability to impact supply. We also want to focus on stabilization because ultimately it is much more effective to keep people in the homes that they're in. So that's weatherization support for low-income people. That's rent stabilization - helping people stay if they're getting behind on their rent. It's also increased notice for people when rent increases are going to happen. We had a bill last year that would have required six months' notice for a tenant if the rent increase was going to be 7% or more. That bill did not make it out of the House last year. We can talk more definitely about the challenges of a bill like that. I also think we'll have a rent cap bill. So actually keeping a cap on rent - maybe similar to what we saw in Oregon, which was a 7% or inflation, but it could be - like in a case where we have inflation, it could be higher. And then also the last tier of that stool is subsidized housing. So that's the public investment in permanently affordable housing. You can call it social housing, you can call it public housing - but it's subsidized housing by the government to keep it affordable in perpetuity. And there's a number of different ways that we do that. Primarily at the legislative level, it's through the Housing Trust Fund. We need to vastly increase our investment in that. So the numbers that I started off with - the 500,000 that are 0-50% AMI - that's very difficult to build considering how expensive it is to build housing, with the cost of land, infrastructure, materials, workforce, permits, timeline, all the things, impact fees. So we really do need the government to step up and help support the subsidized lower-income housing. Over the last 40 years - since 1986 - the Housing Trust Fund has only built 55,000 homes. So if we're looking at a 20-year horizon of a need of 500,000 homes - that is pretty simple math for the common person to just say that does not add up. So we've got a significant gap in the need and what we're investing. That number just came out recently - I had been telling my colleagues we need to add a minimum double our Housing Trust Fund investment. Now that those numbers have come out, it tells me we need to make a significant investment, much more than double. So that's just the start of what I'm thinking for 2023. [00:09:15] Crystal Fincher: Well, and that does certainly seem like it would make a significant difference and addresses many of the different elements of challenge in the whole issue. When I hear people - who have been less excited about this bill, or about taking on housing challenges, or even in opposition to - saying things, there are a few things that I hear. One is just, and I think there was a local meeting last night where it was expressed - hey, this is all growth. Why do we need to accommodate people who are coming here? Somewhere else can accept the growth. That's for big cities and not necessarily for all of the other communities. What would you say to- [00:10:00] Representative Jessica Bateman: I would say that is not a factual statement. It's not based in reality or evidence or fact. Cities in Washington state - when you take an oath to serve the Constitution of Washington state - you take an oath to obey its laws and to fulfill them as a local elected official. And in our state law - under the Growth Management Act - we are required as local municipalities to plan for future population growth. It's a requirement. We can't just opt out of that and say no - although I have heard that before. I've doorbelled and had someone tell me - let's just build a wall around our city and tell people they need to move somewhere else. I think it's a fantastical idea. It's convenient to think we just don't have to welcome people into our community - I like it exactly how it is. The reality is that's not an option. If it's not an option and we know population growth will happen and that we have to accommodate it, our choice and opportunity is, what do we want that to look like? What do we want our community to look like? [00:10:57] Crystal Fincher: That makes sense. And I think the entire business community would be pretty unhappy with just saying - no, we don't want anyone else in this community. Definitely would not be a community that thrived. [00:11:10] Representative Jessica Bateman: If you walk through that argument - think about doctors, nurses, construction, waitresses, waiters. Our lives depend upon people being here, people working here - solutions, creative thinking, schools, everything we have - we want people to be here. [00:11:30] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. What do you say to other people who - there was another recent local meeting where folks were - well, we're supposed to absorb growth within these existing boundaries that - in either special districts or existing areas where there are homes. But there's all this other land that we have out in these suburban and rural areas and we can, instead of "burdening" single-family neighborhoods, we can just build new housing elsewhere. What do you say to people who say that? [00:12:02] Representative Jessica Bateman: Also a fantastical idea about reality. Going back to the Growth Management Act, which stipulates that we concentrate population growth in our urban environments, in our cities - for good reason. That's where the infrastructure already exists. It's much more cost effective to build there. And because we want to retain green spaces, habitat conservation for our environment, for farmland, for habitat for endangered species and different animals - we have to have those green spaces. That's why the Growth Management Act stated its intent to have cities - population growth to occur in cities. Cities have processes for annexing and for expanding out, but there's a process for that as that's not something that happens every day and it's complicated. The reason is because we know we have to abide by the law and that population growth has to occur in our cities. [00:12:53] Crystal Fincher: Last session, we heard from a number of cities - through a number of advocacy organizations and lobbyists - that cities don't want a one-size-fits-all solution for the state. They want to be able to come up with their own solutions for their own cities on their own. Unsurprisingly, not many cities have figured out that solution, despite the fact that this has been a growing crisis for years and years. What do you say to those who say - we need local control? [00:13:24] Representative Jessica Bateman: I think local control is a 20th century ideology - it's outlived its use in this conversation. And it's vastly inadequate as a defense when we're looking at not enough housing for the people in Washington state to live in. The argument just falls incredibly flat. In addition to that, I would say I heard it for five years when I was on the Olympia City Council. We passed middle housing there - legislation, ordinance - after years of work, after 44 public meetings, after 1200 pages of written comment, after 3 public hearings. We went through it and we passed it anyway because we had - fortunately, an organized group of residents that were supportive and wanted livable, walkable communities. And we also had about a half that were really vocal and opposed, which is traditionally the people that show up at City Council meetings. We have data that tells us in fact that people that show up at City Council meetings are predominantly older, whiter, male property owners - so I would argue that the very process that we go through to receive public input on things like zoning changes and proposed zoning changes - where we're considering whether or not we want to grow as a city, which means allow more people to live here and be here - and the people that show up are the people that have the investment, the financial stake in maintaining the status quo is not equitable. And as government, as elected officials, we should - especially as Democrats, with our values - we should be looking at this system and analyzing - is it equitable? Who is benefiting from this? We have to think of the future that we want. When I think of the future that I want and the problem that we're currently experiencing where we have not enough homes for the people that are here resulting in homelessness, resulting in people spending a third to half of their income on their housing, being vulnerable to falling into homelessness, not buying basic necessities like medicine because they cannot afford their needs because their rent is so high, or people that are terrified of a rent increase over a hundred dollars - the stress that that causes. When I hear those things and that's the problem that I'm trying to solve and a city comes to me and says - but I want to maintain local control. That's why it falls flat. And the data doesn't lie - the vast majority of cities do not allow middle housing. 5% of the permits in Washington state for new construction are for middle housing. The data doesn't lie. The consensus among social scientists - people that study this work - doesn't lie. There's, at the local level, not a lot of incentives for individual residents to support new housing. That's just a fact. It's not a judgment. I'm not judging people. I think it's a very natural inclination to say - I want things to stay how they are when you give a choice. Like I mentioned before, the way that we go about getting public input for these decisions really is inherently getting input from people that are already housed, not the people that are working two jobs, single moms, or someone that speaks English as a second language, or someone that has a reaction to an institutional setting like a City Council meeting. We need to be aware of that and we need to be thinking collectively about the good of Washington state. I would also argue that we've got over 220 cities in Washington - the vast majority of them are small ones. Does it make sense when we have something that's impacting cities across the state that we would want them to be doing it on an ad hoc individual basis across the state? I would argue that we would want a floor statewide, and then if they want to add additional incentives and additional density increases - that they can do that. [00:16:54] Crystal Fincher: That makes sense to me. I think one interesting thing that I've noticed, as this conversation has taken place over the last several years, is that there's been a hesitance on behalf of a lot of elected officials because of what you just described - in hearing from the most vocal people who, as you talk about, usually are wealthy landowners who are profiting handsomely on the status quo, being vocal and saying - no, we don't need this. We don't want this. This isn't the right way to go. We don't need to grow. Just leave things the way they are. And a real hesitance from a number of elected officials to take action because they feel like it will come with a lot of pushback. However, I think what has been really encouraging to see is that over the, especially the last couple electoral cycles, we have seen voters in districts where this has been a big topic of conversation - in a number of districts where some of the most outspoken critics or people who have been hesitant to take action on this have been - and their districts and their jurisdictions, overall in voting, when this has been an issue in the election - and basically where candidates have taken opposing views on the ballot - voters have voted overwhelmingly in favor of candidates who are saying - hey, this is not sustainable, we have to take action, we need to implement middle housing, we need to make housing more affordable, we need to protect renters and just make sure people can afford to age in place, live where they are. Hearing from a number of parents who have raised kids and who were not paying attention so much, but now their kids are in college and in early careers - and they're seeing through their kids' eyes a lot of times how hostile this housing market is, how hard it is to get your foot in the door as a homeowner, and how hard it is just to afford rent year after year - and that creating a different kind of a sense of urgency and need than we've seen before. This issue is affecting everybody, everywhere. Do you see a change in perspective among some of your colleagues in the Legislature after seeing so many voters vote in favor of a new direction? [00:19:16] Representative Jessica Bateman: Yes. I have noticed the tone change on this particular issue - because I've been working on it for eight years now - and it's significantly different today. I noticed it a lot last session when I was working on the middle housing bill. We even had an article, I think in the Auburn paper, where when they presented the middle housing bill, it was pretty - they didn't try to burn anyone at the stake with their description of the bill. It was pretty balanced - I was surprised. And what that tells me - and also the anecdotal stories that I hear from people talking to members in their district, from what I hear from my colleagues - is that as Washingtonians get more squeezed by this housing shortage, the more people it impacts, the more real it becomes. Like my little sister - my dad worked at Boeing 40 years, something like that. My little sister is the baby of the family. She's a nurse. She can't afford a home in King County. She makes a good living at her wage. She has a partner too that makes a decent living. But the median home price last year when I was working on this bill, or earlier this year, was $830,000 - which they just cannot afford. They want to live near downtown because they don't want to spend an hour commuting every day and it's just impossible - there's no way that they can do that. So they're postponing starting a family, postponing building equity, building a future, getting roots in a community. That's happening all across the state, so we're seeing people that have children, like you mentioned, that are experiencing that. We're also seeing people that have relatives - like parents - that are stuck in these big suburban homes that are going - I would move to a smaller home if there was an option for me, and there aren't. Because we're not seeing the construction of - those smaller homes and condos really aren't being constructed. They're being constructed at a very low rate. So because it's impacting more and more people, I think you're seeing that dialogue change. Also, the younger and more diverse our legislators are, the more connected they are to this issue. It's pretty simple. And just this recent year, our freshmen incoming class is the most diverse class - both racially, lived experience, and economically. So I'm very optimistic that we're going to take this issue seriously, that we're going to work on solutions for the people of Washington, and that we're going to get some major things accomplished this next year. [00:21:30] Crystal Fincher: All right. So talking about getting things accomplished - is middle housing going to pass this year? [00:21:36] Representative Jessica Bateman: I am very hopeful. So a couple of things have happened. First, we have changed our committee structures. Every two years, we evaluate our committee structures and the jurisdictions within them. And so going into 2023, we heard from our members in the Democratic caucus on the House side that housing was the number one issue that they wanted to focus on. So we took a look at the committees and we decided to create one committee that's just housing and everything housing. That might seem like an obvious choice, but it wasn't. Before that, the current committee structure - until the end of this year - I'm on the Housing, Human Services and Veteran Affairs Committee, which includes veteran affairs, developmental disability, social services, and housing. So we're putting everything other than housing - we're pulling it out - and then we're going to take zoning and GMA out of Local Government and put it into the Housing Committee. Makes sense because we want to look at not just the symptoms of not having enough housing - like the need for rent stabilization, for instance. We want to look at the cause, the root of the problem, and look at all of those things together - condos, HOAs, rent stabilization, Housing Trust Fund dollars, and above all, supply. Because to be honest, we have not been focusing very much on the supply side of this problem. It's almost been like a dirty word amongst politicians. And I think there may be subconscious reasons for that - it's really easy to vilify developers. When we get into the nitty gritty of why housing is so expensive, it's because it's expensive to construct housing. And actually the government's responsible for a lot of that. So we need to be honest about that - it's the first step in coming to terms with a solution is being honest and accepting the current conditions. So we need to look at those things and figure out how are we going to solve them. And I'm very enthusiastic and excited about this committee. We'll decide later on this week who will serve on committees and it will be adopted by our caucus next week. But I think that indicates that we're really taking this seriously and want to put a concerted focus, like I mentioned before, triaging the issue of housing. I'm going to be bringing back my middle housing bill this year. It will be more ambitious than it was last year. It will be impacting cities - last year it was cities 10,000-20,000 duplexes everywhere, and cities 20,000 and up fourplexes everywhere, basically. And this year we're starting at cities of 6,000 or more - and it will be legalizing fourplexes on every current residential lot. In addition, if two units are affordable, there's a density bonus and they could have a sixplex. So on any current single-family residential lot, a sixplex could be allowed if two of the units were affordable - up to 80% AMI. And then in addition to that - same as last year - allowing sixplexes within a half a mile of transit. So that's the basic gist of the bill. It will impact - oh, and cities that are contiguous with any city larger than 200,000, which will impact some of those smaller cities that are up close to Seattle and larger cities in King County. And so we have a coalition working on it this year - Futurewise, which is an environmental organization that's been focusing on Growth Management Act policies, land use, protecting and conserving the environment - they're making this a priority this year, along with House Bill 1099 from last year, which is a climate change bill requiring cities to adopt climate change policies in their comprehensive planning processes. I'm thrilled that these two bills are together a priority, because we often don't talk about the connection between climate change and land use. But the reality is we will not accomplish our climate change, our carbon reduction goals in Washington state if we do not change land use. Because utilization of public transit and multimodal transportation is predicated on density. And that means we have to do infill. And so having those two priorities and bills together and talking about them together is my dream come true. Because ultimately this is about solutions and we need solutions that actually work. And these two really are - the intersection of climate change with all of the things that we want to focus on - equity, racial justice, conserving and protecting the environment, economic stability, all those things. It all works together, housing and climate. And so I'm happy to have them on board and working the issue. And working on getting more and more support from my colleagues - I had a good number of colleagues that co-sponsored the bill last year, I'm hoping to have even more this year. We've been doing a lot of work over the interim and I'm excited. [00:26:11] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Now, when you talk about you've been doing a lot of work and the coalition that you've been able to put together with this - how have you gone about this? How have you involved stakeholders in the process? How did you get to where you are today with this bill? [00:26:26] Representative Jessica Bateman: So last year was my first - I sponsored it in 2022. But prior to that, Representative Nicole Macri, who is my housing shero, sponsored that bill. She asked me to take it over last year because she had a lot of other bills she was working on and I was happy to do so. It was Governor request last year, and there's a process for Governor request - they have to go through their whole internal process. So this year is different because I'm drafting it on my own. Last year, the public engagement process was kind of me on Twitter - that was the extent of it, which I really didn't use before that bill. But the response that we got was overwhelming. The number of people that signed into the bill last year - I've got it on a sticky note - 548 people signed in Pro on the bill last year, which is phenomenal. And we had quite a few people that were signed up to support it - I think 37 people were signed in to actually comment. That's a lot of people for a bill, especially a wonky land use bill. So what that tells me is that this is impacting so many people - that they're motivated to come and talk to their legislators about it and to sign in to support a bill, they're engaging on social media, they're listening to podcasts - and we did interviews and news and all the different things - that's happening because it's an issue. It's top of mind for people - that's the only reason why this issue continues to be focused on - is because the people in Washington are saying - fix this, we need a solution. And so after session ended and the bill died, I got together with my labor stakeholders and advocates, environmental advocates, some racial justice advocates and said - this is something that intersects all of these issues. We need to work together and we need to work together on a package looking at this holistically. What are all of the things that impact our ability to create housing and enough housing for Washingtonians? And then how do we keep people stable in the homes that they have, and how do we build enough subsidized low-income housing that will only be built by the public because the private sector won't be able to make it pencil out? And so in doing that, we saw - over the summer, the Washington State Labor Council passed a resolution stating that they supported ending exclusionary zoning because it impacts working families and their ability to take those wage gains that they've earned - hard-fought over years - they just dissipate when the cost of rent and homes go up so much. We've also seen the environmental organizations and supporters come on board and say - this is impacting climate. And the Black Homeowner Initiative has a 7-point plan for creating homes - and included in that is legalizing middle housing. So what we really saw was a consensus among these stakeholders and organizations that this is something that they want to focus on in 2023. They really see the intersection and the connected nature of these issues. And that's really enabled us to work and educate lawmakers. We held a town hall last night - a webinar for folks to learn about this package proposal. And then I think what we're going to see is - Democrats working with Republicans - I think this is going to be a bipartisan issue, at least the supply side of this package. Ultimately, that package that includes supply stabilization and subsidy, there will be people or organizations that cannot support certain bills or certain tiers of that stool. But they also recognize that all of those things are included in a solution. So some people might opt out of certain parts. But I think in terms of the supply conversation, we'll see some bipartisan support. [00:30:12] Crystal Fincher: So in terms of the stabilization issues, are there any conversations about lifting the ban on rent control? [00:30:21] Representative Jessica Bateman: Yes. So the bill I mentioned before, that we had last year in Local Government, was just simply providing advanced notice - six months' notice. And that bill was killed. The people that were opposed to that were successful in that bill never making it to the floor. My impression, having been there for two years, is that rent control remains politically very, very difficult to take away - to give cities the ability to actually to have a rent cap, or rent control, or even doing it statewide. I don't actually understand why that is because it's very popular politically. People, my mom included - over the summer, we were garage saleing and we were talking about housing and I said - Mom, does it make sense to you that we can't put a cap on rent? She was like - Nooo. So I think we're going to see probably a rent stabilization bill - a bill that will allow for a cap on a 7% inflationary increase - so with inflation, with a couple extra percentages just as a buffer for things like maintenance or if you need to do some upgrades on the unit, but within reason. Some kind of a stabilizing - you can see and predict how much and it's not excessive. They did that in Oregon when they passed their middle housing legislation a couple years ago, and I really like the combination of the two of those. We'll probably see just one that's straight rent control. Whether or not those can pass - I think it's a really heavy lift and I haven't seen evidence of a coalition organizing around that in a strong way. [00:32:00] Crystal Fincher: What can people do to help organize around that and middle housing and funding - increasing funding for the Housing Trust Fund? How can the public engage, get involved with this, and help make sure their Representatives and Senators are in the right place on this? [00:32:18] Representative Jessica Bateman: I think - and it's tough when I hear that question, because I know having been a renter and a person earning minimum wage and living in poverty, poverty wages - it's really hard to tell people - take time out of your day, your stressful life, and put the onus on them to then contact their elected officials. However, I do think that those stories really resonate with people in the Legislature. Personal stories are the most important. I was a legislative assistant years ago before being elected to City Council. And I can tell you, even as a staffer, those personal stories really resonate and they do far more than a fact sheet does. That being said, I know it's difficult for people. So even - if you have a tenants' union, they probably have legislative priorities. You can sign on to bills and track bills and just sign your name - that's important. Also, the Low Income Housing Alliance has a legislative priorities - they're very, very organized and they have a really great outreach and engagement with their members to tell those stories. Ultimately, we need more people that are directly impacted by our housing shortage and rent increases. I'm surprised - because when I go out to my community, I hear from seniors - like this summer, the senior resources center in my community - the woman who manages that told me she gets two or three calls a day from a senior that says they can't afford their rent increase. And she looked at me and she said - you know what I tell them? What I give them? And I said, what? She says - I give them the phone number for homelessness services because that's all I have. There's no resources for them. There's no bucket of money for them. Nothing. That's all I have. And she has to do that every day - because there's no special funding for seniors. And seniors are on a fixed income - it's so obvious. But then, we hear these stories - $400 increases, $500, $1,000 increases. People can't afford it. So that's the reality of our constituents across the state. And it's a huge problem - both from a humanitarian perspective, also from a cost-effective perspective - because once you're unhoused, it is so much more expensive to get you back into housing and the destabilizing impact that has on you, your family, your children, school, for everything. [00:34:40] Crystal Fincher: What else can be done to help stabilize, or what else is on the agenda this session to help keep people in their homes, to help people be able to manage the rent increases? I have a neighbor who this past year had their rent go up over 40%. And just really, really hard to manage and negotiate through. Obviously, their income did not go up at all and trying to squeeze that in. And there just seems to be no kind of incentive for landlords - many of them corporate landlords or corporate entities, not even people you can talk to - doesn't seem to be any kind of incentive for them to slow down or moderate the rent increases. It seems like it's going to have to happen through regulation or it's not going to happen - and we'll continue to pay the consequences until then. [00:35:33] Representative Jessica Bateman: I agree with everything that you said. And I think what we're going to see is a big push for a significant increase in the Housing Trust Fund. And I know that sounds vague. It's the beginning of a conversation around what does that look like and what does that entail? There's a couple - so when we say an increase in investment in the Housing Trust Fund, we have to identify where that money comes from. And we have to identify what revenue source because there's a lot of reluctance to move money that's going towards something now into something else. We don't want to have a scarcity mindset where we cut things that are really important in order to fund other things that are important. Revenue is a tricky thing for us to address. It takes a little bit of organization and demonstrated support. A lot of things have to kind of line up in order for that to happen. I have heard of two revenue sources. First is an additional local REET option for cities to pass that they can use for affordable housing. Cities have - [00:36:38] Crystal Fincher: And is the REET a real estate investment tax? [00:36:41] Representative Jessica Bateman: Real estate excise tax. [00:36:42] Crystal Fincher: Excise tax - thank you. [00:36:44] Representative Jessica Bateman: Yes. And cities have a couple of different tools in their toolbox right now. They have a 1% property tax or sales tax that they can implement for the use for affordable housing. They also have a sales tax that they can get back from the state as a form of credit - that was a June Robinson bill from before I was in the Legislature that I cannot recall right now. It's not a significant amount of funding, but it would add to if they were to do the Home Fund - which is what we call it in Olympia - the 1% sales tax. Those are two revenue sources. Not all cities are doing that - a handful are and counties. First, I would say the Low Income Housing Alliance has been really great about educating local electeds to know what revenue options they have. We need cities to be a partner in this. In addition to that, we also need to identify revenue sources at the state level so we can make a big investment. It'd be really lovely if we had a sense of urgency and investment from our federal partners as well. I'm not going to bank on that. However, I have a fabulous Congresswoman, Marilyn Strickland, who's working on that. So REET local option. Also, we have a progressive REET - we changed it a couple of years ago. For the higher properties, there's a discussion about lowering the threshold for when the higher rate would apply, which would increase the amount of revenue that we're collecting from that. There's also discussions about wealth tax - that was something we considered a couple of years ago when we passed the capital gains excise tax. A wealth tax is very popular amongst Washingtonians, and it makes sense to have the wealthiest Washingtonians paying their fair share. However, going into what some people might call a recession - we're feeling recession, inflation - we're hearing a little bit of talk about that. I think that it remains very politically popular and feasible, so I would push us to do that. We do need to increase our investment in the Housing Trust Fund for the reasons you identified. We need to have rent stabilization. We have a doc recording fee Rent Stabilization Fund for the first time - that was created last year or the year before - and that goes directly into rent assistance for people. We need to provide more investment in that and we need to vastly increase the number in the Housing Trust Fund. The Association of Washington Cities is advocating for a billion dollar a year increased investment in the housing trust fund. [00:39:09] Crystal Fincher: That is significant. [00:39:11] Representative Jessica Bateman: That's six times what we're currently investing right now, so it's significant. [00:39:16] Crystal Fincher: I would love to see it. I think the final thing I just want to cover - you had mentioned that government does have a role to play in how expensive it is to build housing and challenges. We hear challenges about design review and the time it takes to permit, just the time it takes to build and all the different factors involved with that. Are you looking at anything to address those issues? [00:39:42] Representative Jessica Bateman: We are. First, there's going to be a bill on eliminating minimum parking requirements near transit, which would save - I think in Seattle the last time I heard, it adds an additional $75,000 per unit. In addition to that, an impact fee deferral bill. As a developer, when you go to start building, you can defer out the impact fee until after you sell the property. Permit streamlining in Washington state - cities are supposed to turn around a permit in 120 days. There's no accountability or action that happens if they don't meet that timeline. We need to provide them with resources and support so they can actually honor that timeline and hold them accountable if they don't. There's another bill for condos that will allow condos of 12 units or less to be subject to residential energy code and residential building code instead of commercial - will significantly reduce cost. I know Representative Duerr is working on a bill that's similar to that for middle housing, but it's going to be a study to get them to come up with a plan for how to do that - so we can have middle housing only have to go through the residential building codes, which would reduce the costs as well. Those are just a handful of the bills that we've talked about so far. I think there will be more, but there is a significant area of interest in reducing the cost and our role in creating the high cost of constructing housing. [00:41:17] Crystal Fincher: Sounds good. Then the issue of just some notoriously bad actors who are landlords - and hearing from cities that code enforcement resources are short, seeking funding for that - are you looking at anything to help hold bad landlords accountable for illegal and negligent actions? [00:41:43] Representative Jessica Bateman: That hasn't been an issue that has been brought to me. I'm happy to work with folks and see additional revenue that we could provide for cities. I know - in the city of Olympia, we have code enforcement, so if you've got a violation of a code, I guess it would depend upon how active the code enforcement department is. In Olympia, it's pretty active and if you have - I've called them before - and they come pretty quickly. If cities are saying they need more resources to enable them to actually take those complaints and actually go out and investigate, I'm happy to have that conversation. Because while we focus on making sure there is housing available, we want to make sure that it's healthy housing for people. [00:42:23] Crystal Fincher: Makes sense. How can people follow the work that you're doing throughout the Legislature and just stay up to date on what you're working on? [00:42:33] Representative Jessica Bateman: So first, my email - you can reach me at jessica.bateman@leg.wa.gov. You can also follow me @jessdbateman - B-A-T-E-M-A-N - on Twitter. And you can also find me on Facebook - I have a legislative Facebook account. It's frozen right now, I think, because of the elections. I think it'll be active starting next January. I would say that the most fast-paced information is on my Twitter account, and I will be posting updates on my middle housing bill as I introduce it, which should be happening in the next week. I was really hoping to drop it today on my birthday, but it didn't work out that way. So I'll be posting information for people so they can get engaged. Also, Futurewise, I'm sure, will be doing that. And Futurewise has an account as well on Twitter. [00:43:29] Crystal Fincher: Excellent. Well, thank you so much for taking this time to explain all this to us, for working so hard on this for so long. I wish you a very happy birthday. Thanks for joining us. [00:43:42] Representative Jessica Bateman: Thank you so much. It's been a pleasure and thank you so much for hosting the opportunity to have this dialogue about this really important issue. [00:43:50] Crystal Fincher: Thanks so much. [00:43:51] Representative Jessica Bateman: Thanks. Bye. [00:43:52] Crystal Fincher: Thank you all for listening to Hacks & Wonks. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler. Our assistant producer is Shannon Cheng and our Post-Production Assistant is Bryce Cannatelli. You can find Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks, and you can follow me @finchfrii, spelled F-I-N-C-H-F-R-I-I. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered right to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave us a review wherever you listen. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

Bipran Ki Reet Ton Sach Da Marg Vol 1 by Gurbaksh Kala Afghana Voice Gurjant Singh Rupowali Punjabi Audio Books --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/punjabi-audio-books/support

On this week's Hacks & Wonks, Crystal is joined by Executive Director of The Urbanist, Doug Trumm. Crystal and Doug quickly run through news items about progress on Washington state's capital gains tax, a discussion on the worsening traffic safety crisis, and labor stories about Amazon's questionable fulfillment of a court order and the federal government's blocking a railway workers strike ahead of the holidays. Public safety news out of Pierce County includes the start of embattled Sheriff Ed Troyer's criminal trial and troubling news about an officer charged in Manuel Ellis' death having been flagged for violent behavior during their academy training. Doug and Crystal then discuss the gulf between reality and rhetoric that has appeared in media reporting on crime and law enforcement and how it reaches into electeds' handling of issues like decriminalization of simple drug possession at the State Legislature, outcry over a miniscule portion of the Seattle Police Department budget not being funded in the City of Seattle budget process, and the campaign messaging of the King County Prosecuting Attorney's race. On a hopeful note, Leesa Manion's solid win in the King County Prosecutor's race and her strong performance - across the county, across cities, and across legislative districts - serves as a referendum for voters rejecting punitive measures and signifies an appetite for root cause-addressing, data-driven solutions that work. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Doug Trumm, on Twitter at @dmtrumm. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources “WA Supreme Court clears way for state to collect capital-gains tax” by Claire Withycombe from The Seattle Times    "The Urbanist's Ryan Packer Discusses Worsening Traffic Safety Crisis on KUOW" by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist   “Labor board blasts Amazon's "flagrant" attempt to flout court order“ by Emily Peck from Axios    “Biden signs rail agreement into law, thwarting strike“ by Shawna Chen from Axios   “Criminal trial begins in Sheriff Ed Troyer's false-reporting case” by Jim Brunner from The Seattle Times   “Academy warned Tacoma of violent training episode by officer later charged in Manuel Ellis' death” Patrick Malone from The Seattle Times   “Washington should be a leader in ending the War on Drugs” by Mark Cooke from ACLU-WA   “Nelson, Pedersen, and Sawant Dissent Ahead of Final Vote on Seattle Budget” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist   “Public Safety Politics and the Even Election Reckoning” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher - I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, we are continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a cohost. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's cohost: Executive Director of The Urbanist, Doug Trumm. Welcome! [00:00:52] Doug Trumm: Hey, thanks for having me. It's such a busy news week - it's really going to be a slog to get through it all. [00:00:57] Crystal Fincher: Yeah we will make an attempt. I guess, starting off with some statewide news that isn't ultimately the news that everyone is waiting for, but kind of a pit stop along the way - the Washington Supreme Court clears the way for the state to start collecting capital gains tax. So what happened here? [00:01:16] Doug Trumm: It's still just an early - not a ruling, but just a decision on the Court's part - not to issue an injunction. But hey, that's a really good sign because if the Court was leaning towards invalidating the capital gains tax, they probably would have issued an injunction. But at the same time, you don't want to read too much into these tea leaves, but certainly the fact they can start collecting the tax makes this start to feel pretty real. [00:01:41] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I would agree - don't know what's going to happen yet. I think lots of people are hoping that we do get a favorable ruling for the capital gains tax, but there still is the big issue of whether this counts as, officially, an income tax, which would make it unconstitutional under our Constitution. Many interpretations show that it is not, but we are waiting for the ruling to definitively decide that from the Supreme Court, which I think we're anticipating getting early next year. Is that the case? [00:02:14] Doug Trumm: Yeah, that sounds about right. And there's a lot of ways they could rule. But yeah, certainly one of - the hope, I think, is that they would create a new category of - income actually being income, which in our state - oddly, it's not. So that's what creates this huge hurdle to doing progressive taxation - is that it counts as property, and property you have to tax flat. And progressives - we're not trying to argue for a flat income tax. We want a graduated progressive income tax. So if they get a really favorable ruling, that will open the door to that and suddenly there'll be a lot more options on the table and hopefully Democrats actually take them. [00:02:53] Crystal Fincher: I definitely hope so. Also in the news, one of The Urbanists' own, Ryan Packer, was on KUOW discussing what is really - our own crisis here locally, and a nationwide crisis in traffic safety. What is happening here? [00:03:13] Doug Trumm: Yeah, Washington state really echoes the national trend. And the national trend does not mirror the international trend, which - most industrial nations are getting much safer. They've used the pandemic, sort of as a catalyst in a way, to encourage people to take transit, or walk, or bike or - hey, the roads aren't as busy, let's do this project now and make the streets safer. That's really not the approach we've seen in the United States and in Washington state. We've kind of spun our wheels and we've let projects kind of get behind schedule because of the pandemic. And that's happening globally too in some cases, but usually the vision's only getting sharper. So this is reflected in the data and the New York Times had a piece about this this week - Emily Badger - and the US is up 5% during the pandemic in traffic fatalities. But almost every other major nation, it's going down significantly - so it's a bad case of American exceptionalism. We were so excited for our transportation reporter, Ryan Packer, to be on KUOW to talk about this - their reporting is really raising this issue locally a lot. And they really, at all these meetings where some of these decisions quietly get made, whether that's a transportation safety advisory commission or some obscure regional body. But mostly, there's little efforts here and there to improve safety, but we're not seeing the wholesale re-envisioning of streets or strategy that has really been effective in other countries and bringing down collisions and deadly crashes. [00:05:04] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think so. And we continue to see this tension here, in the United States and locally, between designs that are car-centric being more dangerous for everyone else on the road. And investments in transportation, in pedestrian mobility, bike and transit access and mobility - and it seems like the more we design roads and transportation through ways principally for, primarily for cars and prioritizing their needs above everyone else's, that we come out with these outcomes that are just less safe and too often fatal for all of the other kinds of users. [00:05:50] Doug Trumm: Yeah, exactly. And the American system doesn't even treat pedestrian safety as a category of car safety when they give out their gold, whatever-rated car safety awards. If - you can have a three-ton car that maims pedestrians, but if the person inside is fine - oh, that's safety rated - great. So there's certainly federal stuff, but Ryan and The Urbanist, in general, we've really focused on - what are these projects at the City level? Unfortunately, the clear epicenter of this crisis in Seattle is Southeast Seattle District 2, Tammy Morales' district - and she's been a champion. She's recently told me - hey, I didn't think I was going to become the traffic safety person when I first ran for office, but given my district, this is - I really am. And she didn't say this, but implicit in this is our Transportation Chair hasn't really been focused on that - Alex Pedersen - and we'll probably get into that some more when we talk about the budget, because that's - the investments we're making aren't completely safety-focused, as you alluded to. And we have projects queued up to make it safer to bike and walk in D2, but there was just a wave of delays - projects pushed back one year, two years from the original timeline. There's supposed to be a safe bike route through Beacon Hill, there's supposed to be a safe protected bike lane on MLK Way - but those projects are behind schedule. As far as we know, they're still happening, but if you were - if this area is responsible for over half of the - D2 is responsible for over half of the traffic fatalities in the whole city - the last thing we'd want to be doing is delaying those projects in that district. [00:07:39] Crystal Fincher: Seems so - it doesn't seem to make much sense - same with just connecting sidewalks and neighborhoods that people have been waiting for decades to happen and still hasn't. So long way to go there. Also this week, we had a number of events, news happen in the labor realm - couple of items that affect us locally. One - so Amazon just had a ruling from the National Labor Relations Board directing them to correct some of their action, which they still seem to be just not doing. What's going on at Amazon? [00:08:19] Doug Trumm: Yeah, they think they're kind of above the law when it comes to this. They were supposed to read out this ruling saying - hey, you can't be fired for union organizing, or even having discussions with union organizers, or being union-curious. But instead of just following the order to the letter of the law and reading that out to all their employees, they chose specifically the shift change and then just played a video. So the Labor Board was pretty upset about that because this was a court order, they were supposed to follow it - but they weaseled their way out of it in a very corporate lawyer-y kind of fashion where theoretically just maybe - if you squint your eyes, does this qualify for following the order? I don't know. Alexa, read order. I don't know how you could get - this ruling actually to get to the people, but they're figuring out a way not to do it. [00:09:16] Crystal Fincher: One of the interesting things here - employers are responsible for letting their employees know what their rights are. Amazon has bent over backwards not to do that. This is another example of it. We also see Starbucks bending over backwards to be hostile to the union and we continue to see those actions, and then being called out by the National Labor Relations Board also. And this week, of course, we saw - yesterday - Congress take action to avert the railroad strike by passing legislation that still denies railroad workers any kind of paid sick leave, which just should be the most basic thing that every employee everywhere is entitled to. And just beyond disappointing to me personally - to a ton of people - that we had particularly a Democratic president and right now a Democratic Congress who acted against workers and against unions and their ability to take sick pay. It's just bad all the way around, and it feels like they were thrown under the bus because of the threat of bad things happening if they strike - instead of that being the key that says, wow, these really are essential employees. And hey, there have been billions in stock buybacks recently and hundreds of millions of compensation over the past few years for executives. Maybe they can also spare a sick day and to pressure the companies to provide that very, very, very basic thing for employees. Just very disappointing for me personally. How did you feel about that? [00:11:01] Doug Trumm: Yeah, that was disappointing and Amtrak Joe really let us down. I think it's odd that employees are held hostage to how valuable their work are, right? Their work is, right? Because everyone's - we can't have rails shutting down right in the middle of the holiday crisis when all these companies are trying to make a ton of money for themselves and have a strong Q4 and really try to get some blood flowing in this economy. But instead of going - oh yeah, so I guess we should pay those workers well to make sure that happens, and give them the sick time they're asking for and the benefits - it's just force it through because we create a vision of a crisis if they are actually allowed to use their union rights. So it just goes back to 1880s again of the rail barons and the laws that they got passed - that they're able to compel the workers in this way and have Congress step in. But it certainly is not - hopefully not the end of the story. Hopefully they can actually get real sick pay, especially in a time of a lot of viral spread - both in the COVID realm and really bad flu season. This is upending their lives when they get sick and it doesn't have to be this way. So it's disappointing, and I saw Mayor Harrell decided to pile on with that and say it was great that they'd broke the strike, and work in that he still supports workers' rights and everything - I think you can't have it both ways in this case. You can't One Seattle your way out of this one - you're either with the workers or you're not. [00:12:46] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, pretty cut and dry there. And what I just think is so shortsighted is that this policy is partially a response to being short-staffed. They are already facing staffing shortages. We are already at the breaking point where if - right now, under the current staffing levels, if an employee is sick, if someone does miss a day, that can create chaos in the system because there aren't enough people to cover. And this just perpetuating a system that is hostile to workers, where workers can face discipline for any unplanned absence - and people get sick and families get sick, as we all know - this is an inevitability. That if you're subject to discipline for that, they're seeing more people just leave, instead of have their career of however many years or decades end with them being disciplined for taking care of their sick kid. So we are already setting ourselves up for massive disruptions by making this worker shortage worse. We see things like this happening in education, in healthcare, in transportation - across the board - with public transit systems and others. So we just need to really take a look at what we're doing here and - are we setting ourselves up for the same problems that we swear we have to take action like this to avoid, when really we're just making it more of an inevitability that it does eventually happen. I hope we all learn from this and do better and hold our public officials accountable for doing better. Also in the news this week, speaking of holding public officials accountable, the criminal trial for Pierce County Sheriff Ed Troyer just started. This is the trial about him making a call, that was allegedly a false report, accusing a newspaper delivery person - a Black man who was delivering newspapers - of being suspicious, acting nefariously. He said that his life was threatened by the newspaper carrier, which does not - at least through all the reporting initially, did not seem to be supported by other accounts in what happened. He ended up being charged and now the trial has began. They sat the jury. Opening statements happened. Testimony has begun. What has happened in this trial that's been notable so far? [00:15:22] Doug Trumm: They use the same strategies they always use, it seems like - it's pretty clear that this police officer clearly didn't act as you'd want someone to act. Now he's trying to get out of it claiming - okay, I did feel threatened or I did. And it's how it plays out every time and a lot of people were willing to go along - suddenly this violence incident that this Sheriff deputy caused - suddenly it's not his fault because something else, and it just seemed like hopefully we're finally learning from that. But we've seen a lot of other cases where it's enough for some people to exonerate someone. I don't know - it's frustrating that this is how it always goes, but maybe eventually this line will go stale. [00:16:13] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, we will see. This is one where it's interesting because - for the day job and for this podcast, following the news is useful. But for my own personal sanity, this is a situation where often I find my inclination is to disconnect from - definitely the daily news, the drumbeat of news about this - just because some of the early signals, decisions, indications from this trial feel really familiar to me. Meaning that - man, we've seen so many of these trials end and the police officer, sheriff ends up being found not guilty, gets off regardless of what looks to be very obvious evidence to many people in the public. And I just - this will be very disappointing once again, if that does happen, but we will see what happens with this trial and continue to follow it for you all. Also, there was news that came out about an officer that wound up being charged in Manuel Ellis's death, having a very violent episode previously, and that not being heeded after that was communicated to the Tacoma Police Department. And so tragic. Can you detail what we found out here? [00:17:44] Doug Trumm: Yeah, I really encourage everyone to read about this story because it really makes you question how these systems are working and how this can happen. Because this officer - Rankine, I think is his name - was in the police academy. They identified that he had an issue with violence and with - I forget what they called it, "code black" or something like that - basically just shutting down and going tunnel vision, not hearing the outside world once he's in that mode. And it's related to his combat service as a veteran - obviously, that's a complicated issue - we're very, very glad that people serve, but that doesn't necessarily mean we want to put them on the frontlines interacting with the public if they have these unaccounted-for issues that are identified by the police academy. The police academy trainer decided to write a note, his superiors after a couple of days forwarded it to the Tacoma Police Department who was sponsoring him to be in this police academy and said - hey, we're worried about this guy. He had this violent incident where he shot someone during a training simulation who was not someone - the training simulation was supposed to be how do you de-escalate the situation, how do you - and the person was not cooperating, to be clear - and it was a virtual simulation. But the trainer was - why did you do this? And he couldn't really explain it because he went blank or whatever, and thought he had done fine because, I guess in the military, that's what he was conditioned to do and had seen a lot of violent episodes - but hadn't really made the connection that now you're in a civilian setting and you're supposed to be de-escalating situations instead of fighting your way out of them. And what ended up happening, despite the police academy issuing this warning saying - hey, maybe don't take this guy actually - the Tacoma Police Department still took him, didn't really make any accommodations, or - it's not clear that they warned his - the rest of the people he'd be working with, basically just treated him like one of the guys. They did put him on desk duty initially, but I think that's just what rookies kind of do. Then they put him on patrol with another rookie and it was not even a couple months - it was less than a year - and he had already, this happened. It was clearly a tragic incident waiting to happen and it did happen. It leaves us with a lot of questions like - is the police academy - is a little note in your file enough, or should he fail out of the academy? That's one odd thing about this case - they didn't fail him. The other odd thing is that even with this big warning, this huge red flag, Tacoma PD didn't do anything and now they're stonewalling the reporters from The Seattle Times and all the other newspapers that are knocking on the door, and they're just kind of clammed up about it, but it's clear they messed up in a big, big way. [00:21:03] Crystal Fincher: It's just one of those things that makes you want to once again ask - what are we doing here? If there is behavior that is so violent that you feel that you need to warn someone else not to hire him, why are you passing him? To the question that you just asked, why does that person pass the academy in the first place? Why was that not heeded when they were hired? Okay, they were hired and brought onto the academy. Why was no corrective action taken, no additional guidance? And yes, this wound up very predictably. The warning was given because it could be foreseen that this would wind up in unjustified violence to a member of the public - which it did, resulting in that person's death. This is a person, right? And it's just - if we can't weed out someone who even before they get in the system are demonstrating unacceptable violence - violence that you have to tell someone to look out for - what is the point of anything? There is this characterization by people, who I believe are acting in bad faith largely - that any kind of talk of accountability is antithetical to safety, it makes us less safe, it's hostile to police officers, and is not worth pursuing. And if we do, we're making life harder for them. If they're saying this is what belongs in their ranks, if they're saying that this is acceptable for passing and getting in, and then hiring without anything - then this is unacceptable. They're saying - they've said that their own policies were violated - this is seemingly saying that the warning came from them not meeting their own standards. If they can't hold themselves to their own standards and weed people out who don't fit that, then someone else has to. And evidently those aren't really their standards if they can't adhere to them. So someone has to, otherwise we're just letting - in this situation - basically killing machines out onto the street. And we have to do better. And it just makes no sense that we are entertaining people who say that this is bad for police officers. Acting against policy should not be bad for them. If so, we should have discussions about the policy, but this doesn't make any sense. And if their job truly is to protect and serve, and someone is acting completely against that, then acting more in concert with that and making sure that happens should be a welcome development. And over and over again, the public continues to vote for real accountability and reject those kinds of disingenuous arguments that - hey, you got to "back the blue" or nothing else. People can be happy to have a police officer there, that they're happy to have a police officer when they call 911 and show up, and still believe that there should be guidelines for their conduct and behavior that guide them and that they should be held accountable to - just like everyone else with every other job in this society. It just is so infuriating that - hey, this is predictable, it's foreseeable. And just with a shrug. [00:24:50] Doug Trumm: Yeah, and it wasn't his first time - [00:24:52] Crystal Fincher: Right. [00:24:53] Doug Trumm: - using basically a chokehold-type thing. And he had another I-can't-breathe incident and they just were like - oh well, it happens. And if he says - oh this person was threatening or violent - they kind of just, even though after the whole George Floyd thing - there's one thing that I thought was kind of the lowest hanging fruit - okay, we probably shouldn't use chokeholds anymore or knee on people's back, but this is exactly what this guy was doing. And he suffered no consequence for it until he killed someone. [00:25:27] Crystal Fincher: Acting against policy. And as we have seen with so many of these incidences, that there have been several occasions where officers who wind up killing someone - use violence unjustifiably, use violence against policy in situations before the killing occurs - which there is no discipline for. It is time for them to be held accountable to the job that the public believes they were hired to do. Just like all of us. That's not hostile. That's just common sense. So we'll see how that continues. It is just another infuriating, devastating, tragic element of Manny Ellis's death that is just - it's tragic. [00:26:21] Doug Trumm: Hopefully we learn from it. And I think it relates to how we get so breathless and just completely operate on fear and desperation - we have to hire, we have to reach some sort of set number of cops and then we'll feel safe. But when you get that desperate and you just want to add ranks so you can put out your press release to claim victory on that - you're hiring the bottom of the barrel. If we were serious about safety, we wouldn't worry so much about that number as flunking people out of the academy who are killing machines. You have to put accountability ahead of "let's just hit a number," "here's the right response time," "here's the right number of officers" - those are important things, but you can't get so blinded to them that you're taking terrible cops. [00:27:13] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and that makes the community less safe. The academy warned that - Hey, putting this officer on the street may make the community less safe, this is acting against public safety, we don't want people to be victimized unjustly by violence - and that was the warning that came with this officer - and look. We'll continue to see how this happens. Also kind of teeing up this week were some articles just talking about the War on Drugs - how much of a failure it has been - which is very timely because in this upcoming legislative session, which we're starting to see a flurry of activity with. And our new legislators now down in Olympia - and getting set and oriented and all of that to start the session next month - is that the Blake decision, which a couple years ago the Supreme Court basically decriminalized or invalidated the law that criminalized simple possession of any substances. Our Legislature subsequently acted to bring a uniform policy across the state and kind of instituted a new method of criminalization - some of it was lighter criminal penalties, but still criminal penalties for substance use and possession - in the face of a ton of evidence and data that shows that - Hey, criminalization is actually not an effective intervention. We've seen the entire War on Drugs. We've seen what has happened there. If we actually treat this as a public health problem and not as a criminal justice problem, we are much better off. There was a survey of Washington state voters - a poll taken - and in that poll, 85% of likely voters - the poll was in June 2022 of this year - 85% of voters believe that drug use should be treated as a public health issue and not a criminal justice issue. And this really sets the tone and provides a mandate for our Legislature, which has to take up the Blake decision and the Blake legislation again this year - because there was a sunset provision in it that is now up this year - to actually make good on this policy. How did you read this? [00:29:45] Doug Trumm: It seems like the public's at a different place than some of the very serious, centrist, establishment Democratic leaders on this who are - the likes of Chris Gregoire, who are saying - Oh, we really need to get - go back to our old policy where - it was drug possession was fully criminalized and it was just one strike and they could, people could be locked up for simple possession. And I think they portray that it's really important to dealing with downtown disorder, or crime, or whatever. But that's not really where the people are at, and this three-strike provision probably does make it, if you're only listening to cops, annoying - 'cause they feel like these warnings are letting people off the hook. But with jails being pretty full right now, you start running into this problem of where are are we putting people? We've done this drug war thing a long time, it hasn't really worked, the people are ready for a public health approach instead of a punitive lock-them-up approach. We just saw that with the election of Leesa Manion for King County Prosecutor that - the people went with the person who was willing to do diversionary programs that try to get people help and not load them up with jail time and fees, but instead give them an opportunity to get back on their feet and better themselves and think about rehabilitation instead of just ruining someone's life. I think the people are ready to take a different approach - I don't know how far folks, both in terms of the State Legislature and the public, if they're - maybe not ready for a Portugal-style solution, but I really think they're ready to have that conversation rather than just go back to the old way of doing things. I think the - maybe one of the things will come up is fentanyl - it really is a scary drug in terms of what it can do to a person and how likely it is to overdose - I'm sure they'll try to use that and maybe fentanyl is treated a little bit differently than other drugs, but it seems like a lot of substances doesn't - I don't know why you immediately lock someone up for having possession of a set quantity. It's sort of like - we got to get this person help, but jail isn't help. [00:32:11] Crystal Fincher: And jail doesn't help, and it actually does more harm than good in this situation. It makes our streets less safe. People are less stable, more prone to commit crime, when they get out - and more prone to continue to use. We've seen all of this and again, this is just about possession. This doesn't impact any laws on selling, or distributing, or anything like that - those still remain and that's not part of this discussion. But it would be good for them to act in alignment with where the evidence and data show - we are made more safe, and people are made more healthy and less likely to use and abuse drugs and other harmful substances. So we will continue to follow this throughout the legislative session and see what happens. Also big news this week - the Seattle City Council passed their budget. What did we get? What are the highlights and lowlights of this budget? [00:33:19] Doug Trumm: Yeah, it was a marathon day to wrap up the amendments and do all the speeches on Monday and Tuesday - I guess the really marathon day was the Budget Committee last week. It always is a slog at the end and it's tough to know everything that's happening, but ultimately the budget is - there's a lot of different takes on it, there's a lot of perspectives. But ultimately what happened is largely - Mayor Harrell's budget is reflected in the Council's balancing package. They did make some significant changes, but nothing enormous. And the issue that they're dealing with is that there is a large budget shortfall. It started out at $141 million at the beginning. And then they got the news that the projections had gotten a lot worse late in the game - so that any hope of Council just adding a bunch of new investments in evaporated, once they got that forecast that Real Estate Excise Tax was going to be way down - that was the main thing that took a bite out of the budget. And we use that REET money to fund a lot of our infrastructure investments in this city. So from a transportation focus, I was pretty disappointed to not see more investments in street safety. They did make some. Councilmember Tammy Morales really fought for her district - as we mentioned earlier - epicenter of the safety crisis. So she got a proviso to make sure that they improve the bike lanes in Southeast Seattle to have harder infrastructure, so you can't just run over those flex posts and injure someone on the bike lane or the sidewalk. That's one positive add, but it was just a proviso, so hopefully SDOT does the right thing and implements it rather than kind of wiggling out of it. But by and large, transportation didn't get a ton of adds and Mayor Harrell's budget didn't make a ton of new initiatives or pushes there, so that's one thing that fell victim to that shortfall. But a lot of the action was around public safety and that's where we saw a lot of the grandiose takes on - especially on the centrist side of - Oh, this was a disaster. End of the day, the Council funded 99% of the mayor's SPD budget. They're making a really big deal about this 1% - and within that 1% that the Council did do cuts was the ShotSpotter gunfire detection surveillance system, which has a really - it has a track record - it's been implemented in a lot of cities and that track record is not very good. It doesn't really, there's no correlation to it decreasing crime, leads to a lot of false calls - those false calls can then cause over-policing of communities of colors where they're implemented. And it has in, in instances, led to violent altercations between cops who are like - Oh, the gunfire thing said there was a gunshot here. And sometimes it's slamming a car door, or firework, or something - could set something off - or backfiring car, I guess. So what are we doing here? This is not evidence-based practice - Council made the budget safer, but if you listen to Councilmember Sara Nelson or Councilmember Alex Pedersen, who voted against the budget, and then some of the press releases that were fired off shortly after - the Chamber actually sent the press release before the final vote, but right after the Council briefing. They said - this is, these are public safety cuts. And the other big thing that happened was - there's 80 positions that were unfilled of actually 240 total unfilled positions at SPD, because they're having a hard time recruiting faster than they're losing officers, which relates to a national trend of a lot of attrition and police officers and not as much new people entering the profession. But they eliminated 80 positions off the books - because when they leave those 240 empty positions, that means that those, that money goes into SPD's budget every cycle. And it throws out the balance of the whole thing because you're - basically all the extra money goes to SPD instead of just being in the General Fund for them to debate and figure out where to go. It can go back into public safety investments and that's what happened this time, even with the eliminating the budgets. But basically a lot of people tried to turn that into - they were cutting officers - but they fully funded the mayor's hiring plan, which - they're going to hire 125 officers, which they hope - that's then 30 new, net new officers. But that wasn't good enough for those two councilmembers and for the Seattle Chamber of Commerce. So they both kind of opposed this budget. And that seemed to be pretty upsetting to Budget Chair Teresa Mosqueda, because she had worked with both of those Councilmembers Nelson and Pedersen and had put their amendments into the budget - some of them. And she thought that spirit of compromise would lead them to vote for it, but they did not. And so it almost - this budget almost failed because it needed six votes. It only got six votes because of those two defections, plus Councilmember Sawant makes it her tradition and has always voted against the budget. And she's coming at it from the opposite direction of - Hey, let's invest more in social services, and let's tax the rich, and increase the JumpStart payroll tax - is her argument, the last few years. And she specifically said - I'm not chucked in with Pedersen and Nelson. So yeah, it ended up being kind of a mess messaging-wise, but largely this budget was reflecting Harrell's priorities, plus a few of the Council's. And it made the most of a really downward trend in revenue - and that was by virtue of JumpStart payroll tax kind of papering over some of the holes, and also then letting them make a record investment in housing. So housing definitely did well. There were some Green New Deal priorities. And it's a really big budget, so I'm kind of - broad strokes here - but if I'm missing anything, Crystal, let me know. But yeah, it felt bizarre to me that the the debate about it was so far from the reality. And I guess these few million dollars in the police budget are enough to cause these votes against, and the Chamber to be really upset, and saying this is public safety cuts. But it largely seemed like much more collaboration and kumbaya between the mayor and most of the council, with Budget Chair Mosqueda and Mayor Harrell complimenting each other about how well they work together. [00:40:35] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. I think what we're seeing is reflective of some of the reality versus rhetoric that we see on a national level, that we see with conservative Republicans, even the MAGA Republicans, where the rhetoric just doesn't match reality. But the rhetoric is a tactic to eventually shift people's perception of what reality is. It doesn't matter what happened if you just keep saying something else happened - Oh my gosh, this is, you know, horrible. We didn't get anything we're asking for. We need to move in this completely different direction - people start to absorb that and pick that up. As we saw this week with the New York Times - basically admitting without participating, pointing the finger at themselves - saying, Yeah, rhetoric about public safety was really disjointed from the actual facts. There are tons of stories, but when you look at the actual crime rates, they weren't actually high. Media did this. And they very conveniently left out that they were at the top of the list of media doing that. But it felt like that's similar to this conversation. This rhetoric is completely detached from what happened in the budget and from what's happening on the ground - yeah, majority of what Harrell asked for was in there. One notable exception was the ShotSpotter technology as you covered, which actually didn't have a big, a huge price tag compared to some other things. But it's still money that, especially in a shortfall, can be better spent to make people safe. And I think that's where a lot of people are at right now. It's just - lots of people are worried about safety, but where they continue to vote, and how people on the ground continue to vote in elections is - yes, we do want our communities to be safer, but we recognize that the public safety equation is bigger than just policing. We have to talk about interventions that are appropriate for the crises that we're facing. Just sweeping and moving around and criminalizing people who are unhoused is not making that problem any better, it's making it worse. So instead of investing money continually in sweeps and in criminalization and carceral solutions - Hey, what if we actually use that money to put people in houses - that actually is a solution to that problem. Other cities are doing that with success. We could be doing that. Hey, if people are having behavioral health crises, what if there was actually treatment available for them and a way for them to get the issues that they have addressed? Jail is not that. Arresting them is not that. And we still have, and prior to some of the heel digging-in that police unions have done over the past few years, there were tons of officers and unions who admitted that freely - hey, we go into a situation where someone's called us and someone is having mental health issue - jail isn't going to do anything for that. If anything, it may destabilize that situation more and put them further away from help and make that situation worse. We actually need interventions that are appropriate for the challenges that we're facing. We have to deal with extreme poverty. We have to deal with people who are in crisis. We really do not need to deal with it like New York is signaling they're going to deal with it - in mandatorily incarcerating people. We see that we have problems here in our state and a lawsuit that's currently being filed with people with behavioral health problems struggling in our current jail system and not getting their needs met, and their whole process is being delayed sometimes with no foreseeable end because we don't have enough resources in that direction. So people want that, but they don't want this continual one note - Hey, it's either police or it's nothing. And we'll see where it's going - as we hear a siren in the background here, appropriate - but yeah, it's just the rhetoric doesn't match the reality. The saddest thing is that the public sees it and our leaders are behind where the public is at - and they keep asking and they keep voting for something different. And we have leaders that are just stuck on the same thing, and I think that frustration and tension is growing. And it feels like they're ratcheting this up for the 2023 City elections coming, and they're going to try and make this a flashpoint for those conversations. But I think that's not a very wise strategy, because the public has not been going for it. We just had an election where it's pretty clear they did not go for that argument in many different ways at many different levels. This is not just a Seattle thing. This is a King County-wide thing, a State of Washington thing. And it's time that they take heed instead of pushing on, just kind of - despite all reason and evidence to do this. [00:46:15] Doug Trumm: Yeah. It's pretty clear they're telegraphing this is their signal when you have your press release fired up before the budget's even officially passed. And in the case of the Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce, that these are public safety cuts. Nelson - and Pedersen is the one who's up for re-election - they really complimented the way he voted on that as far as voting down this budget over this tiny, tiny bit of disagreement over the police budget that they blew out of proportion. Apparently deleting these 80 out of 240 unfilled positions - you know, sending the wrong signal and is - people, the public trust has been damaged now. And it's just - get me to the fainting couch - they can add back these positions anytime. No other department in the whole city would ever have this many, anywhere near this - 240 empty positions - you just keep the money. And they get to - SPD gets to put it wherever they want in their department, basically, because of the way they don't eliminate those positions, and just Council and the mayor - tell them which parts they wanted - who would run an organization this way? If you don't have, if you're not paying for something - why are you still paying for it? It just, it - I dunno - it drives me nuts. It goes back to that sort of frenzy and the sort of fear mongering around crime - where if we don't just heap gobs of money at the police department - we're not talking about Defund, we're not talking about reducing the amount of - the headcount at SPD. We're just saying - how are you spending this money? Can we spend this money wiser? If we have less officers, we need to be spending the money wiser. We can't just have it be a slush fund, like we saw in - I think it was 2018 or 2019, right after they passed the budget - the average police compensation went up to like $157,000 per officer. This one officer made over $400,000 because they were just letting the overtime fly like hotcakes. And an officer working 80-hour weeks - is that making us safer? It doesn't really seem like the way to do it. You kind of put yourself in between a rock and a hard place because they also fight the alternatives - they say they're for a mental health professional showing up for those crisis calls, but then they block the program to actually set up an alternative emergency response. And that's what SPD has been up to the past few years. As Councilmember Lewis and Mosqueda and others have fought to set up - like Denver has - a alternative response, and they make up excuse after excuse. They say maybe the police actually have to be there. They dispute their own study that showed that most of these calls could be done without an armed officer there. But yeah, it just - there's nothing evidence-based or strategic about this kind of election-based fearmongering, just kind of opportunistic way of dealing with this problem. People wonder why this problem is festering - there has been a troubling trend over the last nine years - of corporate mayors that the Chamber and all these other centrist forces and Seattle Times have endorsed. They're not making the problem better, but they keep running on it like they are. So it really is - it's created a weird thing. And I wrote about how this sort of relates to us holding our mayoral and council elections in odd years when the electorate is smaller and they can kind of dominate the debate among this crowded, smaller electorate - tends to be more homeowners, tends to be wealthier and whiter than the population at-large. So it works in the odd year. But as we saw with voters passing even-year election reform - they're not asking for these elections to be in odd years, they'd rather them be in even years. And the County is going to make that move for Executive and Council races, and a few others like County Assessor - county-level races. But we actually need state permission to do that for the municipal level. So hopefully we get that because if we're going to solve this problem, it makes sense to have the broader segment of the electorate actually weigh in on that rather than purposely choosing a low turnout election to make all these decisions. So that's one thing I hope happens out of this, but don't hold your breath because I think they like it that way. [00:50:54] Crystal Fincher: They absolutely do seem to like it that way. And you did write a real good article breaking this phenomenon down. It's just frustrating to see voters - they are frustrated about public safety. They do know that we could be doing better, while seeing people continue to make decisions in the opposite direction. And when they are given a voice, it's definitive in one direction. And we just - the King County Prosecutor race that we just had was really a referendum on this entire argument. And mirrors what we saw in 2020, with the King County Charter Amendments. This is not just a Seattle thing. This is a countywide thing. One of the things I think people try and dismissively do i - oh, this is just, it's only a thing in super liberal Seattle, progressive Seattle, and no one else wants this. And we continue to have voters say - no, no, actually this is what we want - all over the county. And places where their electeds really are under the impression that - hey, the public, maybe they do just want more police officers, or I'm afraid to say anything different because they may not accept it. Public's already there, as we continue to see. And my goodness, in these Council elections coming up, there could not be a more clear mandate of movement in one direction in literally every district in the City. To enormous degrees - Leesa Manion's victory was large throughout the county. Yes, in Seattle - it was decisive and humongous. And in each of the council districts, it was - it was just really - it's just really something. I'm sitting here working in elections and you try and understand where voters are, understand where policy is - what's effective, where things need to move - and they're actually in alignment. And the barrier is - there seem to be some in media who are very stuck on not wanting this to happen, and a number of elected officials who believe them. And it's just continuing to be frustrating. But we see, in so many cities and so many districts - whether it's City Council districts, County Council districts, cities, precincts - across the board, they prefer a balanced, comprehensive approach to public safety and outright reject what we heard from Jim Ferrell - the more punitive - Hey, we need to crack down on things, make crime illegal again - understanding that punishment doesn't equal safety. And we would all rather be safe. We've tried punishment for decades and it has not resulted in a safer community for all of us. It has actually hurt it. And people want to be safe. They want to do the things that make us safe, and they understand - more than where a lot of leaders do - what the evidence says about that. So it's just really interesting. Was there anything noteworthy or unique that you saw in election results about that? [00:54:20] Doug Trumm: Yeah. I think it bears underscoring that the - very, very much the same coalition that was behind Republican now-City Attorney Ann Davison was the people behind Jim Ferrell, who was also a former Republican. Now, they both claim that they're Democrats now, but very much still act like Republicans. And there was a lot of Democrats - Sara Nelson endorsed Jim Ferrell and it didn't seem to help him very much in Seattle because, or her in Seattle - it helped her opponent, I guess, his opponent in Seattle. Leesa Manion cleaned up in Seattle - and that was part of her victory, but she won by 18 points. So it wasn't just Seattle, although Seattle was her strongest base of support. So it really seems like what an odd-year electorate does - electing a Republican in Ann Davison to be their City Attorney. And it's odd that we elect city attorneys - it doesn't really need to be that way. But they worked people up about crime and they did support Ann Davison, but in a much larger electorate just one year later they overwhelmingly supported Leesa Manion who's very much - let's stay the course, let's keep these diversionary programs. So whatever mandate Ann Davison thinks she had is absolutely gone. And all these people who are calculating - oh, maybe we can, maybe this whole region is just going to go tough on crime. It's just not happening. And the even-year election helps - we had reasonably good turnout. But the numbers are such that I wouldn't want to be Ann Davison going up for re-election, but hopefully we can get some of that turnout bump into the council elections because that's really what's at play here is - we've seen what an even-year electorate wants, and can we make that also what an odd-year electorate wants? But yeah, these crime narratives aren't connecting in the even year. Leesa Manion just did surprisingly well, considering - the way the race looked beforehand. One poll showed them tied right before the election, but clearly - A) their polls might've been a little bit overestimating support - and some of that goes into people didn't think that young people would turn out. And young people did turn out in relatively high numbers in this election. And hopefully that's a sign of things to come as well. It's just - that's what happens in odd years - why they're so much more conservative - is a lot of that younger vote kind of fades and a lot of communities of color and renters also fade. So you're left with the rest, which is the more conservative side of things. But it doesn't - people can - if we make clear what the stakes are, we hopefully can sustain some of that even-year turnout, but it also just - election year reform also would make this a lot simpler. So I can't underscore that enough. It drives - yeah, it's sort of odd that we are stuck in this predicament of - it's clear what people want, but because of odd years, we have to fight twice as hard. So yeah, I think these results really are - suggest potentially that 2021 - in Seattle's case - where we saw a lot of centrists come into power, might've been a bit of an outlier. It doesn't necessarily mean all these people are weak in their re-election hopes, but all the talks about Seattle's now drifting conservative - I don't see it. [00:58:02] Crystal Fincher: And there was a backlash and - I feel like I've been on a small island, with just a few others, who have said the entire time that that race was an outlier. One, Seattle is different than a lot of other areas. If there really was a wholesale pushback on that, we would have also seen that in suburbs, we would have seen that in different areas. We actually saw the opposite happen in suburbs, where they elected - a number of suburbs elected more progressive officials than they ever had before - who were speaking strongly about making the community more safe with comprehensive public safety policies and really rejecting the punitive policies. The race in Seattle was an odd race - you had an incumbent who lost in the primary, you had two really unknown people who both - didn't really consider themselves to be Democrats, so there were unalignments. You had massively different levels of spending and different levels of voter communication. And, from a political consulting point of view, you have to talk to all of the voters who are voting in the election. It's wonderful - and canvassing and doorbelling is great - but you just cannot canvass a city as big as the City of Seattle in one election cycle. And that's what we saw happen. There was a lot of canvassing, but a lot less direct voter communication. You may make it to 50,000 people with that canvassing, but you got to talk to the other 200,000 - and that happens with direct voter communications. And they were just massively, massively outspent. And the spending that did happen was really late for the progressive candidates, so if you aren't known, and if your opponent can define who you are - and spends half a million dollars doing so - that's going to carry the day and it did. But that is a unique kind of nuts-and-bolts-of-campaigns thing that was apparent to a lot of people before the election results. So that's not just hindsight is 20/20 things - those were, as that was shaping up - that was concerning to a lot of folks who were looking at and participating in those elections. And so we had before that, the 20 - well, we did see a direct public safety vote in the King County Charter Amendment votes, which wound up largely like these wound up. And just looking at these 2022 King County Prosecutor results - again, people try and characterize this as a Seattle thing - but Renton, Newcastle, Mercer Island, Sammamish, Issaquah, Bellevue, Bothell, Kenmore. Those cities are not what I think a lot of people would group into the Seattle progressive bucket, and were firmly in the side of Leesa Manion and rejecting punitive public safety policies. As we look at the Blake decision and people, looking at - well, people are scared, it's really worrisome to look at that. We're talking about - the 45th, the 48th, the 41st, the 11th, the 33rd LDs, right - these are not Seattle-based LDs. These are North and Eastside, Vashon Island, like these - everywhere around the county, voters are very decisively saying - we want to move in a direction that evidence points will make us more safe. And I just really hope that our elected officials stop listening to some of the detached rhetoric and start looking at the evidence and what their constituents are saying - because those who aren't are going to pay a price. And it's really important to take a look at what results actually are, and tether ourselves to reality here, and call out the reporting and the characterizations that are not tethered to reality. That's going to be an important thing. [01:02:33] Doug Trumm: Hey, there was this Seattle Times editorial this morning that was mad at Bruce Harrell for not being louder about the huge public safety cuts to his budget - the 1% that we mentioned earlier. Why isn't he getting in the arena? That's what Blethen and his buddies said, and it's - okay, that's crazy - first. But also, maybe this is saying that some of the politicians see the writing on the wall that - okay, this isn't like a home run issue for them like they maybe thought. They have to kind of actually try to moderate and have compromise and have a truly, comprehensive public safety plan instead of putting lip service to the alternatives and just being all police all the time. I don't know if that's what went into the thought of Harrell not getting into the arena, like the Seattle Times Editorial Board asked him to, but yeah - it certainly is unhinged. And it - Fox News always has a ton of crime coverage right before elections, and then it drops in half - there's been a study on this and after the midterm. So suddenly it's not prime all the time when you turn on Fox News - there's a reason for that. It's calculated, it's manipulation, it's election manipulation. And a lot of these other papers, including The Seattle Times, do that as well. I haven't seen the studies see that it's dropped in half, but that's part of the whole game and it's part of why the playing field isn't even. But I think, eventually, you have to have actual truth to what you're saying, or it starts just not connecting where we're at then. [01:04:17] Crystal Fincher: Well said. And with that, we thank you all for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, December 2nd, 2022. Hacks & Wonks is co-produced by Shannon Cheng and Bryce Cannatelli. Our insightful co-host today was Executive Director of The Urbanist, Doug Trumm. You can find Doug on Twitter @dmtrumm - that's two Ms at the end. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks. You can find me @finchfrii. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, or wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get the full versions of our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you soon.

Just a quick update on the excise tax changes effective January 1, 2023. Excise tax is paid by the seller, at close of escrow.

Welcome to Episode 33 and the 3rd of our Catch Up Episodes. A different format to usual for the new listener, today I've dipped into my previous guests and picked out 3 for a bit of a chat to see what they have been upto since we last talked. First up from Episode 22 is Simon Miller. We had to cut the last interview short (well after 2 hours

EP. 11

#Jackie Wilson reet petite# one of the greatest artists ever # distinctive vocalist and showmanship # very influential # classic song and vocals # co wrote by Berry Gordy # respect and Rip --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/mr-maxxx/support

We talked to our friend Jake (@losdrogas) about Reet lore, getting yelled at for playing Dance Dance Revolution upstairs and the relative merits of living in Northeastern Ohio. Aaron has a new idea for a bank.   https://twitch.tv/jakethasnake   For bonus episodes go to:   https://patreon.com/chapofym

W listopadzie 1969 roku w Kalifornii znalezione zostało ciało młodej kobiety. Przez kolejne 46 lat miała być znana jedynie jako Sherry Doe lub Jane Doe numer 59. Mimo licznych teorii na temat tego kim była oraz kto stał za jej tragedią, prawdę o jej tożsamości udało się odkryć dopiero po prawie pół wieku.

As the Episode number ends in a 3 its time to dip back into my list of previous guests and give them a ring and see what they have been up to. This is also the first ever "Award Winning Episode" following Yarkshire Gamers win in the Best Podcast Category so if you are new, welcome onboard.  First on my list is Rules Author and Big Gamer, Simon Hall from Episode 8. Since we spoke Simon has been a busy boy releasing two more sets of rules, Divisions of Steel for WW2 and Renato et Gloriam for the Renaissance  Divisions of Steel (divisions-of-steel.co.uk) Renatio et Gloriam – Renaissance Tabletop Gaming (renatio-et-gloriam.co.uk) But that's not all he's been up to, in some very exciting news Simon is working on a boardgame version of the all time classic computer game Rome Total War, the production looks amazing and I'm sure it will do very well, TOTAL WAR ROME: THE BOARD GAME — PSC Games   Next up I speak with the owner of the Wargames Holiday Centre, Mr Mark Freeth last time we spoke we were in the middle of lockdown and the Centre was just about to move venue so things were very much on hold. We find out what new games are on the menu for this year and chat about the upcoming Donald Featherstone Weekend, an Italian Wars extravaganza which will be attended by yours truly. Below is a link to the weekends at the centre, hurry up though places are very limited, Home - War Games Holiday Centre (wargameshc.co.uk)   My final guest goes back to Episode 3 and everyone's favourite Arnhem and Scottish Medieval History expert Dr Chris Brown when we spoke last time Chris was planning his annual wargames event in Arnhem (on the anniversary of the landings) set in a hotel was was fought through in the battle. Unfortunately the Phobon Plague prevented the event going ahead but things are going full steam ahead for this year and we chat about his plans for the event. S.P.I.T. Wargames: The Return to Arnhem! - Warlord Community (warlordgames.com) (6) S.P.I.T. Wargames | Facebook Chris has also recently discovered one of my favourite wargaming places in the UK Common Ground Games in Stirling. CGG has a huge gaming area, a well stocked shop and a great cafe and is a must visit every time Yarkshire Gamer is North of Northallerton.  He is organising a Normandy themed gamed day this summer, with plans for other days including a Vietnam themed event. If you are ever in the area pop in and pay a visit Tabletop gaming venue Scotland, Stirling 40k, fantasy games tables UK (commongroundgames.co.uk) I'm still waiting for confirmation of my next guest but there will be a new episode at the end of the month, I know, 2 episodes in a month I am spoiling you ! Until next time, Sithee Regards Ken The Yarkshire |Gamer

Sakshatkar Ki Reet : Pujya Sant Shri Asharamji Bapu Satsang

Sakshatkar Ki Reet : Pujya Sant Shri Asharamji Bapu Satsang

Sakshatkar Ki Reet : Pujya Sant Shri Asharamji Bapu Satsang

Sakshatkar Ki Reet : Pujya Sant Shri Asharamji Bapu Satsang

In this episode of ETF Battles, Ron DeLegge @ETFguide referees an audience requested contest between three real estate equity ETFs. With shaky stock prices thus far in '22, more investors are looking to boost their bottom line with dividend income from yield paying industry sectors like real estate.  In this particular ETF bout it's a triple-header between rival real estate ETFs from iShares (REET), Charles Schwab (SCHH) and Vanguard (VNQ). Program judges Athanasios "Tom" Psarofagis with Bloomberg Intelligence and John Davi with Astoria Portfolio Advisors judge the ETF field, sharing their investing research insights. Each ETF is judged against the other in key categories like cost, exposure strategy, performance and a mystery category. Find out who wins the battle!*********ETF Battles is sponsored by: Direxion Daily Leveraged & Inverse ETFs. Know the risks. Proceed Boldly. Visit http://www.Direxion.com 

When starting a new outdoor pursuit, should you buy your gear or rent it first? Is renting gear only for beginners? What kinds of outdoor gear should you rent, and which ones should you buy? In episode 7 of the Outdoor Minimalist podcast, Reet Singh, co-founder of TripOutside, and I explore questions like this as well as the pros and cons of renting vs. owning, mindset surrounding *having* to own gear, and the ins and outs of the outfitter industry. Reet gets stoked about mountain biking, scrambling mountains, backcountry camping, snowboarding, and introducing others to outdoor adventure. Where to find him: Trying new experiences, meditating, playing with your dog, mountain biking, and falling from stuff. Founded by Reet and his wife Julie, TripOutside helps people get outside and enjoy human-powered adventures. The platform provides outdoor inspiration for human-powered adventures and allows users to discover adventures, check availability across local outfitters, and easy online booking. INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/outdoor.minimalist.book/ WEBSITE: https://www.theoutdoorminimalist.com/ PRE ORDER THE BOOK: https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781493063994/Outdoor-Minimalist-Waste-Less-Hiking-Backpacking-and-Camping ---------------------------------- Lava Linens Discount Code for 15% off your next purchase: OUTDOORMINIMALIST TRIPOUTSIDE WEBSITE: https://www.tripoutside.com/ TRIPOUTSIDE INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/trip.outside/

If you know the great group over at Reets, you know that besides providing some of the most dynamic and engaging education, they have a great time doing it. As Merideth states in this event...it's CULTURE. Toby and I want to thank each and every member that shared their valuable time with us. We hope this short time we spend gives you a brief insight into how powerful not only certification and education are to your business, but not all academies are created equal. We also want to strongly encourage you to check out Reet's TV. We here at Restoration Advisers are subscribers and have found it incredibly useful in our coaching business with restorers. Links for everything will be listed in the bottom session. As always, we hope you enjoy it. We want to thank our incredible sponsor- Kahi Asset Management Software Kahi Homepage https://kahi.io/ Visit Reets Drying Academy for the huge schedule of both Live (In-Person) and Virtual Classes. Both restoration technical certifications as well as a strong Xactimate class taught by Nick Sharp. You will find something here for all your training needs. https://reetsdryingacademy.com/ Contact Rebekah Beilan to get an intuitive demonstration of Reets TV; https://reetsdryingacademy.com/tag/reets-tv/ Thanks for tuning into our podcast. If you enjoyed this one, we think you will find many of our past episodes equally as entertaining. They can be found here: https://www.restorationadvisers.com/podcasts/disaster-podcaster-2https://www.restorationadvisers.com/podcasts/disaster-podcaster-2 Restoration Advisers https://www.restorationadvisers.com/ DisasteHomePager Podcaster Page https://www.restorationadvisers.com/podcasts/disaster-podcaster-2https://www.restorationadvisers.com/podcasts/disaster-podcaster-2 Restoration Advisers Official Facebook Group https://www.facebook.com/groups/restorationadvisers

If you know the great group over at Reets, you know that besides providing some of the most dynamic and engaging education, they have a great time doing it. As Merideth states in this event...it's CULTURE. Toby and I want to thank each and every member that shared their valuable time with us. We hope this short time we spend gives you a brief insight into how powerful not only certification and education are to your business, but not all academies are created equal. We also want to strongly encourage you to check out Reet's TV. We here at Restoration Advisers are subscribers and have found it incredibly useful in our coaching business with restorers. Links for everything will be listed in the bottom session. As always, we hope you enjoy it. We want to thank our incredible sponsor- Kahi Asset Management Software Kahi Homepage https://kahi.io/ Visit Reets Drying Academy for the huge schedule of both Live (In-Person) and Virtual Classes. Both restoration technical certifications as well as a strong Xactimate class taught by Nick Sharp. You will find something here for all your training needs. https://reetsdryingacademy.com/ Contact Rebekah Beilan to get an intuitive demonstration of Reets TV; https://reetsdryingacademy.com/tag/reets-tv/ Thanks for tuning into our podcast. If you enjoyed this one, we think you will find many of our past episodes equally as entertaining. They can be found here: https://www.restorationadvisers.com/podcasts/disaster-podcaster-2 Restoration Advisers https://www.restorationadvisers.com/ Disaster Podcaster Home Page Restoration Advisers Official Facebook Group https://www.facebook.com/groups/restorationadvisers